Detailing

Figure 1

Following the last post, I thought a few architectural thoughts about Hall No.1 at Kings Place were in order. Figure 1 above, turned up by Bing, gives some idea of the construction, if not the atmosphere of the place under concert lighting.

The dominant motif from where I was sitting was that of the rows of pillars, left, front and right, arranged so as to look as if they are free standing against a dark space. I was not sure whether they were free standing or not, being reasonably sure that cunning lighting could give that illusion. A rather good idea, but the effect was rather spoiled by the chunkiness of the pillars.

A chunkiness which was accentuated by the use of distance between two successive pillars, measured from left hand edge of one to the left hand edge of the next, or put another way the interval plus one pillar width, as the unit of length from which the design as a whole was put together. I associate to the old difficulty with telegraph poles, where the number of poles is one plus the number of spaces between poles, an endless source of confusion and error in computer programs.

Figure 2

A unit of length which was used for the panels beneath the pillars, which, inter alia, gave the unfortunate effect of the pillars sitting on the gaps between two successive panels. This might be clearer in Figure 2 than Figure 1.

The ceiling, which was lightly coffered with square panels of the same size, worked rather better.

The sound might have been good but while the hall was not as bad to look at as it had seemed on the first occasion, it was still not good. It would be interesting to know whether it was done on a tight budget or whether there was money to burn on this prestige project

In any event, it seemed to me that this was a hall which had been designed about some good ideas, but by someone who either disdained detailing in favour of a modern look - or did not know how to do it. A lack of basic training in architects' school. Perhaps all wannabee architects should be made to study London's County Hall, where the exterior stone detailing is generally very good and gave me much pleasure through the years when I walked past it, twice every day.

So, for example, the panels underneath the pillars could have been done much better, perhaps by allowing the pillars to run down between successive panels, rather than having them sitting on the crack. Perhaps a little coffering of the panels, to pick up that of the ceiling. While stopped bevels running most of the length of the two outside edges of the pillars would have taken away their unsightly chunkiness, and provided some relief from the brown - of which there was, as things stand, rather too much. And something better could have been done at the corners, something better than sticking rigidly to the unit of length.

A hall which might have been.

PS: Bogger, for some reason, has taken to varying the font within a post without my knowingly asking it to. The only remedy I can think of is to pass the offending test through Notepad to strip off the formatting. Tiresome. No doubt some erring paragraphs will slip through my editorial net.

Reference 1: https://www.kingsplace.co.uk/.