Professor Sean Griffiths, from Westminster’s School of Architecture + Cities, has voiced his concern to Dezeen regarding the proposed alterations of the National Gallery’s Sainsbury Wing.
In the piece, titled Revamp of Venturi Scott Brown's National Gallery Extension Would Be "An Act of Vandalism", architects, critics and academics talk about the building’s history and cultural heritage.
The article echoes the concerns in the world of architecture after the release of the proposed alterations by the Selldorf Architects firm, based in New York. The Sainsbury Wing, opened in 1991, was designed by Venturi and Scott Brown and is one of the UK's best-known postmodern buildings.
Professor Griffiths asserted that museums must adapt to changing needs over time, but still have to be able to keep the unique character of a building. He compared the planned aesthetic to an airport or a corporate firm, stating that it looks a lot like an “act of vandalism”.
The piece goes on by explaining the planned changes and the criticism from different academics and organisations. The building has a controversial history, being the winner of the second competition for the site, after the first one was interrupted by King Charles III, due to the functional and unbending characteristics of the previous plans.
"It's loved and loathed in equal measures but that's what's brilliant about it. Whether you love it or hate it, it is a totally unique building, unlike any other in the UK or in the world, " said Professor Griffiths.
Professor Griffiths was re-quoted in a follow-up article by Dezeen about Selldorf Architects making changes to the proposal after the uproar from architects, heritage bodies and stakeholders. The National Gallery has pledged to keep more of the building's existing fabric, but criticism of the updated design is still immense.
Reacting to the updated plan Professor Griffiths said: “I don't think the revisions made to the scheme, subsequent to the barrage of criticism it has received, help much, if at all. The National Gallery should go back to the drawing board and find a way of addressing its needs in a way that does not disfigure a unique and historically important Grade 1 listed building that has significant merit in its own right but which has also played a critical role in development of public architectural debate in this country.”
Read the original article on Dezeen’s website.
