Royal National Theatre | An anthropocentric design approach by Nefeli Christidi

Royal National Theatre An anthropocentric design approach

UCL | The Bartlett School of Architecture Architecture and Historic Urban Environments MA Surve ying and Re cording of Citie s |BARC0065 Tutors: T. C olin, P . Guillery, S. Milne

NEFELI â&#x20AC;&#x201C; ALEXANDRA CHRISTIDI | SN: 18121741

Index 1 | The Idea of a National Theatre

1.1 | In search of site

1.2 | Casting for the design of NT

2 | Lasdun Philosophy

2.1 | urban landscape approach

2.2 | A National theatre open to people

3 | The design process

3.1 | From the idea to the reality

3.2 | Working with models

3.3 | Details

3.4 | Materials

Conclusions

Bibliography

1 | The Idea of a National Theatre The idea of creation of a National Theatre and Opera House has started one century before the Sir Denys Lasdun building was built. The first proposal for a National Theatre was made in 1848 by London publisher Effingham Wilson and found support in a number of leading figures of that period including Charles Dickens, critic Matthew Arnold, and actors Charles Kemble and Sir Henry Irving.â&#x20AC;? Although only after years of conversations and negotiations between the national theatre company and the government the project was decided to be true. The first step when the National theatre has set the foundations of its formation in 1963, under Laurence Olivier, was to product shows. For the first five years the NT has been hosted in the Old Vic theatre until the South Bank Theatre and Opera House building were finished. 1

National Theatre Company at the Old Vic, 1960s Photo: Chris H Arthur - NT Archive

Haworth Tompkins, Conservation Management Plan for the National Theatre/Final Draft, London, Dec. 2008, p.14,16

1.1 | In search of site A lot of different sites were considered by the commission of national theatre company before they choose the final one. Between 1909 and 1942, the ‘Shakespeare Memorial National Theatre’ group had considered sites across London for the theatre, and plans were proposed by a succession of architects including Sir Edwin Lutyens and Cecil Masey, who produced the first designs for a site on the South Bank, but the decision for the erection of the National Theatre didn’t happened.2 After the Blitz the South Bank became a focus of post-war regeneration. Abercrombie and Forshaw’s Plan of 1943 proposed South Bank transforming to a shared space for all Londoners away from the pressures of business; where they could unite around art and culture. Five years later Charles Holden’s scheme (1948) proposing a theatre and concert hall on a site between Hungerford and Waterloo Bridges in front of the Shell Centre.3 Although the site of the NTOP4 was supposed to change again in 1966, after the Opera House was dropped from the scheme. The theatre moved to the current site adjacent Waterloo Bridge, but then an architectural re-conception was required.5 The shift in location was pivotal in shaping the final form: at the new site Lasdun drew inspiration from the adjacent Waterloo Bridge, Somerset House across the river, and a view to St. Paul’s Cathedral in the distance.6

Haworth Tompkins, Conservation Management Plan for the National Theatre/Final Draft, London, Dec. 2008, p.18 Haworth Tompkins, Conservation Management Plan for the National Theatre/Final Draft, London, Dec. 2008, p.18 4 National Theatre and Opera House from now on is mentioned as: NTOP 5 Haworth Tompkins, Conservation Management Plan for the National Theatre/Final Draft, London, Dec. 2008, p.22 6 D. Douglass-Jaimes, AD Classics: Royal National Theatre / Denys Lasdun, Archdaily online magazine, 8-9-2015 3

1.Social & Functional Analysis map from County of London Plan 1943 by Abercrombie and Forshaw 2.South Bank plan, LCC County of London Plan, 1943, Abercrombie and Forshaw for South bank

3. A view of the South Bank Exhibition from the north bank of the Thames 4. Cuper's Gardens site of the NT, c.1825, Lambeth Archive

3,4. Riverside view of National Theatre

1.2 | Casting for the design of NT The other important decision was the choose of architect. For this purpose, a panel of architectural experts appointed by the RIBA, selected twenty architects, who were invited to interview. The intention was to produce a shortlist of two or three who would produce preliminary designs for further discussion with the theatre experts. The twenty selected were almost all well-known practices including Stirling and Gowan, Ernö Goldfinger, etc. Although, the Building committee impressed by Lasdun’s stated enthusiasm to learn from the Building Committee, and his statement that ‘the essence of designing a theatre is a spiritual one’, the panel chose Lasdun unanimously and the selection process was terminated.7 It is really interesting the fact that Lasdun, himself, mentioned in an interview at BBC that the only way to build a National Theatre is to sit around the table and really discuss with the artistic commission about the building.8 His acceptance from the Building Committee was so passionate that Laurence Olivier said “Oh, my dear! We all fell for that. Well, he was a unanimous choice; we knew we'd got by far the most suitable man and probably the most brilliant man in England.”9 Also Lord Cottesloe, the Chairman of the Arts Council and the South Bank Board, mentioned that “the committee was particularly impressed when he said he knew nothing about designing theatres and would have to sit down and learn what was needed from our committee.”10

Haworth Tompkins, Conservation Management Plan for the National Theatre/Final Draft, London, Dec. 2008, p.20 Desert Island Discs, Roy Plomley’s castaway is architect Sir Denys Lasdun, BBC Radio 4, Sounds, 1976, Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p009n046 9 Denys Lasdun's National Theatre, Web Archive, 22-07-2010 10 Denys Lasdun's National Theatre, Web Archive, 22-07-2010 8

1, 2 Lasdun and Olivier with model of NT, after 1967, NT Archive 3. Lasdun with members of Comitte, 1971, Lasdun Archive/ RIBA Collections

2 | Lasdun Philosophy 2.1 | Urban landscape approach The perspective of Lasdun for the public space and connection of architecture and society was socialistic. His references of the Bauhaus’ architecture and his travel to Le Corbusier’s concrete buildings in Paris, embodies to Lasdun the principles of modern movement. He believed that the public architecture should be open to everyone and involve the people’s reactions of the public spaces inside and outside of the building as part of the design. He had mentioned: “For me, architecture only makes sense as the extender and promoter of human relationships. I don't believe it is about technology - it is about people getting together. I think architecture is about space, light and shadow, and the sort of movement which you get on this staircase and which is seen in the National Theatre.”11 Lasdun approached the site and the building with dialectical way, but simple forms. He had researched the ancient Greek theatres and their ritual. Their promenade that audience should walk to reach the theatre and their plain landscape design. In the case of NT, the multiple elements at the surrounding area and the various levels of them lead to a complex design. The relationship of the river and Waterloo Bridge with the National Theatre could be seen abstract as a metaphor for landscape.12 Even the period that the scheme for a National Theatre and Opera House on a site opposite the Shell Tower these notions have been embodied in the building. The design was dissolved into a series of terraces on which people could congregate. Also at the final building’s design the external terraces or strata of the National Theatre provide places for many activities such as cultural events, leisure and so the building performs much the same function as the piazza.13

2.2 | A National theatre open to people Lasdun embraced the same ideas of the exterior public spaces also for the interiors. Inside in the foyers there are also events going on: free exhibitions, places to browse, bars, bookshops, open to everyone. He aimed to create a lively building in which people will enjoy to use it multiple. The idea was the user to feel familiar, if he wants to sit on the floor and enjoy this and use the foyers like the ancient hypostyle. The floor seems to evoke warm and lively participation, also constantly on different levels there are views of the city 11

Lasdun D., Architectural Aspects of the National Theatre, Journal of the Royal Society of Arts, Vol.125, No. 5256 (Nov. 1977), pp. 780-792, p. 787 Lasdun D., Architectural Aspects of the National Theatre, Journal of the Royal Society of Arts, Vol.125, No. 5256 (Nov. 1977), pp. 780-792, p. 788 13 Lasdun D., Architectural Aspects of the National Theatre, Journal of the Royal Society of Arts, Vol.125, No. 5256 (Nov.1977), pp. 780-792, p. 788,9 12

beyond and the large cantilevered concrete overhangs keep your eyes focused on the riverscape.14 It is the same philosophy as at the exterior public spaces of the building. He believed that: “All these things help to break down the barrier between ordinary people going to the theatre and the past tradition that it was something only for the élite.” 15 The aim was to remind that much of our happiness in cities is conditioned by the public open spaces: parks, rivers, observation platforms, all of which help make comprehensible the city's landmarks, organization and focal points of memory.16

1,2. Exterior public spaces of National Theatre, Source: Flirck

14 15

Lasdun D., Architectural Aspects of the National Theatre, Journal of the Royal Society of Arts, Vol.125, No. 5256 (Nov. 1977), pp. 780-792, p. 789 Lasdun D., Architectural Aspects of the National Theatre, Journal of the Royal Society of Arts, Vol.125, No. 5256 (Nov. 1977), pp. 780-792, p. 789 Lasdun D., Architectural Aspects of the National Theatre, Journal of the Royal Society of Arts, Vol.125, No. 5256 (Nov. 1977), pp. 780-792, p. 788

1.Aero photography, Lasdun Archive/ RIBA Collections 2.Exterior, Dezeen

3. National Theatre, 1967-76. Lasdun Archive/ RIBA Collections

3 | The design process 3.1 | From the idea to the reality The National Theatre had a long process to complete. It needed 13 years and eventually opened in 1963. As Lasdun said there were so many holdups the whole NT has been a political football. The brief called for a small, experimental space and one large adaptable theatre that could host both an open stage and proscenium. But it was concluded that a single theatre could not successfully involve both needs. Hence the need for a total of three auditoriums was accepted. The final Lasdun’s design was described, by himself, as a ‘fourth theatre’. He said, “I feel that all the public areas of the building, the foyers and terraces, are in themselves a theatre with the city as a backdrop.”17 The public interior spaces merge with the exterior terraces and create a flow network, or what Lasdun describes as the ‘geological strata’ of his architecture of urban landscape. The composition of the sculptural exterior under the spectrum of the connection of urban environment and multileveled interior public spaces and different typologies of theatres and supportive facilities is brilliant. The design of the building started from the interior and the creation of auditoriums. The Lyttelton is a lower proscenium theatre with capacity of 900 people, at ground level alongside the entrance hall, and the Olivier theatre is an open stage theatre with 1,165 seats above the entrance hall. The upper auditorium and its fly tower, poised over the main entrance on a 45o turned axis inclined towards Waterloo Bridge, are the dominant elements in the design.18 Below these elements terraces are stepped up from the riverside to continue into the building, forming the main foyers from which the river views can be enjoyed. At the outside part of the building, at the lower levels, terraces link with Waterloo Bridge and the existing system of walk- ways. Higher up they provide external spaces for the theatre audiences and those working in the theatre and essential emergency escape routes. The combined entrance of the two main theatres faces the river. It is accessible at three levels - the underground car park; road level, also that of the riverside walk; and the pedestrian walkway level. Lifts and staircases connect all three levels. Vehicle access the main entrance from a one-way loop road, with ramps serving the basement car park and will have space for about 420.19

Mull, O., Brutalist buildings: National Theatre, London by Denys Lasdun, Dezeen online magazine, 6-10-2014 South bank cultural centre, Official Architecture and Planning, Vol. 32, No. 8 (August 1969), pp. 918-923, p. 923 19 South bank cultural centre, Official Architecture and Planning, Vol. 32, No. 8 (August 1969), pp. 918-923, p. 923 18

1. Section through Olivier Theare and Front of house terraces 2. Plan at Olivier theatre at stalls level 3. Plan at circle level of Lyceton theatre

1. Photo of NT from the Waterloo bridge, NT Archive 2.Oliver Theatre, NT Archive

3.2 | Working with models The complexity of the building and the various different levels and stratas inside out, made the use of physical models necessary. Lasdun used to work with models as a tool for the design, but also at the meetings with the building committee, in order to be able everyone to understand the process.20 Barnabas Calder, at his article about Lasdun, mentions that this was an often Lansdun’s tactic. “Although it was to be the late 1950s before this really bore fruit, the creation of his best buildings was done almost entirely through models, as drawings were inadequate to visualise the effect of complex spaces over several floors. In his later work, Lasdun would sometimes take a model outside covered in black cloth and peer in to see how the light would fall in the space when built.”21

1. Lasdun and Olivier at Committee meeting 2. National Theatre models in the Lasdun office, 1960s - Behr Photography 3. Model of NTOP scheme, 1965

Lasdun D., Architectural Aspects of the National Theatre, Journal of the Royal Society of Arts, Vol.125, No. 5256 (Nov. 1977), pp. 780-792, p. 789 Barnabas Calder, The Education of a Modern Architect: Denys Lasdun in the 1930s, Twentieth Century Architecture, No. 8, British Modern: Architecture and Design in the 1930s, (2007), pp. 118-128, p. 127 21

1. Model of the National Theatre as it would appear across the Thames, with Waterloo Bridge to the right. (S: South bank cultural centre)

3.3 | Details Lasdun wanted to highlight the National Theatre starting from the details to its connection with the urban landscape. For this reason, he designed with passion even the smaller corner of the building. It has already been referred his opinion that the details composing the sense of a place. The game with the light and shadow, the reflections on the concrete and the design of distinctive small spaces all over the building were important factors of the interior. Also there are so many spaces with different heights, even at the same room that the architect himself has said for the building that if someone does not like the feeling of a space inside the National theatre, I advise him to move a few meters and I am sure that his sense of the space will change. Great attention was paid to the details of the "quiet" interior of the theatre: lighting, sign posting, fittings, the auditorium seats, a change from the stucco and mirrors of theatres of the period. Lasdun even selected the crockery and cutlery for the restaurant.â&#x20AC;?22

Mull, O., Brutalist buildings: National Theatre, London by Denys Lasdun, Dezeen online magazine, 6-10-2014

1,2,3,4. Photos of details, personal Archive

3.4 | Materials The concrete dominates the space in the National Theater. Lasdun explained his choose at a talk at had given: “Why was concrete chosen? Deliberately, for fantasy reasons. Of course there are also practical and structural reasons, but concrete was chosen inside and outside so that it would evoke warm stones, ancient ruins, the non-slick and the permanent, irrespective of whether it streaks, grows warts or has lichen growing on it. A great deal of care was taken in the mixing of the concrete: white cement and ordinary cement, white Leighton Buzzard sand and aggregate from the Thames beside which the building sits. Inside, the spaces become more dominant but the language does not change. I think that graphics and lighting help enormously at the decorative level. But there is no attempt to apply decoration. It is simply light, space, people, concrete.”23 Apart from the aesthetic reasons the concrete is a new material of those period and a powerful tool that allows the architect the possibility for new forms and architectural accomplishments. In NT’s case Lasdun said: “There are immense cantilevers which act to give a certain amount of shade from glare for people within the theatre. This is a form you can't do in steel or stone. The building has to be very dense, because we are protecting the word from outside noises. The auditoria have to be embedded in a solid structure, and we can't afford stone – so concrete is the natural material. It's a very intractable material, but it can be a very beautiful material if it is used the way that its own nature intends it to be used. [The building is] asymmetrical, and it has its own dynamic. It is a sort of sculptural form that you can only do with reinforced concrete, but you need to work at a certain scale for this to come off.”24

23 24

Lasdun D., Architectural Aspects of the National Theatre, Journal of the Royal Society of Arts, Vol.125, No. 5256 (Nov. 1977), pp. 780-792, p. 783-5 Denys Lasdun and Peter Hall talk about the building, televised on Aquarius, 29 February 1976, (reproduced in https://web.archive.org/)

1. National theatre concrete, Personal Archive

Conclusions The National Theatre still in people minds is an almost new building with a unique shape. It is a Grade II* listed building and its history is huge, such as its contribution to the cultural life of London. It is an excellent example of the British Brutalism and one of the most significant buildings of Lasdun. However, these essay researched the building under the spectrum of Lasdunâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s anthropocentric and â&#x20AC;&#x201C; in my opinion socialistic- philosophy for the architecture. I believe that he ended up with this masterpiece because he was open to learn from the experts the needs of a theatre. In addition, in his eyes the open and close spaces of the building were totally dedicated to the British people to use them multiple.

1. National theatre concrete, Personal Archive

Bibliography Printed Sources          

B. Calder, The Education of a Modern Architect: Denys Lasdun in the 1930s, Twentieth Century Architecture, No.8, British Modern: Architecture and Design in the 1930s, (2007), pp. 118-128 W.J.R Curtis, Denys Lasdun - Architecture, City, Landscape, Phaidon Press, London, 1994 A. Drexler, Transformations in modern architecture, The Museum of Modern Art: Distributed by New York Graphic Society, 1979 D. Lasdun ‘A sense of place and time’ Listener, 17/02/1966 (reproduced in Curtis, 1994) D. Lasdun ‘Architect’s approach to architecture, RIBA Journal, April, pp.184-195 (reproduced in Curtis, 1994) D. Lasdun, Architectural Aspects of the National Theatre, Journal of the Royal Society of Arts, Vol.125, No. 5256, Nov. 1977, pp. 780-792 D. Lasdun, Architecture in an age of scepticism: a practitioners' anthology / compiled by Denys Lasdun, Heinemann, London, 1984 D. Lasdun & J.H.V. Davies, Thoughts in progress, Architectural Design, 1956-57 (reproduced in Curtis, 1994) South bank cultural centre, Official Architecture and Planning, Vol. 32, No. 8 (August 1969), pp. 918-923 Survey of London: Volume 23, Lambeth: South Bank and Vauxhall, published by London County Council, London, 1951.

Online Sources  

  



Denys Lasdun and Peter Hall talk about the building, televised on Aquarius, 29-02-1976, (reproduced in https://web.archive.org/) Denys Lasdun's National Theatre, Web Archive, 22-07-2010, Source: https://web.archive.org/ Source:https://web.archive.org/web/20100722093613/http://www.nationaltheatre.org.uk:80/7081/history-ofthe-nt/denys-lasduns-national-theatre.html D. Douglass-Jaimes, AD Classics: Royal National Theatre / Denys Lasdun, Archdaily online magazine, 8-9-2015, Source: https://www.archdaily.com/772979/ad-classics-royal-national-theatre-denys-lasdun Historic England, Source: https://historicengland.org.uk/listing/the-list/list-entry/1272324 A. Frearson, Haworth Tompkins completes renovation of Denys Lasdun's National Theatre, Dezeen online magazine, 15-5-2015, Source: https://www.dezeen.com/2015/05/15/haworth-tompkins-denys-lasdun-nationaltheatre-london-renovation-production-centre-cafe-bar-education-centre-auditorium/ O. Mull, Brutalist buildings: National Theatre, London by Denys Lasdun, Dezeen online magazine, 6-10-2014, Source: https://www.dezeen.com/2014/10/06/brutalist-buildings-national-theatre-london-denyslasdun/?utm_medium=website&utm_source=archdaily.com

Audiovisual    

Welcome to the National Theatre, National theatre’s YouTube Chanel, YouTube, May 2018, Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oBV8pqN4MFs AA School Architecture, 1989-04-15 LASDUN Denys, online video recording, YouTube, 1 April 2015, Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OmLH4e2fsmk Desert Island Discs, Roy Plomley’s castaway is architect Sir Denys Lasdun, BBC Radio 4, Sounds, 1976, Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p009n046 Royal College of Physicians, The Anatomy of a building, online video recording, YouTube, 9 September 2014, Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z-4ydFg6jww

Archive Sources     

Collage, The London Picture Archive - https://collage.cityoflondon.gov.uk National Theatre Archive National Theatre Publications department Lambeth Archives - http://landmark.lambeth.gov.uk/default.asp Lasdun Archive, RIBA library