LIKE so many Glaswegians, on Friday night I found myself wiping away tears as fire engulfed the Mackintosh building at Glasgow School of Art for the second time in four years.
I have a strong and very personal relationship with this wonderful, magical, beautiful building. Over the years I’ve seen countless exhibitions at the Mack, done various evening classes, danced and laughed with friends. I’ve stood quietly and been bowled over again and again by its sheer elegance and practicality.
And by Saturday the initial sadness I felt turned to anger. How for the love of God could this happen again? How could four years of painstaking research and restoration by hundreds of craftspeople, the rebuilding of the peerless library, the ambitious plan to give every first year student at GSA a chance to study in the Mack, to live and breath its inspiration, have gone up in smoke?
Who or what was responsible for starting the fire and why did it take and spread so quickly? Were there not procedures in place to prevent this inconceivably grim turn of events?
We must be rigorous and ruthless in uncovering answers to all these questions and more in the months to come. In the aftermath of the 2014 fire, such inquiries were overshadowed by the outpouring of goodwill around restoration. This will not be the case this time around, and nor should it be. The people of Glasgow, Scotland and beyond deserve answers, not least because we gave so willingly and generously of our money to fund the restoration that now lies in ruins in Renfrew Street.
Once the fire service has produced its report into the cause of the blaze, a full public inquiry may be the only way to establish where responsibility lies and ensure nothing like this ever happens again.
But another, even more difficult question will soon need attention: what now for the Mack? It is painfully early days, of course, and since we don’t yet know the exact extent of the damage, or how viable the shell of the building may or may not be, at present thinking about the future just makes your head hurt.
But since this building has always been a place of ideas, creativity and ingenuity, I’m trying my damnedest to focus on the positives.
Firstly, the building is not, as some are suggesting, “gone”. I went to see what remains twice at the weekend and grim as the experience was, what struck me was the fact that the once beautiful west gable, arguably the finest architectural aspect in Scotland, is still recognisable, as is the iconic front elevation.
Secondly, thanks to an innovative project started after the first fire in 2014, the entire building has been digitised to within a millimetre of its life, both inside and out. In this respect at least The Mack still exists in its full glory, making the experience of the teams that worked on the now destroyed restoration invaluable rather than wasted. We should also remember that many of the surviving fixtures and fittings from the 2014 fire are still in storage.
It will be possible to rebuild the Mack from scratch if that’s what it takes. We should take heart from the Frauenkirche in Dresden, rebuilt after German reunification over 10 years starting in 1994 after it was completely destroyed during World War Two. The miracle rebirth of this beautiful church is now part of its story, something that makes it even more interesting to visitors. Think, too, of the chamber of the House of Commons, totally rebuilt after being razed on the final day of the Blitz in 1941.
The Mack arguably exceeds either of these two buildings in terms of architectural and cultural importance. Its place in the hearts and imaginations of Glaswegians, meanwhile, simply cannot be overstated.
Yes, the cost of rebuilding from scratch would be astronomical - quite possibly into the hundreds of millions - though maybe not as much as a football stadium. And yes, any such project would require a daunting amount of political and civic will to succeed and take many years to realise. But surely if any building deserves this sort of effort, the Mack does.
A build of this scale and ambition would be a heritage project unlike any other undertaken in Scotland, one that could ultimately provide employment and training opportunities for hundreds of people. There are pros as well as cons to be considered. But the biggest pro of all would be the continued existence of the Mack, both as a physical presence and an idea. A world without it would be an eminently poorer place, after all.
Let’s be honest, the original Mack was lost in 2014; what was being re-created and restored until last week was already something new. A complete rebuild would represent yet another, even bigger leap of faith. But it could be done.
Ultimately, it will be up to GSA to decide, and I expect to hear calls for a different future for the site, a less costly one that could be filled with deserving, long-suffering students more quickly. But I believe the people of this great city will galvanise and rebuild their beloved Mack once again if that is what is asked of them. Come on Glasgow, what do you say?
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel