ever since i arrived in sydney i've been madly in love with this brutalist architecture, reminiscent of an austere cold war stacked pile of child's blocks. it sits adjacent to the southern approach of the harbour bridge. this is my secret palace. the stuff of dreams and giant wonderland alician doll houses.
the "one way jesus" window banner has imprinted its monotone message to the masses for nigh on a decade at least. possible even three. divine intervention sees that it does not fade.
this is the sirius block. a concrete apartment precinct developed in the 1970s to house displaced residents in the rocks. a measure instigated by the green bans [imposed by the builders labourer federation] to enforce the retention of some original aspects of both the topography & people as redevelopment bowled the area over threatening to suck out the harbour's overlooked soul.
traditionally this had been the home to maritime workers, labourers & industrious artisans. the people who built & created the space when noone else valued the subdued shadows, domino cottages and crooked lanes.
the block was the outcome of the protest policy. the battle for the rocks in the early 1970s saw residents clashing with police over relocation "initiatives".
ultimately in response to public debate what we see today is a tangible endeavor of the department of housing to retain some original character & existing communities [the population base at one point fell to 240] as gentrification & high rise swept in and made low rents bureaucratically unjustifiable for the required historic restoration. updated environmental policy now takes into account the importance of cultural, social and historic values.
ironically today this development is once more under the interrogative eye as many bemoan the million dollar views enjoyed by the poor & cite the building as an aesthetic intrusion. i ask you, what would you rather have them see?
ultimately in response to public debate what we see today is a tangible endeavor of the department of housing to retain some original character & existing communities [the population base at one point fell to 240] as gentrification & high rise swept in and made low rents bureaucratically unjustifiable for the required historic restoration. updated environmental policy now takes into account the importance of cultural, social and historic values.
ironically today this development is once more under the interrogative eye as many bemoan the million dollar views enjoyed by the poor & cite the building as an aesthetic intrusion. i ask you, what would you rather have them see?
