The Tate Modern: Approach

Sir Nicholas Serota, Director of Tate Museums and Project Leader took the Tate Trustees to see the site from across the river to really give them a sense of the potential for the project, and to highlight the vast scale of the industrial building. Many architects were disappointed by the Trustee’s decision to re-use an existing building and not create something new. Serota himself wanted the project to be art not architecture led. The Tate wanted the project to also address building, landscape, and immediate neighbourhood: community and borough. These formed the three layers of the project.

Nearly 150 architects entered the design competition for the Tate Modern, but Herzog & de Meuron’s was the only proposal that completely accepted the existing building – the form, materials, and industrial characteristics. They saw the solution to be the transformation of the building into an art gallery. Their proposal included minor changes to the external envelope, mainly altering the interior.

Simplicity was a key element of the approach with the architects adopting a simple and straightforward layout, following the idea to ‘alter less rather than more’. Herzog & de Meuron did not want to specifically preserve the building in the sense of maintaining heritage, but to preserve it as a building that was recognised as having a life, and memory. New elements were introduced, creating a tension between the original and the new as well as sometimes blurring the boundaries between the two. Using the existing building meant they could dismiss making grand gestures and address more subtle and complex matters. In addition to this, Herzog & de Meuron wished for the patina of history to remain, for example in arguing successfully for the brickwork to be left uncleaned. Even new elements complement the existing strong industrial character, such as the new internal window fittings and the introduction of ventilation grilles in the gallery floors that appear as if they were always part of the original power station.

The proposal also acknowledged the symmetry of the exterior with two main elements to the conversion – the Turbine Hall and Boiler House. The Turbine Hall was more or less unaltered, to retain character, offering a recognisably industrial space. Two gantry cranes were kept to transport large artworks and sculptures and the vast openness proved ideal for art installations after being cleared of its machinery. In contrast, the former boiler house offered no space and all walls had to be removed. It was stripped and five new floors were added, following Serota’s vision of a more formal, fully-serviced gallery space contrasting with the heavy industrial character of the Turbine Hall.

Jacques Herzog stated ‘the new shouldn’t be alien to the old and the old shouldn’t be alien to the new’, and looking outside the building connects what is inside. This aims to maintain a sense of connection to the city, offering views of London and giving visitors a sense of where they are despite the buildings huge size.

The galleries themselves experiment with the idea of temporality, appearing solid but not providing any support for the building. They contain walls that may, in places, be added or removed, consisting of white painted MDF mounted on internal light metal frames.

A key success of Herzog & de Meuron’s approach is their understanding of human experience. They have cleverly adapted the building to be for people, from its former use, changing its role from a technological to a social one. Throughout the design and construction process there was also community participation through user group meetings.

The building once served the public on a basic level but has now allowed for the regeneration of Bankside, establishing it as a dynamic commercial and cultural quarter and providing links in the local area. In addition to this it has brought an economic benefit of £100 million and about 3000 new jobs. The number of visitors has currently reached a record 5.5 million in 2013. 30% of these are expected to come from overseas, allowing the gallery to join the international competition to become a prime cultural site globally.

The Tate Modern is the first institution of international stature to adapt an existing industrial structure – in keeping with the government policy on regenerations, that ‘the re-use of old buildings is important for the revitalisation of urban areas.’[1]

The building is a ‘flexible container for art’[2] but there is still the illusion of permanence and monumentality in the existing building. Contemporary art can be seen in relief within the industrial architecture, providing a link between the historic and the contemporary, where an alternative new architecture could have shifted the focus. In this setting visitors can appreciate the artwork against the immense scale of the building that houses it; this is particularly successful in the Turbine Hall, used primarily as an art installation space.

[1] glias.org.uk, Murray, S. (2010) The rise, fall and transformation of Bankside power station, 1890-2010 [online]
Available at: http://www.glias.org.uk/gliasepapers/bankside.html [Accessed 10 May 2015]

[2] architectsjournal.co.uk, Powell, K. (2000) Powerhouse In transforming Bankside power station into the Tate Modern, Herzog & de Meuron has created a flexible gallery which retains the monumentality of the original building [online]
Available at: http://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/home/powerhouse-in-transforming-bankside-power-station-into-the-tate-modern-herzog-and-de-meuron-has-created-a-flexible-gallery-which-retains-the-monumentality-of-the-original-building-photographs-by-rich/190088.article [Accessed 10 May 2015]

The Tate Modern: Overview

The Tate Modern is a useful precedent for the re-use of existing industrial buildings and their transformation into cultural spaces that assist in the positive development of cities and communities. It is one of the most successful examples of urban regeneration, transforming the Bankside district of London into a thriving and attractive area for the local community and visitors. It does this through the adaptive re-use of a former power station into a container for contemporary art.

The building, entitled Bankside ‘B’ was designed by Sir Giles Gilbert Scott, a well-known architect of the time. It was the last power station to be built in Central London (in 1947), situated on the River Thames in Bankside. The de-industrialisation during the 20^th century required the previously heavily polluted area to be addressed in terms of clearing, rebuilding, and social programmes. In 1981 Bankside ‘B’ was decommissioned and stood in the way of what was regarded as a redevelopment and investment opportunity for developers.

Civic organisations held campaigns against demolition and the three attempts by English Heritage to get the building listed were turned down by the government, alongside adaptive re-use proposals. The campaigns to save the building showed the change in attitude to industrial architecture, Bankside ‘B’ had now become a historical and architectural icon of the mid-20^th century and needed to be preserved as a valuable heritage asset.

At the time some of the world’s best architects were in the process of turning industrial power buildings into world-class museums: In Turin – Renzo Piano and the Fiat Plant, Germany – Norman Foster and Partners and the titanic boiler house conversion at the redundant mine in Zollverein Essen, to name a couple.

At the turn of the millennium Bankside still showed poverty and unemployment and was in need of urban regeneration. Tate saved Bankside Power Station in 1994.