All architecture goes through a period of being unloved. The decline in admiration begins to set in after about 15 years. The sense of newness has faded, the innovative elements have been tested and either absorbed into mainstream design or found wanting, the glossy finish of the materials has dulled, wear and tear is evident and the services require an upgrade or replacement. Besides, new buildings to praise, inspire and emulate are constantly being constructed.
But the real period of unloved architecture comes after about 30 years.

Widespread feelings of affection and comfortable familiarity are replaced by indifference or, worse, disregard. The next generation of designers simply don’t recognise or understand what made a building or place significant and therefore have little reason to value it. It usually takes another generation to rediscover and appreciate the inherent historical significance of the older architecture, but in this interim period – the unloved phase – these buildings and places are vulnerable to neglect, often subjected to unsympathetic modification and too frequently demolition.

This is not a new phenomenon. Each generation tends to extol the virtues of an earlier period of design that closely reflects and reinforces its own design values and aspirations. Early twentieth century Modernists abhorred the excessive historicist decoration of Victorian architecture, while admiring Georgian simplicity; 40 years later Post-Modernists in rejecting Modernist minimalism celebrated the colourful exuberance of Art Deco.

Within this cycle of changing design values it is the built environment of the post World War II period that is currently enduring its unloved phase. The reaction is perhaps more pronounced because the post-War period presented a dramatic break with the past and the results are more widely evident. The technical advances in the use of structure, form and materials, coupled with shifts in our social behaviour, produced radical changes in the built environment. Progressive government policies, backed by an expanding economy, enabled architectural and planning theories developed in the inter-war years to be put into practice.

Traditional concepts of architectural form and urban planning were surpassed by the increasing availability of the motorcar, the spread of suburbia and the introduction of the shopping centre. It was an exciting time for designers, but the public response was mixed. They experienced what Robert Hughes aptly described as the ‘shock of the new’. And now, faced with government, professional and public indifference and even outright dislike, the unloved Post War Modern places are particularly vulnerable to neglect and destruction.