To think the Barbican Estate in London is a masterpiece?

[zymbole]

I never really liked concrete or 1960s architecture until I did the Architecture Tour on the Barbican Estate a few days ago. Now I “understand” it and can really appreciate it. Living there would be a dream. AIBU to consider it a masterpiece?

No, that's not accurate - while the flats were always rented at commercial rates rather than council housing rates; it was council owned, therefore RTB applied and had a high uptake.

It was built, owned and operated by the local authority, the City of London. As such, it was subject to Right to Buy, and the vast majority of flats are now in private ownership.

There are loads of amenities underneath or next door to the Barbican although I agree sometimes it can feel like you are cocooned off from it all

Golden Lane pool and leisure centre
Private gym (Nuffield)
Silk street public library
State primary school
Private secondary
Two nurseries (one of which is bilingual Chinese but mostly British/European kids)
A drop in playgroup
A very active residents association
NHS GP surgery
Dentist
Optician
Waitrose on Whitecross Street
Everything on Whitecross Street - the food market, pubs, cafes, restaurants etc.
The shops under Golden Lane flats including hardware store etc.

And of course the world class theatre, cinema, exhibition and concert space

Thanks for your answer

To me, it just looks like a pile of concrete with a strange maze effect - I get lost every time I have to go. It's not somewhere I would choose to go. I'm sure the inside of the flats are lovely and clearly a lot has changed - it probably seemed like a good thing in the 60s

I wouldn't feel safe there at all

That’s true, but as I understand it the original rents were high because it was always intended to be a wealthy enclave. The fact that it’s become largely privately owned and traded hasn’t altered the demographics of its population.

Even flats now regarded as terrible were usually seen as an improvement on the slum housing they replaced in the 60s. My mum was moved as part of a slum clearance in Manchester - the privately rented bedsit she moved out of didn't even have a working toilet, she had to use a public toilet! She was delighted to be moved to a block of council flats with a fully functional bathroom, kitchen and heating - she didn't stay there long because she got married and they bought a house - so not long enough for the flats to start to decay and go bad socially.

Not everyone was happy to be moved from slums as this broke up communities but as living accommodation, when they were new and fully functioning, council flats were an improvement.

Eastern European vibes,

I'm talking about the actual podium. I know there's loads of stuff in the streets beneath.

Apologies.
I always thought it was privately owned flats.
(I remember Trixie in 'Call the Midwife" saying that her and husband were planning on buying one of "those new Barbican flats")

@MoiraPlunkett yes my parents thought it was amazing! I remember being little and one day, wherever we were going, they said "Ooh we can drive past the barbican" and they were excited! And then as a little kid they said to me, oh you have to go in there and actually see it otherwise you won't understand ... then I first went as a teenager to the gallery, and I really didn't get it. I absolutely loved London at that time. But I totally didn't get it.

😂 at the poster saying they got lost entering the museum of London. So did I. I could see it from the street and I was baffled because it was right in front of me and yet, I couldn't find it 😂

I suppose the 60s just seems like such a crazy long time ago, now it's been explained to me I can see why it would be appealing to people in that era. Not now though.

That wasn't alway true of new housing. For example in Glasgow they demolished the traditional tenements in the Gorbals (which were badly overcrowded and lacked indoor toilets) and replaced them with a brutalist development. These buildings were so poorly constructed that the water began seeping through the walls as soon as they were finished and when the Queen came to open then in 1972 they had to superglue the wallpaper to the walls of the show flat because the dampness meant it was otherwise peeling off the walls. The black mould started to grown soon after, the flats became known as the dampies and within 15 years they had been demolished because they were uninhabitable. Communities had been torn apart and people had been moved from one type of substandard accommodation to another.

www.glasgowlive.co.uk/news/history/notoriously-dire-gorbals-flats-locals-23683548

Even flats now regarded as terrible were usually seen as an improvement on the slum housing they replaced in the 60s.

Immediately post-war, people loved the pre-fabs. But they were houses with gardens set out along streets. So people had their own defined space but still knew their neighbours and had a sense of community.

I have a friend there. It’s a bit marmite I guess.

The prefab houses were pretty good.
High Rise flats not so much.
It's ironic that many are now being knocked down and replaced by essentially the same thing.
Why didn't they just build decent ones to start with.

I used to know people who lived there. They are amazing flats , and feel very secure. And to have access to all the facilities in the Barbican, the public and the private ones must be wonderful.

I've gone down a bit of a Barbican rabbit hole this afternoon. I think this is a much better example of why these flats are desirable: https://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/69206650/?search_identifier=d57f4af9b4a74bc01a7b57ed33b991356cc1e164a930456e5a938a692742b69a

Ooh, thank you for that interesting link.

Ooh, thank you for that interesting link.

Completely agree. There is some awful brutalist architecture, but also some fantastic examples and the Barbican is one.

Who did you do the tour with? I’d like to do that

Don’t suppose she needs any more God children? Asking for a friend….😂

Ugly as hell. Screams Soviet era. Theatre is very bland inside but you can see well no matter where you sit.

Incorrect.

The Barbican was never 'council housing' in the conventional sense but was owned and managed by the Corporation of the City of London, considered a local authority under the Housing Act 1980. This meant that Right to Buy applied to it.

Not everyone was happy to be moved from slums as this broke up communities but as living accommodation, when they were new and fully functioning, council flats were an improvement.

Could the slums have been refurbished with bathrooms and electricity etc?
Certainly where the Chelsea World’s End Housing estate is now there were 30 acres of streets of terraced housing which was demolished to make way for tower blocks.
A flat 50 feet or so across Kings Road in one of the Victorian terraces goes for two and a half times as much as a tower block flat of the same sq. footage.
Also those who did the right to buy in the tower blocks have huge service charges as constant repairs are needed.

I’m inclined to be generous to post-war architects and planners. They genuinely thought there was a better life in the tower blocks, where for whatever reason they couldn’t provide new towns.

But they got it horribly wrong. Partly from a disconnect with ordinary people and partly from a small ‘p’ political view that the state knows best and that you should be grateful for what you’re given. There was a great deal of worthy activism in ‘60’s rebuilding. But it was, in many cases, an imposition on communities who were powerless to argue against the social ‘improvers’ employed by the state.