Interior Architecture Dissertation

Heritage

by Emma Cook Nottingham Trent University

Architectural Heritage as a Social Construct in the 21st Century

A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S

F irst and foremost I would like to give thanks to my good friend Zoe

Timimi (University of Cambridge) who gave great insight into philosophers and readings. Without your help, this book would not have been as philisophically in depth as it is. To all the tutors on the Research Project team at Nottingham Trent University for guiding my research to where it is now, Thank You. I’d also like to thank my family and friends for their continuing support throughout my studies.

KEY WORDS

09

LITERATURE REVIEW

11

METHODOLOGY

13

INTRODUCTION

15

ARCHITECTURAL HERITAGE

21

TASTE

41

GENTRIFICATION

49

CONCLUSION

57

CASE STUDY 01

61

CASE STUDY 02

101

CASE STUDY OVERVIEW

127

TABLE OF FIGURES

131

BIBLIOGRAPHY

133

C O N T E N T S

05

TA B L E O F

ABSTRACT

VISUAL

E S S AY

ABST R ACT

A B S T R A C T

T his book looks at architectural heritage as both a capitalist concept and as a social construct. Much of architectural heritage boasts elitist design elements, which appears to be driving the concept into a middle-class, middle-age audience field; and much of working class architectural heritage is now being used by private owners as a means to produce economic capital. The paper explores the commodification and exploitation of architectural heritage through two case studies, critically examing the reasoning behind crucial design elements. The use of cheap materials since the industrial revolution is being used more, and the social reproduction of society is allowing this to become a social ‘norm’ in todays society. Are our tastes towards this changing as a result?

The aim of the paper is to underpin whether architectural heritage is a social construct; a way of defining classes in the 21st Century. The conclusion being that, due to gentrification, redevelopment and previous era social reproduction, heritage does divide the class system. However, a shift in our tastes may provide a different view in future years.

VISUAL

E S S AY

ABST R ACT

Figure 01: Abstract (Cook 2020)

KEY

WORDS

C A p I T H

E

R

I

T A G

E

L

X

I

P

S

L

M

O I

T A S T E A A

R C

H

I

T

E

C

T U I O

G

E

N

T

R

I

Figure 02: Key Words (Cook 2020)

F

I C

A T

I O N

R

E

L IT E R AT U RE

L I T E R A T U R E

REVIEW

R E V I E W

C apitalism, presented by the Oxford Dictionary (a)(2019) as “an economic and political system in which a county’s trade and industry are controlled by private owners

for profit, rather than by the state.”, has been endlessly explored by philosophers and academics. With each one interpreting the concept slightly differently, the topic can be problematic to define.

Arguably the most significant discourse on capitalism is Marx’s ‘The Communist Manifesto’ (1848) which explores the thesis that capitalism is the exploitation of labour. Marx believes that this exploitation causes an ongoing ‘antagonism’ - as he calls it – between the classes as the working class must conform to the capitalists’ desires in order to earn (minimal) money and survive. In his later work, ‘Das Kapital’ (1867), Marx refers to capitalism as an object of ‘self-destruction’ as people put economic issues at the forefront of their lives, rather than happiness. Walter Gropius proposed a similar theory in 1923; he wrote “the power of capital, the work of man against man” (Deamer 2014).

In the book ‘Capitalism’ (2005), Lippit suggests that capitalism causes a decrease in social community and an increase in child labour, with his main theory being that “capitalism is ultimately incompatible with human life as we have known it”. Lippit’s analysis draws off the basis of Marx’s philosophy as Marx claimed that capitalism “carries the seeds of its own destruction”. (Marx 1848).

Mangold quotes Marx in his book ‘Money-tecture’ (n.d.) - “When something becomes a commodity, it is on the path to exploitation”. (According to the Cambridge English Dictionary (2019) a commodity is “a substance or product that can be traded, bought, or sold”). Mangold relates this thesis to architecture; he states that the number of hours put into a project, by the architect’ had no relation to the value of the property. Rather it is the number of rooms and square footage that determines the exchange value; this characterizes the commodification – act of turning something into a commodity - of architecture (n.d.). ‘Architecture and Capitalism’ (Deamer 2014) follows on this and claims that there is a lack of design element in architecture since the industrial revolution, as capitalists now use easily accessible and cheap materials to gain a high profit. Mangold represents this idea as the ‘norm’ today as society has accepted ‘commodified buildings’ and ‘cheap construction’ through the process of social reproduction. Briefly, social reproduction is a process of how ‘norms’ have adapted from desire through TV shows and advertisement alike (Mangold n.d.).

Philosopher, Bourdieu, calls this desire ‘taste’ and he critiques the idea of ‘taste’ in his discourse ‘Distinction’ (1984). Possibly enlightened by the works of Marx, Bourdieu looks at ‘taste’ as a social construct caused by the differentiation between the classes. He theorizes that culture and heritage are inherited from preferences of a bourgeois society and that it conforms to middle-class civilisation. “Taste is first and

MET HOD OLO GY

foremost distaste, disgust and visceral intolerance of the taste of others.” (Bourdieu 1984).

The past tastes of the bourgeois architecture are now possessed within ‘heritage’ buildings. These buildings are incredibly important for education, maintaining a city’s richness and providing links to the past (Kurtich, Eakin 1993) which humans subconsciously desire. Older buildings have stylistic features that are extremely hard to replicate today including detailed carpentry and rich materials. Due to a lack of skilled craftsmen in current times, modern buildings tend to lack the character that historic buildings hold so much of (Kurtich, Eakin 1993). The lack of a skilled labourforce results in high prices which reduces the profitability of methods of construction, therefore reducing demand; this is causing a switch to simplified architecture. It is this theory that causes adaptive reuse to be a desirable option for capitalists; as saving money means more profit.

However, as Pugin says in his book ‘Contrasts’ (1969), “Architecture, that grandest of sciences, is fallen to a mere trade and conducted not by artists but by men of business”. To summarise, the desirable use of heritage buildings – particularly for gain of capital – is merely turning it into a commodity; and to reflect on Marx’s ideology, “it is on the path of exploitation” (Mangold n.d.).

During this discourse, adaptive reuse will be explored within heritage buildings, with careful analysis of the new uses and users to form an understanding as to whether the heritage is being exploited. The focus will be commercial use property, but residential typologies will not be ruled out. The aim is to form a summary of ‘Architectural Heritage as a Social Construct’.

M E T H O D O L O G Y

T o start, a deeper understanding of the word ‘heritage’ needs to be gained by comparing definitions and further reading on philosophy of heritage. Confronting Bourdieu’s ideologies about heritage and taste (Bourdieu 1984) with examples will lay the foundations for discussing the factors that have caused a ‘shift’ in taste; and how this shift in taste, through ‘social reproduction’, may be changing the way we see heritage buildings in today’s society.

The paper will analyse case studies of adaptive reuse within heritage buildings, considering their historical importance, to note whether they have exploited the heritage in any way – presumably for capital. It will be interesting to investigate the change in typology and user of the space, also the target audience of the space, as this may inform materiality and spatial arrangements.

Qualitative research will be gathered to understand the idea of heritage and culture and be able to compare this with previous philosopher’s views.

VISUAL

E S S AY

INT RODU CT ION

I N T R O D U C T I O N

Ipossesses t is no secret that modern day architecture a certain starkness, particularly when contrasted to heritage architecture.

Since the industrial revolution, the use of prefabricated building elements and lack of craftsmen has driven architecture to be a product of engineering rather than design.

The comparison between post-modernism and previous eras, such as baroque and art deco, provides insight into how ‘trends’ have changed over the decades. What happens to the previous architecture once disused, however? This thesis will investigate the uses of heritage architecture in the 21st Century and explore how society now recognizes heritage architecture and what impact this is having on it.

VISUAL

E S S AY

Figure 03: Architectural Movement over time (Cook 2020)

MIDDL E C L ASS S O CI ET Y

MODE R N

INT RODU CT ION

T he term ‘Heritage Architecture’ will be explored as a social construct and how this architecture may be exploited by its new uses and users for capital. From the basis of Marx’s ideology on ‘dialects’ (1848), an understanding will be formed about the links between heritage and the class system. Developing this idea alongside Bourdieu’s ideologies on ‘taste’ should help clarify how heritage can further the ‘dialects’ between classes.

Figure 04: Elitist View on Heritage (Cook 2020)

B OURGEOIS SO C IET Y

HE R I TAGE

C oncluding from this, analysis of certain heritage architecture will be made to gain understanding of the links between their design and the bourgeois society – again referring to the work of Bourdieu – as well as understanding how it is being used today.

By the end of the paper, the ideas of Marx and Bourdieu, along with other philosophers, will have been developed through the research of heritage architecture to analyse whether heritage is a social construct which defines classes.

VISUAL

E S S AY

W H A T

I S

H E R I T A G E ?

T he term ‘heritage’ can be rather problematic to define. It connotes more than just historic

buildings or landscapes; as it encompasses the people surrounding it. Therefore, the term can resonate with people on a personal level which encourages mixed views of what heritage actually is (Baxter 2014).

“property that is or may be inherited; an inheritance. ” (Oxford Dictionary 2020).

Figure 05: Heritage (Vukile Batyi n.d.)

T he idea of ‘inheritance’ further personalises the idea of heritage as it suggests an object that may be part of a family or small group of people.

INT RODU CT ION

Figure 04: Conservation (Cook 2020)

when referring to ‘Heritage Architecture’ this is defined

“buildings or structures of historical or cultural importance, which are a vital part of the country’s heritage and require conservation.” (Bidwells 2018). This definition as

implies that a much larger culture of a place. This definition will be used for the thesis.

VISUAL

E S S AY

A RC H IT E CT U R AL

H O W I S H E R I T A G E B Y S O C I E T Y ?

Figure 07: Words linked to Heritage (Wicks n.d.)

T hese key words are what ‘Heritage’ means to the public, taken from a study

by Katharine Peacock of Heritage Alliance. Words such as ‘Tradition’ and ‘Culture’ can be controversial as it poses the question of ‘who has the tradition/culture derived from?’.

It is important to note terms like ‘Proud’, ‘Castle’, ‘Money’ which connote more elitist society. If these words are what the public percieve ‘heritage’ to be then there may be a vernacular between architectural heritage in the UK which stimulates these ideas (Ellison, Powell 2018).

HE RITAGE

V I E W E D

VISUAL

E S S AY

T he pie charts below show people’s responses to how much they believe heritage matters. With 16-24 year olds, only 14% said that heritage matters a

large/very large amount, compared to 45% of over 65 year olds (Ellison, Powell 2018).

Figure 08: Pie Chart Showing Results of What Heritage means to the Public (Cook 2020) Information from: Ellison, Powell 2018.

A RC H IT E CT U R AL

F rom this study, carried out by Ellison and Powell of the Heritage

Lottery Fund (2018), the results show that middle class, white, older people tend to engage with heritage more than others.

This may be from the fact that it resonates more with them on a personal level, as they might understand the history more; 50% of candidates described heritage as being ‘old’ (Ellison, Powell 2018).

Does the recurring elitist typology of architectural heritage have anything to do with the fact middle class society engages with heritage more?

If heritage worked more with working class buildings such as council houses, would this change the results?

T he phrases occurring in the word map (Figure 07) might alter if

heritage vernacular was different. It is no secret that council housing is looked down upon by a large portion of middle-class/ elitist society, therefore words such as ‘pride’ might not have appeared so much if more lower class society was included more in heritage.

HE RITAGE

VISUAL

E S S AY

I S H E R I T A G E F O R M E D F R O M E L I T I S T S O C I E T Y ?

B reamore House is a 16th Century house in Hampshire. The house stands proud sat in the Breamore Village and the vast grounds of 125 ha boasts Elizabethan style (HistoricEngland 2020 (b)).

T he interior of the house evokes very classical features such as high ceilings, stone fireplaces, wooden floors and panelling.

Figure 09: Breamore House in Winter (Historic England 2020 (b))

Figure 10: Drawing Room of Breamore House (Historic England 2020 (b)).

A RC H IT E CT U R AL

HE RITAGE

T he architectural detailing is incredibly ornate and a feature

of pre-industrial revolution.

All stonework would have been done by hand by a craftsman, a skill that lacks in modern day society.

Now a museum, the overall grandeur of the mansion is only telling of why people would pay to visit.

Figure 11: Cornice Detail (Historic England 2020 (b)).

VISUAL

E S S AY

Figure 12: Dining Room 1 (Breamore House n.d.).

Figure 13: Ornate Furnshing (Breamore House n.d.).

Figure 14: Copper Taps (Breamore House n.d.).

A RC H IT E CT U R AL

HE RITAGE

T he building is obviously from an elitist group, the decorative architecture, ornate furniture and numerous artwork shows this. As skilled craftsmen in modern day are

lacking, it is rare to find a newer build that possess such detail - hence why modern day architecture is described as ‘stark’. Therefore, the need to protect these older buildings, which hold so much of the craft, is significant. Significant for the fact that they are like a timeframe of history and so are educational to younger people (even architectural students). The kitchen contains copper ware which has the names of their owners engraved on them, a very nostalgic touch (Breamore House n.d.).

This architectural heritage is the very type that mostly older, middle class generations will engage with. Although younger generations can see the beauty in the building, the cultural significance doesn’t resonate with them as much (Ellison, Powell 2018).

Figure 15: Artwork 1 (Breamore House n.d.)

VISUAL

E S S AY

A RC H IT E CT U R AL

T he work of Marxist theorist Theodor Adorno, summarises heritage as

permanence which loses cultural value over time. In theory, heritage objects, such as architecture, provide an insight into past societies but the reailty is that younger generations overlook the cultual value and just see the aesthetic. This may be an insight into why more elitist architecture remains as heritage as a pose to social housing as after so long it only provides aesthetic value.

That being said, there are a number of examples of social housing that has been given the status of protection that more elitist arhitecture would normally gain (REF).

Figure 16: Beauty over Culture (Cook 2020)

HE RITAGE

VISUAL

E S S AY

E nglsih Heritage are unable to give a number of listed social housing in

the UK however, they have said that there are “45 listed post-War housing estates” (Youde 2018). Many housing estates that are under threat are being denied listing.

“There are a lot of incredibly good post-War housing estates that should be listed.”Catherine Croft (Youde 2018).

L ocal authorities and landlords want to increase the amount of social housing, however this can be

expensive once a building becomes listed. Instead, they take the cheaper alternative, building new, which puts the social housing at risk. 1950s and 1960s housing estates are expensive to ‘do up’ due to the stonework - it would take months/years for a stonemason to do repair work (Youde 2018).

Stonemasons in modern day are expensive due to a lack of them, an expense most local authorities are unwilling to pay. Not only this, but planning permission for a building that is listed can take 3-6 months longer than a building that isn’t listed (Youde 2018).

The best option here, for authorities and developers, is to keep the original architecture but with no listing so that refurbishments can be done quickly and inexpensively. English Heritage know this and therefore denies multiple listing applications in order to prevent from the building becoming disused.

This process underlines the capitalist views on heritage architecture and their ways of being used.

Although it is interesting that this way of thinking probably wouldn’t apply to more elitist architectural heritage.

A RC H IT E CT U R AL

HE RITAGE

B yker Wall Estate, Newcastle-Upon-Tyne, is

a Grade II listed housing estate. The bricks needed for repairs cost £3.50 per brick, because of the listing, rather than 60p for an ordinary brick (Youde 2018).

Figure 17: Byker Wall Estate (Youde 2018).

T rellick Tower (Grade II) apparently was the inspiration

for the book ‘High-Rise’ by JG Ballard (Youde 2018). The Architect Erno Goldfinger, was prevailant in the mid 20th Century due to his designs of high rise buildings and his contribution to the modernist movement. Trellick Tower is one of his most famous works (Maher n.d.).

Figure 18: Trelick Tower (Youde 2018).

A nother Grade II listed high rise is The Lawn, deisgned by Sit Frederick Gibberd (Youde 2018). Harlow, the place of The Lawn, is well known for being home to the first residential tower blocks in UK (RIBA 2020).

Figure 19: The Lawn (Youde 2018).

VISUAL

E S S AY

Figure 20: Hoover Building (Historic England 2011 (a)).

Figure 21: Wheal Jenkin Copper Mine (Historic England 2011 (a)).

A RC H IT E CT U R AL

HE RITAGE

Figure 22: Sheffield’s Cornish Place Works (Historic England 2011 (a)).

A number of industrial buildings have been listed, which provides

critical interest as these entail many stories of working class communities.

Although, a lot of them are now being reused commercially and residentially for capital (Historic England 2011 (a)).

For example, the Hoover Building (Figure X) has been turned into luxury apartments (Wood n.d.).

This could be seen as an exploitation of the working class who once inhabited the space, as the very people who exploited them for their labour, are now using the buildings that possess their stories, for yet more profit. The use of heritage buildings in order to gain economic capital, drives the heritage more upmarket into a middle class community through the processes of regeneration and gentrification.

Figure 23: Saddleworth Woollen Mill (Historic England 2011 (a)).

“This was as much a cultural, social and economic revolution as a revolution in the techniques of making things�Historic England on the Industrial Revolution (2011 (a)).

VISUAL

E S S AY

A RC H IT E CT U R AL

HE RITAGE

E nglish Heritage protects buildings as well as the memories they evoke to those associated with them; the idea of nostalgia. They advise the government on what buildings to protect - it could be argued that English Heritage, a board of middle class people, are fueling the heritage industry with their own tastes.

A lot of heritage buildings, now, are used commercially, housing shops, restaurants, etc. Could it be, that the decision leading to what becomes heritage is profit-led rather than for nostalgia (Bayley 2009)?

Figure 24: Heritage for Nostalgia or Profit? (Cook 2020).

VISUAL

E S S AY

P ark Hill, a social housing complex in Sheffield, was given a Grade II listing in 1998 in hope that it would bring business into the area. There was a fair amount of dispute

about the listing as some believed it opposed what ‘English heritage’ is (Bayley 2009).

Figure 25: Visual 1 of Park Hill (Urban Splash 2020)

T he listing was made due to the modernist architecture that was influenced by Le Corbusier, as well as its attempt to bring the community together through clever

architectural layouts within the space (Urban Splash 2020). The listing contrasts to the traditional English Country House, or religious building that would normally be listed, hence the commotion caused.

T he fact that a social housing complex has been listed as heritage

might seem fair and inclusive, however, English Heritage have taken a different approach to Park Hill. Their intentions (which are currently going ahead) were to remove the stains of the past, literally, and restore the building to its “abstract historical model” (Bayley 2009).

The idea that architectural heritage is supposed to host nostalgia is completely eradicated by the notion of English Heritage ‘removing’ the proof of the working class living there.

Figure 26: Visual 2 (Urban Splash 2020)

A RC H IT E CT U R AL

HE RITAGE

A lot of the existing fabric was removed from the building and only the concrete structure remained - something that would not normally happen to a listed building.

The English Hertiage were acting more like property developers rather than conservationists, in this case.

Figure 27: Visual 3 of Park Hill (Urban Splash 2020)

T he architectural renders by Urban Splash show business people, artists and

student walking around the complex.

The new ideal demographic that the development is aiming at, removes any nostalgia and meaning to those who once lived there. New ‘trendy’ furniture targets younger audiences with clean lines and minimal finishes.

C ontrary to this, some would say that it would be unmoral towards the

original architect to leave his work in a state of disrepair. Afterall, the survey (2018) did show that 43% of people think that heritage can help address provide homes (Ellison, Powell 2018).

The restorations were made respectably, following the principles of William Morris, by making the repairs “such that you can see them, but not too easily” (Moore 2011).

VISUAL

E S S AY

A RC H IT E CT U R AL

C O N C L U S I O N

A ll architectural heritage is important for telling the stories of communities within the UK, however there seems to be a decision

process by English Heritage that drives a more profit-led ‘industry’ (the term ‘industry is being used cautiously as English Heritage isn’t one but does tend to act like one).

One of the main reasons for listings to occur is due to architecturally interesting elements. Architectural heritage that derives from more bourgeois society tends to boast very intricate detailing within timber, stone and hardware. As mentioned before, this is something very lacking within post-industrial architecture therefore there is a need to keep the architectural heritage that exhibits this.

As this architectural heritage connotes more middle to upper class society, it is easy to make the assumption that heritage is exclusive to this community alone.

It has been discovered that English Heritage have denied certain social housing blocks to be listed so that local authorities and landlords can create more profit by developing these buildings.

Without listing, landlords are free to use cheaper materials, and quicker build times - thus creating more economic capital.

The continuing of this will only push architectural heritage into a more middle-upper class community.

HE RITAGE

VISUAL

E S S AY

TAST E

D O E S T A S T E C L A S S E S ?

D E F I N E

Figure 28: Bourdieu Distinction Model (Bourdieu 1984)

B ourdieu theories in his book Distinction (1984) that ones personal taste is not personal at all but an idea put in our minds formed from our status and education;

and in modern day this could be advertisement too. The idea of social reproduction as society has passed on likes and dislikes throughout generations is a way of distinguishing the class system posed by Marx (1848). The graph (Bourdieu 1984), shows the generic attributes of people within different societies. For example, if one were to enjoy drinking champagne, own a boat and go hunting, it’d be assumed that they have a high capital volume (both cultural and economic). Compared to people who drink ordinary red wine and play foot ball, these are at the lower end of the spectrum.

VISUAL

E S S AY

A lthough this theory may seem harsh, the reality of it, even in today’s society, is undeniable It isn’t hard to spot what has derived

from precious elitist societies. Take hunting for example, a sport carried out by endless generations of privileged communities so they didn’t just have to live off farmland crops like the poor (Alimentarium n.d.). Similar stories apply to piano, horse riding and skiing; not cheap hobbies to endure. These are what Bourdieu presents as ‘Luxury Tastes’ - essentially what people with ‘spare cash’ can afford, compared to the ‘Necessity Tastes’ held by people of lower economic capital.

Figure 29: Elitist Tastes (Cook 2020).

TAST E

T aking Bourdieu’s graph into modern day,

if someone’s attributes put them at the pinnacle of capital volume then it is likely they would become ‘trend setters’ for that society. Therefore everything they do or enjoy will become a ‘trend’; this is a brief introduction of how social reproduction occurs.

The influx of advertisement, TV and social media today causes an increase in the social reproduction as a result.

Capitalists have made the most of advertisement to reach out to society in order to gain more profit.

Advertisement can merge the line between luxury and necessity by making the audience believe they ‘need’ something in order to live a happier life.

However, the produce being endorsed quite often comes at a value. It is this notion that encourages a divide in the class system; those who can afford and those who cannot.

Here we ask ourselves the question, is it taste that differentiates the class system or the ability to buy?

Figure 30: Social Reproduction Model (Cook 2020)

Idegree t may be that those who cannot afford possess a of jealousy towards those who can, furthering

the antagonism between classes. Therefore, the ‘lower class’ stick to interests that fall within their income, such as football, which in turn moves them toward the lower end of capital volume, according to Bourdieu’s graph.

VISUAL

E S S AY

TAST E

“Taste

is first and foremost the distaste, disgust and visceral intolerance of the taste of others”(Bourdieu 1984).

T his quote made by Bourdieu sums up how ‘taste’ is a social

construct. The antagonism between classes can cause each to want to be completely separate from the other. For instance, lower class society have a different heritage to middle/ upper class society. In order to stop themselves being associated with the other class, they (maybe subconsciously) prevent themselves from enjoying the same things. E.g. elitist society will rarely drink ordinary red wine as they don’t want to appear cheap.

So how much choice do we have in informing our own tastes? If we are subconsciously following the likes and dislikes of our ancestors, schooling system and social class, then the bias takes away from the complete freedom of making our own choices on our own desires.

VISUAL

E S S AY

So how does this relate to architecture?

T he model to the left takes Bourdieu’s Distinction model and puts it into architectural context. The further

left the building lies, the more cultural capital it holds and the higher up the building lies, the more economic capital it holds. It takes the idea of culture in a heritage fashion; therefore the more cultural buildings possess more historical meaning. For example the tudor house on the left side of the graph holds a lot more cultural heritage than the new build house on the right. The newer buildings are harder to analyse in terms of ‘culture’ as who is to say whether in decades/centuries they will be classed as an important part of English heritage or not.

Although, this model is extremely subjective. For what do we class as culture? How can a subjective matter be graphically organised?

It still, however, analogises the fact that our class is presumed from connotations of our tastes - in this sense, architectural taste.

W ith regards to architectural heritage, from what modern society perceives as Enlgish Heritage (see survey from Ellison, Powell 2018), the majority seem to fall in the ‘Capital Volume +’ sector - the elitist sector.

TAST E

Figure 31: Distinction Model in Relation to Architecture (Cook 2020)

VISUAL

E S S AY

GE NT RIFICAT ION

G E N T R I F I C A T I O N

G entrification is “the process of renovating and improving a house or district so that it conforms to middle-class taste.� (Oxford Dictionary 2019). Places such as Southwark (see case study 01) have seen huge amounts of gentrification from redevelopment of surrounding areas.

Figure 32: Gentrification Model (Cook 2020)

VISUAL

E S S AY

GE NT RIFICAT ION

T he thing with gentrification is it exists where (presumably) older

buildings exist and so here the choice lies whether to build from scratch or use the existing fabric. In a lot of instances, developers will choose to work with existing fabric to save time, money and effort - a true capitalist. These buildings then turn into apartments, trendy bars, etc., which drive the younger middle-class generation into the area.

We can question, from this, as to whether heritage is driving gentrification, or if gentrification is driving heritage.

T hrough the idea of social Gentrification, naturally, drives the prices reproduction, the desire for young of the area up. Kelham Island, Sheffield (see people to move into a trendy area, such as new Southwark, is ever increasing. With social medias now becoming a form of advertisement, this vogue doesn’t take long to catch on.

case study 2), has seen huge amounts of development since the 1980s, driving the younger generation in; which in turn furthers the development in the form of coffee shops, leisure and trendy bars. In this case, the (predominantly) working class society that have lived there before the development, have expressed concerns over the rising prices within the area.; these concerns have been expressed in the form of violence, vandalism and verbal. This supports Marx’s ideology framing the ‘antagonism’ between classes.

VISUAL

E S S AY

A s the aim of gentrification is to conform to middle class

geometric shapes

society (in particular the younger generations), the design of the adaptive resuse must be considered to what they believe is the tast of this society. To make the space ‘trendy’ and bring in the target audience, companies are using ...

bold colours Figure 33: Mood Board of Current Vogues (Cook 2020)

T hese design elements can often distract from the natural beauty of the existing architectural

heritage and, in some cases, over power. Not only this, but due to the desire for a high profit margin, the materials are often cheaper and more readily available which can be seen to be an exploitation of the existing.

GE NT RIFICAT ION

T he notion that the exisitng architecture is having to be adapted to Scandinavian furniture

suit the tastes of middle class society, conflicts the idea that the heritage architecture alone conforms to these tastes. Surley, if middle class society resonates with bourgeois heritage as an element of their own past, they should enjoy the space as its raw and natural self.

It should be made obvious, that here speaks mainly for restaurant and bar design - as seen in case study 1 - whereas English stately homes tend to hold onto their past state more.

G oing back to the study by Ellison and Powell (2018), perhaps the younger generations’ tastes are starting to blend.

It may be possible that Bourdieu’s theory stands until now, but millenials are beginning to change the demographic of this idea and enjoy similar things. Could this be from social media; a place where most have access to the same type of imagery?

VISUAL

E S S AY

GE NT RIFICAT ION

“ culture

d e s i r e s shape what architects talk about and see”(Deamer 2014).

M odern day social reproduction is blending the boundary between the distinctions in class taste. The

use of cheap and minimal materials, since the industrial revolution, has become a social norm(ality) and is what we now call ‘modern’. Architects and designers are conforming to this vogue and are using it within designs, furthering the reproduction of the trend (Deamer 2014) - hence the lack of engagment 16-24 year olds have with heritage (Ellison, Powell 2018).

It will be interesting to see whether the influx in adaptive reuse within heritage buildings affects the engagment younger people have with heritage, or whether the continued use of cheap materials will distract too much from this.

VISUAL

E S S AY

C ONCLU SION

C O N C L U S I O N

A nalysing Bourdieu’s philosophical theories of ‘taste’ is both challenging yet interesting. Challenging because with it being a subjective discourse, it is hard not to

be bias and informed by one’s own taste. The subjective nature also means that it isn’t factual and therefore, tricky to form solid conclusions from. However, one thing that was prevailent during the thesis was that the interests of the younger generations in the 21st Century, seem to be challenging Bourdieu’s model of Capital Volume (Figure 28). It would appear that, due to social reproduction, people from different classes are sharing the same interests. The influx of social media in recent years has allowed a wide variety of people to have access to the same types of ‘trending’ imagery; thus causing a blur between the boundaries of class.

Although present tastes appear to be unifying, the classes are still very seperate when it comes to architectural heritage. It goes without saying, now, that large stately homes, galleries/museums, religious buildings and more derive from an elitist background; but it doesn’t mean that working class society doesn’t have their own heritage. From the survey carried out by Ellison and Powell (2018), one word that stood out as a way of describing heritage was ‘pride’. The idea of architectural heritage being used as a way of ‘promoting’ the UK, it is no wonder that ‘pride’ is used by people of the UK. Consequently, more elitist architecture is going to be used as endorsement over lower class architecture.

It was realised that many listed buildings were old industrial buildings, making the idea of architectural heritage more inclusive within all classes. However, after analysing the precedents, it is clear that a lot of the buildings are now being used to house new residential and commercial properties.

Due to the lack of intricate architectural detailing within modern architecture, it is understandable that heritage buildings which evoke these attributes are listed.

Due to the intricacy of the stonework, covings, windows, etc. it was expensive - pre industrial revolution - to get this work done to a property, therefore only the elitists could afford such elements. Now we have properties that are desirable to keep, but just so happen to be part of a society that some can’t relate to.

VISUAL

E S S AY

C ONCLU SION

Figure 01: Abstract (Cook 2020)

CASE

ST U DI E S

MICHAELI S B OYD D U D D E L L’ S R E S TAU R A N T

A RC H I T E C T: PROJ E C T:

I N T R O D U C T I O N

T he brand ‘Duddell’s’, founded in Hong Kong in 2013, is a one-star Michelin grade restaurant

and is aimed at people with interest in arts and culture. Architecture studio, Michaelis Boyd, has helped them to create a new branch in Southwark, London, set in a Grade II listed church. (Levy 2018) The new space will act as a restaurant as well as a place to display contemporary art collections.

Figure 34: Exterior of Duddell’s Restaurant (formerly St. Thomas Church) (Cook 2019)

T he designers working on the project wanted to highlight the difference in old and new. Co-founder of Michaelis Boyd said that the “clear distinction between the old and new, works well in the monumental space” (Levy 2018).

D U D D E L L’ S

RE STAU R ANT

T he design won ‘Best Holy Orders’ in the Wallpaper Design Awards (2018) and ‘Best Restaurant in a Heritage Building’ in the Restaurant and Bar Design Awards (2018) (Michaelis Boyd n.d.).

Figure 35: Interior of Duddell’s Restaurant (Levy 2018)

CASE

ST U DI E S

L O C A T I O N

Figure 36: Sketches of Southwark (Cook 2019)

S(Hallt. Thomas’ Church - now Duddell’s- is set in Southwark, London’s oldest borough 2006). During and up to the 16th Century, Southwark was infamous for “vice

and immorality” (Tames 2001).

Since the regeneration of Southwark, which commenced in 1980s following the regeneration of London Docklands (Tames 2001), it has become a trendy part of London which is seeing a lot of adaptive reuse. In 2006, Architect Piers Gough said that the area has “made the most of the great potential of being close to the river” (Hall 2006), as the bankside is full of restaurants, galleries and winebars. The regeneration of the area has brought in millions of tourists, as well as created jobs and a nicer environment for locals. This new Southwark with its jobs and attractions is appealing to a more middle class society and is bringing in more capital to the area.

Other than leisure, Southwark has become a hub for offices - making the borough a capital hub.

Figure 37: Architecture around Southwark (Cook 2019)

D U D D E L L’ S

Figure 38: Location map of Duddell’s at 1:10,000 and 1:5,000 (Cook 2019)

RE STAU R ANT

CASE

ST U DI E S

D U D D E L L’ S

“

RE STAU R ANT

T h e b o r o u g h w a s s o r u n d o w n . . . n o w i t h a s m a d e t h e m o s t o f t h e g r e a t p o t e n t i a l o f b e i n g c l o s e t o t h e r i v e r .

Pie rs G oug h (Ha l l 2006)

“

CASE

ST U DI E S

H I S T O R Y

St. Thomas’ Hospital was founded 13th Centur y

A N D

P O L I T I C S

St. Thomas’ Church was built as part of the rebuild scheme for the hospital.

It was ran by nuns and monks. At the same time, the hospital was being rebuilt in red brick.

1680

16th Centur y Material changes 1666 The Great Fire of during this period became expensive London didn’t touch the hospital but did to maintain. cause damage to some of the owned property. This caused short term financial issues.

The hospital began to use the upper floor in the Church an a place to teach operating techniques. This continued until 1862.

1822

1732 The Church stopped being 1830s-40s a part of the New London Bridge Hospital and opened, and later the became a Parish addition of the station.

Church until The hospital had to be 1898. slightly re-aligned to suit this. An increase in passing traffic caused the hospital seek a quieter location Figure 9: Timeline of the History of St. Thomas Church, Hospital and opposite the Houses of surrounding area (Cook 2019) Parliament.

Information: (Tames 2001), (Museum 2019)

D U D D E L L’ S

Florence Nightingale set up her nursing school on the hospital site.

1859

The operating room of the Church was discovered during maintenance and is now open as a museum.

1957

1901-02 St. Thomas’ Church was converted to be reused as a Chapter House for the Southwark Cathedral. The conversion was done by Arthur Bartlett.

RE STAU R ANT

The regeneration of Southwark began, this was kickstarted by the regeneration of London Docklands.

1980s

2007 Refurbishment for Cathedral Group PLC.

2016 Duddell’s restaurant was designed within the Church by Michaelis Boyd.

CASE

ST U DI E S

O R I G I N A L D E S I G N S P A C I A L I T Y

Figure 40: Plan and Section of St. Thomas Church (Museum 2019)

A N D

D U D D E L L’ S

RE STAU R ANT

Imany nterestingly, the Church doesn’t evoke the typical ‘cross’ plan which is seen in so churches and cathedrals, instead its plan comes (presumably) from its ‘Queen Anne Style’ (Historic England 2019) which tends to be more of one rectangle than traditional cathedral design. The plan also features a square, four-storey, tower to the South-West (street side) of the building.

The plan and section show the layout of the interior, presumably designed by Sir Christopher Wren (Museum 2019). The outline of a gallery can be seen above the vestibule (the entrance space (Britain Express n.d.)) on the most west side of the Church. Galleries on the west side are a traditional feature that came into popularity during the late 17th century and historically hold the musicians and/or choir (Britain Express 2019).

CASE

ST U DI E S

O R I G I N A L E X T E R I O R

D E S I G N

-

Figure 41: Exterior of St Thomas Church (Levy 2018)

T he original architecture - built in 1680 - is notably designed in the Baroque style, typical of the 17th Century. Baroque architecture normally combines

architecture, painting and sculpture within the design to give a ‘sense of emotional exuberance.’ (History World n.d.). The architecture of the Church is also described as ‘Queen Anne Style’ (Historic England 2019) and holds many of the features of this style, such as the stone quoins featured at the corners of the building. The Queen Anne Style is seen more frequently in domestic typologies rather than churches which formulates the question of why the Church got built with these characteristics - particularly as it was designed before the period where the Style was popular (late 19th Century and early 20th Century) (History World n.d.).

D U D D E L L’ S

Figure 42: Sketch of Architectural Details (1) (Cook 2019)

RE STAU R ANT

Figure 43: Sketch of Architectural Details (2) (Cook 2019)

T he street facing elevation has four rounded windows which feature a different emblem on each one made from stained glass. The windows are given dynamism

from the lead lines which are made symmetrical and equal on each window; symmetry is regarded as a religious architectural characteristic (History World n.d.).

The lead lines, as well as add interest and composition, help to strengthen the glass.

Stone architraves boarder the windows, a typical architectural detail of the time and styles (Historic England n.d.).

It is known that at the same time that the Church was being built (1680), the Hospital was also being rebuilt in red brick as part of a rebuilding programme (Londonlives n.d.) - hence the red brick Church. It is unknown, however, why red brick was chosen as the main material. It could be guessed that the brick was cheaper to maintain than previous materials used during the 16th Century, as these became expensive to maintain (Historic England 2019).

CASE

ST U DI E S

2 0 0 7 R E U S E C A T H E D R A L

‘ T H E G R O U P ’

Figure 44: 2007 Refurbishment (Team n.d.)

Icompany n 2007 the Church was refurbished to suit the new location of property developing ‘The Cathedral Group PLC’ (Team n.d.) From the images, it is clear that

new flooring was laid out and electric points within the flooring were installed.

The materiality of the furnishing within the space could be argued to be poorly chosen as they have no relation to the existing materials. The glass top tables with trestle legs completely contrasts the intricate detailing of the existing oak altar.

D U D D E L L’ S

RE STAU R ANT

Figure 45: 2007 Refurbishment (2) (Team n.d.)

F rom looking at the plans of, it is clear that the former gallery space was turned into a mezzanine level and was also extended along the most north side of the Church. The new structure is formed from (presumably) steel beams, pre-fabricated timber boarding and a glass balustrade - all elements from the industrial revolution (Moreno, Blanco 2014). This completely contrasts the artistry of the masonry and carvings that have been preserved from the past.

CASE

ST U DI E S

D U D D E L L’ S

“

RE STAU R ANT

[ p r o p e r t i e s ] a l l o w u s t o t u r n a r o u n d l o s t p o c k e t o f L o n d o n a n d t h e s o u t h - e a s t , a n d p u t b r o k e n p l a c e s b a c k t o g e t h e r a g a i n . T o c r e a t e j o b s a n d h o m e s a n d s e n s e o f w e l l b e i n g . T o g e n e r a t e v a l u e i n u n l i k e l y n e i g h b o u r h o o d s V a l u e n o t j u s t f o r u s , b u t l a s t i n g v a l u e f o r l o c a l e c o n o m i e s , c o m m u n i t i e s a n d b u s i n e s s e s . W e ’d c a l l o u r s e l v e s a g e n t s o f s o c i o - e c o n o m i c c h a n g e .

T he C at he d r a l Group PLC ( Archel l o n . d. )

“

CASE

ST U DI E S

2 1 0 6 R E U S E T H E B R A N D

-

D U D D E L L ’ S

T he graphics for Duddell’s (brand)

were designed by Yang Rutherford. They “pay close attention to Hong Kong’s Colonial heritage and uniquely Chinese culture (Yang n.d.).

Figures 46 - 49: Duddell’s brand graphics (Yang n.d.)

D U D D E L L’ S

T he people in the images quite clearly reflect a Bourgeoisie society - the long

coats, top hats and long dresses indicate this. The imagery replacing the heads of the figure may represents the society’s ‘tastes’ and interests. It is clear that the brand Duddell’s is making efforts to attract a middle-class customer to its restaurants from these imageries.

RE STAU R ANT

CASE

ST U DI E S

A ccording to the Business Traveller (2017), the pricing of the food served at Duddell’s is “at a notoriously high price”.

Figure 50: Food at Duddell’s (1) (SilverSpoon London 2019)

Figure 51: Food at Duddell’s (2) (SilverSpoon London 2019)

D U D D E L L’ S

RE STAU R ANT

Figure 52: Food at Duddell’s (3) (SilverSpoon London 2019)

T he

table ware and glass ware designs are inherited from Chinese culture (Duddell’s n.d.) but have an essence of opulence about them which tailor to middle class taste.

Figure 53: Food at Duddell’s (4) (SilverSpoon London 2019)

CASE

ST U DI E S

2 0 1 6 R E U S E D U D D E L L ’ S T H E A R T W O R K Figure 54: Artwork (1) (Rim 2018)

D uddell’s in a “private member’s club and restaurant

for people who have an active appreciation for the arts.”

(Rutherford n.d.). The blend between restaurant and art gallery supports the idea that the brand conforms to middle class society.

Figure 55: Artwork (2) (Rim 2018)

D U D D E L L’ S

RE STAU R ANT

“Cultural capital objectified in material Figure 56: Artwork (3) (Rim 2018)

objects and media - such as ‘writings, paintings, monuments, instruments, etc., is transmissible i n i t s m a t e r i a l i t y. A collection of paintings, for example, can be transmitted as well as economic capital and its r e p r o d u c t i o n .”

(Bourdieu 1986)

T he above theorises that

quote by Bourdieu art forms part of a ‘Cultural Capital’, the culture of which is inherited from bourgeoisie civilisation.

The gentrification of Southwark location of Duddell’s London - is key to understanding the audience that businesses in the area are targeting.

Figure 57: Artwork (4) (Rim 2018)

CASE

ST U DI E S

Figure 58: Artwork (5) (Rim 2018)

Figure 59: Artwork (6) (Rim 2018)

D U D D E L L’ S

RE STAU R ANT

Stheomespace, of the artwork displayed in interestingly, evokes a

Figure 60: Artwork (7) (Rim 2018)

Figure 61: Artwork (8) (Rim 2018)

certain renaissance. This renaissance, although presented in a more abstract manor, subtly nods to the old use of the space as a Church.

On-the-other-hand, other artworks are very modern such as the projected image (below) and the neon signage (bottom left).

It is unknown who curates the art work but it would appear that some consideration to the original building has occurred. In the bottom left image, it is apparent that the neon signage has been fixed to a new (presumably temporary) structure in order to prevent impact to the wall.

It must be noted that all the artwork presented in Duddell’s is created especially for the space. Some of the pieces do have religious elements and some are inspired by the building itself.

CASE

ST U DI E S

Figure 62: Oh... My Toy! (1) (See 2018)

Figure 63: Oh... My Toy! (2) (See 2018)

D U D D E L L’ S

RE STAU R ANT

O ne of the art pieces featured in 2018 was ‘OH... MY TOY!’ by Michael Lau in 2018 (See 2018). The artwork is a large sculpture of

a ‘toy’ which stands infront of the original altar.

Michael Lau is “known as a pioneer of the ‘designer toy’ movement” (See 2018), somewhat a capitalist. He sees collecting toys as almost like a religious ritual and aimed, in this exhibition, to bring “toys, art and God together in a new trinity” (See 2018).

CASE

ST U DI E S

2 0 1 6 R E U S E T H E D E S I G N

-

D U D D E L L ’ S

T he new space is a “cultural and social destination for people with an appreciation for the arts” (Archilovers 2018) and then general arrangement is organised in a way to encourage conversation.

Figure 64: Duddell’s Ground Floor Plan (Michaelis Boyd 2016)

T he “ground floor design is focused towards the original dark timber church altar” (Archilovers 2018). This plays homage to the original religious

D U D D E L L’ S

RE STAU R ANT

T he new additions to the interior, such as the reception desk and new bars, are not attached to the existing structure to ensure that no damage to the existing structure occurs (Archilovers 2018)

“

R e s t o r i n g t h e b u i l d i n g t o i t s f o r m e r g l o r y . . . a b i g p a r t o f t h e dM i ceh ase lii sgo fn .

“

Micha el is B oyd Ass o c i ate s , 2 0 1 8 ( L e v y 2 0 18 )

CASE

ST U DI E S

Figure 65: Duddell’s Interior (1) (Levy 2018)

D U D D E L L’ S

“When designing the space, we wanted to celebrate the b u i l d i n g ’s r i c h h i s t o r y a n d highlight the difference b e t w e e n o l d a n d n e w. We maximised the natural light that comes into the building to accentuate key heritage features and now the former church has a new lease of l i f e” (Levy 2018)

RE STAU R ANT

CASE

ST U DI E S

Y ounger generations will be more attracted to brightly coloured interiors with bold patterns as they seem more

lively. With gentrification being so key in modern day Southwark, it is necessary for businesses to cater for the younger generation.

The press release by Michaelis Boyd (Archilovers 2018) described the new bar as ‘monolithic’ - “very large and characterless” and “large, powerful [...] and slow to change” (Oxford Dictionary 2019).

Figure 66: Duddell’s Interior (2) (SilverSpoon London 2019)

D U D D E L L’ S

Figure 67: Duddell’s Interior (3) (Levy 2018)

A ‘pod’

RE STAU R ANT

new partitioned replicates the oak panelling that remains from the original build, only this time it is pink.

To contrast, green gloss tiles clad the check-in desk which is topped with pink terrazzo. The glossy green tiles successfully contrast the slightly worn original oak which highlights the designers concept.

According to Frank and Rudolf Mahnke (1993) pink and green ‘hold pleasant associations with smell’ and taste. These colours also contrast well the dark oak that exists from the original design.

Figure 68: Duddell’s Interior (4) (Rim 2018)

CASE

ST U DI E S

M ichaelis Boyd created a “retro space with a contemporary twist” (Archilovers 2018). The geometric flooring helps to create the ‘retro’ feel

and the colours within it compliment the furnishings and existing features.

The existing features, such as panelling, the altar and the impressive windows, gives the restaurant a USP (unique selling point) which helps keeps customers coming back as it has the designed ‘character’ that socalled ‘hipsters’ find trendy.

Figure 69: Duddell’s Interior (5) (Levy 2018)

Figure 70: Duddell’s Interior (6) (Levy 2018)

D U D D E L L’ S

RE STAU R ANT

Figure 71: Duddell’s Interior (7) (Levy 2018)

“Michaelis Boyd has introduced modern chandeliers connected to the original ceiling by a series of lightweight fixings that have minimal impact on the original structure.” (Archilovers 2018). The “suspended lights [resemble] Chinese lanterns” (Dimon 2017).

Figure 72: Duddell’s Interior (8) (Levy 2018)

T he 8 meter high space is partitioned with a mezzanine level - from looking at plans it can be assumed that this was added prior to the 2007 refurbishment. A glass balustrade lines the mezzanine yet still allows the

ST U DI E S

Notes

LOUNGE BAR PROPOSED BANQUETTE DETAILS

EX.05

WL 2

WL 2

SECTION A

WL 2

DL

P7 WL 2

245

P2

DL

DL

1150

TL 2

EX.02 EX.03

905

SECTION A

DL

DL

DWARF WALL TO BACK OF BANQUETTE TO BE FORMED OF 50X25MM SW STUDWORK, CLAD IN MDF WITH OAK VENEER FACING. WITH SOLID OAK CAPPING TO ENDS. FINISH TO MATCH EXISTING PANELLING.

ELEVATION A BANQUETTE DWARF WALL TO FORM LEVEL JUNCTION WITH EXISTING COLUMN.

Plan - Banquette

LEATHE

SUPPLIER: NAME: COLOUR: REF:

Scale: 1:20

Elevation B

3

300

SCREEN TO BE FORMED OF 20X20MM WELDED BLACKENED STEEL FRAME AROUND METAL MESH. ALL WELDED JOINTS TO BE RUBBED DOWN AND POLISHED TO MATCH. MESH TO BE 1.5MM THICK, BLACK POWDER COATED FINISH. (amronarchitectural.co.uk ref. H4.5 T5).

100

Scale: 1:10

230

225

245

SCREEN TO BE FORMED OF 20X20MM WELDED BLACKENED STEEL FRAME AROUND METAL MESH. ALL WELDED JOINTS TO BE RUBBED DOWN AND POLISHED TO MATCH. MESH TO BE 1.5MM THICK, BLACK POWDER COATED FINISH. (amronarchitectural.co.uk ref. H4.5 T5).

BANQUETTE BACK AT 10DEG FROM VERTICAL. TO BE FORMED OF 300MM FLUTED ROLLS UPHOLDETERED IN LEATHER. SEE LEATHER SPECIFICATION FOR FURTHER DETAILS.

0°

0.0

10

905 3.50°

320

SPRUNG BASE AT 3.5DEG FROM HORIZONTAL. UPHOLSTERED LEATHER FINISH - TO BE STRETCHED TO ACHIEVE FLAT FINISH. SEE LEATHER SPECIFICATION FOR FURTHER DETAILS.

470 150

150

150

Client

JIA Group Drawing Title

Lounge Bar Prop Details Scale

15086-302 Revision

T1 Drawn By

4

Section A Scale: 1:5

Figure 73: Duddell’s Banquette Detail (Michaelis Boyd 2016)

Figure 74: Duddell’s furniture (Michaelis Boyd 2016)

ISSUE

St Thomas' Chur

Drawing Number

BANQUETTE FRAME TO BE FORMED OF SW TIMBER BATTENS.

CD

TIMBER SKIRTING. CONTRACTOR TO ALLOW FOR FINISH TO MATCH EXISTING PANELLING.

100

Elevation A

22/12/16

Project

Do not scale from draw checked on site. Report discrepancies to the arc

TIMBER SKIRTING. CONTRACTOR TO ALLOW FOR FINISH TO MATCH EXISTING PANELLING.

Scale: 1:5

T1

Varies @ A1

1150

1150

DWARF WALL TO BACK OF BANQUETTE TO BE FORMED OF 50X25MM SW STUDWORK, CLAD IN MDF WITH OAK VENEER FACING. FINISH TO MACTH EXISTING PANELLING.

905

960

1150

BANQUETTE BACK TO BE FORMED OF 300MM FLUTED ROLLS. SEE LEATHER SPECIFICATION FOR FURTHER DETAILS.

DWARF WALL TO BACK OF BANQUETTE TO BE FORMED OF 50X25MM SW STUDWORK, CLAD IN MDF WITH OAK VENEER FACING. FINISH TO MACTH EXISTING PANELLING.

NOTE: SA CONTRAC PRODUC MANUFAC CLIENT A

FEATURE LIGHTING SUPPORT - SEE DETAIL DWG. 313 FOR FURTHER DETAILS.

700 470

20

20 30

2

DL

P2

TL 1

EX.01

1

DL

1

DL

DL

WL 2

DL

P2

DL

DL

750

650

DL

DL

1

ELEVATION B

DL

FP

770

DL

WL 2 WL 2

SCREEN TO BE FORMED OF 20X20MM WELDED BLACKENED STEEL FRAME AROUND METAL MESH. ALL WELDED JOINTS TO BE RUBBED DOWN AND POLISHED TO MATCH. MESH TO BE 1.5MM THICK, BLACK POWDER COATED FINISH. (amronarchitectural.co.uk ref. H4.5 T5).

800

100 100

5393

WL 2

5592 100

TEN FEATURE LIGHTING SUPPORT - SEE DETAIL DWG. 313 FOR FURTHER DETAILS.

FP

CASE

Michaelis Boyd 108 Palace Gard London W8 4RT

44 20 7221 1237 hello@michaelisb michaelisboyd.co

D U D D E L L’ S

Figure 75: Duddell’s colour and material palette (Cook 2019)

RE STAU R ANT

CASE

ST U DI E S

D U D D E L L’ S

RE STAU R ANT

“

D u d d e l l ’ s L o n d o n a n n o u n c e d i t s p l a n t o m o v e t o a n e w l o c a t i o n [ . . . ] T h e c l o s u r e o f t h e L o n d o n B r i d g e s p a c e c o m e s a s a r e s u l t o f c o n t i n u e d p l a n n i n g c h a l l e n g e s w i t h t h e l a n d l o r d a n d t e c h n i c a l d i f f i c u l t i e s r e l a t e d t o t h e G r a d e I I l i s t e d c h u r c h , w h i c h h a s p r e v e n t e d D u d d e l l ’ s f r o m f u l l y r e a l i s i n g i t s a u t h e n t i c C a n t o n e s e c u l i n a r y v i s i o n .

C o g h l an 20 1 9

“

CASE

ST U DI E S

D U D D E L L’ S

D U D D E L L ’ S

RE STAU R ANT

O V E R V I E W

T he new users of the space (Duddell’s) are certainly capitalists. The ‘membership’ concept of the institution in-deniably conforms to the

bourgeoisie, as does the design.

Although the building hasn’t become a commodification in this instance (according to Marx’s ideas of ‘commodification’ and ‘exploitation’, 1848), it could be argued that the building is being exploited in other ways, such as its use and ‘privatisation’.

The architects have been careful not to cause harm to the existing structure by avoiding direct contact with existing walls and raising the new floor to protect the original; they have also made efforts to replicate the existing materials. However, the use of cheap materials weakens the richness of the existing material - e.g. the use of oak veneer on joinery to replicate the hardwood panelling.

CASE

ST U DI E S

T EAT UM + TEATUM T ESTON E FACTORY

A RC H I T E C T: PROJ E C T:

I N T R O D U C T I O N

T he Testone Factory was designed by Teatum + Teatum, London based designers, in 2018 (Wood n.d.). The building was originally an 18th Century ironworks factory,

however it has been adapted into an office and co-working space used by the creatives of Sheffield.

Figure 76: Testone Interior (1) (Wilson 2018)

T E STONE

FACTORY

Figure 77: Testone Interior (2) (Wilson 2018)

The clients are the brand communications agency ‘Peter and Paul’. who claim to be a team of “designers, planners, developers, writer, art directors, film-makers, and ideas people creating positive change for ambitious clients.” (Peter&Paul n.d.).

Half of the 400sq metre space is private space for Peter and Paul’s company whilst the other spaces have been adapted suit a co-working space for other creatives.

CASE

ST U DI E S

L O C A T I O N

Figure 78: Location map of The Testone Factory at 1:5,000 (Cook 2019)

T he creative workplace is set in one of Sheffield’s oldest industrial sites, Kelham Island (Divisare 2018). It sits on the edge of the River Don, which runs through

Northern Sheffield (Divisare 2018). The location has seen a huge amount of gentrification since the late 1990s and this has encouraged fresh creatives into the area (thenorthernurbanist 2017). These transitioning spaces are ‘driving Sheffield’s innovation economy’ (Peter&Paul n.d.).

T E STONE

FACTORY

Figure 79: Old Exterior of the Site (thenorthernurbanist 2017)

Shasince the late 20th Century, Kelham has seen a huge influx in development which caused the local population to increase tenfold (thenorthernurbanist 2017). This

change in demographic has cause social conflict within the area as people who lived there before feel that the so-called ‘hipsters’ (younger generation) are taking over the area (thenorthernurbanist 2017). The conflict has most likely derived from a fear in the less wealthy people that lived there before that the house prices are going to rapidly rise and that they will be forced out of the area (thenorthernurbanist 2017).

This social disrupt fits Marx’s theories on ‘Antagonism’ and the ‘Dialects’ between classes (Marx 1867).

CASE

ST U DI E S

T E STONE

FACTORY

“

d e m o g r a p h i c s h i f t i n t h e p a s t 1 0 1 5 y e a r s ; f r o m p o o r p e o p l e l i v i n g i n s u b s t a n d a r d ( b u t c h e a p ) a c c o m m o d a t i o n - i n o l d . . . e x - i n d u s t r i a l . . . b u i l d i n g s - t o y o u n g , w e a l t h y , e d u c a t e d , l i b e r a l t y p e s w h o f l o o d t h e a r e a s w i t h c o f f e e s h o p s , r e n o v a t e t h e o l d b u i l d i n g s , a n d p u s h u p h o u s e p r i c e s .

“

t he nor t he r nu r b anist 2 0 1 7

CASE

ST U DI E S

H I S T O R Y Fashionable tableware started being produced which conformed to a bourgeois society in order to seek more profit.

Within the next half century, the population would increase by 35,000. Some improvements were made to the city 1740s but the conditions of the working class homes were cramped and unsanitary.

1820s

1624 ‘Company of Cutlers’ was set up within the cutlery making industry and working class were migrating to Sheffield to gain an income.

Sheffield gained the right to employ 2 MPs, although votes were limited to people who were ‘seen fit’ to vote.

1832

1832 A cholera outbreak caused the death of 402 people in Sheffield.

1780s Industrial yards became overly populated with both factories and people.

This caused political unrest.

Figure 80: Timeline of the History of Sheffield (Cook 2019) Information: (Jones 2017)

1840s The addition of railways into the city provided new opportunities.

T E STONE

New businesses employed thousands of working class and they made relative profit from this. People started coming from agricultural backgrounds as they saw the industrial revolution as a new source of income.

1860s

Following destruction from the war, slums began to be cleared to make way for new housing estates.

1940s

1860s The working conditions within the factories were extremely poor and life expectancy was seen as low as 40. There was no trade unionism.

1950s Large scale developments, such as Park Hill, began appearing in the city.

FACTORY

Regeneration schemes throughout Sheffield developed and young people seeking education moved into the city, making it a trendy place and gentrifying the area.

1980s

1960s A new Clean Air Act was started to reduce air pollution from the factories. By 1966, Sheffield was given the title of the word’s cleanest industrial city.

CASE

ST U DI E S

T E STONE

H I S T O R I C A L

FACTORY

O V E R V I E W

Sclassheffield made the most of its industrial factories and started conforming to middlesociety desires by creating bourgeois tableware and ornaments. In the shadows

of the profit that came from these industries were the suffering working class who only had labour to offer - unlike the middle-class who had their power and wealth.

This is where the social unrest between classes derives from, in Marx’s theories.

The working conditions of the factories were completely inadequate and it was said that is was “normal for a fork grinder to be past work at 35 and dead by 40.” (Jones 2017). One cannot blame the working class for their hatred towards the capitalists.

After the ‘Sheffield Blitz’ in 1940, where bombs raided the city, Sheffield began to redevelop. Slums were destroyed and ‘proper’ homes for the working class were built in the form of council housing. As more developments went on, particularly during the 1980s, the younger generation began to move in in search of education.

Sheffield was now seen as an ‘education centre’ and then influx of the young drove new industries such as retail, coffee shops, bars and leisure - gentrification.

“the growth in population between 1800 and 1900 was driven by innovation and e x p e r i m e n t ” (Divisare 2018).

CASE

ST U DI E S

2 0 1 8 R E U S E P A U L T H E B R A N D

-

Figure 81: Peter and Paul Website (Peter&Paul n.d.)

P E T E R

A N D

T E STONE

“

B e c a u s e g r e a t i d e a s a r e w h a t e n g a g e a u d i e n c e s m a k e t h e m r e m e m b e r l i k e l o v e s h a r e n o t i c e b u y d o n a t e a n d v i s i t Pe te r and Pau l n .d.

“

FACTORY

CASE

ST U DI E S

2 0 1 8 R E U S E P A U L T H E D E S I G N

-

P E T E R

A N D

J a m e s Te a t u m : “ t h e n a m e ‘ Te s t o n e F a c t o r y ’ r e f l e c t s the rich heritage Sheffield has in the production of good and products, and was an approach we took to considering the space as a factory for the production and experimentation of ideas” (Divisare 2018)

Figure 82: Plan of Testone (Wilson 2018)

T E STONE

FACTORY

Figure 83: Plan Concept Sketches (Cook 2019)

T he new plan of the factory is designed around three concepts: ideas, speculation and production.

“The factory separates ideas and production” (Divisare 2018) and in between is a space for speculation.

Speculation occurs in “a large corridor” (Divisare 2018) where conversation is encouraged to allow for ‘creative collaborations’ and ‘commercial sustainability’ (Divisare 2018).

The plan reflects the thought process that someone would go through in a creative industry.

It would appear that Peter and Paul are much more interested in the ‘ideas’ and ‘speculation’ side of the brand - in a recent instagram post to they stated: “A r t f i r s t b u s i n e s s l a t e r ” (testonefactory 2018).

‘full height glazed windows’ at each end of the building allow the interior to be ‘connected to the city at both ends’ (Divisare 2018). The idea that the space is ‘connected to the city’ runs throughout the design - “it shows how regeneration at a local level can contribute and be a positive catalyst for change” (Divisare 2018).

Figure 84: Section Concept Sketch (Cook 2019)

CASE

ST U DI E S

T E STONE

FACTORY

“

W e b e l i e v e c u l t u r e i s i n t r i n s i c a l l y l i n k e d t o c o m m u n i c a t i o n ; c o m m u n i c a t i o n s h a p e s c u l t u r e a n d c u l t u r e s h a p e s c o m m u n i c a t i o n .

Pe te r and Pau l ( Wi ls on 2 0 1 8 )

“

CASE

ST U DI E S

Figure 85: Testone Interior (3) (Wilson 2018)

T E STONE

“The space [...] is formed by deep polycarbonate walls. A back lit box, allowing both daylight and LED light to animate its surfaces through t h e d a y. It becomes a register of activities in the serviced spaces and the sunlight around the site.

Supported by a raw timber frame, the walls separate the world of thinking from the world of making�

(Divisare 2018)

FACTORY

CASE

ST U DI E S

The rear side of the polycarbonate walls is a timber construction which forms a corridor space. The LED strip light mirrors the movement of the corridor and successfully illuminates the space.

The lighting throughout the building is minimal and/or hidden - within polycarbonate walls. There are no lavish chandeliers like Duddell’s Restaurant.

Infact, the entire design is based on minimalist principles. This minimalism is in keeping with the flexibility of the space. “excess of flexibility to create an excess of possibility.” (Divisare 2018).

Figure 86: Testone Interior (4) (Wilson 2018)

T E STONE

Figure 87: Testone Interior (5) (Wilson 2018)

FACTORY

CASE

ST U DI E S

“Splashes of colour are provided throughout by red storage and textural wall art�

(Divisare 2018)

Figure 88: Testone Interior (6) (Wilson 2018)

T E STONE

FACTORY

CASE

ST U DI E S

Figure 89: Testone Interior (7) (Wilson 2018)

“ [ S h e f f i e l d ’s ] media was the red hot glow of the crucible glimpse through factory do ors” (Divisare 2018)

Figure 90: Testone Interior (8) (Wilson 2018)

T E STONE

FACTORY

T he materiality of the space is very minimalistic. Chipboard allows creatives to pin work up within the space, allowing flexibility. Plywood is also used in some of the micro-offices, a cheap material that has good strength.

The materials certainly don’t conform to a bourgeois society but more to a younger, creative generation who are behind the gentrification. This generation, in some opinions, are the future capitalists.

Figure 91: Testone Material Palette (Cook 2019)

“Splashes of colour” (Divisare 2018) within furnishings and art give an essence of playfulness, arguably necessary within a creative environment. The polycarbonate can be seen to glow red and blue - a nice touch when hosting events.

Figure 92: Testone Interior (9) (testonefactory 2018)

CASE

ST U DI E S

T E STONE

FACTORY

T E S T O N E F A C T O R Y O V E R V I E W

P

‘

eter and Paul’ support local and independent business by offering space to work for ‘reasonable rent’ (Divisare 2018). Unlike most capitalists, who fight for the top, Peter and Paul work on a collaborative basis. Granted, they are making profit from creatives renting the space but the idea of collaboration is seen “to be a creative and a commercial benefit to owner and tenant” (Divisare 2018). This ‘creative benefit’ may be more profitable than the economic gain.

One of Marx’s theories was that workers couldn’t ‘see themselves in their own work’ and that produce lacked an individuality. Peter and Paul seem to have created a space that moves away from this idea as the idea is to excel individuality and enforce creativity. This may be because the space is rented by individual creatives who work for themselves or a smaller group of people, or it may be the lack of machinery within the environment. The old typology of a factory is still present within the space, the large spaces, lack of soft materials and existing concrete provide this memory. However, the present user(s) seem to be more forward thinking ‘capitalists’ and provide a more sustainable business.

The new materials used in the space reflects Deamer’s notion that easily accessed materials which are cheap, are used in modern builds to gain a higher profit (2014).

The Testone Factory supports this theory as plywood and chipboard are cheap materials, and are used everywhere in the design. However, if rich materials, such as hardwoods and stones, were used within the spaces, people could argue that (according to Bourdieu’s theory on ‘taste’, 1984) the design was conforming to a more middle-class society; which would go against the integrity of ‘Peter and Paul’.

In contrast to Marx’s idea of ‘antagonism’ - a division between classes (Marx 1848) - the Testone Factory works with locals to fight the negative connotations of gentrification (Divisare 2018). “The gallery seeks to bring a public to Kelham and host an emerging generation of creatives.” (Divisare 2018). As mentioned in the previous case study, Bourdieu’s theory (1984) is that art is a culture inherited from bourgeois society; but the fact that Testone is situated within a historical factory which witnessed the exploitation of the working class, seems to diminish this notion from the practise.

“When something becomes a commodity, it is on the path to exploitation” (Mangold n.d.). ‘Peter and Paul’ have created spaces that can be rented out to creatives, in Marx’s theory this is the ‘exploitation’ of the heritage building as the spaces have been commodified to create a capital.

CASE

ST U DI E S

C ASE ST U DY C OMPARIS ON

C A S E

S T U D Y

C O M P A R I S O N

T he commodification in each case study is completely different. In the Testone Factory, the building is the commodification as parts are being rented, where as in Duddell’s the food and service is what is being sold. In terms of architecture, this would mean that the building Testone Factory is being exploited more than the Church.

However, analysing the uses of each building and the morals of the capitalists who occupy them, it is evident that Duddell’s is the bigger exploiter of culture.

Interestingly, the buildings seem to have reversed roles: the Church (once open to all) has become a victim of cultural exploitation, whilst the factory (once an establishment of harsh working conditions) is now opening up to a wider audience of all classes.

The materials used in each project are both ‘cheap’, presumably in order to gain a higher profit. Michaelis Boyd designed Duddell’s to reflect the existing - almost in a pastiche manor. The choice in materials for the restaurant cater to a middle-class society. Whereas Teatum + Teatum completely changed the interior of the factory, only leaving the existing concrete structure and added simple materials to devise a creative setting.

Duddell’s restaurant has been designed to meet the needs of gentrified Southwark, it has taken inspiration from the other typologies in the area and the desires of the ‘trendy’ locals and a space which suits the needs of the ‘new’ locals has been created.

Testone Factory challenges the perception of gentrification within Sheffield, particularly Kelham, and has responded with an open and inviting space which works with the ‘new’ creatives in the area but also caters for the ‘locals’.

CASE

ST U DI E S

C ASE ST U DY C OMPARIS ON

“

W h e t h e r b u i l d i n g s h a v e b e e n t r e a t e d w i t h n e g l e c t , o r a t t e m p t e d t o b e i m p r o v e d , b o t h r e s u l t s a r e d i s a s t r o u s i n t h e e x t r e m e .

P ug i n

1 9 6 9

“

LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 01: Abstract (Cook 2020)...................................................................................PAGE 5 FIGURE 02: Key Words (Cook 2020)..............................................................................PAGE 9 FIGURE 03: Architectural Movement over Time (Cook 2020).......................................PAGE 16 FIGURE 04: Elitist View on Heritage (Cook 2020).........................................................PAGE 17 FIGURE 05: Heritage (Vukile Batyi n.d.)........................................................................PAGE 18 FIGURE 06: Conservation (Cook 2020)........................................................................PAGE 19 FIGURE 07: Words Linked to Heritage (Ellison, Powell 2018)......................................PAGE 21 FIGURE 08: Pie Chart showing Results of what Heritage means to the Public (Cook 2020)...... .......................................................................................................................................PAGE 22 FIGURE 09: Breamore House in Winter (Historic England 2020).................................PAGE 24 FIGURE 10: Drawing Room of Breamore House (Historic England 2020)....................PAGE 24 FIGURE 11: Cornice Detail (Historic England 2020)......................................................PAGE 25 FIGURE 12: Dining Room 1 (Breamore House n.d.).....................................................PAGE 26 FIGURE 13: Ornate Furnishing (Breamore House n.d.)................................................PAGE 26 FIGURE 14: Copper Taps (Breamore House n.d.).........................................................PAGE 26 FIGURE 15: Artwork 1 (Breamore House n.d.)..............................................................PAGE 27 FIGURE 16: Beauty over Culture (Cook 2020)..............................................................PAGE 29 FIGURE 17: Byker Wall Estate (Youde 2018)................................................................PAGE 31 FIGURE 18: Trelick Tower (Youde 2018).......................................................................PAGE 31 FIGURE 19: The Lawn (Youde 2018)............................................................................PAGE 31 FIGURE 20: Hoover Building (Historic England 2011)...................................................PAGE 32 FIGURE 21: Wheal Jenkin Copper Mine (Historic England 2011).................................PAGE 32 FIGURE 22: Sheffield’s Cornish Place Works (Historic England 2011).........................PAGE 33 FIGURE 23: Saddleworth Woollen Mill (Historic England 2011)....................................PAGE 33 FIGURE 24: Heritage for Nostalgia or Profit? (Cook 2020)...........................................PAGE 35 FIGURE 25: Visual 1 of Park Hill (Urban Splash n.d.)...................................................PAGE 36 FIGURE 26: Visual 2 (Urban Splash n.d.)......................................................................PAGE 36 FIGURE 27: Visual 3 of Park Hill (Urban Splash n.d.)...................................................PAGE 37 FIGURE 28: Bourdieu Distinction Model (Bourdieu 1984).............................................PAGE 41 FIGURE 29: Elitist Tates (Cook 2020)............................................................................PAGE 42 FIGURE 30: Social Reproduction Model (Cook 2020)...................................................PAGE 43 FIGURE 31: Distinction Model in Relation to Architecture (Cook 2020)........................PAGE 47 FIGURE 32: Gentrification Model (Cook 2020)..............................................................PAGE 49 FIGURE 33: Mood Board of Current Vogues (Cook 2020)............................................PAGE 52 FIGURE 34: Exterior of Duddell’s Restaurant (formerly St. Thomas Church) (Cook 2019)......... .......................................................................................................................................PAGE 60 FIGURE 35: Interior of Duddell’s Restaurant (Levy 2018).............................................PAGE 61 FIGURE 36: Sketches of Southwark (Cook 2019).........................................................PAGE 62 FIGURE 37: Architecture around Southwark (Cook 2019)............................................PAGE 62 FIGURE 38: Location map of Duddell’s at 1:10,000 and 1:5,000 (Cook 2019).............PAGE 63 FIGURE 39: Timeline of the History if St Thomas Church, Hospital and Surrounding Area (Cook 2019)...................................................................................................................PAGE 66 FIGURE 40: Plan and Section of St Thomas Church (Museum 2019)..........................PAGE 68 FIGURE 41: Exterior of St Thomas Church (Levy 2018)...............................................PAGE 70 FIGURE 42: Sketch of Architectural Details (1) (Cook 2019)........................................PAGE 71 FIGURE 43: Sketch of Architectural Details (2) (Cook 2019)........................................PAGE 71 FIGURE 44: 2007 Refurbishment (Team n.d.)...............................................................PAGE 72 FIGURE 45: 2007 Refurbishment (2) (Team n.d.).........................................................PAGE 73 FIGURE 46 - 49: Duddell’s Brand Graphics (Yang n.d.)................................................PAGE 76

FIGURE 50: Food at Duddell’s (1) (SilverSpoon London 2019)....................................PAGE 78 FIGURE 51: Food at Duddell’s (2) (SilverSpoon London 2019)....................................PAGE 78 FIGURE 52: Food at Duddell’s (3) (SilverSpoon London 2019)....................................PAGE 79 FIGURE 53: Food at Duddell’s (4) (SilverSpoon London 2019)....................................PAGE 79 FIGURE 54: Artwork (1) (Rim 2018)..............................................................................PAGE 80 FIGURE 55: Artwork (2) (Rim 2018)..............................................................................PAGE 80 FIGURE 56: Artwork (3) (Rim 2018)..............................................................................PAGE 81 FIGURE 57: Artwork (4) (Rim 2018)..............................................................................PAGE 81 FIGURE 58: Artwork (5) (Rim 2018)..............................................................................PAGE 82 FIGURE 59: Artwork (6) (Rim 2018)..............................................................................PAGE 82 FIGURE 60: Artwork (7) (Rim 2018)..............................................................................PAGE 83 FIGURE 61: Artwork (8) (Rim 2018)..............................................................................PAGE 83 FIGURE 62: Oh... My Toy! (See 2018)...........................................................................PAGE 84 FIGURE 63: Oh... My Toy! (See 2018)...........................................................................PAGE 84 FIGURE 64: Duddell’s Ground Floor Plan (Michaelis Boyd 2016).................................PAGE 94 FIGURE 65: Duddell’s Interior (1) (Levy 2018)..............................................................PAGE 88 FIGURE 66: Duddell’s Interior (2) (SilverSpoon London 2019).....................................PAGE 90 FIGURE 67: Duddell’s Interior (3) (Levy 2018)..............................................................PAGE 91 FIGURE 68: Duddell’s Interior (4) (Rim 2018)...............................................................PAGE 91 FIGURE 69: Duddell’s Interior (5) (Levy 2018)..............................................................PAGE 92 FIGURE 70: Duddell’s Interior (6) (Levy 2018)..............................................................PAGE 92 FIGURE 71: Duddell’s Interior (7) (Levy 2018)..............................................................PAGE 93 FIGURE 72: Duddell’s Interior (8) (Levy 2018)..............................................................PAGE 93 FIGURE 73: Duddell’s Banquette Detail (Michaelis Boyd 2016)....................................PAGE 94 FIGURE 74: Duddell’s Furniture (Michaelis Boyd 2016)................................................PAGE 94 FIGURE 75: Duddell’s Colour and Material Palette (Cook 2019)..................................PAGE 95 FIGURE 76: Testone Interior (1) (Wilson 2018)...........................................................PAGE 100 FIGURE 77: Testone Interior (2) (Wilson 2018)...........................................................PAGE 101 FIGURE 78: Location Map of the Testone Factory at 1:5,000 (Cook 2019)................PAGE 102 FIGURE 79: Old Exterior of the Site (thenorthernurbanist 2017).................................PAGE 103 FIGURE 80: Timeline of the History of Sheffield (Cook 2019).....................................PAGE 106 FIGURE 81: Peter and Paul Website (Peter&Paul n.d.)..............................................PAGE 110 FIGURE 82: Plan of Testone (Wilson 2018).................................................................PAGE 112 FIGURE 83: Plan Concept Sketches (Cook 2019).......................................................PAGE 113 FIGURE 84: Section Concept Sketch (Cook 2019)......................................................PAGE 113 FIGURE 85: Testone Interior (3) (Wilson 2018)...........................................................PAGE 116 FIGURE 86: Testone Interior (4) (Wilson 2018)...........................................................PAGE 118 FIGURE 87: Testone Interior (5) (Wilson 2018)...........................................................PAGE 119 FIGURE 88: Testone Interior (6) (Wilson 2018)...........................................................PAGE 120 FIGURE 89: Testone Interior (7) (Wilson 2018)...........................................................PAGE 122 FIGURE 90: Testone Interior (8) (Wilson 2018)...........................................................PAGE 122 FIGURE 91: Testone Material Palette (Cook 2019).....................................................PAGE 123 FIGURE 92: Testone Interior (9) (testonefactory 2018)...............................................PAGE 123

BIBL IO G R APH Y

BOOKS Deamer, P., 2014. Architecture and capitalism: 1845 to the present. London New York: Routledge.

Graham, B., Ashworth G.J., Tunbridge, J.E., 2013. The uses and abuses of heritage. In: Building a new heritage: tourism, culture and identity in the new Europe. Abingdon: Routledge, 2005. Pp.26-34.

Kurtich, J., Eakin, G., 1993. Interior architecture. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.

Langston, P.C., n.d. ON ARCHETYPES AND BUILDING ADAPTIVE REUSE. p.12.

Mangold, W., n.d. Money-tecture... Or How Architecture is Exploited by Capitalism. Pratt Institute.

Marx, K., Engels, F., Varoufakis, Y., 2018. The communist manifesto. Repr. London: Vintage Classics.

Marx, K., Moore, S., 2011. Das Kapital. London: Createspace.

Moreno, E.L., Blanco, Z.G., 2014. Ghost Cities and Empty Houses: Wasted Prosperity., 3(2), p.10.

Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors, 2002. Property in Business - a waste of space?

London: RICS. Tames, R., 2001. Southwark past. London: Historical.

Pugin, A.W.N., 1969. Contrasts; with an introduction by H.R. Hitchcock. 2nd ed. [reprinted] Leicester: Leicester University Press.

E-BOOKS Bourdieu, P., 1984. Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste [online]. London.

Available at: http://www.mit.edu/~allanmc/bourdieu1.pdf.

Bourdieu, P., 2002. The Forms of Capital [eBook type]. In: Biggart, N. W., ed. Readings in Economic Sociology. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishers Ltd, 2002, pp. 280–291. Available at: http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/9780470755679.ch15 [Accessed 10 December 2019].

Corsane, G., 2005. Heritage, Museums and Galleries [eBook type]. Abingdon: Routledge.

Available at: https://books.google.com/books/about/Heritage_Museums_and_Galleries. html?id=AMB4m45ThS0C [Accessed 29 November 2019].

Lippit, V.D., 2005. Capitalism [eBook type]. Florence, USA: Routledge. Available at: http:// ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/ntuuk/detail.action?docID=308590 [Accessed 4 October 2019].

NEWSPAPER ARTICLES Bayley, S., 2009. The muddled magic kingdom that is English Heritage [online]. The Guardian. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2009/apr/18/englishheritage-park-hill-sheffield [Accessed 18 February 2020].

Moore, R., 2011. Park Hill estate, Sheffield – review [online]. The Guardian. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2011/aug/21/park-hill-sheffield-renovation [Accessed 18 February 2020].

Hall, Z.D., 2006. Southwark: Britain’s hippest borough [online]. The Independent. Available at: http://www.independent.co.uk/property/house-and-home/southwark-britains-hippestborough-6098259.html [Accessed 27 November 2019].

ONLINE JOURNALS/ARTICLES Archilovers, 2018. Duddell’s London | Michaelis Boyd [online]. Archilovers. Available at: https:// www.archilovers.com/projects/223222/duddell-s-london.html [Accessed 10 December 2019].

Baxter, I., 2009. What is Heritage? [online]. Building Conservation. Available at: https://www. buildingconservation.com/articles/what-is-heritage/what-is-heritage.htm [Accessed 5 January 2020].

Beaumont, E., 2019. Enough is enough: Oslo Architecture Triennale 2019 [online].

Architectural Review. Available at: https://www.architectural-review.com/today/enough-isenough-oslo-architecture-triennale-2019/10044805.article [Accessed 22 October 2019].

Bidwells, 2018. What is Heritage Architecture? [online]. Bidwells. Available at: https://www. bidwells.co.uk/faqs/what-is-heritage-architecture/ [Accessed 5 January 2020].

Bronte, G., 2017. Hong Kong’s Duddell’s to make its UK debut in November [online]. Big Hospitality. Available at: https://www.bighospitality.co.uk/Article/2017/09/05/Michelin-starredDuddell-s-to-make-its-UK-debut-in-November [Accessed 10 December 2019].

Coghlan, A., 2019. Influencer-Hyped Dim Sum Restaurant Duddell’s Is Closing in London Bridge [online]. Eater London. Available at: https://london.eater.com/2019/10/23/20928286/ dim-sum-duddells-restaurant-closing-london-bridge-hong-kong [Accessed 10 December 2019]. de Graaf, R., 2015. ‘Architecture is now a tool of capital, complicit in a purpose antithetical to its social mission’ [online]. Architectural Review. Available at: https://www.architecturalreview.com/essays/viewpoints/architecture-is-now-a-tool-of-capital-complicit-in-a-purposeantithetical-to-its-social-mission/8681564.article [Accessed 3 October 2019].

Dimon, G., 2017. Restaurant review: Duddell’s [online]. Business Traveller. Available at: https://www.businesstraveller.com/tried-and-tested/duddells/ [Accessed 10 December 2019].

Divisare, 2018. Teatum+Teatum Testone Factory [online]. Divisare. Available at: https:// divisare.com/projects/392269-teatum-teatum-luke-hayes-testone-factory [Accessed 6 December 2019].

Ellison, G., Powell, T., 2018. Public Perceptions of Heritage 2018 [online]. Heritage Lottery Fund. Available at: https://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/ attachments/18%200618%20HLF%20Word%20Report%20FINAL_accessibility_v1.0.pdf [Accessed 20 February 2020].

Hey, D., 2005. The South Yorkshire Steel Industry and the Industrial Revolution [online].

Northern History, 42(1), pp.91–96. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1179/174587005X38435 [Accessed 10 December 2019].

Historic England, 2011 (a). Industrial Buildings: Listing Selection Guide [online]. Historic England. Available at: https://historicengland.org.uk/images-books/publications/dlsg-industrial/ heag134-industrial-buildings-lsg/ [Accessed 20 February 2020].

Historic England, 2011 (b). Domestic 3: Suburban and Country Houses: Listing Selection Guide [online]. Historic England. Available at: https://historicengland.org.uk/images-books/ publications/dlsg-suburban-country-houses/heag104-domestic3-suburban-and-countryhouses-lsg/ [Accessed 20 February 2020].

Jones, R., 2017. How Sheffield became Steel City: what local history can teach us about innovation [online]. Soft Machines. Available at: http://www.softmachines.org/ wordpress/?p=2057 [Accessed 10 December 2019].

Levy, N., 2018. Michaelis Boyd transforms London church into Duddell’s restaurant [online].

Dezeen. Available at: https://www.dezeen.com/2018/04/01/michaelis-boyd-interior-designlondon-restaurant-duddells-church-conversion/ [Accessed 10 December 2019].

Londonlives, n.d. Background - Minute Books of the Court of Governors of Bridewell/St Thomas’s (MG) [online]. London Lives. Available at: https://www.londonlives.org/static/MG.jsp [Accessed 20 November 2019 a].

Londonlives, n.d. Background - St Thomas’s Hospital [online]. London Lives. Available at: https://www.londonlives.org/static/StThomasHospital.jsp [Accessed 20 November 2019 b].

Maher, n.d. Who was Erno Goldfinger? [online]. The National Trust. Available at: https://www. nationaltrust.org.uk/features/who-was-ern-goldfinger [Accessed 29 February 2020] Mark, L., 2015. Neave Brown: ‘You cannot build homes properly without a programme’ [online]. Architects Journal. Available at: https://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/news/neavebrown-you-cannot-build-homes-properly-without-a-programme/8688905.article [Accessed 23 February 2020].

Nettleingham, D., 2018. Relocating the Dream: Working-Class Housing as History and Spectacle [online]. Working-Class Perspectives. Available at: https://workingclassstudies. wordpress.com/2018/06/04/relocating-the-dream-working-class-housing-as-history-andspectacle/ [Accessed 19 February 2020].

Prockter, A., 2015. St Thomas the Apostle, Southwark [online]. Know Your London. Available at: https://knowyourlondon.wordpress.com/2015/02/25/st-thomas-the-apostle-southwark/ [Accessed 20 November 2019].

Rim, T., 2018. Duddell’s London Announces Its Inaugural Group Art Exhibition [online]. The Artling. Available at: https://theartling.com/en/artzine/duddells-london-announces-its-inauguralgroup-art-exhibition/ [Accessed 10 December 2019].

Sanches-Molini, A., P., 2018. RIGHT TO AFFORD: Dunboyne Road Estate [online]. Hidden Architecture. Available at: http://hiddenarchitecture.net/right-to-afford-dunboyne-road-estate/ [Accessed 23 February 2020].

See G.I., 2018. Opening of Michael Lau’s ‘Oh... My Toy!’ at Duddell’s London [online]. The Artling. Available at: https://theartling.com/en/artzine/opening-of-michael-laus-oh-my-toy-atduddells-london/ [Accessed 10 December 2019].

SilverSpoon London, 2019. Dim Sum at Duddell’s London [online]. SilverSpoon London.

Available at: http://www.silverspoonlondon.co.uk/2019/05/dim-sum-at-duddells-london.html [Accessed 10 December 2019].

Su, R., Bramwell, B., Whalley, P.A., 2018. Cultural political economy and urban heritage tourism [online]. Annals of Tourism Research, 68, pp.30–40. Available at: http://www. sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160738317301469 [Accessed 10 December 2019].

Team, L.S., n.d. Former St Thomas’ Church to be turned into a restaurant [online]. London SE1. Available at: http://www.london-se1.co.uk/news/view/7548 [Accessed 4 December 2019]. thenorthernurbanist, 2017. The Illusion of Gentrification: A Case Study of Kelham Island, Sheffield [online]. The Northern Urbanist. Available at: http://www.thenorthernurbanist.co.uk/ the-illusion-of-gentrification-a-case-study-of-kelham-island-sheffield/ [Accessed 10 December 2019].

UrbanSplash, 2020. Park Hill [online]. Urban Splash. Manchester. Available at: https://s3-euwest-1.amazonaws.com/us-website-content/Downloads/park-hill/US_Park_Hill_Brochure_ Low_Res.pdf [Accessed 24 February 2020].

Wilson, R., 2018. Teatum + Teatum launches collaborative workspace in Sheffield [online].

Architect’s Journal. Available at: https://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/buildings/teatum-teatumlaunches-collaborative-workspace-in-sheffield/10035201.article [Accessed 4 December 2019].

Wood, B., n.d. Teatum+Teatum transforms Sheffield iron foundry into a co-working space [online]. The Spaces. Available at: https://thespaces.com/teatumteatum-sheffield-coworkingspace/ [Accessed 10 December 2019].

WEBSITES Alimentarium, n.d. The history of hunting [online]. Alimentarium. Available at: https://www. alimentarium.org/en/knowledge/history-hunting [Accessed 18 February 2020].

Archello, n.d. Cathedral Group Ltd [online]. Archello. Available at: https://archello.com/brand/ cathedral-group-ltd [Accessed 4 December 2019].

Breamore House, n.d. Breamore House [online]. Breamore House. Available at: http://www. breamorehouse.com/page83.html?LMCL=m1hNTM [Accessed 18 February 2020].

Britain Express, n.d. Gallery definition, Illustrated Dictionary of British Churches, History and Architecture [online]. Britain Express. Available at: https://www.britainexpress.com/churchhistory.htm?term=Gallery [Accessed 4 December 2019].

Cambridge English Dictionary, 2019. COMMODITY | meaning in the Cambridge English Dictionary [online]. Available at: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/commodity [Accessed 10 December 2019].

Cambridge English Dictionary, 2019. HERITAGE | meaning in the Cambridge English Dictionary [online]. Available at: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/heritage [Accessed 2 October 2019].

Creative Mornings, n.d. Steve Roche | Preserving people and ideas (in stone) [online].

CreativeMornings. Available at: https://creativemornings.com/talks/steve-roche-akastonemason [Accessed 10 December 2019].

Duddells, n.d. Duddells – Home [online]. Duddells. Available at: https://www.duddells.co/ home/en/ [Accessed 10 December 2019] Historic England, 2019. 9A, ST THOMAS STREET [online]. Historic England. Available at: https://historicengland.org.uk/listing/the-list/list-entry/1385873 [Accessed 4 December 2019] Historic England, 2020 (a). Park Hill [online]. Historic England. Available at: https:// historicengland.org.uk/listing/the-list/list-entry/1246881 [Accessed 20 February 2020].

Historic England, 2020 (b). Breamore [online]. Historic England. Available at: https:// historicengland.org.uk/listing/the-list/list-entry/1000329 [Accessed 18 February 2020].

History World, n.d. HISTORY OF ARCHITECTURE [online]. History World. Available at: http:// historyworld.net/wrldhis/PlainTextHistories.asp?ParagraphID=kgr [Accessed 10 December 2019 l].

Michaelis Boyd, n.d. Bars and Restaurants: Duddell’s [online]. Michaelis Boyd. Available at: https://www.michaelisboyd.com/portfolio_items/duddells/ [Accessed 4 December 2019].

Museum, T.O.O.T., 2019. The Old Operating Theatre Museum [online]. The Old Operating Theatre Museum. Available at: http://oldoperatingtheatre.com/history/history-of-old-st-thomashospital [Accessed 20 November 2019].

Oxford English Dictionary, 2019 (a). Capitalism | Definition of Capitalism [online]. Lexico.

Available at: https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/capitalism [Accessed 22 October 2019].

Oxford English Dictionary, 2020. Capitalism | Definition of Capitalism [online]. Lexico. Available at: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/heritage [Accessed 5 January 2020].

Peter&Paul, n.d. Peter & Paul — Home [online]. Available at: http://peterandpaul.co.uk/ [Accessed 10 December 2019].

RIBA, 2020. The Lawn, Harlow, Essex: the tower [online]. RIBA. Available at: https://www. architecture.com/image-library/RIBApix/image-information/poster/the-lawn-harlow-essex-thetower/posterid/RIBA63886.html [Accessed 01 March 2020].

Rutherford, Y., n.d. Duddells [online]. Yang Rutherford. Available at: http://www.yangrutherford. com/en/work/duddells [Accessed 10 December 2019].

Wood, B., n.d. First look at show apartments in London’s iconic Hoover Building [online].

The Spaces. Available at: https://thespaces.com/first-look-show-apartments-hoover-buildinglondon/ [Accessed 25 February 2020].

Youde. K., 2018. How listing of social housing costs landlords [online]. Inside Housing.

Available at: https://www.insidehousing.co.uk/insight/insight/how-listing-of-social-housingcosts-landlords-54220 [Accessed 29 February 2020].

SOCIAL MEDIA testonefactory, 2018. Testone Factory (@testonefactory) • Instagram photos and videos [online]. Instagram. Available at: https://www.instagram.com/p/BqPvzUrAeCv/ [Accessed 10 December 2019].

VIDEOS Cowling, R., 2016. Marx: Genius of the Modern World [online]. Marx. Available at: https://www. bbc.co.uk/programmes/b07gpdbx.

IMAGES Michaelis Boyd, 2016. Banquette Detail [online]. Available via: Michaelis Boyd [Accessed 4 December 2019].

Michaelis Boyd, 2016. Ground Floor Concept Plan [online]. Available via: Michaelis Boyd [Accessed 4 December 2019].