D
Deleted member 5619
Non Registered Member
GUEST
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?
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?
