Art

The complex relationship between art and architecture has always been a defining feature for both fields. Architects, like artists, are always striving toimpact and transform the lives of those who experience their work.This was no different with the construction projects behind the Tate Modern and Saatchi Gallery, however,Tate Modern went on to become oneof the most popular attractions in Great Britain whereas the Saatchi Gallery did not. Again,a variety ofdifferent but specific factorsmust be present in order to successfully blend art and architecture into a popular attraction, like Tate Modern.
    To begin with, the Tate Modern galleries are currently housed in what was the Bankside Power Station, located on the south bank of the River Thames. The plant was commissioned following a severe power shortage during the late 1940s, despite strong public opposition due to the main chimneys height rivaling that of St. Pauls Cathedral. Bankside was commissioned to be an oil-fired power station, which in 1947 was one of the few models that could be used to develop mass amounts of power needed to supply a city. However, the fact that it was an oil-based power plant, it also pumped out massive amounts of industrial air emissions. Not only that, numerous toxic chemicals were dumped in the surrounding grounds as part of the ongoing process of the plant. The station eventually closed in 1981 due to the fact that the station was simply uneconomical with the rising oil prices at the time (DCSE 2009). Looking at it from a glance, this place didnt exactly shout that it had the potential to becoming one of the most famous modern art galleries in the world.
    In fact, for many years the Bankside Power station stood at great risk of being demolished by potential developers. It remained in a state of limbo for years as many people campaigned for the building to be saved, putting forward numerous possible new uses for the structure (Silna 2009). However, its future continued to be undetermined. Ultimately, the buildings fate appeared doomed in 1993 as contractors began work knocking a large hole in the side of the building and removing much of the redundant plant. Just as the end of the station looked eminent, though, Tate Gallery announced in 1994 that the Bankside Power station would be the home for the new Tate Modern. Something about Bankside was just right they said (DCSE 2009).
    Due to it being in a condemned state for a number of years, there were also a number of pollution issues to deal with before Tate Modern would be able to begin construction. The ground had to be purified due to the chemicals that had seeped into it from the plant, and the oil-fed burners also had to be cleaned and sanitized in order to be safe to the public. Along those same lines, much of the interior architecture had to be strengthened and reinforced due to disuse, and multiple new installations built to accommodate the increased public presence that would be there, i.e. gallery space, bathrooms, etc (DCSE 2009).
    What Tate Modern did that would become one of its defining qualities with Bankside is that the architects opted to use much of the remaining structure as is in the creation of the art gallery. The original design of the Bankside, created by Sir Giles Scott, while industrial, also sported a powerful 99m chimney which highlighted the London skyline. Herzog and du Mueron took note of this as well as the overall popular support of the structure and decided to keep much of the original building intact (Glancey 2006). A similar power plant, the Battersea Power station, was also being considered at the time due to the similarities it had with what Tate Modern wanted to accomplished, but since Bankside was less dilapidated and less polluted, it was chosen.
    The vast building was remodeled at considerable cost however, the most obvious external change to the building was only the blocky two-story glass extension on one half of the roof. Much of the internal structure actually remains, including the incredibly cavernous main turbine hall, the hall retaining its original overhead travelling crane (Silna 2009). An electrical substation also remains on-site, owned by the French power company EDF Energy.
Basically, although the massive block, with its huge central tower, has been essentially smartened up, its overall industrial character still asserts itself.
    There were numerous reasons behind keeping Bankside in a relatively preserved state for the gallery. For one, the power station was designed by architect Sir Giles Scott as aforementioned, who also designed the Liverpool Cathedral, and he incorporated many cathedral elements into its construction. This type of design allows for easy utility transition for buildings. However, the Chairman of the Tate Trustees explained it best when, in his words, told what this huge building will be for the future, In 1962 when you last visited this building, it was a great oil-fired power station giving power to Southwark and light to London. Now, in its new guise, it will generate no less power, energy, light and electricity than the old one (Glancey 2006). What this building was to embody was the new light and life of art, and in what better place than an abandoned power station designed somewhat like a cathedral
Now, Tate Modern defines the London skyline with a two-story beam of light that runs along the top of the building, known as The Swiss Light. Inside, the cathedral-like Turbine Hall, spanning the whole height of the building, showcases three gallery floors, shops, and cafes built into the compact bank on one side. Visitors can enjoy the views down into the Turbine Hall from the mezzanine bridge and from other various galleries, and seating is included between the two suites on each floor for views of the Thames and across London. Tate Modern also boasts one of the most awe-inspiring entrances to any gallery in the world, and simply walking down a ramp this visitor is confronted with Turbine Hall, a massive enclosure which once housed the power stations heart. The caf on Level 7 boasts panoramic views across the river to St Pauls Cathedral, the very cathedral aforementioned, as well as south London (Balka 2009). Tate Modern captures art, it doesnt just exhibit it. Tate Modern fully utilizes the architectural design and location of the power station to maximize what it deems to be the artistic experience.
    Saatchi Gallery, on the other hand, in both locals, has been set up in a palace-like museum with no remarkable qualities like Tate Modern indicative of its design. Saatchis collection had a gallery, which opened in 2000, just miles down the River Thames from the Tate Modern. However, eventually the Saatchi moved to Chelsea due to competition with that Tate. As a quick historical summary, the Saatchi Gallery is a rival London gallery that focuses in contemporary art, opened by Charles Saatchi in 1985. It has occupied several premises, first in North London, then the South Bank by the River Thames and Tate Modern, and now currently in Chelsea (Black 2008). Each location failed to meet popular expectations, however. What did Tate offer, and continues to offer that Saatchi Gallery cannot replicate
    As aforementioned at the Tate, viewing galleries from the upper floors of the Tate gives the visitor another stunning exhibition of the huge crane that runs the length of the building, simultaneously looking down on the exhibitions. Its breathtaking views over the Millennium Bridge to St Pauls are truly as inspiring as any other Tate exhibit. Saatchis County Hall, on the other hand, while a massive complex in and of itself, has only a small portion of it taken up by the Saatchi Gallery. This building also, consequently, shares its space with two hotels, an aquarium, an arcade centre, and numerous other cafes and restaurants. The building that houses Saatchi Gallery oozes the Edwardian, oak-paneled feel of some institution for Londons worthy municipal men and women as well, giving off somewhat of an irreverent feeling against the controversial art exhibited (Black 2008). Where Tate Modern exposes a natural relationship to art and atmosphere and architecture, Saatchi Gallery seeks to contrast its controversial artworks with its atmosphere.
     In that same light, the type of art displayed at each art also differs widely. For example, when the Queen toured the newly-open Tate Modern, she was taken on a safe route around the building, a route that distinctly avoided some of the gallerys more controversial art exhibits. However, this would be impossible in Saatchi gallery due to its dominance of controversial selections. It would be incredibly hard to ignore Marcus Myras giant portrait of the child killer composed of Childrens handprints, or the series of disembodied body parts hanging from a tree, the Chapman brothers Great Deeds Against the Dead (Saatchi 2009). That Tate, on the other hand, contains more family friendly works that can be enjoyed by all classes of artists and avid spectators of the field. Of course, Tate Modern does has its fair share of art that is shocking and contemporary, but it also boasts a much broader and wider selection of works, as would befit a much larger and public institutions. Tate Modern feels much more old fashioned than Saatchi Gallery in many respects.
    The cost is another important factor behind the success of Tate Modern. Tate Modern is free for general admission, although it does charge occasionally for some exhibitions. Saatchi Gallery, on the other hand, at its South Bank location costs 8.50 for adults. For tourists and the general public touring the South Bank, the choice is not a hard one to call, especially if they have children. Since its free, Tate Modern simply is the perfect end or beginning if you will, to a walk along the Thames. The new Saatchi Gallery located in Chelsea, however, will also be showcasing its exhibitions for free now as well. Saatchi himself stated that Free entry can only help spread the interest in contemporary art. (Saatchi 2009) Theres really little doubt that the Saatchi Gallery will become popular though, it has the atmosphere for mystique and the publicity of controversial pieces.
    All this added up to that Tate Modern boasted an impressive 3.2 million visitors in just its first 6 months of opening (DSCE 2009). This number was substantially larger than even the original projections and has incited talk of increasing the grounds even further to incorporate the added public popularity. Education facilities and more gallery space have been the two hottest topics in regards to Tate expansion, both of which could be easily incorporated within the space. The Saatchi Gallery, though, boasted less than 1 million during that same time frame.
    The new Saatchi Gallery in Chelsea, however, does boast a number of new ways to reach the gallery in hopes of increasing visitors. Now, it is accessible by foot, car, bus, train, or even by underground through Victoria, District, and Circle Lines (Saatchi 2009). Again, however, Tate Modern is looking a river transportation design to make their galleries even more accessible despite the disadvantage they have to Saatchi in regards to ease of accessibility.
    Tate Moderns Turbine Hall commission has always been the talk of the London art world. This annual, highly-anticipated fixture of the art scene, ranging from a giant egg-clutching arachnid through a vast shimmering sun to a fissure that zigzagged across the floor has captivated London in a way that Saatchi doesnt have the facilities to do. Miroslow Balka went on to say that
The Turbine Hall often feels like an indoor playground. I was thinking about how to create limits, to bring calm and quiet to the place, to discipline peoples gestures. I also wanted to create something like a photographic black hole... Every day millions of photographs are taken in London. I wanted to create a place, a situation, where people would not be able to take good pictures. Their experience will be more intense. (Balka 2009)
    Ultimately, despite some of their obvious common grounds, these two galleries offer a very different artistic experience. The vast Tate Modern will undoubtedly continue to be one of the best British institutions, an approachable showcase to any visitor because of its huge range of material on display. Not only that, it is itself much more than just a gallery, its a destination. With its unique incorporation of architecture and art, its become a blend of artistic experience thats virtually unforgettable. In contrast, the Saatchi, limited by its size and strict contemporary nature, can only offer a much more tightly-focused exhibition. While this can be thrilling and challenging, its simply not something that is everyones taste like the Tate.