2011 Streak Day 245 (Monday Sept 5th): Looking at buildings

2011 Streak Day 245 (Monday Sept 5^th): Walk - 4 miles, Time - 2hrs, Weather - blue sky and sun (could be confused with summer)

A day in London.

The photo was taken in Whitcomb Street.  China Town looked very festive with yellow and red lanterns strung across the streets. The paper globes absorbed the light and glowed whilst the tinsel shimmered, reflecting the sun. Below people strolled, stood talking in groups, or walked purposefully. It was (however briefly) summer in the city.

The effect of weather on behaviour is fascinating. Yesterday, when it was raining, people were defensive, hunched into themselves but today, in the sun, they open out and the atmosphere is more relaxed.

I like warm (but not too hot) days in London. Not taking public transport allows you to look more closely at the surroundings: the people, the buildings. The great trick when looking at buildings is to look up. At eye level a streetscape is dominated by shop fronts and their signs and as the majority of these are chain stores they will look the same wherever. However above first floor level the buildings show their history and are particular to their location

But looking gives only a general impression. it never gives the full story behind why buildings were built the way they were at that particular time. The exterior never tells everything and I sometimes think we spend too much time judging various stylistic ticks and less on how buildings actually function.

A good example is the National Gallery Extension. The story behind it is fascinating in that it had been the site of a department store, which had been destroyed in the Blitz. For over 30 years the site had been vacant and there had been a desire to expand the Gallery but money was the problem (it is amazing how mean spirited our attitude to public building has been during most of the post war period). The 80s were not a propitious time as they were the time of Thatcher, the introduction of museum charges and a suspicion of public provision. Thus the initial plan was for a mixed development with office and gallery space, the former paying for the latter.  There was a  public competition won by Ahrends  but their modern design that incurred the wrath of the Prince of Wales. His speech where he compared it to a "monstrous carbuncle on the face of  a much loved and elegant friend" sparked a huge cotroversy and the design was withdrawn

Although this was unfair to Ahrends, who had done a good job with a compromised brief, there was a a happy consequence: members of the Sainsbury family donated enough money to allow the site to be developed for the National Gallery alone (as should have been the plan all along).

The new building was designed by Robert Venturi, an extremely influential theoretician and architect, often associated with Post-Modernism. The exterior is an understated pastiche, designed to miimc the main National Gallery building. Inside there is a simplified, stylised classicism to the rooms but the colouring is grey - everywhere there is grey.

At the time I can remember most people being snooty about the the building. The modernists didn't like it because they thought it backward looking and a compromise, whilst the nostalgic romantics were not that impressed either.

My own view at the time, and still is, that it was very clever. The exterior gives minimum offence and is designed to blend-in and avoid more controversy, whilst the interior offers an excellent environment for viewing the pictures (which is after all a gallery's job). The use of grey is an example of this. If it was used in this way in a normal multi-use building it would be oppressive but here it allows the colours of the Renascence painting to come alive and seem vivid (which again is the purpose of the space).

Looking at the building now and knowing the background story means that the initial visual impression is supplemented by a wider understanding.  However most of the time when I walk around London I am more aware of what I don't know than what I do. Most of the time  I fall back on fleeting visual impressions.

Anger and Detachment: Cycling in London

These are very small incidents and many more of them happen on every road, every day.

Last Sunday a group of us went for a walk around Lyme Park. At first we tried to park in a car park that has access to a disused railway line that is now a footpath, a canal, and the footpath up to Lyme. In other words it is a base for recreation. Lots of other people had the same idea and although it was full cars were still streaming in. As it was a bit awkward to turn round and get out cars had to make room for each other. A woman was doing this and therefore blocking the road up to the spaces. This incensed the driver behind and I watched in fascination as he gradually increased the pitch of his swearing and got redder in the face. It was a place to go to for pleasure so why was he so wound up? Sunday mornings should not be like that! It just reminded me how angry everybody seemed to be with all other road users.

There is an badly designed cycle way at the bottom of Gordon Square in London. Lots of traffic wants to turn right into the road to get to Euston but they not only have to cross the lane of oncoming traffic they have to cross the cycle path with bikes coming in both directions. It requires extra vigilance. I saw a near collision where the cyclist berated the driver for not looking and the driver turned round and yelled “ Well I would take more notice of you lot if you paid any notice to traffic lights!” The conversation was very loud.

On the South Circular Road near Kew Bridge two lanes merge into one. Instead of the orderly intertwining of one vehicle from one lane with the next from the other, one van was determined not to allow this to happen and kept as close as possible to the bumper of the car ahead. The van in the other lane was outraged and wanted its space so they both carried on in parallel, with the road running out, looking at each other swearing and gesturing. It was silent slow-motion ballet

A few years ago I was crossing the road at traffic lights, waited for the green man and set off but had to jump back as I was nearly barged into by a cyclist who had not intention of stopping at the lights. I could have coped with that if he hadn't shouted at me to look where I was going, as if it was my fault. As he disappeared out of sight all I had was the bitter taste of impotent rage. After I had stopped wanting to chin him I had one of those moments of insight and realised that over time the traffic had increasingly been getting to me.

I had been making the egocentric error of thinking people were deliberately getting in my way or being malicious idiots just for the fun of it. I used to get especially annoyed at traffic lights, when other cyclist would just cycle through. The annoyance was increased if I then caught them up between lights was then obstructed. Taxis and bendy buses were enemies and pedestrians were no better when they wandered out into the gutter without looking.

Things were getting stupid and so I decided to let go and cycle by two maxims:

The first and most important is that cycling in London is transport and not training. Getting or proving fitness has nothing to do with anything as you are only trying to get from A to B. There will be lots of obstructions and you will have to stop and start many times so don't worry and let the journey take as long as it takes.

The second is to not worry about what you cannot control. You cannot control the way other people treat the highway code so you have to become detached about their actions. However for your own safety you have to be very aware of what they do. The more you become detached the more you must increase your vigilance.

Two simple rules but the consequence is that I do not count any cycling in London towards cross training. The way things are it is more the equivalent of strolling.