The Sack of Bath by Adam Fergusson
One of the joys of a trip to London is a visit to the very lovely Persephone shop; however, that visit always creates its own problem in the form of making the decision as to which Persephone title(s) to buy! I last dropped in there in November, when I met up with some lovely ladies from the LibraryThing Virago Group and before travelling I spent a little time going through the books on their site to come up with a shortlist. And a book which intrigued me, and which I ended up getting, was “The Sack of Bath” by Adam Fergusson.
On the surface of it, you might ask why a publisher which specialises in 20th century women’s fiction would bring out a book which looks at the wholesale destruction of a particular kind of architecture in that city. However, the city of Bath is a special one, and if for nothing else literary is remembered for its connection with Jane Austen. But as Fergusson’s book makes clear, the city had a rich cultural heritage, as well as an architectural one, and this short book is a passionate polemic aimed at those who were trying to destroy its individual character.
First published in 1973, “The Sack of Bath” was an attempt to bring the attention of the wider public (and indeed the world) to the fact that the authorities in Bath were undertaking a large-scale, wide-ranging demolition programme, bringing down buildings that although not Grade 1 listed, had immense historical significance. Much of the city itself had been built and developed in the Georgian style, and although the well-known and well-to-do streets were being preserved, the artisan dwellings and less prominent areas were being declared unfit and flattened to make way for large, incongruous Brutalist developments. The 1970s saw much of this kind of redevelopment, but in a city like Bath the new buildings sat very uncomfortably next to the old.
More to the point, the blind demolition of whole areas was altering the whole character of the city, which was losing its homogenous Georgian whole; and as Fergusson makes plain, much of this was development for development’s sake as it would have been just as cost-effective to upgrade the existing dwellings, therefore providing plenty of housing which was in the same style as the rest of Bath.
Fergusson is a strong and fierce champion of those who sprang up and formed local groups, trying to stop the destruction. And he makes a special case for the city being retained in its original form, pointing out that nothing is really irreparable, and that if you live in somewhere as special as Bath you have to take the consequences…
The point is that a damp house may have a damp course inserted; that an unfit house may be made fit; that those who live in and enjoy the beauties of an eighteenth-century town should not expect the amenities of Harlow New Town or Hemel Hempstead; and that if they want them that is where they must go and live.
Much of the problem seems to stem from the local authorities at the time having no real expertise or overview, and relying on a series of experts who really didn’t know what they were doing. And I have to say that Bath was not alone in having such changes made to it; I can recall the small town I lived in having its centre torn out and turned into a modern shopping centre, and the pictures of before and after are striking. However, this needs to be put in context; the post-WW2 years had seen a Britain that had been heavily bombarded with large areas destroyed or made difficult to live in. The country was striding into a brave new modern future, and the new kinds of architecture were part of that. I should declare here that I actually had something of a fondness for Brutalist structures and it’s ironic that so many of them are now being wiped out and replaced with modern buildings that look to me even more faceless and ugly.
But that’s by the by; “The Sack of Bath” set out to do a specific job, and it certainly did that, bringing the fight for Bath’s heritage to national attention (and as an unexpected result making other parts of the country more aware of what was happening and inclined to take action to save buildings and areas). Bath itself was declared a World Heritage Site in 1987, though that in itself is not without problems and a quick look at the city’s Wikipedia page reveals that controversy about developments is still rumbling on.
The book itself is a short and fascinating read, capturing a moment in time when a call to action was made. It’s liberally illustrated with a large number of photographs, most notably several by Lord Snowdon, and these are an essential and integral part of the book, speaking just as eloquently as Fergusson’s prose. Although the book is slim and can be read in one sitting, it does make you think deeply about the bureaucracy and red tape in the country, the people we put in charge of making decisions and plans on our behalf, and also the constant trends in building and architecture. I do feel that there is a place for Brutalist architecture and but what’s quite certain is that Bath was not it!
Jan 09, 2017 @ 07:17:23
I agree that it’s dispiriting when beautiful places are despoiled by so-called developers: I lived near Bath in the 70s & visited often after that, & saw it happen. It did in central Cambridge – many English towns. But towns aren’t museums – I followed the recent debate about the Globe Theatre director Emma Rice being sacked for over-innovative use of the place (according to her detractors): somehow we need a balance between progress & preservation. Yet another cloned shopping mall certainly isn’t progress, but a shrine to bourgeois cultural conservatism isn’t always preservation- it’s atrophy. Far too early in the morning for controversial rants, so I’ll get off my high horse. Interesting choice, Karen
Jan 09, 2017 @ 09:53:35
No, rant away! And I tend to agree – just preserving places in aspic tends to mean they’re no longer living, breathing towns or cities and that’s not good for us humans who live in them. I think that there needs to be sensitivity in development, a more holistic overview rather than just plonking down a building in the latest styles. But these things go in cycles anyway – some lovely brutalist buildings locally have been tarted up and clad in modern facings and glass, and I think they look horrid. The original design could have been preserved, just cleaned up and modernised inside. I guess there’s no easy answer…
Jan 09, 2017 @ 12:39:38
Interesting that some of those post-war brutalist buildings are now themselves in line for protection/preservation (South Bank, e.g.), so there we go. One person’s desecration is another’s…what…reinvention? I deplore the bulldozing of lovely sites if all that replaces them is tat, of course, but there are times when we need to move on. Houseman’s boulevards were hated (still are in some quarters), but now admired…plus ça change…
Jan 09, 2017 @ 14:29:43
Indeed we do. Having said that, I adore the Royal Festival Hall and would be at the front of the barricades if it was threatened….!
Jan 09, 2017 @ 07:21:51
An intriguing review… as Tredynas states above there’s a need for careful balance because cities must be for living in, not merely looking at.
Jan 09, 2017 @ 09:54:28
Exactly – and thinking about it now, maybe Fergusson goes a little too far. It’s easy to forget how eagerly the people living in what were in effect slums embraced the idea of clean, modern housing. As you say, cities are to live in…
Jan 09, 2017 @ 07:34:09
This sounds very different from the other books in the Persephone collection, a very interesting choice of subject matter. As Simon and Kim say above, there’s a delicate balance to be struck here…
Jan 09, 2017 @ 09:55:12
It’s an unusual choice, but a fascinating read. And I’m not entirely sure Fergusson gets the balance quite right, but it certainly makes for food for thought and debate!
Jan 09, 2017 @ 13:06:38
I have never much fancied reading this despite my love for Persephone. You do make The Sack of Bath sound fascinating though. It is dreadful to think about the architectural crimes which were committed in the name of progress.
Jan 09, 2017 @ 14:29:00
Indeed – it’s the lack of any overview or sensitivity on the part of the developers which always stuns me.
Jan 09, 2017 @ 15:18:03
Interesting review, interesting discussion. And gorgeous endpaper design too!
Jan 09, 2017 @ 16:05:28
It’s lovely, isn’t it? And the book is fascinating – really thought provoking!
Jan 09, 2017 @ 17:49:43
such a sad way to treat the glories of this city but as you say Bath is not the only place to be treated in such a cavalier fashion. I’m afraid the chain retailers and food merchants have exercised such power that they insist on having their corporate identity applied to store fronts even when they are totally out of keeping. And the whimps in the council planning department just let them do it….
Jan 09, 2017 @ 21:38:25
It *is* a great shame that corporate power is so out of control – and councils are staffed by people who aren’t necessarily the best qualified to deal with architectural issues!
Jan 10, 2017 @ 17:51:14
Single-stting reads have really captured my interest for this year. Initially I had planned a few longer works as priorities for this year, and I’m caught up in that for now, but more generally speaking, I would really like to read more slim volumes which give you some solid (sometimes provocative) things to think about in just an afternoon or evening’s worth of reading. This sounds like a very good one (although I am still always surprised to find a male author on P’s list)!
Jan 10, 2017 @ 18:23:53
There are a few men on the list and the ones I’ve read have been good. Like you, I do enjoy a short sharp read – the Peirene Press books are designed to be read in one sitting and are really rather lovely!
Jan 11, 2017 @ 06:11:18
I don’t think Brutalism works as well in our damp climate as it does in California or the south of France, but I do enjoy a well-designed modern building and initially welcomed the new additions to the London skyline (before it all started to go out of control). However, knocking down perfectly good buildings to make way for the retail outlets and office space of corporations is unforgivable.
Jan 11, 2017 @ 07:14:36
It is tricky and you make a good point about the climate – these buildings never look so good in the grey damp UK as they do in the shiny pretty architects’ drawings with sun and trees and flowers. I think it’s just wanton destruction for the sake of it and throwing up nasty homogenised corporate structures that upsets me the most.
Jan 11, 2017 @ 09:45:16
I’ve always thought this was an odd one in the Persephone collection and have been looking forward to your take on it, esp as you’re another Brutalism fan (I did petition about the loss of Birmingham’s old library and was gutted to see it go). Interesting perspectives in these comments, too.
Jan 11, 2017 @ 11:23:32
It isn’t an obvious choice for Persephone maybe, but I can see how the preservation of a city with such a literary heritage might sneak in there! It’s hard to make sweeping judgements – there has to be change, but I think it has to be well-thought out and I think alas that much planning isn’t…
Jan 17, 2017 @ 15:55:59
I was surprised to see a Persephone book written by a man. I must check if there are more. I always thought they had only women’s works.
The review is interesting. The topic that the book deals with seems to be a little heavy handed, yet you make it sound simpler in the review.
Jan 17, 2017 @ 16:00:55
Thanks! It’s certainly an issue that provokes strong views, and the book is very much in favour of preservation. There are several Persephones by men, including some wonderful titles by R.C. Sherriff and one by Leonard Woolf!
Jan 17, 2017 @ 16:02:49
Yes, R. C. Sherriff!
Didn’t know Leonard Woolf was in there. I will check, Thanks!
Jan 17, 2017 @ 16:04:56
If you click the “Books” link on their site, it gives you the option on the left to choose books written by men!
Jan 17, 2017 @ 17:33:39
What people do to cities… I wonder if this devastation by construction is the 20th-century thing. How common was this kind of thoughtless building before? I am not well informed.
Some weeks ago, an online portal brought a story about an idea for a new, grand hotel above Sarajevo. Would you just look at the monster: https://static.klix.ba/media/images/vijesti/b_161231030.jpg?v=2
It’s unbelievable!
Jan 17, 2017 @ 18:54:23
OK – that’s really hideous and out of control….. There needs to be change and development, but with sensitivity. Havin said that, it’s kind of hard for us living through that change to know how it will look in decades to come!
Jan 25, 2017 @ 17:41:47
Completely out of control.
I agree that it’s hard to know. But at least we should know how we don’t want our cities to look, and act to pave the path away from kitsch and atrocities.
Jan 25, 2017 @ 19:18:19
Exactly!
Jan 24, 2017 @ 13:54:05
I would love to go to Bath, though, as you say, I know it mainly from Austen. It is so sad when historic buildings go because of developers’ greed. What an unusual book for Persephone to publish!
Jan 24, 2017 @ 15:01:55
It’s not their typical book, but very interesting nevertheless.