Tate Modern: From Redundancy to Urban Stardom
AR30006 Glenn Mckerracher
01 Abstract The 1994 competition to renovate the redundant Bankside Power Station, attracted some of the most famous Architects the world over. At this time Herzog & De Meuron were a relatively young practice and had not dealt with a public building of this magnitude before, therefore it came as a surprise when their proposal was selected by the judging committee. Fast forward to present day and the practice have most certainly made a name for themselves, “Ask an architect to name the ten most famous practices at work today and you could safely wager that Herzog & De Meuron would feature.”1 What came as a further surprise was that their winning proposal intended to leave the external skin of the existing building more or less untouched. The decision by the Tate in picking a site containing an existing building, followed by the architects bold design moves, has proven to be an excellent example of reuse architecture. The conversion of the old building stock is essential in a society which is rapidly changing. “Although the majority of such buildings are anonymous, the conversions use the old building as a vehicle of expression, intervening with a vocabulary that either contrast or conforms to the existing building substance.”2 Many would have preferred a shiny new building in place of the Power Station, however, retaining the existing structure adds to the buildings character and maintains the style of the city. This essay will examine how adaptive reuse has had a positive impact in the design of the Tate Modern by studying the Turbine Hall - which is undoubtedly the key space within the gallery. Furthermore, assessing the benefits of remodelling an existing building to suit a new function and the philosophy of both Giles Gilbert Scott and Herzog & De Meuron.
1 2
Naomi Stungo, Herzog & de Meuron. (London: Carlton Books, 2002),: 1. Chris van Uffelen, Re-use Architecture. (Salenstein: Braun, 2010), 8.
Page 2
Contents
01 Abstract 02 Introduction 03 The Architects Giles Gilbert Scott Herzog & de Meuron 04 Adaptive Reuse 05 The Turbine Hall Key Moves The Unilever Series 06 Conclusion
Page 3
02 Introduction In 1992, the decision was made to split the Tate collection and form the Gallery of Modern Art. “As the Tate was always short of space, and never able to show more than 20 per cent of its collection at any one time, the case to build a new, separate Tate gallery of modern art became more compelling.”3 The quest to build a new Gallery had begun, starting with the most crucial element, finding a site. Multiple cities around the world have shown in the last thirty years how a new public building can rejuvenate an entire city or an area within it, key examples of this would be, the Bilbao Guggenheim Museum by Frank Gehry or V&A Dundee by Kengo Kuma.
01. Guggenheim, Bilbao. Architect: Frank Gehry
02. V&A, Dundee. Architect: Kengo Kuma
A similar thought process was in place with the selection of Giles Gilbert Scott’s redundant Bankside Power Station. “The area around Tate Modern was originally a zone of pleasure and luxury, then squalor and wildness.”4 After the Second World War the area of Southwark was almost bypassed when London was expanding along an East/West axis. The building was relatively unknown to most who passed it unlike its sister, the Battersea Power Station, designed by the same architect. “Now after periods of neglect or lack of cohesion, post-industrial Southwark is a role model for new British urbanism”5 There were around one hundred and fifty entrants to the initial competition, with thirteen of them being asked to produce an initial design and from this only six would proceed to a more detailed round. What made this competition even more interesting was that only one of the six finalists were British, sparking some controversy within the media. ‘It was a tricky brief, as Michael Craig-Martin, then a Tate trustee and on the competition panel, recalls “Bankside Power Station wasn’t really a building; it was a shoebox. It was four exterior walls with a big machine in it, and when you took out the big machine all you had was a giant empty box.”’ 6
3 Rowan Moore and Raymund Ryan. Building Tate Modern: Herzog & de Meuron transforming Giles Gilbert Scott. (London: Tate Gallery, 2000), 15. 4 Frances Morris, Michael Craig-Martin, Andrew Marr and Sheena Wagstaff. Tate Modern: The Handbook. (London: Tate Gallery, 2006), 15. 5 Rowan Moore and Raymund Ryan. Building Tate Modern: Herzog & de Meuron transforming Giles Gilbert Scott. (London: Tate Gallery, 2000), 14. 6 “The ones that got away: Tates rejected designs,” The Art Newspaper, Jun 2, 2014. Page 4
03. An ‘empty’ Bankside Power Station
The space left after the removal of the Turbine was an exceptional space that would be very tricky to produce from scratch with the budget that Tate had. The Turbine Hall would become the most important aspect of the gallery, yet there was such minimal alteration to it from the original form which was set up to merely house machinery. Another aspect which had minimal alterations was the exterior façade, Herzog & de Meuron kept elements that would not be needed in the new building but maintain its character, such as the chimney. “The chimney was primarily designed as an urban landmark that transcends exclusively functional purposes and enters into a dialogue with St. Paul’s on the opposite shore of the Thames.”7 Though the chimney does not play the same crucial role in the building as it once did, it instead maintains the recognisable silhouette of the building like a memorial to what came before. The reinterpretation of the old Power Station is an excellent precedent for the adaptive reuse of buildings, it pushes the boundaries of what can be done with spaces that have lost their purpose. In the UK there is a large quantity of existing buildings which are obsolete, rapidly approaching disuse or facing demolition that could be viewed as a ‘mine’ of raw materials for new projects. These mines are simply awaiting for regeneration, which, is the responsible thing for architects to do. Building on brownfield sites, like that at Southwark can give areas a new purpose and increase the attraction of tourists to the area.
7 Richard C. Levene and Fernando Márquez Cecilia, “Herzog & de Meuron : 1981 – 2000.” Madrid: El Croquis.
Page 5
04. Nolli Plan highlighting Tate and St. Pauls
Page 6
03 The Architects Giles Gilbert Scott
The Bankside Power Station has been in place since 1891 however, the building as it is known now designed by Giles Gilbert Scott, was built in 1953. The architect of the power station was also responsible for other landmarks in UK cities. “Scott is best known as the designer of London’s other great power station at Battersea, now sadly derelict, and Liverpool Anglican Cathedral, as well as the once ubiquitous red telephone box.”8
05. Battersea Power Station, London
06. Anglican Cathedral Church of Christ, Liverpool
07. Red Telephone Box
At this time London was a very different city to as it is now, the air was thick with smoke and the legacy of the second world war could be seen everywhere. “London was once a manufacturing city, a centre of the industrial revolution, and nowhere was as ruthlessly disfigured by factories and crammed slum housing as Southwark.”9 This industrial London has left behind multiple redundant buildings, the current population now can reinvent these spaces to serve a new purpose. Scott’s design of the Bankside Power Station was not without controversy. One issue the public had with the building was “It has been said that the power station will dwarf St. Paul’s.”10 This ‘cathedral of power’ facing up to St. Paul’s on the opposite side of the riverbank could be seen as a potential issue however, Scott reassured the city that his chimney would stand lower than the grand dome of city cathedral. In addition to the issue of height, many within the city were beginning to worry about the effects of air pollution, including the King who wrote to the Prime Minister to voice his concern however it seems Parliament were more worried about the city’s electricity supply than health of its people. Although the Power Station had many critics it was built and remained in operation until October 1981 when its doors were closed and left in waiting for a new purpose. .
8 Frances Morris, Michael Craig-Martin, Andrew Marr and Sheena Wagstaff. Tate Modern: The Handbook. (London: Tate Gallery, 2006), 22. 9 Frances Morris, Michael Craig-Martin, Andrew Marr and Sheena Wagstaff. Tate Modern: The Handbook. (London: Tate Gallery, 2006), 15. 10 Rowan Moore and Raymund Ryan. Building Tate Modern: Herzog & de Meuron transforming Giles Gilbert Scott. (London: Tate Gallery, 2000), 177 Page 7
“Nothing is more boring or stupid than to wake “Nothing is more boring or stupid than to wake up in the morning naively confident in what you up in the morning naively confident in what already know”11 – Jaques Herzog you already know”11 – Jaques Herzog
11 Richard C. Levene and Fernando Márquez Cecilia, “Herzog & de Meuron 1993 – 1997,” El Croquis, No. 84 (1997): 7 – 21.
03 The Architects
Herzog & de Meuron
Herzog & de Meuron are an ever learning and ever-changing practice, unlike many architects who have a set style, like the afore mentioned Frank Gehry for example, who’s buildings are all identifiable by their deconstructivist stainless steel form. What Herzog & de Meuron do instead is experiment with the building form and materials that they use. “It is this ability to continually surprise – the constant reinvention of their style, their refreshing lack of preconceptions about what their buildings look like – that marks them out as some of today’s most interesting designers”12
Frank Gehry
08. Lou Ruvo Center for Brain Health, Las Vegas
09. Walt Disney Concert Hall, Los Angeles
10. Museum of Pop Culture, Seattle
12. Laban Dance Centre, London
13. De Young Mueseum, San Fransisco
Herzog & de Meuron
11. Elbphilharmonie Hamburg
The skin of the building is the first aspect of the building that is seen upon approach, it gives the user their first impression of the architecture which they are about to experience. The practice has a rather interesting way of observing this skin, Jaques Herzog explained this approach in an interview stating “In that respect the human body can be compared to a building. Everybody creates his or her own architecture, which then becomes part of the city. Clothes are a kind of link between the public and the private just like a house”13 This approach helps us consider how the architects are so fluid with the design of buildings, they consider what is fashionable at the time and give people what they want rather than force ideas upon them. The skin of the Tate modern is certainly nothing like the architects have designed before, keeping the details that Giles Gilbert Scott has gifted them has maintained the heritage of the building. 12 Naomi Stungo, Herzog & de Meuron. (London: Carlton Books, 2002): 2. 13 Richard C. Levene and Fernando Márquez Cecilia, “Herzog & de Meuron 1993 – 1997,” El Croquis, No. 84 (1997): 7 – 21. Page 9
Appealing to the people of London was essential, preserving the heritage of the building and the city helped this drastically. “We like to deal with existing structures, make them more powerful, expose them and add some new parts if necessary. We try to enhance the existing qualities to rediscover what is here in front of all of us.”14 This part of the firm’s philosophy was essential to them winning the competition with their design. By accepting the architecture of Giles Gilbert Scott and making small changes to the skin, rather than try to mould the building to create their own gesture it improved the aesthetic of the gallery. “At Tate Modern it is not always possible to know where Gilbert Scott ends and Herzog & De Meuron begin.”15 The architects never wanted to design an abstract eyesore but rather a building that would be comfortable in its context. “We never wanted our architectural works to be seen as art works. We have always thought of them as part of the city, i.e., as part of something subject to change, with or without our participation.”16 This aspect of their philosophy also links back to the buildings need to appeal to people in the city. It allows us to view the building not as something belongs to the architect but as a public space.
“Here it is, an old behemoth of Heavy I
ndustry re-presented for the twenty-first century, a redundant power station poised as a 14 Richard C. Levene and Fernando Márquez Cecilia, “Herzog & de Meuron 1993 – 1997,” El Croquis, No. 84 (1997): 7 – 21. 15 Rowan Moore and Raymund Ryan. Building Tate Modern: Herzog & de Meuron transforming Giles Gilbert Scott. (London: Tate Gallery, 2000), 8. 16 Richard C. Levene and Fernando Márquez Cecilia, “Herzog & de Meuron : 1981 – 2000.” Madrid: El Croquis.
Page 10
“Here it is, an old behemoth of Heavy Industry 17 Palace of Art re-presented forand the Experimentation” twenty-first century, a redundant power station poised as a Palace of Art and Experimentation”13
17 Rowan Moore and Raymund Ryan. Building Tate Modern: Herzog & de Meuron transforming Giles Gilbert Scott. (London: Tate Gallery, 2000), 13.
04 Adaptive Reuse The Tate is a prime example in the important recycling of old buildings. Adaptive reuse is needed more than ever in our current society where the needs of the public change so often. “Sarah Castle underlined the importance of retrofit in view of the fact that around 85 per cent of the UK’s current buildings will still be in existence by 2050.”18 The Bankside Power Station can be described as the host building for the museum. The term ‘host building’ refers to the skin in which the new building can live similar to a hermit crab inhabiting its shell. “All host structures are in many ways found objects, whole existing structures that have lost their relevance and are unused or underused.”19 In the UK especially there is a large stock of these hosts that are in need of being repurposed. There are a six types of host building shown in the diagrams below, of which the Tate conforms to the shell category.
Entity
Shell
Semi-ruin
Fragmented
Relic
Group
14. Host Structure Types
The Environmental impact of building is very well documented and the building industry plays a large role in the production of carbon. “Noting that nearly 40% of final energy consumption in Europe is in buildings”20 Architects hold a responsibility to adapt buildings as the world we live in changes or it has potential to prove costly to the environment. The city of London is starting to wake up and see the benefits of retrofitting, programs like RE:FIT will have a positive impact in kickstarting a revival of the cities old buildings. “RE:FIT aims to retrofit at least 40% of London’s public-owned buildings by 2025 and cut CO2 emissions across the city’s public sector by 45,000 metric tons by the end of 2015.”21 Projects like this will help to show the public the benefits of reusing old buildings and lead the way in reducing the carbon footprint to which the building industry plays a huge part in. 18 “The Rise of Reuse,” Architecture Today, accessed Jan 2, 2020, https://architecturetoday.co.uk/the-rise-of-reuse/ 19 Liliane Wong, Adaptive REUSE: Extending the Lives of Buildings. (Basel: Birkhäuser,2017), 104. 20 Gurkan Kumbaroglu and Reinhard Madlener, “Evaluation of economically optimal retrofit investment options for energy savings in buildings.” Energy and Buildings, no.49. (2012): 327-334. 21 “Cities100: London – Large-scale building retrofit reduce emissions, C40 Cities, 2015, Accessed Jan 2, 2020, https://www.c40.org/case_studies/cities100-london-large-scale-building-retrofits-reduce-emissions#:~:text=RE%3AFIT%20aims%20to%20retrofit,emissions%20by%2093%2C000%20metric%20tons. Page 12
Though the reuse of buildings has a positive impact on the environment, there is economic punishment for retrofit in the form of a 20% tax in the UK whereas the newbuild and demolition categories is usually zero-rated.22 This is a rather peculiar tax which seems to discourage a very viable and effective building solution. Campaigns to restructure the levels in tax within the building industry are ongoing and have been for many years now. One of the most recent began in January 2021, when a petition was created to lobby the government to implement such changes. The outcome of this petition is yet to be made clear however, it is a step in the right direction. One of the main arguments against the changes was that the government was constrained by EU law to make them, however this is no longer an issue.
22 Isabella Kaminski. “Vat chance: Can tac reforms spur a retrofit renaissance?” Architects Journal, 2020, Accessed Feb 15, 2021, https://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/news/vat-chance-can-tax-reforms-spur-a-retrofit-renaissance. Page 13
“We have the hope that it is this hermaphroditic aspect, the mixing of materials of different “We have the hope that it is this hermaphroditic aspect, the mixing of materials of different origins, the different weight and intensification origins, the different weight and intensification of places, that can make contemporary of places, that can make contemporary architecture as attractive as the architecture of an old Engadine house.”23 architecture as attractive as the architecture of an old Engadine house.”23
23
Yoshida Nobuyuki, Herzog and de Meuron 1978 – 2002. (Tokyo: A & U Publishing, 2002), 122.
03 The Turbine Hall Key Moves
15. Turbine Hall Painting
The Turbine Hall was the platform that the museum was built around, it is the key space that most visitors will enter the gallery from. The space created in the Turbine Hall has been praised by many around the world. The key move to leave the space almost as found has worked hugely in their favour. “But to enter the museum through the exhilarating space of the Turbine Hall is also to escape, momentarily, from the onslaught of everyday life and work.”24 The space works as a transition between the inside and the out, a space of activity before entering the calm gallery spaces. It is certainly the central element that the rest of the museum revolves around. The space works well at inviting any passers-by inside, “Herzog & de Meuron realised that the Turbine Hall was essentially a street that ran through the building and that it had both a north façade and a south façade.”25 This description from Nicholas Serota, the director of Tate, further explains the feeling that Herzog & de Meuron have created within the grand welcoming space. The reference to a street is crucial in the understanding of how this space was designed, just as a street is utilized as the most public space providing access to users so to does the Turbine Hall. It is the place that people meet, wait and eat in which allows it to be active. It provides a backdrop for life to occur where before it was merely a backdrop for machines to work. 24 Frances Morris, Michael Craig-Martin, Andrew Marr and Sheena Wagstaff. Tate Modern: The Handbook. (London: Tate Gallery, 2006), 21. 25 Rowan Moore and Raymund Ryan. Building Tate Modern: Herzog & de Meuron transforming Giles Gilbert Scott. (London: Tate Gallery, 2000), 38. Page 15
Another key move within the space that adds to its success is the ramp. “The ramp takes visitors down to the base level of the building, the floor of the turbine hall, situated below the water level of the Thames.”26 Bringing the floor level of the hall down to its lowest point heightens the sense of scale when the user is within. It also removes the hierarchy within a public space, Jaques Herzog said “when you come into the museum nothing should be lower and nothing should be higher in status.”27 The feeling that everyone is equal within this space allows those within the Turbine Hall to appreciate their reason for being there, which is to view the galleries impressive art collection. Even though the Tate missed out on much needed storage space within the building, they have gained much more from the ramp that adds to the scale upon entering the gallery. Another small detail which has remained within the building from the original building “the original gantry cranes that have been retained in the Turbine Hall, to be used in moving works of art and to carry a flexible lighting system.”28 The cranes run along tracks on level four of the concourse. These gantry cranes were originally used for moving machinery around the space but have found a new purpose in a very changed building. This is a key example of how the architects of the Tate have considered so carefully the elements that can be repurposed to have a use that they were never intended for.
16. Turbine Hall Crane
26 Rowan Moore and Raymund Ryan. Building Tate Modern: Herzog & de Meuron transforming Giles Gilbert Scott. (London: Tate Gallery, 2000), 138. 27 Rowan Moore and Raymund Ryan. Building Tate Modern: Herzog & de Meuron transforming Giles Gilbert Scott. (London: Tate Gallery, 2000), 39. 28 Wouter Davidts. The Vast and the Void: On Tate Modern’s Turbine Hall and the Unilever Series. (Research Gate, 2007)
Page 16
“In 2001, when he was developing the second in the Unilever series, theinsculptor “In 2001, when he was commission developing the second commission the Unilever series, the sculptor Juan Munoz said he came ‘to look at Juan Munoz said he came ‘to look at the Turbine Hall as part of the city rather than part of the 29 Turbine Hall as part of the city rather than part museum’” of the museum’”29
29 Frances Morris, Michael Craig-Martin, Andrew Marr and Sheena Wagstaff. Tate Modern: The Handbook. (London: Tate Gallery, 2006), 21.
05 The Turbine Hall The Unilever Series
The Unilever Series ran for 12 years, between the May 2000 and October 2012, involving 13 commissions in which artists were invited to create a work of art that would be displayed within the Turbine Hall. “To take on the daunting challenge of making new work within the enormous space of the turbine hall is a courageous and risky task, which can be undertaken successfully by only a handful of artists.”30 The artists that have undertaken this have provided some amazing spectacles, and all of them were brilliantly unique in their own way. “The past seven installations of ‘The Unilever Series’ make up a rather diverse palette of artworks.”31 Some of the exhibitions include when Carsten Holler’s ‘Test Site’ which turned the space into a sort of play park, the sunset has been brought inside with ‘The Weather Project’ by Olafur Eliasson and Louise Bourgeois brought ‘Maman’, her industrial size steel spider to the Turbine Hall. These exhibitions are so large they would struggle to be shown in any other gallery, so the Tate and so to the artists must be thankful for the architects gifting them with such a unique space.
17. Maman, Louise Bourgeois
18. The Weather Project, Olafur Eliasson
19. Test Site, Carsten Höller
In addition to this, the Unilever series disregards what, the world-renowned phrase, ‘form follows function’ pushes architects towards. “This also suggests that actions qualify spaces as much as spaces qualify actions; that space and action are inseparable and that no proper interpretation of architecture, drawing or notation can refuse to consider this fact.”32 The function of the Turbine Hall has no limits, the vast array of different activities that it has seen is astounding. The form of the Turbine Hall was determined well before Herzog & de Meuron laid eyes upon the space. It is without a doubt a very versatile spaces, the function of the space can never really be pinned down and this draws people to it. No person will use this space in the same way nor will the space give them the same feeling when inside it.
30 Frances Morris, Michael Craig-Martin, Andrew Marr and Sheena Wagstaff. Tate Modern: The Handbook. (London: Tate Gallery, 2006), 33. 31 Wouter Davidts. The Vast and the Void: On Tate Modern’s Turbine Hall and the Unilever Series. (Research Gate, 2007) 32 Kroydon Smith, Introducing Architectural Theory: Debating a Discipline. (London: Routledge, 2012): 154. Page 18
06 Conclusion The Bankside Power Station that was remodelled by Herzog & de Meuron into the Tate Modern Art Gallery can now be viewed as a landmark within the city of London. Ander Marr put this perfectly when saying “Tate Modern has its place firmly in the middle of a new family photo.”33 Who would have thought that something previously bypassed by so many would now draw so many people to the city. It’s success in this has been well documented, in the first five years of opening “twenty million visitors have made their way down the Gallery’s wide, sloping Turbine Hall.”34 Projects like the Unilever Series have shown how a former Turbine Hall can be remade into such a versatile space. The adaptation of spaces should be pushed further within architecture and Herzog and de Meuron have shown us exactly how it should be done. “Infact, form could precede use; use could be determined later.”35 The way Bernard Tschumi speaks of building use in his essay ‘Architecture and Disjunction’ paves the way in modern thinking. The views he has put forward within this, help to push more freedom within architecture yet also allow us to keep in mind that buildings can have more than one use. “Tate Modern confounds those who argued that converting an old building was a cop-out.”36 It has proven many doubters of retrofit wrong and clearly shows the positive effect that this way of building can have on a city. To conclude, the Tate Modern has revived a part of London and shown that knocking down historic structures to provide something new is not always the most effective way of building. They turned the old into the new, the private to public and the redundant to the fundamental. By doing so, Herzog & de Meuron have raised their international recognition and have made a lasting impact on those who come to visit the space. The renovation of the Tate Modern has helped to ignite a culture of building reuse in the UK which is only just beginning.
33 Frances Morris, Michael Craig-Martin, Andrew Marr and Sheena Wagstaff. Tate Modern: The Handbook. (London: Tate Gallery, 2006): 17. 34 The Burlington Magazine, “Tate Modern five years on,” 2005. 35 Kroydon Smith, Introducing Architectural Theory: Debating a Discipline. (London: Routledge, 2012): 146. 36 “Powerhouse In transforming Bankside power station into the Tate Modern, Herzog & de Meuron has created a flexible gallery which retains the monumentality of the original building” Architects Journal, 2000, accessed Jan 2, 2020. https://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/archive/powerhouse-in-transforming-bankside-power-station-into-the-tate-modern-herzog-de-meuron-has-created-a-flexible-gallery-which-retains-the-monumentality-of-the-original-building-photographs-by-rich Page 19
References 1. Stungo, Naomi. Herzog & de Meuron. London: Carlton Books, 2002. 2. Van Uffelen, Chris. Re-use Architecture. Salenstein: Braun, 2010. 3. Moore, Rowan and Raymund Ryan. Building Tate Modern: Herzog & de Meuron transforming Giles Gilbert Scott. London: Tate Gallery, 2000. 4. Morris, Frances, Michael Craig-Martin, Andrew Marr and Sheena Wagstaff. Tate Modern: The Handbook. London: Tate Gallery, 2006. 5. The Art Newspaper. “The ones that got away: Tates rejected designs.” Jun 2, 2014. 6. Levene, Richard C. and Fernando Márquez Cecilia. Herzog & de Meuron : 1981 – 2000. Madrid: El Croquis. 7. Levene, Richard C. and Fernando Márquez Cecilia. “Herzog & de Meuron 1993 – 1997,” El Croquis, No. 84 (1997): 7 – 21. 8. Architecture Today. “The Rise of Reuse.” Architecture Today. Accessed Jan 2, 2020. https://architecturetoday. co.uk/the-rise-of-reuse/ 9. Wong, Liliane. Adaptive REUSE: Extending the Lives of Buildings. Basel: Birkhäuser, 2017. 10. Kumbaroglu, Gurkan and Reinhard Madlener. “Evaluation of economically optimal retrofit investment options for energy savings in buildings.” Energy and Buildings, no.49. (2012): 327-334. 11. C40 Cities. “Cities100: London – Large-scale building retrofit reduce emissions.” C40 Cities. 2015. Accessed Jan 2, 2020. https://www.c40.org/case_studies/cities100-london-large-scale-building-retrofits-reduce-emissions#:~:text=RE%3AFIT%20aims%20to%20retrofit,emissions%20by%2093%2C000%20metric%20tons. 12. Kaminski, Isabella. “Vat chance: Can tax reforms spur a retrofit renaissance?” Architects Journal. 2020. Accessed Feb 15, 2021. https://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/news/vat-chance-can-tax-reforms-spur-a-retrofit-renaissance 13. Nobuyuki, Yoshida. Herzog and de Meuron 1978 – 2002. Tokyo: A & U Publishing, 2002. 14. Davidts, Wouter. The Vast and the Void: On Tate Modern’s Turbine Hall and the Unilever Series. Research Gate. 2007. 15. Smith, Kroydon. Introducing Architectural Theory: Debating a Discipline. London: Routledge, 2012. 16. The Burlington Magazine. “Tate Modern five years on.” 2005. 17. Architects Journal. “Powerhouse In transforming Bankside power station into the Tate Modern, Herzog & de Meuron has created a flexible gallery which retains the monumentality of the original building” Architects Journal. 2000. Accessed Jan 2, 2020. https://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/archive/powerhouse-in-transforming-banksidepower-station-into-the-tate-modern-herzog-de-meuron-has-created-a-flexible-gallery-which-retains-the-monumentality-of-the-original-building-photographs-by-rich
Page 20
Bibliography Architects Journal. “Powerhouse In transforming Bankside power station into the Tate Modern, Herzog & de Meuron has created a flexible gallery which retains the monumentality of the original building” Architects Journal. 2000. Accessed Jan 2, 2020. https://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/archive/powerhouse-in-transforming-banksidepower-station-into-the-tate-modern-herzog-de-meuron-has-created-a-flexible-gallery-which-retains-the-monumentality-of-the-original-building-photographs-by-rich Architecture Today. “The Rise of Reuse.” Architecture Today. Accessed Jan 2, 2020. https://architecturetoday.co.uk/ the-rise-of-reuse/ C40 Cities. “Cities100: London – Large-scale building retrofit reduce emissions.” C40 Cities. 2015. Accessed Jan 2, 2020. https://www.c40.org/case_studies/cities100-london-large-scale-building-retrofits-reduce-emissions#:~:text=RE%3AFIT%20aims%20to%20retrofit,emissions%20by%2093%2C000%20metric%20tons. Davidts, Wouter. The Vast and the Void: On Tate Modern’s Turbine Hall and the Unilever Series. Research Gate. 2007. Gerhard, Mack. Herzog and de Meuron 1978-88: the complete works. Vol.1. Basel: Birkhäuser, 1997. Hoyt, Alex. “Report shows environmental benefits of retrofit.” Architect Magazine, Feb 2, 2012. Kaminski, Isabella. “Vat chance: Can tax reforms spur a retrofit renaissance?” Architects Journal. 2020. Accessed Feb 15, 2021. https://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/news/vat-chance-can-tax-reforms-spur-a-retrofit-renaissance Kumbaroglu, Gurkan and Reinhard Madlener. “Evaluation of economically optimal retrofit investment options for energy savings in buildings.” Energy and Buildings, no.49. (2012): 327-334. Levene, Richard C. and Fernando Márquez Cecilia. Herzog & de Meuron : 1981 – 2000. Madrid: El Croquis. Levene, Richard C. and Fernando Márquez Cecilia. “Herzog & de Meuron 1993 – 1997,” El Croquis, No. 84 (1997): 7 – 21. Moore, Rowan and Raymund Ryan. Building Tate Modern: Herzog & de Meuron transforming Giles Gilbert Scott. London: Tate Gallery, 2000. Morris, Frances, Michael Craig-Martin, Andrew Marr and Sheena Wagstaff. Tate Modern: The Handbook. London: Tate Gallery, 2006 Nobuyuki, Yoshida. Herzog and de Meuron 1978 – 2002. Tokyo: A & U Publishing, 2002. Smith, Kroydon. Introducing Architectural Theory: Debating a Discipline. London: Routledge, 2012 Stungo, Naomi. Herzog & de Meuron. London: Carlton Books, 2002. The Art Newspaper. “The ones that got away: Tates rejected designs.” Jun 2, 2014. The Burlington Magazine. “Tate Modern five years on.” 2005 Van Uffelen, Chris. Re-use Architecture. Salenstein: Braun, 2010. Wang, Wilfred. Herzog and de Meuron: Projects and Building 1982 – 1990. Rizzoli, 1990. Wong, Liliane. Adaptive REUSE: Extending the Lives of Buildings. Basel: Birkhäuser, 2017.
Page 21
Image Reference 01. Guggenheim, Bilbao. Architect: Frank Gehry. (Photo: https://www.apollo-magazine.com/is-the-bilbao-effect-overguggenheim/ ) 02. V&A, Dundee. Architect: Kengo Kuma.(Photo: https://www.dezeen.com/2018/09/15/video-interview-kengokuma-v-and-a-dundee-museum-nature-artefact-movie/ ) 03. An ‘empty’ Bankside Power Station (Photo: Authors own) 04. Nolli Plan highlighting Tate and St. Pauls 05. Battersea Power Station, London (Photo: https://gilbertscott.org/liverpool-anglican-cathedral) 06. Anglican Cathedral Church of Christ, Liverpool (Photo: https://thespaces.com/sir-giles-gilbert-scotts-legacy-5seminal-projects-battersea-power-station-architect/ ) 07. Red Telephone Box (Photo: https://thespaces.com/sir-giles-gilbert-scotts-legacy-5-seminal-projects-batterseapower-station-architect/ ) 08. Lou Ruvo Center for Brain Health, Las Vegas (Photo: https://www.fodors.com/news/photos/13-iconic-andwacky-frank-gehry-buildings ) 09. Walt Disney Concert Hall, Los Angeles (Photo: Authors own) 10. Museum of Pop Culture, Seattle (Photo: https://www.fodors.com/news/photos/13-iconic-and-wacky-frankgehry-buildings ) 11. Elbphilharmonie Hamburg (Photo: https://www.e-architect.com/architects/herzog-de-meuron-architects ) 12. Laban Dance Centre, London (Photo: https://www.e-architect.com/london/laban-centre ) 13. De Young Museum, San Fransisco (Photo: https://www.e-architect.com/sanfrancisco/de-young-museum) 14. Host Structure Types (Photo: Liliane Wong, Adaptive REUSE: Extending the Lives of Buildings.106.) 15. Turbine Hall Painting (Photo: Authors own) 16. Turbine Hall Crane (Photo: http://www.archipicture.eu/Architekten/Schweiz/Herzog%20de%20Meuron/ Herzog%20de%20Meuron%20-%20Tate%20Modern%20London%2022.html ) 17. Maman, Louise Bourgeois (Photo: https://londonist.com/london/art-and-photography/tate-modern-turbine-hallcommissions) 18. The Weather Project, Olafur Eliasson (Photo: https://londonist.com/london/art-and-photography/tate-modernturbine-hall-commissions) 19. Test Site, Carsten Höller (Photo: https://londonist.com/london/art-and-photography/tate-modern-turbine-hallcommissions)
Page 22