Visible evidence of the past

Does the enthusiasm to protect historic buildings and areas of character demonstrate an appreciation of their intrinsic value or is it rather an obsession with the past.One of the pieces of legislation that Tony Greenwood when Environment Secretary of State in Harold Wilson`s cabinet was most proud of was The Civic Amenities Act 1967. This introduced the requirement for local planning authorties to periodically review their areas and determine which parts were of special architectural or historic interest. They then could  designate these areas as Consevation Areas and promote policies to preserve or enhance their character or appearance.The Bill had originally been the work of Duncan Sandys – later Lord Duncan Sandys – and the Civic Trust. There had been mounting concern that the preservation of buildings available under the original 1947 Act did not give protection to a group of buildings and a more general power was required.There are now more than 8,000 Conservation Areas in England, and around 500,000 listed buildings on the National Heritage List for England.

William Morris and SPAB

Legislative measures for the protection and enhancement of the built cultural heritage have a long pedigree. William Morris took the first positive steps by founding the Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings in 1877, which became a prime agent for the dissemination of his ideas  and  those of Philip Webb. Webb had championed what he called the common tradition of honest building when describing vernacular buildings.In 1882 the first measure of statutory protection was introduced, “The Ancient Monument Protection Act”. The concept of protecting buildings in more or less daily use is more recent. The 1882 Act and its successors were mainly concerned with “unoccupied” buildings and structures, and it was not until 1932 that protection of buildings generally in use, and of architectural or historic interest, had a legal basis and the powers were discretionary rather than mandatory. Systematic protection for historic buildings first arrived during the Second World War with the Town & Country Planning Act 1944.

The “Heritage Industry”

Alongside these post-war legislative changes came an enormous public interest in the built cultural heritage, stimulated by television pundits such as the late Sir John Betjeman and Alec Clifton-Taylor, who both presented well-researched and amusing television programmes that encouraged viewers to look around their immediate built environment, and to reflect on its history and providence. By the mid 1980`s there was an expansive list of organisations : governmental, charitable, private and non-governmental, engaged in protecting and managing the built cultural heritage ranging from SPAB, the Civic Trust and the National Trust through to privately funded organisations such as the Landmark Trust and Vivat Trust charged with restoring old buildings and finding viable uses for their future. In 1983 the National Heritage Act set up a commission for England, which became more popularly known as English Heritage, and which – as we will note later – has become the over-arching organisation for the designation and protection of heritage assets.

An obsession with the past

Many observers probably felt that these legislative changes and the growth of popular concern for the protection of the built cultural heritage marked a high point in the post-war reassessment of the country’s built environment. But a critical note was introduced into this discourse by cultural historian Robert Hewison, in his book The Heritage Industry published in 1987. At the height of the Thatcher era, with rampant industrial decline, he witheringly captured the mood of an era obsessed with the past and unable to face its future. Prepared to challenge a growing orthodoxy, he described a discourse, which he thought expected the “Heritage Industry” to more and more replace the real industry on which the country’s economy depended. Instead of manufacturing goods, we were manufacturing heritage, a commodity which nobody seemed to define, but which everyone was eager to sell, in particular those cultural institutions that could  no longer rely on government funds as they had in the past.

Networked Heritage

An ambitious attempt to provide a paradigm that reconciles how heritage shapes people`s identity with the places they live, work and play but also helps communities create heritage for themselves is the Networked Heritage project commissioned by The Royal Society of Arts supported by the Heritage Lottery Fund. In England, while over 200 neighbourhood plans have been adopted in law, a further 1.700 local communities have plans in development – predominantly led by volunteers. All have some bearing on local heritage. A networked heritage sector would be able to create, collate, publicise and support the adoption of some standardised approaches. Acknowledging that politics cannot be taken out of heritage decisions , the RSA`s research suggests that communities must ensure that the politics of decision – making in heritage is pro-active and inclusive. A more assertive heritage offer could demonstrate :

Broader and deeper civic engagement, bringing disengaged communities together to have an influence over how the memory of their local area is taken forward; and at its most ambitious, creating a sense of meaning, belonging and healing social divides

• Attraction of business investment and visitor spending, through articulating a coherent story about the economic trajectory of a place and it`s distinct characteristics in a wider context.
• Achievement of social outcomes in heritage settings , such as improving learning outcomes in schools, or offering heritage activities as social prescriptions for social isolation or poor mental health.
• The research concludes that devolution in England is creating new political and planning geographies and in a devolved world, place itself is a
• “ product” with an increased premium. These conclusions contain a powerful statement of the importance of heritage which is worth quoting in full.
• “Our lived experience in the material reality of the places we live our lives, and our connections to those who have lived in those places before, is a deep and powerful connection. Strengthening shared local identity across newly created political territories will be a vital contribution to the success of devolution within England.”