Wren the Goth

Kicking off a new series , we welcome the return of Philip Wilkinson – author, architectural historian and denizen of the wonderful English Buildings Blog – to take us on a journey round some buildings with rather unlikely creators…

Do architects dabble? Most architects would probably scorn such an idea. Nowadays in the UK they train for seven years, before joining a profession which must often feel like total immersion. Putting up any kind of building is a lengthy and complex process, and the qualities required are diverse and daunting   – from design flair to dogged determination,  leadership skills to efficiency in form-filling, plus legal and technical knowledge, and the ability to deal with everyone from councils to clients. In past centuries, the legal and technical requirements might have been different, but building has never been simple. Now and then, though, some of our greatest architects left their comfort zone and tried something different. Not dabbling in a new style exactly, but surprising us with an unexpected approach or a kind of building that was outside their usual sphere. To begin, here’s what happened when the Sir Christopher Wren turned to the Gothic style….

If you asked people to name the most famous British architect of all time, the answer many people would come up with would be Sir Christopher Wren. That’s partly because Wren was a major figure in the story of the capital. After the 1666 Great Fire, Wren rebuilt dozens of churches in the City of London and, most famously of all, redesigned St Paul’s Cathedral, a building that became a national symbol, especially after memorable photographs of the dome, surrounded by smoke but still standing proud, during the Blitz.

Most of Wren’s City churches were classical buildings. Wren’s architectural vocabulary was rich with columns, entablatures, porticos, and domes. He adapted that vocabulary, of course – his wonderfully inventive steeples are like nothing in previous classical building. But the basic idiom is classical. It comes as a surprise, therefore, to enter a Wren church and find it done out with the slender columns, moulded arches, and fan vaults of the late Gothic style.

St Mary Aldermary (the curious repetitious name is probably an indication that this was originally the oldest of London’s churches dedicated to the Virgin) is Wren’s great essay in Gothic – Pevsner thinks that it and St Mary’s Warwick are the two best Gothic churches of the period. It’s not quite the kind of Gothic a medieval master mason would recognize. That’s a fan vault, similar to those in great late-medieval buildings like Bath Abbey or the chapel of King’s College, Cambridge. But where the medieval vaults were built of stone. Wren’s is made of plaster. But this intricate vault, the tall windows, and the carefully detailed columns come together to create a beautiful take on the late Gothic that became fashionable in the 15th century. The sense of high, uninterrupted space, lit from above, is also very true to the Gothic spirit.

This church is also an example of the architect’s ability to adapt to his sites. Nearly all Wren’s city churches are hemmed in by the surrounding building plots, so they often have irregular or unconventional plans. In the case of St Mary Aldermary, the east wall with its big window is not at 90 degrees to the flank walls. The effect is rather odd, but it’s also another example of the seemingly endless adaptability of Sir Christopher Wren.

 

 

Share This Post

About Author Profile: Philip Wilkinson

pwilkinson@thedabbler.co.uk'

4 thoughts on “Wren the Goth

  1. finalcurtain@gmail.com'
    mahlerman
    March 23, 2012 at 18:41

    What amazes me about Wren (and his colleague Hawksmoor) is the breadth of his knowledge in universal subjects unrelated to building and architecture and this, if nothing else sets him, and others working at about this time in Europe, apart from the journeymen (and their creations) working here in the last 60 years. If you know about the universe, if you know the workings of the human body intimately, if you have a deep knowledge of science – and if you are a master builder of genius (and an ordinary architect?), you are pretty well placed to make your mark on the world, and be confident that your work will still be held in awe 300 years later. How will City Hall or the Lloyds Building be viewed even one hundred years from now? Assuming they are still standing…..

    • philipwilk@googlemail.com'
      March 24, 2012 at 08:48

      Yes, the 17th century was still an age in which it there were Renaissance men who could command an enormous breadth of knowledge and practice, a breadth that embraced both the arts and the sciences. In Britain Wren was one of the most shining examples of this. He was at the heart of the Royal Society (of which he, with Boyle and others, was co-founder) and the fire of 1666 gave him the unique opportunity to redesign the City churches, although he was deprived of the chance to re-plan the entire City. It’s hard to think of any architect from the last hundred-plus years who could command such knowledge. Buckminster Fuller tried to, but his solutions were so left-field that his legacy has been limited.

  2. john.hh43@googlemail.com'
    John Halliwell
    March 23, 2012 at 19:16

    What a fascinating series this promises to be. I have a great admiration for the best of architects, both ancient and modern, and your opening paragraph adds to understanding of the role. Whenever I’m prompted to think of Wren, I find myself also thinking of the astonishing Robert Hooke, a great scientist in an age of great scientists. How I would love to time-travel to the 17th Century and observe, close-up, the battles between Hooke and Isaac Newton. “Newton nicked my best ideas”, shouted Hooke. “Rubbish, retorted Newton – my genius didn’t require any help from a bloke who knows a bit about a lot.” Well, who knows? I wonder, Philip, if it is going too far to say that Hooke was also an exceptional architect who, working with and for Wren, played a massive part in the rebuilding of the City of London after the fire, and not just in the design and building of churches? It is sad that so little remains in the physical sense of his architectural work

    • philipwilk@googlemail.com'
      March 24, 2012 at 08:59

      Hooke is a fascinating and major figure whose scientific importance is beyond dispute. But his architectural role is much less clear, thanks partly to the lack of records, partly to the fact that so many buildings that Hooke designed have been demolished. We don’t know how big a hand he had in the City churches. He was paid a lot by Wren, and Wren saw Hooke as a colleague, so Hooke’s involvement may have been substantial. What we do have are several major buildings that are by Hooke and can be seen. These include: the Monument (which scholars see as a collaboration between Hooke and Wren, with Hooke playing a major role); Ragley Hall in Warwickshire (altered but with a lot of the original building surviving); and Willen church in Buckinghamshire (also altered, but much of the original still there).

Comments are closed.