MODERN ARCHITECTURE

New Zealand Listener, Volume 26, Issue 662, 14 March 1952, Page 5

MODERN ARCHITECTURE

Sir,-I was profoundly disturbed to read the letter by "Wren" (Listener, Feb. 8). It is not often that one reads so many misleading generalities in so few words. I assume the writer is sincere in his claims, but ‘nevertheless these claims ¢annot go unchallenged. We have been accused of abandoning the ‘heritage passed down from the Greeks, the Romans and other periods in architectural shistory. When -thinking of these matters, it must be realised how much more complicated our lives have become, especially over the last two centuries. Our occupations are more technical, our religion more demanding, our cities much larger and generally speaking our outlook more materialistic. All the beauty and power of a Spitfire aeroplane, in the advent of another war,

would be considered obsolete, yet at the same time large sections of the community want architects to désign~ buildings which are reminders of a past era. Having understood this point, perhaps "Wren" will find it less difficult, in the face of higher costs, new materials and workmen who think differently, to visualise some of the architect’s problems. It gives the architect a great thrill and sense of achievement to design a building in the true contemporary manner. This does not mean the cheap thrill of the "grand mock up." Rather, it means that thrill produced by a building which expresses a fresh, invigorating beauty together with a usefulness for the people of our day. Posterity will be the judge of our buildings. if they are thought to be severe, undignified and lacking in beauty, then it will be said that after that manner we have lived. This is our heritage.

R. I.

MITCHELL

(Onehunga).