If we have been taught anything by the past few decades of Western culture, it is “out with the old; in with the new”. For whatever reason, we and most Western countries have developed a strange obsession with modernising everything: from age-old stories to the definitions of basic concepts like the differences between the sexes. It seems now that even our architecture is not immune to this trend.
Late last year, a proposal – which has been submitted to Dublin City Council and just a few days ago closed opportunities for public commentary – was revealed which suggested a supposed “rejuvenation” of the iconic St. Stephen’s Green Shopping Centre.
Most people who have had the experience of walking through Dublin City centre will be familiar with the current building: a large, colourful, curved corner-building, with white balconies along its façade and a large glass dome at its top. Inside, the building showcases a long glass ceiling, colourful wall tones, and a massive glass clock. The centre, despite being built in the 1980s, is reminiscent of the Victorian era Crystal Palace, built for the 1851 Great Exhibition. Although its architecture is arguably somewhat out-of-place at the end of Grafton Street, it has become a landmark of Dublin City.
But “out with the old”, because Ireland is a progressive country with progressive ideas which must be reflected in our progressive architecture. The proposal for a replacement suggests destroying everything that makes the current centre recognisable, and replacing it with a contemporary-style collection of sharp corners in what appears to be faux redbrick and white-painted metal panelling.
I should make one thing clear: I have nothing in particular against modern architecture. It is perhaps more “basic” than some older styles, but it can still be pulled off very successfully, and it has been in various locations in Dublin. The proposed plan itself is not even wildly offensive to my tastes – it is uninspiring at best, but it does not make me feel like I have lost brain cells by looking at it, as some modernist buildings do. In fact, the idea was originally proposed in 2023, with a markedly more hideous design for the building. The issue is not so much about the building proposed, but about the proposal itself.
Why is it necessary to remove one of the most recognisable buildings in Dublin and replace it with a standard-fare modern building that would be easily forgotten as soon as it is out of sight? Why must we constantly shove the old out, even when the new coming in to replace it is substandard at best?
We appear to be at the point in our culture where we are supposed to be perennially ashamed of anything and everything that represents our past. Much of this is linked to the deep-seated Catholic hatred that has been crafted so expertly by the media and our leaders over the past few decades. The mainstream news outlets have made it their quest to utterly destroy any Catholic culture left in Ireland, constantly reminding us just how evil and bigoted the church is. Apparently, Catholic culture (and Irish culture with it) is now “outdated”.
And what is the solution to this supposed problem? To obliterate every trace of the “outdated” culture and replace it with a more modern and progressive counterpart. All four of the recent constitutional referenda have been sold around the term “outdated”: our definition of marriage is outdated, our protections for the unborn are outdated, our views concerning the value of mothers and homemakers are outdated. These outdated ideas, it seems, must be removed at all costs, and substituted with more contemporary ideologies.
I don’t think that this proposed “rejuvenation” (if it can truthfully be called that) is directly motivated by a wish to chip away at our culture; it is more likely a simple money-making business scheme. Yet it is nonetheless another indication of a wider phenomenon in Ireland and much of the West. Anything that is outdated is marked for destruction – no concern need be taken regarding its cultural or historical importance.
Concerning our architectural heritage, I think it is worthwhile considering the Viktor Orbán approach. The Hungarian Prime Minister has spearheaded a programme of rebuilding and refurbishing some of Budapest’s most iconic buildings, not by knocking them and replacing them with pretentious modernist cubes, but by faithfully restoring their architectural styles using the technology of today. I happened to visit the Hungarian capital last year, and can confirm that the architecture is breathtaking. Our overbudgeting has become such a problem that our government now considers it appropriate to spend three-quarters of a million Euro on a bike shelter; why not put the money to good use in revitalising some of our great landmarks? Our politicians might shudder at the mere mention of Orbán’s name, but they could do well to learn from him at least in this respect.
Although the St. Stephen’s Green centre is less a national architectural treasure than a quirk of history, it still has its own unique value in this sense. I for one would be sorry to see it disappear.
______________________________________
Patrick Vincent writes from Dublin