Ernö Goldfinger’s Metro Central Heights, has been branded ‘soulless’

Ernö Goldfinger’s Metro Central Heights, has been branded ‘soulless’
Designs angered author Ian Fleming so he named a villain after architect

By
Anna Edwards

PUBLISHED:

08:56 GMT, 10 July 2013

|

UPDATED:

10:25 GMT, 10 July 2013

A cluster of towering concrete blocks that loom over London’s Elephant and Castle will now join a list of national treasures, as they’ve been awarded Grade II listed status.

Ernö Goldfinger’s Metro Central Heights, has been branded ‘soulless’ and one of the ‘worst examples of post-war development’.

But that has not stopped Heritage Minister Ed Vaizey giving the building the prestigious award.

Now a national treasure

Once branded ‘soulless’, the building has now been given special status because of its high caliibre design

The influential architect, who was renowned for his ‘austere’ projects, angered James Bond author Ian Fleming so much with his designs that the novelist named one of his most famous villains after him.

Fleming had been among the many unhappy objectors to the pre-war demolition of some Hampstead cottages which were removed to make way for Goldfinger’s house in Willow Road.

Erno Goldfinger considered the Metro Central Heights one of his most significant achievements

The Budapest-born architect threatened to sue who Goldfinger was published in 1959, which prompted Fleming to threaten to rename the character ‘Goldprick’, but eventually he climbed down and dropped his threat.

Built between 1959 and 1967 and originally called Alexander Fleming House, the south London block housed the Department of Health and Social Security until 1989.

But the office block became known as sick building syndrome – where inhabitants suffer health problems linked to spending time inside it – and staff were moved out in the early 1990s to a new headquarters across the road.

It remained empty and was considered for demolition, but it was converted to residential use in 2002.

The Design Museum said: ‘His monumental 1959-1963 scheme for Elephant Castle in south London is frequently cited as one of the worst examples of soulless post-war developments.’

But this hasn’t stopped English Heritage advising that the structure should not enjoy protected status.

Ed Vaizey said: Goldfinger considered this to be his most significant work.

‘Acclaimed when it was first built, it subsequently divided opinion but has now – 25 years after first being put forward for listing – clearly passed the test of time.

‘I am pleased now to be able to give it the recognition it deserves.

Villain Auric Goldfinger was named after the architect, who incurred the wrath of Ian Fleming with his austere designs

Simon Thurley, Chief Executive of
English Heritage said: ‘Built by distinguished architect Ernö
Goldfinger, Metro Central Heights is an excellent example of high
calibre post-war architecture.

‘An accomplished building, it has proved highly influential for designs which followed.

Trellick Tower took years for Londoners - and especially those living there - to warm to it

Trellick Tower took years for Londoners – and especially those living there – to warm to it

‘We are pleased that the Heritage Minister agrees with our advice and has listed it at Grade II.

Grade II buildings are nationally important and of special interest; 92 per cent of all listed buildings are in this class and it is the most likely grade of listing for a home owner.

However there is some hope for those who view the block as a blot, rather than a treasure – listing does not protect the building.

Instead, it means that listed building consent must be applied for in order to make any changes to that building which might affect its special interest.

Listed buildings can be altered, extended and sometimes even demolished within government planning guidance.

An influential figure in the British modern movement, Goldfinger studied architecture in Paris, the Design Museum said.

But his works would often divide residents and critics’ opinions.

He moved to London in 1934, attracting praise for some projects, notably his Hampstead home, but drawing controversy for ambitious schemes at Elephant and Castle and Poplar.

The Trellick Tower in west London, is a prime example of his provoking work.

Popular though Trellick is today, it took years for Londoners – and especially those living there – to warm to it, and other Goldfinger projects proved equally contentious.

The comments below have been moderated in advance.

Newest
Oldest
Best rated
Worst rated

Emperor’s new clothes….

–

Elizabeth
,

Aberdeen, United Kingdom,
10/7/2013 11:31

The one think that’s always noticable about these developments is that the very people that design them don’t live in them with their families, the very people who give approval for their construction do not live in them, and the very clowns that give the buildings listed status don’t reside their with their families.

–

Lachlord
,

London,
10/7/2013 11:22

A wonderful example of neo-Marxist Brutalism. A perfect expression of a globalist future.â€¦

Soulless! True, but as hardcore think of what could be created with it!

A car park maybe?

–

Herbert Newman
,

London,
10/7/2013 11:20

It’s amazing how all of these old 60s/70s buildings are being pulled down for being ugly, I often wonder if “modern” buildings of today will be pulled down too for being so ugly in the near future. I remember my primary school was pulled down, and rebuilt with modern materials I can guarantee it will be pulled down in 30 years from now.

–

MrDrummle
,

Newcastle,
10/7/2013 11:19

Because the government does not want to knock it down and build decent homes for people. However, in the City of London with private foreign investors they can knock down well designed period buildings with character that one would automatically consider to be listed and build ugly cucumber glass eye sores in such a space captured space.

–

Lee
,

London England,
10/7/2013 11:18

Seen far worse buildings

–

James
,

Edinburgh, United Kingdom,
10/7/2013 11:18

I think in a way he is right, just because it is an eyesore does not stop it from being part of our history. it is an example of architecture from the past, even if it ‘s a bad one. I personally think Art Deco houses are ugly but others like them, who’s to say what is right or wrong.

–

kaz
,

bath,
10/7/2013 11:17

If we haven’t got the guts to knock this monstrosity down, then we deserve to be reminded, in perpetuity, of how bad architecture was in the 1960’s.

–

Alan
,

Honiton, United Kingdom,
10/7/2013 11:14

Call me old fashioned, but I’ll stick with my house with a garden, thanks.

–

Kevin
,

Nottingham, United Kingdom,
10/7/2013 11:13

At least he made a good name for a Bond villain……..Robinson or Johnson wouldn’t have had the same ring about them!!

–

TerryP
,

Manchester, United Kingdom,
10/7/2013 11:12

The views expressed in the contents above are those of our users and do not necessarily reflect the views of MailOnline.

List.ify.Me

everything is listed…

Ernö Goldfinger’s Metro Central Heights, has been branded ‘soulless’

Share or comment on this article