Page 1 Iconic Eng.


Our approach to this bridge-design was to make it into - obviously, an inhabited bridge. But, more importantly, (for it would not have solved 'the housing crisis') we thought that if anything so largely unnecessary as a new pedestrian bridge was to be justified, it could serve to reconfigure people's understanding of the River Thames.

The Thames is no longer a mainly physical utility - its roles as water-route, sewer and fishpond had all receded into history. The Thames remained now only as an object, and if it was to be more than this, a symbolic, significant object. Now river valleys, as anyone who chooses to read Duncanology #2 and Duncanology #3, will discover, are an essential item of what we call 'Automatic Architecture' .

So the whole watershed system of a River Valley ought, at this stage of civilisation, to be conceived as a symbolic narrative and planned, which merely means 'informed' with the ideas of the 'Event Horizons' of the Fluvial Narrative (I attempted to get something of this across at a Public meeting in the Albert Hall, but sat down after 5 minutes as it was clearly an hour lecture, at the very least. We live, today, in a soundbite literacy). I thought it might be useful if these 'event horizons' were built into a 'bridge of boats', a a Millenial Construction. So this is what these five 'boats' were beginning to be worked-out to do.


Peabody "Inhabited Bridge" Competition, 1995-6.