Letter: Conservation necrophilia
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Sir: Long after London's Bankside and Battersea power stations were de-commissioned, they continue to generate, with an efficiency they could have used in the production of electricity, an array of seriously inappropriate proposals for new uses.
Thus your correspondent Hugh Keyte (Letters, 10 September) wants to convert the Bankside station - designed and fenestrated to house giant boilers, turbines, dynamos, oil tanks and an enormous sub-station - into a museum of modern art. To display such work in the requisite ill-begotten conversion would reflect biliously on the spirit of the age which such art represents.
This and other lash-ups proposed for the building are but rude gestures at the respectable tradition of industrial architecture they mean to honour. Unfortunately, people suppose that a building that was fine in its time and for its original use must remain fine even when pulled about to accommodate wholly incongruous activities, badly, and at breathtaking expense. This is the point at which a healthy instinct for conservation becomes unhealthy necrophilia.
We would be far better served by the redevelopment of this immense structure, which sprawls gloomily along nearly 200 yards of central London Thames-side, together with the large area of congested and obsolescent buildings around it. This would produce a magnificently located site of more than 20 acres.
Properly planned, and designed by our brilliant architects (who are under-patronised in Britain), it would be of a quality and scale worthy of London and the nation. It could even include a museum of modern art.
Yours faithfully,
LAWRENCE HANSEN
Director
The Southwark Environment Trust
London, SE15
10 September
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments