For history last year we had to read journal articles and write a critical report on a building based on our findings. I wrote about the Scottish Parliament building, which I have since visited.
At the time of writing, I wasn't sure whether or not I liked this building. Certainly, after seeing it in real life, I do see that there are some design errors, such as the covered windows in a country where sunlight is so lacking. However, over all, I think this is a splendid design. It's modern design juxtaposes nicely against the historic centre of Edinburgh, and despite it's designed appearance it really melds into the land of the next door Holyrood Park. Plus, for the entire tour of the building I had my hand running along the walls... it is made out of the smoothest concrete I have ever felt in my life! Stunning!
Most of all I probably love this building because of what it symbolises. Being Scottish myself, I have a great faith in my country, and to be, this building really does symbolise devolution, and Scotland's autonomy. I hadn't published this before for whatever reason (it wasn't to do with grades, that's for sure... I got A+...) but now that I've found it on my laptop I think it's a brilliant time, especially since in September this year Scotland will be holding a referendum for independence that I dearly wish I could vote in.
Saor Alba!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alba gu Brath: Controversy surrounding the Scottish Parliament Building
Can architecture affect democracy? This
question can be posed when analysing the Scottish Parliament building, in
Edinburgh, Scotland: a symbol of a small country trying to stand up on its own
politically. Designed by EMBT and RMJM, the building has a strong concept
deeply rooted in Scottish landscape, history and culture. This lead to a design
that was both praised and criticised, becoming an icon worthy of what it stands
for. Despite its many flaws, it is certainly unique; and the very fact that it
caused controversy could be seen as an embodiment of what it represents: the
discussion of ideas and differing opinions is exactly what is meant to take
place within it.
Figure 1: The Scottish
Parliament Building
Irvine, Hamish. "Fulla T's
Photostream." Flickr.
farm6.staticflickr.com/5163/5374508893_820b717bfd_o.jpg (accessed June 14,
2013).
With metaphors and symbolism deeply rooted
in Scottish culture and geology, Miralles’ simple concept captivated
competition judges. Instead of designing a remote monument, Miralles’ concept
of bundles of leaves and sticks conceived the new parliament as a gathering in
the land.[1]
This relationship with the landscape furthers the idea that Scottish identity
is closely related to its rugged countryside,[2]
something that Miralles expanded on when he created his organic building, made
of stepped contours and acting as a median between the landscape and the urban
experience.[3]
Moreover, Miralles imagined undulating hull-like forms: boats in the building
that could move about and change depending on the circumstances.[4]
This could also be a metaphor for the actions that take place within the
building: since ideas in politics, as well as the representatives debating it
change, these hulls could show the flexibility and willingness to change that
would be evident in a new government aiming to progress its country.
Figure 2: Hull-like forms
are evident on the building plan.
Jencks,
Charles. The Scottish Parliament. London: Scala, 2005.
Considering
that Miralles’ concept was so strong, it is not surprising that an impressive
design was formed. It takes into the account the programme of the building, allowing
the public and its representatives to be near and influence one another, and
also provides an incredible visual experience with its style and beautifully
crafted detailing. There are two circulation routes within the building: one
for the public, and one for the MSPs. This allows them to interact, but also
retains a degree of separation so that workers are not always overwhelmed by
the public.[5] Conciliation
amongst the MSPs, rather than confrontation, is encouraged in the debating
chamber, which is shaped like a rough, pointed oval.[6]
However, confrontation is possible, in the public amphitheatre at the foot of
the Parliament, perfect for protests.[7]
The spatial experiences within the building are complex, with different areas
evoking different responses, such as the monastic under-croft feel of the dimly
lit entrance foyer, and the cellular MSP offices,[8]
which culminate in a cosy inglenook window bay that MSPs are reportedly very
happy with.[9]
The fractal geometries of the building not only add interest to detailing, but,
in the case of the façade of the MSP offices, demonstrate Miralles’ notion that
the ‘system’ in a large building should not dominate the individual, meaning
that the small scale of these fractal elements is perfect for this democratic
institution.[10]
"Scottish
Parliament : NZWOOD." NZWOOD.
http://www.nzwood.co.nz/case-studies/scottish-parliament (accessed June 15,
2013).
"Foyer and
reception of the Scottish Parliament Deliberately dark and subdued, with
crossesin the cu…." Geolocation.ws - Home page.
http://www.geolocation.ws/v/W/File%3AFoyer%20and%20reception%20of%20the%20Scottish%20Parliament%20-%20geograph.org.uk%20-%201296010.jpg/-/en
(accessed June 15, 2013).
Figure
5: The MSP offices façade is an example of the fractal geometries
employed throughout the building.
"Pesquisas
escocesas." AV Monografias 111-112, no. October (2005): 235
Despite the building’s interesting concept
and design, there was an outcry caused due to a variety of factors, including
its style, tectonics and the fact it far exceeded budget. The RIBA Stirling
Prize judging panel questioned whether the fact that a building the people
apparently did not want was being constructed, meant that the government was letting them
down.[11]As
the building is situated right in the heart of Old Edinburgh, at the foot of
the Royal Mile, some critics believed the design might compromise the heritage
of the area,[12]
while others complained that it was far too detailed,[13]
or that some of its elements, particularly its decorated windows, would be
better suited to Miralles’ Mediterranean homeland, as Scotland has infamously
little sunshine, and these windows could compromise the flow of light.[14]
The tectonics of the building were questioned when a beam fell from the roof,[15]
and local businessmen were upset that Scottish materials were not used.[16]
Nevertheless, the greatest criticism was the fact that the project far
surpassed its budget.[17]
However, since the programme was continually enlarged, it is not really
surprising that this occurred.[18]
Furthermore, the Scottish Parliament building, as the embodiment of the popular
spirit of devolution[19]
can be seen as being far more important than other British buildings that also
went over budget, for example the Millennium dome, upon which a shocking £750
million was spent.[20]
These issues all raised discussion on the building, and since challenging and
considering opinions is exactly what takes place within a Parliament, this
could be seen as the materialisation of democracy.
Figure 6: The amount of
detail in the design is evident in the complexity of the building sections.
Slessor,
Catherine . "Scotland the Brave." the architectural review
216, no. Oct-Dec (2004): 46-63.
In spite of its many criticisms, the
Scottish Parliament building, with its compelling concept, interesting design
and ability to evoke strong reactions, is certainly significant. Miralles’
concept focussed on the Scottish people’s connection to their countryside, and
envisaged the parliament as a gathering in the land. This lead to a design that
allowed the people and their representatives to mix, it encouraged
conciliation, while at the same time also providing space for protest. Although
this building sparked controversy, it could be argued that this in itself shows
the building’s success. It is the embodiment of what it supposed to occur
within it: the discussion of ideas and opinions.
Word count: 989
[1] Slessor, Catherine .
"Scotland the Brave." The Architectural Review 216, no.
October-December (2004): 56.
No comments:
Post a Comment