REUNION
2000 DINNER SPEECH
This is the text of the speech delivered by Professor
Barry Maitland, Professor of Architecture and Dean of the Faculty
of Architecture, Building and Design at the Reunion 2000 dinner
at Newcastle Town Hall on Saturday 8 April 2000. It has subsequently
been requested by many of the Reunion 2000 attendees and others.
This was Barry’s last public occasion before his retirement
in July 2000.
Feel free to make a copy if you wish. You might kindly recognise
its source should you wish to distribute a copy. Like all matters
associated with Reunion 2000 and most recently, The Architecture
Foundation, the committee would be happy to receive a donation to
the Foundation at any time from any member of the Newcastle Architecture
Alumni or the interested public.
Distinguished guests, ladies & gentlemen, I am greatly honoured
to be invited to speak on this important occasion, but also somewhat
hesitant, for I feel a little like the gamekeeper invited to address
a reunion of old poachers.
By that I don’t mean to suggest that we are
in any way on different sides, but it does seem to me that the main
purpose of this evening is to renew and celebrate your memories
and friendships of the Newcastle Architecture School as you experienced
them as students, whereas my experience of the place has been as
a teacher. And although as teachers and students we often inhabit
the same world, and share a joke and a glass of beer along with
the more serious matters, still there is a sense, I think, of us
occupying parallel but separate existences. Looking out over a sea
of faces frowning with concentration in my lecture, I may hope that
they are considering the finer points of my argument, but I fear
that they are in fact contemplating what they did the previous evening,
and who they should apologise to for it.
Looking back to my own student days I would have
to say that many of the things that we were most preoccupied with
lay well below the horizon of our tutors’ consciousness –
which was probably just as well. There was, for example, the difficult
problem of contraception, and how to find it. Now things may have
been done on a more civilized basis in Australia, but in those days
in England, contraceptives were purchased in barbers’ shops.
This probably explains why students had such short hair in the days
before the Beetles made long hair obligatory. And it probably also
explains why, when long hair became fashionable, something happened
to the birth rate.
The whole operation followed a rigid and excrutiating
ritual. The student would wait his turn in the barber’s shop,
then sit in the chair to have his hair cut, which didn’t take
long because he had probably had it done only a week or two before.
Upon completion of the haircut, the barber would chant the ritual
phrase, ‘And will there be anything else, sir?’ whereupon
all the men waiting their turn would lower their newspapers with
a loud rustle and stare at the back of the student’s neck,
which would turn a bright pink.
The student would then stare up at the shelves
above the mirror, as if this hadn’t occurred to him, appearing
to wonder whether he did indeed need a comb, or another jar of Brylcream.
Then a thought would seem to strike him, and he would turn to the
barber and whisper something. The barber would then say, ‘Certainly,
sir. And will that be one packet, or two?’ More rustling of
newspapers, and the student’s neck turning a deeper red. He
would mutter again to the barber, who replied in triumph, ‘Very
wise, sir! We can’t be too careful now, can we?’ as
if the hapless student was going to use them two at a time.
Now I make this digression only to illustrate the
special problems of student life, and you all have your own stories
to tell and memories to share. But I don’t want to further
lower the elevated tone of this evening, and I think we can accept
that we all have different experiences and recollections of architectural
education at Newcastle, which we are here to celebrate, each from
our own viewpoint. Perhaps I would be safest to try to contribute
some kind of perspective on the history of the school, and in this
I am greatly aided by the text of Bob Donaldson and Don Morris’s
splendid new book, ‘Architecture Newcastle : Its History Preserved’,
which they have kindly let me read. It will be published shortly,
and let me say that it will be essential reading for you all, for
each one of you is mentioned by name within its pages.
The book makes clear that the School does indeed
have an extended history to celebrate, marked this year by some
important, if somewhat approximate anniversaries.
The oldest of these is the date of the beginning
of architectural education in Newcastle, almost exactly 75 years
ago, in1926 when F.G. Castleden, president of the Associated Architects
of Newcastle & District (later the Newcastle Division of the
RAIA), following the 1921 Architects’ Registration Act, was
pleased to announce the commencement of the Diploma course in Newcastle,
at the Newcastle Technical College, and the appointment of local
architects N.B. Pitt & W.D. Jeater as its first teachers. This
marked the birth of the Newcastle School.
This was a long time ago – in Newcastle,
electricity generation had only just begun, and F.G. Castleden himself
had recently finished the Newcastle Club with Spain, Cosh and Dods,
and before that the Hamilton Ambulance station and the Newcastle
Ocean Baths. Overseas, the modern movement was just being born –
this was the year of the opening of Walter Gropius’s new Bauhaus
building in Dessau, and the Barcelona Pavilion was no more than
a twinkle in Mies’s eye.
To appreciate just how long ago this was, consider
this: in a recent survey, office workers were asked the question,
what was the most significant technological innovation in the modern
office? Was it the word processor, the fax machine, the telephone
or the photocopier? No, the answer came back, the most significant
thing was the invention of the paper-clip. Now the paper-clip was
invented at that same time, 75 years ago. Imagine a world without
paper-clips. It seems almost inconceivable that civilisation had
progressed for 20,000 years without it, doesn’t it? And I
see some parallel between the invention of this modest device and
the birth of the Newcastle School – both small, humble, apparently
insignificant but ultimately indispensable and highly valued.
The school almost died soon after its birth. In
order to enrol, students were required to have employment under
the supervision of a qualified architect, and in the Depression
of the 30s this declined to such an extent that enrolments dropped
from 11 in 1932 to only 1 in 1937.
But it did survive to celebrate another anniversary
with the opening in 1951 of the Newcastle College of the NSW University
of Technology, the Newcastle University College. By this stage its
students included some names that I’m familiar with and who
are with us tonight – Ross Deamer, who later was to go on
to lead the Newcastle School as Associate Professor, and Don Morris
who served the University with great distinction as both a lecturer
and University Architect.
Now I hope they’ll forgive me if I suggest
that this event, 50 years ago, was still a long time in the past.
Civil aviation had just begun in the Hunter, with flights from Williamtown,
electric trams had recently stopped running in Newcastle, and Stephenson
& Turner’s Nixon Wing of the Royal Newcastle Hospital
was under construction.
And one might locate this moment, 50 years ago,
with another modest but important technological innovation. This
one had been invented by two Hungarian emigre brothers during the
war as a high altitude writing implement for the RAF. Their name
was Biro, and their invention, the ballpoint pen, began to appear
in the shops at this time, 50 years ago.
I remember this well, because at this time I won
a scholarship to go to grammar school, and my father, normally a
rather stern Scotsman, in an uncharacteristic flight of generosity,
said I could choose anything I wanted as a reward. No doubt he had
calculated that a Len Hutton cricket bat, or even a Raleigh bicycle,
would leave him well in front. I opted for the latest piece of cutting-edge
technology, a biro pen. What a dummy. I can still smell the ink
leaking over my fingers.
Following the establishment of the Newcastle College,
a degree course in architecture was introduced under the enlightened
leadership of Eric Parker. In accepting the invitation to come up
to Newcastle from Sydney to take over the Newcastle program, Eric
afterwards noted that in his experience, ‘Newcastle students
were enthusiastic and friendly, and a considerable contrast with
his students in Sydney’. Some things don’t change, you
see.
During the 1960s the degree course became firmly
established, with the first graduate Les Reedman, who converted
his 1959 Diploma to the Bachelor of Architecture (NSW) in 1961.
In the following year Cecil Hay, Don Morris and Brian Suters all
graduated, Brian as the first University Medalist, and with First
Class Honours. And if I can embarrass him further, can I also say
what a pleasure it is to announce that he has accepted the offer
of an honorary Doctorate of Architecture from the University of
Newcastle, to be presented at the degree ceremony on 12 May, for
his subsequent contribution to architecture and the arts, particularly
in the Hunter.
The next landmark was the establishment 35 years
ago in 1965 of the school as a Faculty of Architecture in the newly
autonomous University of Newcastle, and under the direction of the
first Newcastle Professor of Architecture, Frederick Romberg for
the following 10 years.
Though still some time ago, this anniversary occurs
in a world that is more immediately recognisable to us. Work had
just begun on the Sydney to Newcastle Freeway, surely one of the
slowest freeway projects of all time. TV transmissions had recently
begun in the Hunter, and work was about to begin on the Captain
James Cook Memorial Fountain in Civic Park, designed by the sculptor
Margel Hinder with architects Wilson, Barnett and Suters. One event
links this year back to an earlier time, however, for 1965 was also
the date when the Australian Agricultural Company, which had operated
in Newcastle since it took over control of coal mining in the Hunter
in 1829, finally ceased operations in the city.
What piece of representative technology could one
choose for this anniversary? Perhaps none more appropriate than
the Rotring drawing pen which succeeded the Pelikan Graphos pen
at this time. These were miracles of scientific precision which
used the laws of surface tension and capillary action in liquids
to torture draughtsmen everywhere. These laws dictate that the surface
tension of ink is inversely proportional to the degree of completion
of a drawing, so that when the drawing nears completion the tension
weakens and the ink descends in a great blob over the artwork. For
those of you who haven’t yet seen it, Bob Donaldson has mounted
a wonderful exhibition of student drawings over the years, in the
Romberg Building at the School – a tribute to the perseverance
of human nature over the Pelikan pen company.
Six architecture students graduated in the University
of Newcastle’s first degree ceremony in the following year.
One of them was Su Park, the first woman to graduate from the School,
and who sadly died last year, a teacher in the Design program of
our Faculty. The others were Bill Crook and Kevin Hoffman, who I
believe are with us this evening, as well as John Guy and Malcolm
Park, who was to subsequently become an outstanding lecturer.
The sixth graduate of that year was Chong Wai Wah,
an overseas student, from Singapore, and this is particularly significant,
I think, because it points up the longstanding role that international
students have played in the life and history of the Newcastle School.
This is also apparent looking around this room this evening, with
the presence here of former graduates who have come all the way
from Malaysia, Hong Kong and Singapore, as well as from the UK.
And so we come to the last date to celebrate this
evening, which is the present, and the fact that, thanks to the
energy and enthusiasm of Bob Donaldson and Ron Armstrong, John Hoffman
and their indefatigable committee, we are all gathered here. And
we find that, once again, the School has greatly changed. Whereas
Professor Romberg could speak of the small size of the School in
1965, with less than 60 students in total and a staff to student
ratio in the final year of one to four, we now have 300 equivalent
full-time students and 18 staff. And where there was then one international
student, we now have over 80, from over 20 different countries around
the world. Where we then had borrowed space in a building at Tighes
Hill, we now have three outstanding purpose-built buildings, all
designed by world class architects. Where we then were an isolated
discipline, we are now part of a faculty which includes construction
management, industrial design and graphic design. And if one were
to identify a characteristic piece of technology of our time, instead
of the paperclip, the ballpoint pen and the Pelikan Graphos, it
would be the Imac perhaps, or Powerpoint, or the Virtual Reality
Visualization NT Workstation we are about to acquire, whatever that
is.
But my point in recalling these dates and going
on about paperclips and the like is simply this – that despite
the enormous changes in technology, in character and setting, something
constant has persisted from that moment 75 years ago when the School
was born. We may call it the Newcastle Architecture School, but
effectively it is you who have lived it, and its soul is the memories
and experiences you share and bring together tonight.
Now I could stop there, having reflected on the
past, but you would probably regard me as something of a coward
if I didn’t speculate a little on the future, which I can
do with impunity since I shall shortly be withdrawing from it, and
will become one of you, sitting in the back row muttering that things
have gone completely to the dogs since my day.
Now to look into the future one needs to understand
the past as more than just a catalogue of facts, and as having a
structure which shapes the present and continues into the future.
One recalls George Santayana’s famous observation, that those
who don’t understand history are condemned to repeat it. I
was struck by this while reading Bob and Don’s book, as for
example by the fact that the University Senate within 3 years of
the foundation of the University proposed to restructure the Faculties,
and to absorb Architecture into Engineering, a suggestion that provoked
great agitation from the School and the profession. Perhaps there
is a message there for the present University, as it contemplates
another round of restructuring. And one is reminded also of Karl
Marx’s comment, that history happens twice, the first time
as tragedy, and the second time as farce.
So let me try to speculate on some pattern which
may be seen to have shaped the evolution of the Newcastle School
from its beginnings in 1926 to its present state, and perhaps on
into the future. I am well qualified to do this, since I’m
not a professional historian, and am therefore entirely uninhibited
by scholarly methods or the facts. But I am guided by two eminent
historians, the first of whom some of you may remember from your
lectures. He is Sir Gordon Frawles, whose great work ‘Fragments
de l’Architecture’ was such an inspiration. And the
other is the American historian Professor Wylie Sypher and his book
‘Four Stages of Renaissance Style’.
And let me say at once that, re-reading these great
works, I was struck by the extraordinary parallels between the evolution
of the Newcastle Architecture School between say, 1926 and 2026,
and that of the European Renaissance between 1400 and 1700.
Both began with a period which we may call the
Early Renaissance with their birth out of a barbarous past, the
Gothic, somewhere south of the Hawkesbury, and the first flowering
of an independent spirit in Florence, or Newcastle. It was characterised
by freshness, originality and inspired improvisation. I am thinking,
for example, of the stories of students taking the overnight ferry
to Sydney in order to spend the following day studying at the Sydney
Technical College, before returning by boat on the following night;
one can imagine the spirit of adventurous scholarship engendered
by such trips. Or again, there is the lovely account of Eric Parker,
surely the Brunelleschi of the Newcastle School, declaring his Rover
75 as the School office, when no other accommodation could be made
available. And most inspiring of all, as a story of almost impossible
improvisation, is the wartime tale of Tim Mayo, also with us tonight,
who joined RAF No 12 Bomber Squadron only to be shot down over Holland
in1942, and then proceeded to study architecture in a succession
of prisoner of war camps with the aid of assignments brought to
him from London by the Red Cross. Having carefully preserved these
pieces of work throughout his captivity, he returned to London at
the end of the War and submitted them to the RIBA for assessment.
With the interruptions of the Depression and then
the War, this first period of beginnings and early growth was rather
protracted, lasting perhaps 40 years. But eventually development
reached a point where a new level was reached, and the Early Renaissance
gave way to the next phase, the High Renaissance. In this stage
improvisation gives way to order, the establishment of clear rules
and the emergence of a distinctive character or voice, and the central
role in this was played by Professor Romberg, the Bramante of the
Newcastle High Renaissance. The School now existed as an autonomous
institution, recognised by the profession, and speaking with a sense
of authority. Now there occurred the codification of stable rules,
which tends to give the High Renaissance a somewhat authoritarian
character.
This is an important and necessary stage, but it
also carries within itself the seeds of its own destruction, for
the world is not stable, and soon events occur to undermine this
sense of clear authority.
In sixteenth century Europe these shocks took the
form of the 30 Years War, the Sack of Rome, and the Reformation,
all of which acted to shatter the certainties of the High Renaissance.
Those of you who were present at the time may identify the Newcastle
equivalent of the Sack of Rome, which probably occurred around 1972,
when the Vice-Chancellor was obliged to take on the role of Dean
of the Faculty of Architecture, and Ross Deamer was recalled from
the golf-courses – I’m sorry, libraries – of Europe
to pilot the School through the turmoil.
And the result of these traumatic events is to
put an end to the certainties of the High Renaissance and to usher
in a period in which change, not stability, is the ordering principle.
This is the Mannerist Period, and I have to admit that this is for
me the most interesting of the four stages of the Renaissance, probably
because my architectural history teacher when I was a student was
Colin Rowe, who made it clear that he found this the most fascinating
period, and whose influential 1950 essay ‘Mannerism and Modern
Architecture’ had drawn parallels between the works of Vignola
and Michelangelo and those of the pioneers of twentieth century
Modernism.
Certainty and stability are replaced by a sense
of experiment, and a willingness to embrace change. It is a time,
not of one authoritarian voice, but of the flowering of many talents,
who nevertheless share a common sensibility and willingness to experiment.
And I would suggest a parallel between this sensibility for innovation
and growth and the spirit which has flourished in the Newcastle
School over the past, say, 20 years, exemplified by its espousal
of integrated problem-based learning as a distinctive approach to
architectural education perfectly suited to the profile of what
we have come to recognise as the characteristic Newcastle architecture
graduate – practical but reflective, with a strong sense of
place but also a wide international perspective.
And what happens next? I find it rather significant
that one of our graduate success stories, Michael Ostwald, University
Medallist in 1990 and now a Senior Lecturer, should have recently
won a Byera Hadley scholarship to go to Harvard to study at the
archives there in order to examine the parallels between the work
of recent architects like Frank Gehry, and the architecture of the
seventeenth century European Baroque. Because of course what comes
after Mannerism is the Baroque, and if Colin Rowe’s essay
may have remotely encouraged a Mannerist tendency in the development
of architectural education in Newcastle, perhaps Michael’s
study heralds its next manifestation, in the final quarter of its
first 100 years.
With the Baroque, a new certainty and stability
return, resurrecting the authoritative voice of the High Renaissance,
but in a more expansive, all-embracing form. It is confident, prosperous,
materialistic, and not prone to self-examination or self-doubt.
And if this is to be the way of it, it promises much that is positive
for the next 25 years of the Newcastle School – a time of
prosperity, stability, and of glorious, golden manifestations.
But perhaps it would be as well to add a word or
two of caution. The Baroque was an invention of the Council of Trent,
which restored the centralised power of Rome, insisted on faith
over reason, and enforced its will with the Inquisition. This is
the dark side of the Baroque, and while we may not know who will
be its Borromini, we might reflect that he may need some help from
time to time to temper the more over-enthusiastic tendencies of
his time, for, as Wylie Sypher reminds us, the Baroque also has
a terrible tendency to descend into kitsch.
And perhaps that is where I should stop, with the
thought that I believe the Newcastle School has a wonderful future
in front of it, but that, as in the past, it will be all the better
for wise council and timely help from you, who represent the whole
tradition of the School, through all its periods, and in that sense
its memory and soul.
And so we may look forward to meeting again in
25 years time to celebrate the centenary of the Newcastle School
of Architecture, and to reflect upon all four periods of its great
history.
Barry Maitland, April 2000
Back to top
|
|