English Parish Churches As Works of Art

by Alec Clifton-Taylor

This portrait of the parish church, written by the architectural author and presenter of the BBC TV series "Six English Towns", emphasizes the character and aesthetic value of the English church rather than its historical evolution, and features interiors, decorations and furnishings. Alec Clifton-Taylor discusses at length the treatment which old churches were given by the Victorians and explains what he feels is most worth looking for and why. There is a section in which the character of each county's churches is defined, and the book concludes with a list of the churches the author feels are best worth a visit from an artistic standpoint. Alec Clifton-Taylor also wrote "The Pattern of English Building".

Genres: Architecture

256 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 1989

Reviews

[Richard Thomas · Rating 5 out of 5]

A review of English parish churches from an aesthetic point of view rather than an historical account of their architecture. Beautifully written and full of the author's prejudices and judgements; none the worse for that. Inevitably there are gaps but if you wish to understand the place of the parish church in the mind of England as a thing of beauty then this is the book for you. None of Pevsner's dry but accurate reviews; none of Betjeman's shorthand descriptions. it's worth reading to share Alec Clifton-Taylor's learning and his enthusiasm for buildings and the materials that make the parish church such a thing of value in the English country.

[Hannah · Rating 3 out of 5]

I found the constant jibes at Victorian restoration were tiring and without nuance. I agree that some 'restorations' did more harm than good but the author's gripe with the Victorians is more a matter of taste than historical preservation and so he is critical even of the more palatable restorations and this blanket treatment takes credibility away from his work.
He also clearly does not care for historical preservation as he suggests digging up 'ugly' Victorian grave for the sake of aesthetic (exactly the attitude of Gilbert Scott and the worst kinds of Victorian restorers). Whilst I do appreciate that no one in particular will miss a grave which gets no visitors, I am very sentimental about graveyards and even if no one in particular visits a grave, I think the headstone in itself is a surviving monument. Collective memory is part of what makes us human.
I also think the treatment of headstones belies the greater flaw in the work. Whilst churches are works of art to a certain extent, to a much greater extent they are functional places. I know the point of this book was to suspend disbelief and focus solely on aesthetics but I think that is a flawed concept. The aesthetics are only there to serve a purpose and they are useful to us today a) to celebrate the wonder of Christ and b) to show the attitudes and practices of those who used the building in the past. The author does appreciate reason a) but I think his blanket approach to the Victorians shows his lack of understanding of reason b). The Victorians are as much a part of the church as those in the Middle Ages and so arguing that we should paint over (literally and figuratively) their contributions is a harmful argument.
This book was clearly well researched and did contain some very helpful summaries. I especially appreciated the focus on regional variations between churches but overall, there was a failure to appreciate historical significance of churches and I found his attitude to graveyards was jarring and lacked sympathy.