Salute the building brutes

Misunderstood geniuses? Alison and Peter Smithson were the architects behind Robin Hood Gardens
The Weekender

Sign up to our free weekly newsletter for exclusive competitions, offers and theatre ticket deals

I would like to be emailed about offers, event and updates from Evening Standard. Read our privacy notice.

Robin Hood Gardens in east London looks like the archetype of a grim modernist estate. Set above the roaring mouth of the Blackwall Tunnel, and pallisaded with concrete fins, this stain-streaked fortress seems made for rain. It is like a face scoured by the raw winter wind. It is hard to imagine the sun shining here, ever. Its walkways, which its architects wanted to be "streets in the air" and full of sociable bustle, are bare and empty.

It is notorious for the violence it attracted even before it was completed, in 1972, and was once used to represent communist Moscow in a Levi's ad. Now, at a time when some buildings of its generation are finally being appreciated, Robin Hood Gardens has defied rehabilitation.

English Heritage considered listing it - as it has listed Erno Goldfinger's Balfron Tower, a 28-storey concrete neighbour of Robin Hood Gardens - but chose not to. "The planning of the flats is unsatisfactory and unresolved" is the main reason given. "They are dark, with an inefficient use of space."

"It is a matter of some debate," says the London Borough of Tower Hamlets, which looks after the estate, "as to whether this particular style of design is suitable for social housing." Robin Hood Gardens, in short, would seem to be an all too brutal example of the style of architecture that proudly called itself the New Brutalism.

So why is the Design Museum, that temple of all things delightful in contemporary artefacts, dedicating an exhibition, opening 6 December, to Alison and Peter Smithson, architects of Robin Hood Gardens and the leading exponents of New Brutalism? And why should the Smithsons be venerated (as they are) by many in the younger generation of architects? Alison Smithson died in 1993, and Peter earlier this year, but their ideas will live on into the future.

Actually, there is a reason, which is that the Smithsons represented values that have been under attack for a quarter-century, and which look ever more attractive as they become more remote. They believed in thoughtfulness, and nobility, and allowing space and time to contemplate and consider your place in the world. They were conscientious and wanted to create buildings not only for the moment, but also for an unknown future. They were extremely serious people, staring gravely at the camera in almost every known picture of them.

"Tomorrow will inherit only space," they said early in their career. "Our ultimate responsibility is therefore the creation of noble space." Yet they were not talking about designing grandiose monuments. They also wanted to design "for the particular", which meant making places that were right for their location and settings for everyday life.

Nowadays, by contrast, space is a thing to be sold and filled, to be appropriated by logos and shopping. Time is to be grasped and wrung dry. The particular is seen as an impediment to the power of mass markets, unless it can be described as a "niche" and sold for a high price.

The Smithsons designed buildings that are not gaudy or ostentatious but have strong personalities. They wrote of "architecture's capacity to charge the space around it with energy" and "influence the nature of things that might come" and achieved this through careful thought about things that are not immediately obvious, such as the width of paving, the rhythm of pillars, or changes of scale or level.

You can see this in another of their London projects, the Economist complex in St James's Street, where a group of new and old buildings loosely encloses an irregular raised plaza, a "pre-entry space" as the Smithsons described it, "in which there is time to re-arrange sensibilities preparatory to entering the building to visit or work". It is a calm place, raised above the humming streets, but not a dead one.

With more ample construction budgets than in Robin Hood Gardens, it achieves a quiet, well-tailored elegance through slender shafts of Portland stone and subtle adjustments of proportion.

It is what the Smithsons called "a family of particularly English city scales", from the old five-storey buildings on St James's Street to a 15-storey tower. The Economist building is conspicuously different from its Georgian and Victorian neighbours, but sympathetic to them.

Once you know more about the Smithsons, you can return to Robin Hood Gardens with a more charitable eye. Surrounded by huge and inhospitable engineering works, such as the docks and the motorway, you can see why the Smithsons wanted to create such a weighty building, "as heroic as supplying a Romanised city with water - as dramatic and obvious as an aqueduct". Something more domestic would look foolish here.

You also notice that Robin Hood Gardens's blocks enclose the only piece of green space in this blasted district, a mounded landscape like a slice of imported countryside, while the blocks are arranged to shield living rooms and the green space from the noise of the road. They were also arranged to allow views of a stretch of water, an old dock that has since been filled in by greater barbarians than the Smithsons.

One still wonders why Robin Hood Gardens had to look so grim but, surveying the surroundings, where everything seems to be snatched at or wasted, and where everything human seems to be barely clinging on, and where trashy tin boxes from the 1980s only add to the desolation, it is possible to appreciate the dignity that the Smithsons tried to bring.

Create a FREE account to continue reading

eros

Registration is a free and easy way to support our journalism.

Join our community where you can: comment on stories; sign up to newsletters; enter competitions and access content on our app.

Your email address

Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number

You must be at least 18 years old to create an account

* Required fields

Already have an account? SIGN IN

By clicking Create Account you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use , Cookie policy and Privacy policy .

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged in