Pavilion X restorationThe dramatic new look of Pavilion X recaptures Jefferson’s original design for the building, including re-creating a rooftop parapet that was removed in the 1890s. The parapet, made of cedar and African mahogany, weighs about 35,000 pounds and stands 9 feet tall. The Chinese railings have been restored to their original design and height. The glossy white paint on Pavilion X’s columns has been removed, and the columns have been restored to their original warm sandstone appearance, with a rough-textured finish. White paint is also gone from the wood trim, which has been painted a grayish-tan color that conservators believe is close to its original color.
Changes to the appearance of the Academical Village have always been controversial, and the Pavilion X restoration is the latest focus of an ongoing debate. “Do we look at the Lawn as it has evolved or at Jefferson’s original vision?” asks Brian Hogg, the University’s senior historic preservation planner. “This is a return to what Jefferson imagined.
“There is no absolute answer,” he says. “Each side makes good arguments. But [until the Pavilion X restoration], we did not have any tangible examples of that first period. The Lawn we know is not the one designed by Jefferson.”
Comments
Only two comments out of many I could make:
It’s hard to believe that the original Pavilion X “attic” (the truer name for the “parapet”) was as unarticulated as the one shown in the photograph. Compare the highly-artucluated cornice just below! One reason the attic looks so huge (apart from the fact that it is huge) is because its mass is so unbroken.
The main problem with restoring the columns and trim to a “sandstone” color isn’t that the new color is unattractive (it’s actually rather pleasing); it is that every building built after The Lawn took its inspiration from the whitewashed columns of the late nineteenth century—giving us the brick-and-white Grounds we are familiar with. Unless the Campus Architect is willing to “sandstone-ize” all the white trim everywhere on The Grounds, Pavilion X (and any Lawn buildings likewise restored) will look, inevitably, just plain weird.
Bill Hubbard
Architecture 1970
I paid a short visit to The Grounds last week and took a look at the new Pavilion X. Unfortunately the new parapet looks terrible. In the 19th century photos of the old structure the parapet looks like an integral part of the pavilion. The new one simply looks as if it was stuck on top.
I’m sure that’s the way it had to be built, but the builder didn’t take the countour of the old roof into account. As a result, there is a very visible gap between the parapet and the roof at the front corner most visible to those approaching from Cabell Hall. It looks very sloppy. If this gap can’t be fixed, we should probably remove the parapet. It degrades the appearance of The Lawn that much.
Leonard Metters
CLAS 1972
I have to agree with Bill. The University - at least, the older portions - are a “red brick, white trim” environment where deviations from that norm tend to stand out. I don’t really have a problem with the restoration but I’m sure that many, if not most, of those who see it will wonder when the white paint is going to arrive.
unfortunately, the university has boxed itself in over the years, architecturally, with the strict promotion of white column/red brick construction. and that’s why, as jim and bill have stated, the new pavilion x just looks odd. had the university’s architecture been allowed to grow organically from jefferson’s original plans - the building designs changing with the development of new aesthetics, materials, etc. - then pavilion x would be a part of the architectural landscape and not a departure from it. instead, our expectations of what a new building (or reconstruction of an old building) on grounds will look like is predetermined. (i, for one, believe jefferson would have tinkered around with concrete and steel had they been available to him, and that being the case, i find the stagnancy of the architecture to be somewhat un-jeffersonian.)
ryan mattie
clas 2004
Sustain CHANGE, progressively, for the “living generation”—NOT arbitrarily regressive to something Mr. Jefferson was ALWAYS nixing anyway!
From the photo presented I have to agree that the restorations looks very weird and inappropriate as Pavilion X is not a stand alone object but part of the bigger ensemble. It is importnat ot remember that - heresy of heresy’s but I am going to state it here - Jefferson was an amtaeur in that very 18th century sense of the word. I am not sure why this capital project was undertaken when there must dozens of more urgently needed projects accross the campus. As an architectural historian and as an Alum, this does not do much to comfort me.
Leave a Comment