THE NATIONAL GALLERY 101
friend, seen by some as yet another in Selldorf’s stream of facelifts for fading museums, a mindless Modernist makeover, understated, refined and neutral, or more the architecture of near-emptiness, the default style of international art-world good taste. Could it have been better? Significantly, there have been no proposed changes to the galleries within the wing. The past never repeats itself exactly, but it can offer us some warnings. In the case of this building, they appear to have gone unheeded. In 2025 we shall see how this turns out.
Columns again – the aftermath Everything about the Sainsbury Wing has remained problematic and contentious. Te director had referred to ‘the gloomier part of the entrance’, the ‘heavy grey architecture’ that he wished to change, ‘to make openings in the crypt-like ceiling, replace the dark glass with clear, and thin out the forest of thick pillars’. Nevertheless, the great and the good weighed in on the proposed changes, firing off letters that called the proposals arbitrary and irreversible, ‘damagingly destructive’, ‘an act of vandalism’ of ‘a beautifully designed sequence of spaces’, ‘corporate blandness’, ‘a
tepid shower of the pallid and the polite’ that would ‘diminish the intended drama of the carefully orchestrated entrance route’, its ‘processional logic destroyed’, that the entrance had been condemned to be ‘an airport lounge’, a ‘hotel lobby’. Overall, the renovation appeared to its critics to be corporate blandness sterilising the original architectural character of the building. To all of which a gallery spokesperson said: ‘We have taken on board the views of various groups and are reviewing certain elements of the scheme in the light of their comments.’ Selldorf was challenged by Edward Jones, who designed extensions to the NPG and the Opera House with Jeremy Dixon, reminding everyone of their 1998 masterplan to revamp the Wilkins portico entrance, the natural focus for visitors. But the critics were not finished. Eight former presidents of the RIBA objected, Historic England, Historic Buildings & Places and the Twentieth Century Society all weighed in. Te National Gallery hit back. Selldorf was invited by the RIBA to give a speech, and was introduced by its then president Simon Allford who said: ‘I sense a certain nostalgia for a reinvented and reimagined past, not unlike the nostalgia that called into being the very scheme about which we’re talking. Te Venturi Scott Brown extension emerged from the ashes of a competition and a winner that was interfered with and unfortunately rejected. Te scheme itself was not universally well-received at the time. Tat, of course, does not mean it is not a fine building. It shows how the vagaries of fashion inform our thinking always, and we should be aware of that. Indeed, it could be said this is one of their finest buildings – their best and most decorated shed. But also it means, like any fine building, it can be adapted if needs arise and I believe that is the case here.’ Indeed, Sir Tim Sainsbury, said that he and his brothers accepted the need to make modifications and if the building was ‘preserved in aspic’ then it would no longer be able to fulfil its purpose. ‘We support the proposed improvements and believe that the Selldorf architects’ proposals are a sensible and sensitive response,’ they said. Unwavering in their opposition, when the proposals were revised, the eight former presidents said that they ‘appear perhaps even more ill-judged’.
Scott Brown urged the Westminster planners to turn down the application and for the architects to ‘bring forward a scheme that better secures the considerable architectural thought that informed the original work’. Tere is history between these two women. In 2022, Selldorf scuppered a Venturi Scott Brown museum expansion in Cleveland where there ‘just wasn’t any space for an exhibition or galleries’ and to ‘reveal the full beauty of the original building’, so perhaps criticism was to be expected. However, Selldorf has claimed, ‘I enjoy my conversations with Denise a great deal’ and
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141
