Robin Hood Gardens: The Rise, The Fall and The Remembering of its Tangible and Intangible Memories

ROBIN HOOD GARDENS

THE RISE, THE FALL AND THE REMEMBERING OF ITS TANGIBLE AND INTANGIBLE MEMORIES

LEMUEL GONZALES Canterbury School of Architecture | UCA CARC5003: Cultural Context Stage 02 Essay 2021/22

Wilkins, D. (s.d.) Robin Hood Gardens: London, 1972 – Streets in the Sky. [Photograph] At: https://www.royalacademy.org.uk/article/opinion-architecture-brutalism-and-the-future-of-housing (Accessed 25/10/2021)

CHAPTER 01 – PROJECT REVIEW The architect Peter Smithson stated in the 1970 documentary, The Smithsons on Housing, “it is a demonstration of a more enjoyable way of living… an exemplar of a new mode of urban organisation”.

The confident but condescending tone that both the Smithson architects exuded during the interview was hauntingly convincing, specifically in the way they expressed their visions and philosophy for the project. Two linear concrete slab-blocks, completed in 1972, was comprised of 214 council flats or maisonettes, Robin Hood Gardens is argued as an epitome of a unique approach to social housing and the ‘New Brutalist’ movement (Thoburn, 2018:614). However, it is ironic knowing that the ‘streets in the sky’ concept at which the Robin Hood Gardens was built upon, would inevitably be met with intense scrutiny; a rollercoaster of public interest and perception throughout its lifespan that eventually led to its demolition.

Robin Hood Gardens (sometimes referred to as RHG here-after) in Poplar, East London was designed and realised by renowned architects Peter and Alison Smithson who, in their prime, arguably

pioneered

how

Brutalism

was

perceived and recognised in the world of architecture. The New Brutalist movement commenced

from

the

formation

of

the

Independent Group, emulating the post-1930’s style of the major French architect, Le Corbusier (Independent Group, s.d.). The movement of ‘New Brutalism’ was first referenced by Alison Smithson in her description of an unrealised project in Soho which was featured in an architecture magazine in 1963 where she Fig. 1 Walking through the surviving East block’s façade of Robin Hood Gardens, 2022

wanted it to be “exposed entirely, without interior finishes wherever practicable” (Scalbert, 2005:57).

THE SMITHSONS AND ‘NEW BRUTALISM’ During austerity years post-Second World War, the Smithson architects in the 1950’s wanted to redefine what we see as ‘aesthetic’, especially with the growing desire to rebuild a welfare-state Britain and looking for more ‘honest’ and ‘authentic’ approaches to the built environment. The two architectural protagonists were intrigued with the idea of looking at materials for what they were: “the woodness of wood; the sandiness of sand”; having completely new perspectives in ‘the ordinary’ in a time where opportunities for creative freedom and artistic expression was rising (Smithson and Smithson, 1990: 201).

Hence the coming about of raw materials such as in-situ concrete and exposed brick; Brutalism’s other key characteristics are asymmetrical, sculptural forms and the separation of vehicular and pedestrian circulation. This was informed by the Smithson’s thorough research and views on social housing and anthropology. They envisioned a system that takes into consideration communal spaces, pedestrian mobility, and the interconnectedness of its inhabitants, which influenced the conceptualisation of the ‘streets in the sky’ (Cunha Borges and Marat-Mendes, 2019:2). The Smithsons had a very detailed sense of engagement with the project’s location and its distinct identity.

The idea of urban renewal and the reidentification of a district, specifically the area of Poplar and surrounding neighbourhoods of the Isle of Dogs and the East India Docks. The truthfulness and authenticity at which they captured, not only in the overall design of the building, but embodied within the very fibre of the materials and processes used for its construction. They preached about using materials that are low-cost and easily available, especially with the nation still rebuilding after the war (Smithson, 1970).

Fig. 2 Robin Hood Gardens, Tower Hamlets under construction (1970)

THE CONCEPT AND DESIGN

Fig. 3 Highlighted in grey - aerial walkway and the 'street in the sky'/architectural drawings, floor plans and sections (s.d.)

The site at which RHG was built upon came certain restrictions that they had to overcome. On the East of the site ran the Blackwall Tunnels, and Cotton Street on the West that connected the Isle of Dogs through the East India Dock Road which became six lanes wide. (Pidgeon, 1972:559). Because the site was encompassed by traffic on two sides, the architects arranged two linear structures in the East and West to act as a wall or shield from the noise from nearby road congestion. In doing so, a ‘stress-free’ central zone was created. This quiet, green enclosure was shared between residents of the estate. A two-storey artificial mound was also created at the centre of the green space from the remains of rubble and dirt from its construction which can be seen in both figure 2 and figure 3 (Smithson, 1970). One of the most prominent and notable design strategies the architects implemented was in the planning and organisation of the space. They wanted to place the bedrooms and the kitchen protected away from noise facing the stress-free zone and “the noisy with the noisy on the outside”. The access decks was situated on the side where roads ran on both blocks as highlighted in grey on figure 3 (Kasimidi, 2013).

Fig. 4 Photograph of the Surviving East-Block - North-east façade, 2022

Fig. 5 The surviving East building in the distance, dwarfed by new apartment blocks, 2022

INTRODUCTION TO THE CONTROVERSY The case of RHG, I believe, is best encompassed by what Owen Luder (cited in Mairs, 2017), a prominent Brutalist architect once said in an interview, “in the sixties my buildings were awarded, in the seventies they were applauded, in the eighties they were questioned, in the nineties they were ridiculed, and when we get through to 2000, the ones I like most are the ones that have been demolished.” The said architect himself has had his share of projects that have faced the hand of the wrecking ball. Although Alison and Peter Smithson never lived long enough to witness their project’s demise, RHG encountered great criticism throughout its lifespan that led to the decision for it to be destroyed (Li, 2015).

Fig. 6 Before and during the demolition of the Western Block, 2017

As soon as there were talks of demolition, Simon Smithson, in partnership with Richard Rogers, gathered support for the preservation of the project. Multiple factors were in play when it came to the debate of the demolition (Kafka, 2017). Some believe it is an influential symbol of ‘brutalist social housing’, some perceive it as an unmaintained, arguably uninhabitable piece of architecture, some saw it as an opportunity for new development. Some refused to be led astray by the politics of the whole fiasco as they held on to memories and lived experiences by the residents of RHG or those who lived nearby (Greyscape, s.d.) A prevalent statement and description for the case of RHG are ‘social cleansing’ and ‘art washing’. This unfortunate common occurrence of low-income communities being displaced to make way for new subsidised housing, that’s not even intended for them. 50% of the new homes are described as allegedly being “affordable” but for London standards, they are highly contentious (Anderson, s.d., Pearman, 2017).

The ongoing debate with RHG stems from what is considered tangible and intangible qualities of the project; the debate with the disconnect and/or the relationship between physical characteristics of the building with the wider significant values and concepts that were envisioned within the project’s initial rationale and agenda. (Chin, 2015).

CHAPTER 02 – THEORIES OF HISTORY AND MEMORY To further grasp the project, delving into select architectural lecture themes can help unravel, not just how a building came to be but what it would eventually turn into, how it will be received and what it represents.

The subject of history and memory is a surprisingly complicated subject when explored further. The difference between the two is similar and yet have distinct, contrasting ideas. History as we know it, or the practice of History is the understanding of events that occurred in the past through the study of collected records and evidence. This approach is the attempt of unearthing events objectively.

Memory, on the other hand, is the understanding and the interpreting of historical events through the lens of our own lived experiences, cultures, and backgrounds. Information may have been altered throughout time, but it does not necessarily make it any less valid when compared to information researched by a historian (Owens, 2017).

Certain structures are particularly significant for their ability to act as a symbolic representation of cultural narratives

in

which

they

are

envisioned; projects with meaningful impacts attempt to justify the past, but more so inform the potentials of the future with a capacity for change.

Certain structures can also often evoke sensitivity and awareness to ethical issues concerning different subjects, whether we approach and Figure 7 Transformations of History and Memory, 2008

understand

them

explicitly

or

subconsciously. Contrary to the very definition of a monument, the destruction of one is just as consequential and sends a powerful message. The removal of such structures is the attempt to forget and eradicate the memory of a particular historical moment in time. (Faust, 2018).

CONCEPT OF COLLECTIVE MEMORY Walter Benjamin, a German philosopher believed that changes in society such as political, industrial, and/or social shifts throughout time are often the reason of memory being lost and undermined. He called it “a deep pervasive memory crisis” in the book The City of Collective Memory. The renowned philosopher further states how memories have the tendency to resurface in moments of crisis as a form of vessel towards the future; a tool for learning, information, and change (Benjamin, 1978 cited in Boyer, 1994:30). The result of ripping down sections of artifacts or buildings from their original location and contexts is not enough of a method in the attempt of preserving such projects for display when they can be remembered and commemorated exactly where they are and be studied and respected (Boyer, 1994:131).

“Where tradition ends, history begins” stated Maurice Halbwachs in his writings on Collective Memory, a French philosopher and sociologist known for developing the concept. He concluded and argued that there is no need to record official narratives of history if they are kept in the memory of the people or a community’s collective experience and interpretation of them (Halbwachs, 1992 cited in Boyer, 1994:133). This, in turn, creates unique characteristics, identity and valid variations to distinct memories.

Social memories collected within a group of people such as ethnic communities, our families added with our own lived and personal recollections show that the idea of identity is intimately interconnected to the very concept of memory. Dolores Hayden (1997:9) writes in her publication of The Power of Place that structures that consciously or subconsciously inform our very way of life, whether it is manmade or natural, urban landscapes act as storage for these social memories that we can all ponder upon for generations to come.

“When the urban landscape is battered, important collective memories are obliterated” Architectural preservation and public history can play an evocative part in determining and the understanding of a city’s historical collection only if a healthy social cohesion and engagement help make sense the idea of social memory; that professionals should practice and involve themselves by sharing their expertise with the residents at an intimate level (Hayden, 1997:76).

Chapter 03 – ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION In the case of Robin Hood Gardens, views on such structures wavered. And as time passed, it certainly was a turbulent one. Unlike projects like The Barbican that cater to the middle-class, Robin Hood Gardens was different. Its name gives it away. For the municipal socialists that envisioned the project, like the English folktale of Robin Hood, it was supposed to be a statement against the very idea of capitalism; taking from the wealthy to give back to the underprivileged (The Architecture Review, 2014). Separating the tangible and intangible qualities of the project can help us better understand the importance of RHG; not just the politics of the built environment, but whose histories matter and are valued the most. In this particular circumstance, there needs to be a closer connection between untold stories and experiences of marginalised or unrepresented groups. The illustration on figure 8 briefly highlights the different groups of people involved in the outcome of the future of the estate.

Fig. 8 Key Players involved in the decision-making and fate of Robin Hood Gardens, 2021

Brutalism, at its very core, have been a target for immense dislike for most people. Because of the project’s layout, one of many bases for people’s criticism focused on aspects that created ominous blind spots, dark stairwells, and alleyways. These locations attracted anti-social behaviour, vandalism and has become a magnet for crime for years (Pearman, 2017). Although I suppose there’s truth to

that, I strongly believe it was predominantly due to the lack of attention and maintenance that the estate received by local authorities that resulted in such circumstance, and therefore tarnished its reputation. Because of its target residence, it was also speculated that the impoverished state of the residents due to economic reasons were also a contributing factor for such behaviour (Graham, s.d.:15) A poll conducted by the Borough of Tower Hamlets in 2008 show that 75% of the workingclass in the borough favoured the estate to be demolished and regenerated. However, a survey carried by a RHG resident proved that 80% believed it should be renovated and refurbished instead (Gallanti, s.d.). English Heritage refused the listing for the project for they concluded that “it has serious shortcomings” and that the estate failed to meet its original brief and agenda as an example of the development of adequate social housing (Historic England, 2015).

Although the organisation stated that they considered evidence and campaigners pro-RHG, I strongly believe that the voices of the architectural elite were amplified but the voices of the residents and people’s lived experiences of the area was unfairly backgrounded.

Contrary to the scrutiny and hatred towards RHG, the documentary The Disappearance of Robin Hood (2018), humanises the whole experience of the estate positively despite the controversies that are associated with it. The bittersweet atmosphere of the film accentuates different resident’s experiences and memories of living in RHG. Residents often expressed how the deck was a hotspot for lunch and dinner during warmer months where young and old can gather and interact. Some have lived in the estate for three decades, one worked as a caretaker, and some have passed on their flat to two generations of their family.

“For the community member or local resident, it means being willing to engage in a lengthy process of developing priorities for a place and working through their meaning with a group. This demands patience as insiders educate outsiders and people of different ages, genders, and political views try to agree on what is meaningful and what is creative.

Like any other local issue, from parking to street widening, protection of public landscape can be exasperating, but it is never unimportant.” (Hayden, 1997:76) The Streetlife in Robin Hood Gardens Engagement Project organised by Erect Architecture (2006) aimed to embody the Smithson architect’s vision and intention. It was a demonstration of the promising potentials of the estate and for ‘outsiders’ to learn the truth about the livelihood of those living in RHG first-hand. A then PhD student wrote about his account of the experience at being at the event and how eye-opening it was to see the vibrant and welcoming spirit and the “accumulation of memories and many years of celebrations”, in contrast to the ‘concrete monstrosity’ they were in shown in figure 9 (Beech, 2006:2, Thoburn, 2018:613).

“The kind of public art that truly contributes to a sense of place needs to start with a new kind of relationship to the people whose history is being represented.”

(Hayden, 1997:76)

Fig. 9 'Open-House Weekend’ at RHG that aims to show community collaboration and cultural identity, 2006

CONCLUSION Visiting the remaining East block of RHG was an unforgettable experience. Prior to visiting the site and having undertaken mountains of research, I was confident that I would be greeted by regenerated, generic apartment blocks that have replaced the project. Realising half of it was still standing was like being witness to the rebirth of the dead. To my initial experience, it was as many described it: narrow stairwells and lifts that smelt of urine, graffiti lined the crumbling concrete.

However, to me and my mother’s surprise, a child came running out from one of the flats followed by her mother, then an elderly woman entering her home. Then, it occurred to us that most of these flats are still lived in to this day. It was at that point that all my research came back in flashes and was hit with emotions, knowing that this so-called ‘concrete monstrosity’ was once flooded with vibrant sounds and smells; long lost personal memories that only those who lived there can fondly reminisce over.

Fig. 10 Walking through the 'Streets in the Sky', 2022

Many will argue that Robin Hood Gardens was an ill-fated experiment in a post-war, utopian way of thinking for the implementation of social housing. Whether or not this is true, at least it was an attempt in tackling such issues in an underrated and underappreciated manner. The Smithson’s approach and philosophy towards the project was a manifestation of their socialist and democratic beliefs that housing should be benefited by everyone and that they should accommodate future generations too, thinking of the future (Melon, 2014). Architects are technically servants of society within their own right. However, their duties are often overshadowed by an economic market that is loosely based on speculation (The Disappearance of Robin Hood, 2018). I strongly believe that the noteworthy ideals and unrealised thought-processes that the Smithsons devised should be educated, further evaluated, and developed in urban planning and design schools. Their architectural ambition is truly inspirational.

However unattractive or uninviting the project might be, Robin Hood Gardens helps us fathom and recognise that there needs to be a closer relationship between the insider and the outsider. Even my own mother was unconvinced in entering the building without prior knowledge of the project; her judgement was purely based on its conditions. Whether the Smithson duo successfully executed their vision or not, this can be helped fairly justify the debate through two determining factors: its architectural significance, alongside the connection, the lived experiences and assessment of the people. The tangible and intangible.

Fig. 11 Lived Brutalism: Portraits of Robin Hood Gardens, 2016

It is a figurative structure that carry and celebrate social memories, both as symbolic representation of philosophical thinking at the time of its creation, what it embodies now and what the future hold for such theories and approaches to urban planning.

Love or loathe what the Smithsons gave us, I wholeheartedly believe Robin Hood Gardens will stand the test of time within our memories and will forever be more distinctive, not just as an influential piece of architecture but the Smithson’s outward and hopeful sense of idealism, than its replacement will ever be.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Anderson, R. (s.d.) ‘Artwashing: The Obscuring or Social Relations in the Brutalist Renaissance’ in Anthropology of Architecture At: https://www.anthropologyofarchitecture.com/#/new-page-1/ (Accessed 23/12/2021) Assmann, A. (2008) Transformations between History and Memory. Social Research: An International Quarterly, 75, 49 – 72. At https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:141726684 (Accessed 08/12/2021) Beech, S. (2006) Problems with Easy Street: At the Smithsons’ Robin Hood Gardens Estate for ‘Open-House Weekend’, Sunday 17 September 2006 At: https://www.ucl.ac.uk/opticon1826/archive/issue1/easystreet.pdf (Accessed 10/12/2021) Bell, T. R. (2017) A Concept Made Concrete: Conserving A Brutalist Icon Through Architectural Intervention. At: https://hdl.handle.net/10652/4353 (Accessed 31/10/2021) Boyer, M. C. (1994) The City of Collective Memory: Its Historical Imagery and Architectural Entertainments.

Massachusetts/London: MIT Press Chin, I. (2015) Saving Brutalist Architecture: Re-imagining Robin Hood Gardens through the experience of Park Hill.

[BA Dissertation] Newcastle University. At: http://dx.doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.1660.7205 (Accessed 27/12/2021) Cunha Borges, J. & Marat-Mendes, T. (2019) Walking on Streets-in-the-Sky: Structures for Democratic Cities. At: https://doi.org/10.1080/20004214.2019.1596520 (Accessed 24/10/2021) The Disappearance of Robin Hood (2018) Directed by Papanicolaou, K. E. [Vimeo] At: https://vimeo.com/ondemand/disappearanceofrobinhood/457703067 (Accessed 30/12/2021) Erect Architecture (s.d.) Street Life in Robin Hood Gardens: Engagement Project At: https://www.erectarchitecture.co.uk/projects/street-life-robin-hood-gardens/ (Accessed 24/10/2021) Faust, D. (2018) On Monuments: Time, Place and Memory. [Harvard University Graduate School of Design 27/02/2018] Gallanti, F. (s.d.) A Brutal End for Robin Hood Gardens: Examining the Demise of a Modernist Housing Estate At: http://kvadratinterwoven.com/a-brutal-end-for-robin-hood-gardens (Accessed 24/12/2021) Graham, S. (s.d.) Robin Hood Gardens: Searching for a Sense of Place. [Research] Wild ReSearch At: https://static1.squarespace.com/static/596384b81e5b6c8b875bc925/t/59930a6837c581f4bd01caa5/1502808702 338/WIL895_Robin+Hood+Garden+-+FINAL.pdf (Accessed 24/12/2021)

Greyscape (s.d.) Robin Hood Gardens: Taking from the Poor to Give to the Rich. At: https://www.greyscape.com/robin-hood-gardens/ (Accessed 27/12/2021) Hayden, D. (1997) The Power of Place: Urban Landscapes as Public History. Massachusetts/London: MIT Press Historic England (2015) Robin Hood Gardens Estate At: https://historicengland.org.uk/whats-new/news/robin-hoodgardens/ (Accessed 10/01/2022) Independent Group (s.d.) Alison and Peter Smithson. At: http://independentgroup.org.uk/contributors/smithson/ (Accessed 31/10/2021) Kafka, G. (2017) Goodbye, Streets in the Sky! Remembering a Concrete Cockney At: https://www.stylepark.com/en/news/robin-hood-gardens-london-brutalism-architecture-alison-peter-smithson (Accessed 08/01/2022) Kasimidi, M. (2013) Robin Hood Gardens: The Past, Present and the Future of a Much-Debated Housing Estate.

[History Thesis] Delft University of Technology At: https://issuu.com/mkasimidi/docs/robin_hood_gardens_thesis (Accessed 24/12/2021) Li, A. (2015) Raised by Association: Robin Hood Gardens and its Interpretations. Thresholds, 43, (pp. 110–299). At: http://www.jstor.org/stable/43892699 (Accessed on 30/10/2021) Mairs, J. (2017) Robin Hood Gardens top Twentieth Century Society’s List of Lost Architectural Treasures At: https://www.dezeen.com/2017/09/27/robin-hood-gardens-tops-twentieth-century-society-lost-modern-list-news-uk/ (Accessed 25/12/2021) Mayo, J. M. (1996) ‘Review of The City of Collective Memory: Its Historical Imagery and Architectural Entertainments; The See-through Years: Creation and Destruction in Texas Architecture and Real Estate’ In: Journal of Architectural Education, 50 (1), pp. 68–70. At: https://doi.org/10.2307/1425289 (Accessed 08/12/2021) Melon, A. (2014) ‘Robin Hood Gardens and the Rehabilitation of Post-War Mass Housing in London’ (51) pp.16-21 At: https://dx.doi.org/10.52200/51.A.XXHURCAO (Accessed 31/10/2021) Pearman, H. (2017) Last Days of the Smithsons’ Robin Hood Gardens At: https://www.architecturalrecord.com/articles/12926-last-days-of-the-smithsons-robin-hood-gardens (Accessed 10/01/2022) Pidgeon, M. (1972) Robin Hood Gardens London E14 In: Architectural Design Volume XLII September 9 1972 Housing A+P Smithson 42. Pp. 557-773 Robin Hood Gardens: Requiem for A Dream (2014) [Online Video] At: https://www.architecturalreview.com/films/robin-hood-gardens-requiem-for-a-dream (Accessed 28/12/2021)

Scalbert, I. (2000) Architecture as a Way of Life: The New Brutalism 1953-1956. 10. At: http://team10online.org/research/papers/delft1/scalbert.pdf (Accessed 30/10/2021) Smithson, A. and Smithson, P. (1990) ‘The ‘As Found’ and the ‘Found’ In: The Independent Group - Post-War Britain and the Aesthetics of Plenty (pp. 201-202) At: http://designtheory.fiu.edu/readings/smithson_as_found.pdf (Accessed 26/10/2021) The Smithsons on Housing (1970) [BBC Documentary] At: (1970https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UH5thwHTYNk&list=PLMRc2TxZ_OfDO88UOkfFOov5cPDwYUXW_&inde x=4&t=100s (Accessed 24/10/2021) Thoburn, N. (2018) Concrete and Council Housing, City, 22:5-6, 612-632, DOI: 10.1080/13604813.2018.1549203 (Accessed on 30/10/2021)

FIGURE REFERENCES: Fig. 1 Gonzales, L. (2022) Walking through the surviving East block’s façade of Robin Hood Gardens [Photograph] In possession of the author: London Fig. 2 Ray-Jones, T. (1970) Robin Hood Gardens, Tower Hamlets, London under Construction [Photograph] At: www.ribapix.com/robin-hood-gardens-tower-hamlets-london-under-construction_riba106839# (Accessed on 31/10/2021) Fig. 3 Keita Heinrich, K. and Bastiaan-Beatley, C. (s.d.) Highlighted in grey - aerial walkway and the 'street in the sky'/architectural drawings, floor plans and sections [Architectural Drawings] At: https://elementsofhousing.com/ex02-case-studies-in-collective-housing (Accessed 01/11/2021) Fig. 4 Gonzales, L. (2022) Photograph of the Surviving East-Block - North-east façade [Photograph] in possession of the author: London Fig. 5 Gonzales, L. (2022) The surviving East building in the distance, dwarfed by new apartment blocks [Photograph] in possession of the author: London Fig. 6 Hantke-Ibanez, F. (2017) Before and during demolition of the Western Block [Photograph] At: http://www.estudioibanez.com/demolition-west-tower-robin-hood-gardens/ (Accessed 06/01/2022) Fig. 7 Aleida Assmann (2008) Transformations of History and Memory [Diagram/Table] At: https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:141726684 (Accessed 09/12/2021)

Fig. 8 Gonzales, L. (2021) Key Players in the decision-making and fate of Robin Hood Gardens: Antagonists and Protagonists [Table/Chart] In possession of the author: London Fig. 9 Erect Architecture (2006) 'Open-House Weekend’ at RHG that aims to show community collaboration and cultural identity [Photograph] At: https://www.erectarchitecture.co.uk/projects/street-life-robin-hood-gardens/ (Accessed 24/10/2021) Fig. 10 Gonzales, L. (2022) Walking through the ‘Streets in the Sky’ [Photograph] In possession of the author: London Fig. 11 Miah, K. (2016) Lived Brutalism: Portraits of Robin Hood Gardens [Photograph Collage] At: https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/gallery/2016/oct/22/lived-brutalism-portraits-from-robin-hood-gardenshousing-estate-in-pictures (Accessed 11/01/2022)