Westminster Abbey
Westminster Abbey was easily one of the most impressive buildings I have ever visited simply because it has so much history behind it. It was intriguing to me to hear about how central a role the Abbey has played in London’s history for so long – for almost a thousand years! – because there isn’t anything close to an equivalent in America. Every time I see dates on buildings founded before the 1700s or 1600s I’m amazed because it blows my mind a little bit to think that here, not only has organized society existed and advanced, but people then were capable of building such impressive structures that have stood for hundreds or thousands of years. In Seattle, where I grew up, anything built before 1900 I considered absolutely ancient; here, of course, a building built in 1900 is practically brand new, at least architecturally speaking. Being in London, and especially visiting some of the more prominent historical sites, has definitely changed my perspective on the abilities of humanity in antiquity. One of the things that struck me in particular about Westminster Abbey was how crowded it was – not just with people, but with placards, sculptures and memorials. It was really cool to see the variety of famous and influential people buried, remembered, or honored there, from Shakespeare to Newton to Churchill. I hadn’t realized that the church was also a burial ground for prominent English figures, so walking around and seeing so many recognizable names was a welcome surprise. I’m glad that Westminster Abbey was lucky enough to be mostly spared from bombing during World War II; it’s an immensely valuable cultural site and I think London is far richer for having it.
It was particularly cool to see some of the scenery, particularly the choir hall, that I recognized from watching the royal in a few years ago. It was easy to imagine the entire building packed with people and decorated for the occasion, though I must say, I’m glad the upcoming royal wedding will not take place in Westminster Abbey because it means I got the chance to see the Abbey! Visiting the Abbey plays into my experiential learning project, which involves photographing and analyzing different architectural trends throughout London’s history. I expect Westminster Abbey will be a valuable case study because parts of its construction are from the 13th century whereas some were constructed as recently as the 16th century. To me, this is a perfect example of how architectural styles from different eras can be blended together and work in concert to create a unique and pleasing design, something I hope to find more examples of.
Tower of London
The tower of London was another quite interesting site to visit. Before visiting, I knew virtually nothing about the place, and so I arrived expecting simply a large tower. For this reason, I was quite surprised, but not at all disappointed, when it turned out to be more of a castle with a moat and everything. While I knew that castles were a big deal in Europe for several hundred years, I had thought that most of them had been destroyed and built over, and I certainly hadn’t expected to see one in the very heart of London. This was my first time ever seeing a castle, and I must say, it was more or less exactly what I expected it to be like, which was fantastic. As a kid I was somewhat obsessed with medieval history: castles, catapults, knights, trebuchets, etcetera, and so this was a bit of a dream come true for me. Walking along the battlements and seeing holes for archers to peek out of, complete with metal sculptures in the shape of guards, was awesome. More than at Westminster Abbey or St. Paul’s Cathedral I felt a very distinct contrast between ancient and modern at the Tower of London. Looking down between the two layers of walls, I noticed cars parked between medieval archways, and modern-looking doors with keypads embedded into rock that had been there for hundreds of years. Looking out across the rest of London from the walls of the castle, which I imagine must have been an even more impressive structure in the past, and seeing skyscrapers and other modern buildings, it was kind of saddening to think that this place was no longer revered as the formidable fortress it must have once been. I, for one, hadn’t even known of its existence until I arrived. However, the fact that the Crown Jewels are still kept there was an affirmation to me that the Tower of London remains an important landmark and that its place in London’s history is still quite significant. Waiting in the long, stuffy line to see the Crown Jewels was absolutely worth it. I was blown away by the detail and intricacy of some of the designs on crowns and scepters. One of the scepters had a dove on the end, which particularly stood out to me because I could pick out individual feathers on the tiny bird from several feet away, an incredibly impressive feat of detail considering the staff was created in 1666. Visiting the Tower of London is definitely a highlight of my trip so far. I believe visiting the Tower was useful to my experiential learning project because it is an example of ancient architecture embedded in a part of the city that contains much more modern buildings. I may be able to use this as an example of contrast in different styles, a clash between new and old.
St. Paul’s Cathedral
I spent a little bit less time at St. Paul’s Cathedral than at the other locations, simply because I was feeling a bit under the weather, but I walked around the entire building and I think I was still able to get the whole experience. More than at Westminster Abbey, I found myself repeatedly wondering how someone had managed to paint the immense murals on the inside of the dome, what must have been more than a hundred feet in the air – then later, following the Industrial Revolution, when the paintings were covered with soot, that another person was convinced to ascend the cathedral and repaint the murals! As someone who is not a fan of heights, this was somewhat vexing to me. However, I braved the several hundred stairs to the first gallery above the main floor, and I was glad I did. The detail on the 8 different scenes on the inside of the dome was amazing from up close, which made me wonder why, according to the audio tour, there had initially been opposition to painting the murals in the first place. I felt that they added to the impressive and classy nature of the building without being over-the-top; without them, I feel the interior would have felt somewhat lacking. From here, I continued to the next level, which brought me to the exterior of the cathedral around the dome. Here, more even than at Westminster Abbey, I was blown away by the fact that a building nearly 400 years old had been constructed so precisely and sturdily that it remains perfectly sound structurally today. I climbed all the way up the couple hundred stairs to the very top, and the view was absolutely worth it.
Other Thoughts
Besides the scheduled excursions, I did a little bit of exploring London by myself. It really was amazing to just be walking around, turn a corner and suddenly be face to face with an impressive, several-hundred-year-old building. This happened to me on more than one occasion; the other day, as I was walking to a restaurant, I happened by the Royal Courts of Justice. During the scavenger hunt, my roommates and I walked out of a tube station to behold a monument to the Great Fire of 1666. Living and studying in London has so far exceeded my hopes and expectations, and I’m very excited for the weeks to come.
During week two, I got more into the rhythm of living and working in London. I started off the week still recovering from a mild cold I think I picked up on my flight here, but by Tuesday I was feeling better. However, because I’d been sick and trying to recover, I had gotten in the habit of sleeping in quite late – I think last Saturday and Sunday I didn’t get out of bed until after noon. Since then, I’ve been trying to break that routine and wake up significantly earlier, closer to 8am, because when I wake up later in the day I feel like I miss out on a major chunk of daylight I could be using to explore and work on my ISP and capstone. One thing I’m hoping will help me keep this earlier schedule is going to the gym. A couple days this week I went and worked out for an hour right after waking up, which really helped me wake up and stay energized for the rest of the day, so I plan to keep that up. Additionally, the walk to and from the gym is through a very cool neighborhood; there’s all sorts of interesting buildings with different architectural styles, as well as parks, cafes, and other local businesses. Just taking the time to walk by and enjoy the scenery London has to offer (as well as warm up and cool down from working out) is a great way to start my day.
This week I spent some time exploring different places to work, which ended up being quite beneficial. On Monday I went to the Barbican Center, which seemed to be a sort of mall that also contained a bookstore and public study spaces, and most importantly, offered free, fast internet. This was an interesting place to work for the day: the tables were in a huge open room with a great view of a courtyard with a fountain, which at first I really liked because it was an interesting environment. However, the space was first and foremost a mall, which became apparent as the day went on and more and more people walked by. It never got particularly loud, but after a while, the increase in activity definitely got a little bit distracting. Overall, I’m glad I spent a day working there, as it was a very unique place that I don’t think really exists in the US, but I’m not sure that I’ll go back. Tuesday I spent studying in cafes nearby Russel Square, where I got to enjoy some delicious English tea and pastries for the first time. To be honest, I wasn’t a huge fan of the tea. It certainly tasted better than black teas I’ve had before, but it was still much too bitter for me. Definitely a good cultural experience to have, though. On Wednesday, Thursday and Friday, I accompanied Aram to the Institute of Engineering and Technology at Savoy Place, right on the banks of the Thames. This was one of the most unique and wonderfully modern workspaces I’ve ever been in; it’s a huge open space with large windows and modern décor. It has a variety of seating options (tables, couches, armchairs, stools, etc.), all designed ergonomically, as well as a library with all sorts of engineering textbooks, and even a café! This ended up being by far my favorite and most productive study location, and I absolutely plan on using this as my main study location for the remainder of my time here.
As far as my actual experiential learning project for this week, I certainly took plenty of pictures. I’ve gotten in the habit of just carrying my camera with my wherever I go, which has certainly paid off. Whenever I’m walking somewhere, I scan the surrounding buildings for interesting architecture, and I’m very rarely disappointed; I almost always find impressive buildings to take pictures of wherever I go. I mentioned this in my reflection from last week, but it continues to be one of my favorite things about being in London; you just never know what’s around the corner. Sometimes it’s a historically significant building from the 17th century, other times a brand new modern building with aggressive angles, or even an old factory that has been converted to serve another purpose. London’s architectural diversity continues to amaze me, and I’m amassing quite a collection of pictures. I’m also beginning to recognize some of the major skyscrapers, and it’s always interesting when I explore a new part of London to spot a familiar building and get a look at a different angle. Some buildings, the “cheese grater” in particular, look drastically different depending on where in the city you view them from, and it really gives me a sense that although I’m moving around quite a bit, everything I see is part of the same city and unified by a collective identity.
On Saturday I got the opportunity to experience an area of London outside of the square mile or so that I’d previously explored. Aram and I went to the London Motor Show at Excel London, which is right near London City Airport. This was an entirely new area of London I’d never been to before, and it looked completely different from the rest; there were fewer roads, smaller houses, and much more open space. What few large buildings there were appeared very modern. It felt like a mix of suburbs and industrial parks, but everything seemed brand new, which was strange considering the menagerie of building styles from many different areas I’d observed in the rest of London. Considering the reasonable distance from the center of the city, I had expected more suburbs with older, Victorian-era houses, as I’d read about for my cluster, but I saw virtually none of these, which was puzzling. I did some research into the area afterward and learned that during Victorian London, this place started out as marshland with a few industrial sites, but grew into a major slum due to overcrowding and high rent prices in poorly constructed housing. The area, it turns out, was known for widespread disease, open sewers, and rampant poverty in the 1800s. Even today, it continues to be one of the most impoverished areas in the UK, although efforts to combat this are underway. Learning this was both incredibly intriguing and quite saddening to me. On the one hand, it was fascinating to see solid evidence that the trends of the Industrial Revolution directly shaped (and continue to influence) modern-day London; on the other hand, it’s unfortunate that some areas are still suffering from poverty and health trends dating back nearly a hundred years. I’m considering investigating this neighborhood’s local history further as I continue research for my ISP. Funnily enough, though it drew my attention in relation to my experiential project, it may also prove helpful for my ISP as well!
I feel as if my reflection would be incomplete if I didn’t at least mention the Royal Wedding. Though I got back to the flat from the car show too late to watch the entire thing, I did manage to catch the parade after the main ceremony, which was incredible. Not only was it fascinating to see the traditional parade with a procession of horses, a carriage, and medieval-looking armor, I was impressed with how many people turned up to watch the parade go by. It seems to me that the Royal Family is one concept that unites England; judging by the parade and news coverage, everyone seems to love them. The closest thing we have in the US I suppose would be the President and family, which of course are seldom universally popular and well-liked in the way that the royal family seems to be. Although I didn’t attend in person, I feel as if I got more out of the experience of watching the royal wedding by being in London; I’ve often heard snippets of conversation regarding the wedding while walking around, and watching it felt very special.
During week 3, I really got going on my experiential learning portfolio. My goal for my portfolio is to have a rather large and diverse pool of images of different buildings from different architectural eras that incorporate signature features from the time period. Of course, this means I have to take a lot of pictures! I tried to dedicate about an hour a day to grab my camera and tripod and just go walk around and take pictures of buildings. I couldn’t find the time on every single day, but on days that I did, I found it was both a productive way to take a break from working on my ISP and capstone and a good way to see even more of London. I’ve definitely got some shots I want to include in my final portfolio; every time I shoot, I go through the pictures as soon as I get back to the flat and pick out my favorites for later. Most of them still need to be edited, but they’re looking very promising so far. While I think I’m a fairly competent photographer in general, I don’t have a whole lot of experience with shooting architecture, and I’m not all that accustomed to urban environments. One thing I struggled with early on was framing my shots correctly; oftentimes, it was difficult to get the entire building in frame thanks to many of London’s streets being narrow or crowded. I’ve had to become more creative with angles and lens choices in order to take the pictures I need. My favorite lens, an old-fashioned, manual-focus Minolta 50mm f/1.4 that is perfect for producing beautiful depth-of-field shots, has been almost useless for building photography. Not only is it a fixed focal length lens (it doesn’t zoom in or out), its particular focal length, 50mm, is in most cases far too zoomed in to capture an entire building, particularly as London streets typically mean I have to stand very close to buildings. As a result, I’ve been pushed outside my comfort zone in terms of lenses. Instead of the Minolta, I’ve been using a much more versatile (but also much bulkier and heavier) 18-105mm f/4 lens. I actually do quite like its capability to zoom in and out. It definitely makes framing subjects much easier, because instead of having to physically move myself closer to or further away from my subject, I can simply turn a dial on the lens and accomplish the same thing. While I’ve mostly been using the zoom lens, I have actually found a use for the fixed lens: highlighting specific features that I want to make stand out. For this use, the tight focal length is actually a benefit, as it provides me a close-up of my subject. The depth of field I can achieve with this lens not only creates a visually pleasing image, it also helps the subject stand out from the softer background. I’ve used this technique mainly to capture statues, gargoyles, and other immediately interesting features, though in the future, as I become better at recognizing them, I think I’ll be able to use it to capture more subtle indicators of a building’s architectural era, like molding patterns or the shape of windows and arches.
Visiting Lacock and Bath on Tuesday was a very different look at English architecture that I think will be an asset to my project. Coming from London’s hodgepodge of different styles all crammed together in one place, seeing a relatively unified architectural theme in Lacock and Bath was an entirely different perspective. I thought the way that modern styles echoed the historical buildings, particularly in Lacock with the new housing that was meant to be similar to the ancient buildings, was incredibly interesting and could provide an interesting comparison with London’s modern buildings that mimic far older ones. While I didn’t get an up-close look at Lacock’s housing, I hope I’ll be able to do sufficient research to compare the two effectively. Bath, too, had a variety of buildings in terms of age, but remained fairly unified in terms of style. Parts of Bath were bombed rather extensively during World War 2 – not on the scale of London, but enough that more than 1000 buildings had to be repaired extensively or reconstructed entirely. Despite this, however, Bath’s architecture adhered strictly to the Georgian style. I took lots of pictures, and I plan to examine the rebuilding efforts after WW2 and compare them to the same process that took place in London, where Brutalist architecture became the trend.
In terms of the more scholarly side of my experiential project, I’ve been doing more research into different architectural eras of London and features specific to each one. While different sources disagree slightly on the exact architectural time periods of London, I’ve decided to go with five different styles: Georgian, Victorian, Art-Deco, Brutalist/Post war, and Modern. I want to photograph a variety of buildings from each time period in order to demonstrate different applications of each style. My current goal is at least two pictures from each time period per week that I think are of sufficient quality and significance to feature in my final portfolio – though of course, I will probably end up narrowing down my selection at some point. So far, I’m slightly off this pace, but I think I should be able to pick it up fairly easily. I’m starting off safe, with buildings that are at least relatively well-known as examples of a particular era’s style, but starting next week, I want to stretch myself a little bit. I plan to find random buildings that I know nothing about, and based on their features, attempt to identify the period during which they were built, then check my work. Not only do I believe this will be a valuable demonstration of my knowledge, I think it will also be an interesting (and frankly, rather fun!) exercise. I’m curious to see how I do. From the research I’ve done so far, there seems to be a fair amount of overlap between styles of different periods, particularly some Georgian and Art-Deco architecture. Additionally, some buildings are constructed or remodeled specifically in the style of another time period, so that’s another potential source of confusion. I’ve already started trying to categorize buildings a little bit, and so far, my results have been mixed – for instance, one building I thought looked decidedly Art-Deco (1920s) turned out to have been built in the 1820s.
Hamlet at the Globe Theater
Hamlet at the Globe Theater was a welcome break from working. Immediately upon arriving at the theater, I was impressed at the theater’s distinctive style. I could absolutely picture the building as the hub of theater in 16th and 17th century London. I hadn’t realized how close it was to the Thames; I’d actually seen it from across the river a few times but hadn’t realized it was the Globe. When the doors finally opened, I scrambled inside and found a spot standing right at the front and center of the stage, and I was surprised at how quickly the floor filled up. I imagine it must have been incredibly crowded during Elizabethan London, when Shakespeare was the premiere form of entertainment, and even today I was surprised at the number of people in attendance. The interior of the theater was incredibly unique; though I know it’s actually a quite recent reconstruction, I got a sense of the history behind the original building. I could easily picture upper-class Elizabethan audiences sitting in the upper boxes while the grounds were packed with lower classes. I really appreciated the simplicity of the building’s construction, despite the availability of modern techniques, when it was rebuilt, as I feel it greatly added to the experience of seeing performances live there. The fact that the actors didn’t use microphones and that music was performed in person by a live orchestra definitely added to the authenticity as well. Something about the actors having to project to the audience rather than relying on speakers to broadcast their voices felt much more genuine than otherwise. I wasn’t familiar with the story of Hamlet beforehand, and I’m not an avid Shakespeare scholar, so I did have some difficulty understanding what was going on some of the time, but I believe I got the gist of the performance. Unfortunately, I must say, I didn’t particularly like the performance. It certainly had its moments, and it was quite interesting to experience Shakespeare as nearly as possible as it had been during the Elizabethan era, but I felt that much of the performance was overacted. As I said, I am by no means a theater aficionado, but that was the impression I got. Overall, though, I’m glad I got the opportunity to experience such a unique and intensely historical performance. Standing inside the theater, surrounded by the architecture as it had been, was like a window into Elizabethan London, in a much more immersive way than I’ve been able to experience at other historical sites in London. Whereas elsewhere, you can observe history and learn about what happened and why it was significant, in the Globe, it felt as if I was living a part of London’s history.
Macbeth at the National Theater
As it turns out, my week was rather full of Shakespeare. Some family friends that live in England happened to be in London and had an extra ticket to Macbeth at the National Theater, so I got to experience another classic play in a strikingly different setting. Where Hamlet had been interesting for its authenticity but kind of a lackluster performance overall, Macbeth was a much more modern interpretation of the original play that was also an incredible show. Modern set pieces, lighting, and sound made the play simply come alive in a way that Hamlet hadn’t for me. Where much of the allure of Hamlet at the Globe was that it was a classic play in a classic setting, I felt that this rendition of Macbeth used modern innovations in theater very carefully in ways that added value to the performance without being obvious to the point of distraction. Some of the weaknesses in Hamlet that I observed, for instance the very basic set that often resulted in confusion, was addressed wonderfully by Macbeth. A huge, rolling section of stage simply rotated around a focal point in the center of the stage to provide a multitude of scenes that gave a sense of depth to the performance that Hamlet lacked. Of course, Macbeth felt far less like a performance of Shakespeare as I regularly think of it than Hamlet had, but I believe the National Theater’s adaption did an excellent job of modernizing Shakespeare’s story while staying quite faithful to the plot and setting of the original. In other words, while it was still quite distinctly Shakespeare’s Macbeth, it also felt to me like it had evolved with advances in theater culture, which was immensely cool to see. While it’s perhaps not a perfect comparison between the two as I did know the story of Macbeth in advance, I felt like I got to see two sides of the best that London has to offer in terms of modern Shakespeare performances. I’m glad I got to see two plays that were so different; I feel like it helped me appreciate what entertainment used to be like and demonstrated the specific ways it’s evolved over the centuries.
The New Forest
This weekend, I got the opportunity to visit some family friends in the New Forest. Firstly, I was amazed at how sparsely populated and green the New Forest remains. While I remembered from the bus tour of Bath and Stonehenge that only 2% of the UK is urbanized, I’ve mostly been confined to that 2%. I’d been able to observe some open fields and farmland from trains, but until this weekend I hadn’t actually been able to explore the countryside. These family friends live near Lyndhurst in a very small town of only about 30 houses, and I was amazed at how spread out the area was. Apparently, the land their house was built on had been parceled out of the land that inspired Lewis Carroll when writing Alice in Wonderland, and I can see why. The incredibly narrow roads of the small town were clearly meant for horse drawn carriages, not automobiles. The shed of the house I stayed in used to be a stable for horses, a carriage, and carriage driver. More than in London, I felt as if I could see the modernization of the small, sleepy town in action. In the city, buildings were often completely demolished due to damage from wars or simply being decrepit and replaced with brand-new ones in the modern architectural style. However, in this town, modern advances were simply added on to buildings constructed hundreds of years ago, to a much different effect. Every building I saw felt incredibly quaint, almost exactly as I had imagined a classic English town might be. I feel as if I better understand now how life in England must have been before urbanization drove so much of the population into major cities.
Hampton Court Palace
Hampton Court Palace was a place that I may not have taken the initiative to visit on my own, but was nonetheless a valuable experience because it gave me an insight into what the daily life of monarchs in the 1500s and 1600s was like. It also provided me with an interesting mix of architectural styles to photograph; some of the palace is in the Tudor style, while other parts are more Baroque architecture. Some of the detail work was incredible. The chimneys in particular, I noticed, each had intricate brick patterns which from what I could tell were all quite distinct. I did some research after visiting and found out that there are more than 200 uniquely-designed chimneys throughout the castle. In the 16th century, owning multiple fireplaces was a symbol of status, and the ornate chimneys of the palace helped elevate the royal occupants above commoners, a detail I found interesting – even minor details of architecture were a tool used to demonstrate social status. However, rather than the ornate designs or impressive scale of the castle, I was more interested in the servants’ quarters and workspaces. The wine cellar, chocolate room, and king’s kitchens all helped paint a bit of a picture of the daily lives of the working class, who until this point I hadn’t known very much about. Admittedly, it was more in the context of how many servants it took to satisfy the needs of the royal court (more than 200) rather than the actual conditions and thoughts of the working class. It was still interesting to see some of what went on behind the scenes in order to provide for the royal family. In visits to other locations, I’d seen many of the more impressive parts of castles and palaces, but oftentimes the quarters and working spaces of servants have been cordoned off or repurposed since the days during which they were used. I feel as if these stories are equally as important to observe in order to gain a more complete understanding of England’s history.
Bonn and Cologne, Germany
This weekend, I visited my friend in Bonn, Germany. This was my first time in mainland Europe, and the whole trip was a little bit outside my comfort zone because I speak absolutely no German. While I’ve been to countries where English is not commonly spoken, in the past, I’ve had at least a functional knowledge of the local language; if I got lost or needed directions, I knew how to ask and could understand the answer. However, in Germany, all I could do when someone spoke to me was smile, nod, and wait for my friend to translate. While the trip pushed me outside my comfort zone, I’m glad I had the opportunity to visit Germany, as I feel I now have a greater appreciation for how difficult it is to come to a new country with a different language and do something as simple as order coffee. At first I was a bit wary to interact with anyone – I had my friend order my lunch for me on the first day – but after receiving a basic crash course in German, I managed to successfully order dinner in German. The waiter picked up on the fact that I knew very little German and was quite patient with me, which I greatly appreciated. The experience helped me understand how significant a barrier language can be, and how difficult it can be to overcome this. Visiting Germany and having the experience of being completely ignorant of the language gave me an immense appreciation for my friend, who speaks English, Mandarin, and German fluently. When he was around 10 years old, he moved to Germany on quite short notice and had to learn the language as he attended school there. I can barely imagine how difficult that must have been; even visiting for two days and attempting only very simple conversation, I struggled. Understanding schoolwork and making friends while learning the language would be quite difficult, I imagine, and it’s impressive to me that he managed it. I quite enjoyed my trip to Germany, and I think in the future I’d definitely like to continue pushing the boundaries of my comfort zone with regards to different countries, languages, and cultures. After this experience, I’m hoping I’ll be able to go on IQP in a non-English speaking country, because I’d like to have the experience of visiting a place with a different language for a longer period of time so I can (hopefully) learn some of the language myself.
Cologne Cathedral
One thing I was looking forward to prior to my trip to Germany was the opportunity to observe different styles of European architecture. One of the most prominent and striking examples I observed was the Cologne Cathedral. Built in the Gothic style, the cathedral remains one of the most famous and impressive examples of Gothic architecture in Europe. The Gothic architecture I’ve observed in England, including Westminster Abbey, are much more understated by comparison. The exterior of the Cologne Cathedral was incredibly intricate and complicated, with hundreds of spiked spires, flying buttresses, and stained glass windows. While I recognized many of the same elements from observing Westminster, the Cologne cathedral took the style to another level. I’m glad I had the opportunity to observe a different take on the same style of architecture, and I think it will be interesting to compare and contrast the two in my experiential learning portfolio.