Tuesday 21 September 2010

Hatfield

In case you hadn't realised there have been two broad themes to my photographic expeditions this summer: post-War architecture of the Eastern Region of British Rail (that's turned out to be an utterly delightful theme); and Elizabethan/Jacobean palaces.


Hatfield House is, of course, one of the latter, built, as the stonework declares, in 1611.


Architecturally it's one of the most important English houses of this period, which is unsurprising given that it was built by the son of Elizabeth I's chief minister, Lord Burghley, who gave his father's grand palace at Theobalds to James I and built Hatfield to replace it.


The site at Hatfield was already occupied by a 15th century Bishop's Palace...


... but most of that was demolished, leaving only the wing containing a rather grand hall and some minor (if picturesque) outbuildings.


The House is surrounded by extensive rolling parkland in the eighteenth-century manner...


... and there are delightful and intimate formal gardens, too, many in the Elizabethan style...


... while some seem to combine different periods, to rather intriguing effect:


Unfortunately for my photographs, the day of my visit was dull and overcast: unrelieved, flattening grey light.


So I retreated inside but, annoyingly, Hatfield has adopted a policy of banning photography. Why do they do this? I can understand no tripods or flashes, but no photography at all?

Being a middle class rebel I defied their ban and stole some snapshots whenever I was out of sight of the warders:


This guerilla filming, along with my intrinsic lack of talent, explains the poor quality of most of these interior shots.


Although obviously the subject matter is actually rather fine.


Pevsner describes this as one of the finest carved staircases from this period. Sorry you can't really see it.


I do like that ceiling, and the tapestries in the great hall are also rather lovely:


However, the pièce de résistance is the garden facade -- which, insanely annoyingly, is the one part of the gardens to which you are not permitted access.


The central porch there is reputedly by Inigo Jones, the pioneer of the English Classical revival, although the rest of the house is by genius architect Robert Lyminge, who went on to build Blickling Hall (which featured on here a few weeks ago).


The main facade and the side wings are more restrained at Hatfield than at Blickling, so the disappointment at not being able to inspect properly the garden facade is all the more keen.


But at least you can take consolation and solace in the delightful gardens -- which includes an extensive (if not particularly brilliant) sculpture garden, as well as these delightful pergolas.

2 comments:

jimbob said...

One of the Wardresses at a local NT residence told me that the rule about photography was to do with security and not being able to photograph valuable objects for later theft-to-order. I'm not sure I believe this though. I think it's just part of the culture of arbitrary and petty rule making and authoritarianism that is endemic to all quasi-autonomous british institutions. High ISO, wide angle lens and medium aperture for max depth of field and shoot from the hip when the old bags aint looking.

LeDuc said...

Thanks for the tips -- I'll do my best!

I don't believe your NT wardress for two reasons:

1) if that's so, why do they sell very glossy full-colour photos of the same objects in their high-priced catalogues (the existence of which might be a clue as to why they hate amateur photography...);

2) if it's such an issue why does English Heritage welcome photography in the interiors of its stately home properties? Are they uniquely well-protected, or something, and the National Trust's uniquely vulnerable? I think not.

And, actually, I think you're right: while I have no problem with flashes and tripods being banned (they're a pain in the arse for other visitors), I think most of our institutions just love making rules.