• Before posting anything about the COVID-19 virus, please read this first Click Here

Self Moderated Georgian Dublin

DS86DS

Deported
Donator
PI Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2020
Messages
144
Likes
89
The Irishness of Georgian Dublin has long been called into question, a contentious issue of debate within both political and cultural spheres for near on a century since independence with passionate arguments both for and against it's presentation. Groups founded in the latter decades of the 20th century such as An Taisce and the Irish Georgian Society have fought tooth and nail for both the preservation and restoration of this architectural heritage, while on the opposing end cultural nationalists such as Kevin Boland have dismissed Georgian Dublin as un-Irish and worthy only of being razed to the ground with it's preservationist supporters dismissed as 'belted earls'. What perhaps didn't help matters was a widespread belief at the time that these buildings were considered to be monuments of an English ruling class who courtesy of the Wide Streets Commission erected buildings and monuments in many ways not too dissimilar to those found in London. Everything from the familiar sash windows to just about every other detail present in these structures is in someway similar to those found on the Georgian streets and blocks of numerous cities and towns throughout England. Nor had their gradual disintegration done them any justice as they would come to be known as some of the worst slums in the city during the late 19th and early 20th centuries.

One argument made in their favour however was that they were built by Irish men and inhabited by Irish people during their heyday. Such arguments however certainly didn't help throughout much of the 20th century when large parts of the city's Georgian fabric were been razed to make way for newer forms of architecture. Areas such as Wood Quay suffered a complete blow despite countless protests, along with the Georgian Mile along Fitzwilliam Street where the (then) new ESB headquarters cut a major chunk out of the original streetscape. It wasn't until fairly recent years that the preservation argument won the day.

Whose side would you take on this issue? Do you consider Dublin's Georgian streets and squares to be an important part of our heritage, or would you rather they were replaced with what perhaps might be considered a more legitimate form of Irish architecture representative of our culture?

fitzwilliam-street-1.jpg


001-Wood-Quay.jpg
 

Tadhg Gaelach

Moderator
Donator
Joined
Jan 14, 2016
Messages
57,284
Likes
54,447
Location
By the Gulag wall.
What we called "Georgian architecture" is really European Neo-Classical architecture. It's not particuarly Irish, but it's not particularly English either.
 

Myles O'Reilly

Donator
PI Member
PI Member
PI Member
PI Member
Top Bloke
Joined
Feb 3, 2017
Messages
11,783
Likes
12,914
Location
Ireland
Describe what I'm looking at in your second picture please Sir.
 

Myles O'Reilly

Donator
PI Member
PI Member
PI Member
PI Member
Top Bloke
Joined
Feb 3, 2017
Messages
11,783
Likes
12,914
Location
Ireland
My eyes were playing tricks with me Sir. I initially thought there was a structure built on the bridge itself! But 'twas the corner building on the other side of the river. Peculiar looking structure.
 

ShumanTheHuman

Donator
PI Member
Joined
Dec 15, 2018
Messages
1,569
Likes
2,864
Location
East of Lyra, Northwest of Pegasus
The severing of the Georgian Mile shows the long running philistinism of the Independent Irish Economic elites.
Ordinary Irish people intuitively understand the aesthetic beauty and importance of this unique architectural heritage

The half assed reimagined job they are doing is an act of belligerent sophistry. If the Eastern Europeans can restore their medieval and Baroque buildings and public squares after the devastation of WW2 in precise and authentic manner we can undo the damage caused by the pig ignorance and rapacious greed of a clique of suited, "well spoken" scumbags and restore this to it unique glory
 

page61

PI Member
Joined
May 25, 2018
Messages
3,555
Likes
3,591
Location
Eire
Old buildings should always be kept once they have passed a certain age. Basically most people would agree, however developers are constantly picking until a scab forms and then they move in .

I was looking at this example of historical archetechture . It was the home of the ORahilly in Herbert park and the developer demolished the buildings around it leaving it totally out of context with its surroundings ...picking at the scab. The house itself is of significant historical interest with a lot of the early dramas regarding the forming of volunteers and preparation for the rising taking place there. Look though at what the developer has done to its surroundings .

The shocking thing (no matter what your thoughts on 1916 etc) is, how easy a developer can ruin an area .There is no protection. This is wrong.

 

TheIrishRight

PI Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2019
Messages
1,463
Likes
2,867
Old buildings should always be kept once they have passed a certain age. Basically most people would agree, however developers are constantly picking until a scab forms and then they move in .

I was looking at this example of historical archetechture . It was the home of the ORahilly in Herbert park and the developer demolished the buildings around it leaving it totally out of context with its surroundings ...picking at the scab. The house itself is of significant historical interest with a lot of the early dramas regarding the forming of volunteers and preparation for the rising taking place there. Look though at what the developer has done to its surroundings .

The shocking thing (no matter what your thoughts on 1916 etc) is, how easy a developer can ruin an area .There is no protection. This is wrong.

I think the great Roger Scrutons (rip) views on architecture should be the norm . Destroying historical structures for the sake of money is beyond criminal.
 

ShumanTheHuman

Donator
PI Member
Joined
Dec 15, 2018
Messages
1,569
Likes
2,864
Location
East of Lyra, Northwest of Pegasus
Old buildings should always be kept once they have passed a certain age. Basically most people would agree, however developers are constantly picking until a scab forms and then they move in .

I was looking at this example of historical archetechture . It was the home of the ORahilly in Herbert park and the developer demolished the buildings around it leaving it totally out of context with its surroundings ...picking at the scab. The house itself is of significant historical interest with a lot of the early dramas regarding the forming of volunteers and preparation for the rising taking place there. Look though at what the developer has done to its surroundings .

The shocking thing (no matter what your thoughts on 1916 etc) is, how easy a developer can ruin an area .There is no protection. This is wrong.

I work a stones throw from there and the other houses were demolished asap the building sites were reopened. It was some shock seeing the area flattened. Lovely, large rare enough stylewise houses by Herbert park to be replaced by monotone modern blandness. Like you say the O'Rahilly house will be left completely out of place
People need to understand we live in a barbarous age
 
Top Bottom