The Victorians were huge achievers on a global scale.
Amongst the many contributors to this process were civil engineers such as Telford, Brunel, Hawkshaw, Fowler, Baker and Wolfe Barry.
I attended a wonderful book launch this week for Roma Agrawal’s new book BUILT during which she kindly signed my copy. The occasion was hosted at the Brunel Museum in Rotherhithe on the site of the first traffic tunnel under a navigable waterway, the River Thames. The civil engineers responsible were Marc and Isambard Brunel, father and son. As I’ve posted elsewhere on this site, Isambard’s son Henry became a close business partner of John Wolfe Barry.
The final chapter of Roma’s book is called ‘Dream’. Everyone dreams, literally, but not so many actually achieve them in real life. Roma managed to write her book which started as a spreadsheet and she’d previously designed key structural parts of the Shard, an architect’s dream come true.
Young people ever since Victorian times (and before) have wanted to fulfil their dreams. Civil and structural engineering is one very visible way of doing this – not just a small, invisible component of a household object, but a big, visible, in-your-face statement of how conceptual design can change the world physically for the better.
Where there was no hospital there now is one to treat the sick, where no bridge now one stands to cross a river.
Communities can flourish and in turn have an influence on their environment, gradually ensuring that it reflects shared ideals and aspirations, including beauty, sustainability and using an ethical approach.
John Wolfe Barry would have been happy with such an outcome.
Since I’ve produced this website about the man who built Tower Bridge, perhaps it would be reasonable to ask why there is such global interest in the structure? Here are 10 reasons:
- It symbolises London. This was used to much effect during the 2012 Olympics Opening Ceremony.
- It is a must see for those millions of tourists who visit London every year for its history, together with the Houses of Parliament, the Tower of London, Buckingham Palace and St Paul’s Cathedral.
- Many people are fascinated by a bascule bridge which you don’t see very often and even if you have seen one, not on this scale. IK Brunel’s son Henry was closely involved in its design.
- Tower Bridge spans the River Thames with many other famous bridges (including London Bridge, but not the original one) and is the furthest east of those to be found in Central London.
- You can take a boat trip along the Thames and if you travel far enough eastwards towards Greenwich (where the Meridian is to be found) you will have to pass under Tower Bridge.
- The Thames Footpath is a great walking and cycling route along England’s most famous river. If you continue west starting at Tower Bridge you will eventually pass Kew Gardens, Hampton Court Palace, Windsor Castle and Henley on Thames (where the summer regattas take place – John Wolfe Barry and Henry Brunel, the builders of Tower Bridge, loved rowing on the Thames).
- Of course there are some die-hards like myself who actually love Tower Bridge as a working bridge built in the Victorian era.
- Perhaps you’ve made the bridge with a Lego kit or using Meccano and want to compare your model with the real thing?
- Or you’ve watched a movie/film/TV programme which has featured it, for example one from the James Bond series (www.007.com).
- Then there’s the off chance that you might bump into a member of the Royal Family on the bridge on their way back to the Tower of London where they all live … 😉
I’ve managed to populate this website about Sir John Wolfe Barry with a fair amount of information about him and things, issues and people linked to him. I’m now wondering what to do next and would appreciate your help. Please respond to this post with your thoughts in the comments part.
For example, should there be more content about the history of civil engineering or architecture as technical disciplines?
Or perhaps more on the commercial and contracting side of John Wolfe Barry’s professional activities?
Or just more stories about Victorian and Edwardian characters who lived and worked in the same circles as him?
The choice is yours.
What matters when designing and planning a building: its aesthetic appeal or the nature of its form and materials? People will have different views about this depending on their tastes, which makes the built environment such a fascinating and sometimes controversial area of practice.
Debates have continued ever since humans first began to shape their environment and introduce the concept of ‘style’ to each other. Different generations may hold vastly differing views about why a particular structure appeals or not.
I’m happy to defend my appreciation of 19th Century architecture and engineering, based as it is on my background as an historian of the first Industrial Revolution, which happened to take place in my country of origin. I suppose when I first studied economic and social history at university I was fascinated by human ingenuity and organisation as an evolving complex system, less so by individual acts of creativity. As time has passed and I’ve moved along with my generation, clearly I’ve started to appreciate the aesthetical side more than I used to.
My challenge now is to address a general misunderstanding of how historical precedent can best be used to help pave the way forward for ‘modernity’, whichever way we may choose to interpret the future.
I believe looking back with hindsight at engineers such as John Wolfe Barry and his contemporaries aids us in this process.
I’m reading a fascinating book about the use of iron and steel in buildings in Victorian London. One of these structures was Tower Bridge which John Wolfe Barry built with his partner Henry Brunel.
You could argue it was more than just a bridge as the two steel towers were clad in stone to provide sympathetic context with the Tower of London.
This stirred up great architectural debate at the time.
Author Jonathan Clarke of the English Heritage monograph ‘Early Structural Steel in London Buildings: A discreet revolution’ explains the basis behind these disagreements on aesthetics and use of materials, which you might say characterised the professional divide between traditional architects and futuristic structural engineers at the time.