Children’s books
are frequently designed for adults, and appear to be aimed at the
‘parent market,’ possibly with the intent of feeding ambitions
for raising elitely brilliant children, cashing-in on
this urge. A friend gave a copy of ROBYN BOID
ARCHITECT to me as a birthday gift, not for any child-rearing use,
but as a book that might be of interest to me as an architect: and so
it was. The idea of a shared adult/child involvement arises in films too, where movies ostensibly for children also have a layer of humour
throughout that is aimed at adults. Adults do take children to the
movies, so it makes sense in one way – well two: if the child is
not interested, perhaps the adult might be the promoter, the
enthusiast for the film. It looks like a cherry offering two bites,
in case one chewer does not like the aftertaste.
"What a big book you have!"
It seems that there
might be something of this strategy in this Melbournestyle Books publication
of ‘Mind-Growing Books’ for ‘Clever Kids.’ This
self-categorisation is actually printed as ‘clever kids
MIND-GROWING BOOKS’ in a pinked-edged yellow medallion – is one
supposed to see sparkling gold? The text wraps around a graphic ‘CK’ that
is drawn as a smiley face within the ‘C’ placed beside a book
that is the ‘K’ illustrated with splayed, open pages: does it
mean ‘creating happy book-lovers’?
Maree Coote
The self-promotion
appears over the top – just too much. Surely one decides after the
reading and the interaction with the child whether the publication is
‘mind-growing’? Still, the book is intriguing. It is written and
illustrated by Maree Coote. The lettering of the title looks like
‘childish,’ cutout-paper-styled text, with ‘ROBYN BOID’ in
white, ‘ARCHITECT’ in letters using nine different colours, (creative), and
‘Maree Coote,’ the author, defined in text tucked away cosily in
the same white on brownish ‘nest scribble’ that includes a
speckled egg on one side and a feather. All of these graphics are on
a pale sky blue. A sketched paler blue and white bird flies over the
‘CH’ of the multicoloured ‘ARCHITECT,’ perhaps identifying the
reference ‘bird’ in case it was missed as the mysterious,
misspelled ‘Boid.’
The cover has an
attractive, commanding identity and a direct message. The terrible
naming using the phonetic pun is immediately obvious to those ‘in
the know,’ and sets the scene for expectations that are confirmed:
corny. One wonders if and why the gangster-sounding, nasal American
accent of ‘boid,’ that hangs between ‘Boyd’ and ‘bird,’
referencing both of these spellings, has any relevance beyond the
fact that it does cleverly allude to both. Is there something
cheekily bold, brazen and ‘gangsterish’ implicated here? More
intimately, one notices how the ‘Robin Boyd’ reference is so
‘tight, snug’ with the title reversing the ‘I’ and the ‘Y’
to give us this personable ‘Boyd-biod-bird’ link.
Is the title just
too clever – too ‘adult-clever’ to be useful even for ‘clever
kids’? Maybe it is the ‘adult’ drawcard, offering some pride,
some silent, personal self-praise to the one who immediately,
cleverly recognises the references? Is this the feel-good
introduction, the prelude to the suggestive ‘buy me’ message? In a world where spelling has become
almost as irrelevant as grammar, and where new spellings for names
are invented as a matter of necessity every day, one wonders how
sensible it might be to promote such variants in things phonetic for
children, when a slightly more serious – and more useful? - book
might spell names correctly; well, as the architect was so named.#
The book too, might start the story accurately telling us that Robin
Boyd ‘Boid’ attended Melbourne University rather than ‘Robyn
Boid lived at the National University, high up on a ledge of the
Architecture School’ - see:
http://adb.anu.edu.au/biography/boyd-robin-gerard-9560
Why back away from such facts when the title is so adamant in its
telling, its suggestive message?
"The silly bird"?
The play in the name
‘Boid,’ meant to be read as ‘bird’ for the story, with ‘Boyd’ apparently hovering in the background – this is a ‘Melbournestyles Book’
after all - casts an immediate shadow, doubt, over the author’s name: is it
a joke? - ‘Maree Coote.’ Is one supposed to do anything with this
in the game of phonetical interpretation or other referencing? Maybe: ‘Mary Coote, the
silly bird’? Is ‘Boid’ a cute ‘Coote’? Who knows? The
ancestory.com site notes:
Coote Name Meaning
English: from Middle
English co(o)te ‘coot’, applied as a nickname for a bald or
stupid man. The bird was regarded as bald because of the large white
patch, an extension of the bill, on its head. It is less easy to say
how it acquired the reputation for stupidity.
Source: Dictionary
of American Family Names ©2013, Oxford University Press
Similar surnames: Foote, Cote, Conte, Coots, Coe, Crute, Corte, Cooper, Motte, Coomer
Similar surnames: Foote, Cote, Conte, Coots, Coe, Crute, Corte, Cooper, Motte, Coomer
I am interested in
books on architecture that have been written for children, just as I
am interested in most books for children that have been written by
serious writers. Ted Hughes’ book on poetry explained for children
is impressive as it tackles everything seriously, simply, openly,
rather than in a complicated, skewed, child-like fashion. Strangely,
most of the books on architecture for children introduce the subject
by talking about the birds and the bees: not sex, but how birds build
nests, and bees build their hexagonal hives. This raises the issue of
shelter that then moves on into caves and the like for ‘man,’ men
and women: the rest is history. Here, Coote takes the ‘nest’ idea
and makes it into the whole theme; everything is a nest. She begins
with the question, ‘What comes first: the nest or the egg?’ One
immediately knows the ‘chicken-egg’ question, and the lack of an
answer, and wonders what the Coote question might be about. Could it
be referencing form and function?
The ‘boid’ then
explores various geometrical, Platonic(?) shapes. The idea that
architecture involves ‘thinking outside of the circle’ is then
floated, laying the subtle suggestion that architecture, even at this early stage, is something uniquely different: ‘thinking outside of the square.’
So the nest is inverted, creating a dome: then the games
develop. One expects the Goldilocks idea to be used: too big; too
cold; too small; too rough; etc. In one way it does become the theme,
but indirectly. Cootes muddles this old story-line that always makes
for a good child’s book as it involves experience; feelings. She
mixes the idea with architectural matters as she explores various
historical examples and architectural details, noting how clever
‘boid’ is to build these, and that none of these models is good
for eggs. Why should they be? Is ‘egg’ meant to be symbolic of
some nice fit for function? What function? What fit? We get the sense
that ‘boid’ is wanting to create a startlingly different ‘architectural’ nest. One wonders why the
original nest was rejected, inverted, (to let the egg fall out), and otherwise distorted and
defaced. This strategy is, of course, simply a way of introducing
names and buildings that teachers can use as ‘teaching aids.’ The
message at the rear of the book tells one that this is so on various
levels, just in case teachers do not know how to use the publication. The book has
to be something to make ‘kids clever;’ and parents smarter too?
‘CAN YOU COUNT the 34 speckled eggs; CAN YOU FIND the 14 wiggly
worms?’ Even counting skills get involved in this educational tome.
Hardly a 'nest,' but an impressive interpretation.
Our ‘boid’ flies
over historical buildings and other examples, all illustrated
‘nest-like’ in brownish scribbled lines, with Coote noting how
each example is no good for the egg. Finally, ‘boid’ discovers
‘egg-actly the right shape for the egg’ . . . ‘egg-shaped’ -
on page 19: shucks! Is this really so? Pages 20 and 21 get filled
with ‘egg-shaped’ holes in ‘nested’ buildings that are
apparently perfect containers. Pages 22 and 23 do likewise, complete
with hanging egg chairs, egg-shaped openings and egg-shaped curves in
scrawled, hatched, thatched(?), walls and roofs. The inspiration for
‘Robyn Boid’s Nest-Building’ ideas are listed on page 25. The
building images on pages 22 and 23 were inspired by Robin Boyd’s ‘Casa
Lloyd, Melbourne.’ The book finishes up with Robyn Boid wanting to
write a book – of course; what else? – called Great
Egg-xpectations: ‘Architecture is like an egg, thought
Robyn, full of egg-citing possibilities.’ Oooooh! It almost
hurts. What might the author of The Australian Ugliness think
of this? What happened to the symbolism? Is it really too hard to be
serious about children’s books? What might the children think when
they discover that Great Expectations is Charles Dickens’
thirteenth novel, and has little to do with architecture? Are the
children as readers merely being ‘egged’ on with adult versions
of the child’s mind?
1. A bird can live anywhere, but an egg needs a nest. (really?)
2. Thinking outside the circle can lead to egg-xcellent ideas.
3. The egg comes first. (?)
Perhaps there is something
one can be pleased with here, in this publication - maybe that it is about architecture; but there is much
that grates and grinds; and there is the concern about talking down
to children in ‘childish’ chat. It is a little like the
stuttering attempts at exaggerated simplicity in hyphenated English
that one hears when another is speaking to a person not fluent in
English: words are transformed into pidgin soundings, grammar is
clipped, and volume is increased in a concerted effort to make sounds more easily comprehended, as if this befuddling approach might make anything more intelligible. Does this Coote book do too much of
this? It is a little disconcerting that architecture is seen as
something special, uniquely different. Why promote this vision that
causes so much strife for the profession? Might a greater emphasis on
the quality of the fit in the solution have been a more appropriate
approach to touch on, to allude to - a quality within architecture as
an experience, rather than endorsing mere visual appearance and
impact? This, of course, would have meant that the original nest was
discovered to be the best: "Why did I ever turn it upside down?" – an outcome at odds with the ‘clever
kids’ educational intent. What really is the message?
Inspired by Boyd's Casa Lloyd and hanging egg chairs.
The subtle touch at
the end of the book is a nod towards ‘good architecture,’ and references the
Casa Lloyd, Melbourne, 1960, a Robin Boyd residence – mmm: think
‘Boid.’ I did not know ‘eeg-actly,’ (yuk!), what this
building was; I could not recall it, so I looked it up. There was
nothing in Google Images, so I checked the text references. Could
this be so?
Robin Boyd-house
faces wreckers’ ball 28 June 2003 – 10:00am The Age.
A Brighton house
designed by influential Melbourne architect Robin Boyd is likely to
be demolished next week after Heritage Victoria decided it was not of
state significance.
The crescent-shaped
glass and wood house in Newbay Crescent, Brighton, was built in 1959
to a Robin Boyd design that featured a curved building overlooking a
pear tree.
A photo of the
house, which was built for local barrister Edward Lloyd and his
family, was reproduced on the cover of Robin Boyd's biography by
Geoffrey Serle. But experts and residents are in dispute over whether
the house is important enough to warrant heritage protection.
Professor Philip
Goad, of Melbourne University's architecture faculty, said yesterday
that the house was a valuable part of Victoria's architectural
heritage and it would be a great pity if it were demolished. He said
the home was built when Boyd was at the height of his powers. It was
among his 20 best houses.
But Neil Clerehan,
an architect and former colleague of Boyd, said the house had been
substantially altered and was no longer worth saving. "There are
many more important Boyd houses that councils are not doing anything
about. This is a minor work," he said.
A Heritage Victoria
spokeswoman said executive director Ray Tonkin had recommended the
house be allocated only "local" significance.
The manager of
sustainability at Bayside Council, Michael Top, said that if the
recommendation was accepted at a Heritage Council meeting next
Thursday the house would be demolished.
Mr Top said the Boyd
home had been assessed twice and was not on a council list of 1000
significant buildings.
But Bernard Lloyd,
who grew up in the house, said he had made a late submission to
Heritage Victoria seeking to have the house protected.
He said that even
though the house was not visible from the street or open to the
public, it should be saved.
"I've never
been in a house like it. It is curved. There is not a single
right-angle in it. I remember when I was growing up, architecture
students used to knock on the door and ask if they could have a look
at it," he said.
Charles Butler, who
bought the house from the Lloyd family in March, said Mr Lloyd had
been unfair because he did not warn him that the house was of
heritage significance before the sale.
He said he would
lose hundreds of thousands of dollars if he was unable to knock the
house down.
"If Bernard
Lloyd believes this house warrants heritage protection, then for
heaven's sake why didn't he do something while he was living in the
house?" he said. He said an interim order prevented him from
knocking down the house and the "whole process had been an
emotional wrench".
Shirley Andersson,
acting secretary of the Bayside Ratepayers Association, said it was
extraordinary that the Lloyd family was trying to dictate what could
be done with the house.
The hanging egg chair - for big 'egg-heads'?
The ghost of Casa Lloyd?
Was this the Casa
Lloyd reference made by Coote? Serle’s book cover illustration was
Googled. Does the building still stand in 2017, the publishing date?
Children might be savvy with the Internet and Google, but will they
discover any illustration of the main ‘good-feel/fit’ reference
from which to learn? The Sydney Opera House, Wangu Pavilion, Saint
Basil’s Cathedral, The Chrysler Building, The Sydney Tower, Eiffel
Tower, etc., (all inspirations listed in the back of the book), can
be researched; but the poor Boyd/‘Boid’ building? Is the lesson
that everything eventually passes, even good work?
The sketch of Casa Lloyd - from the book cover?
As John Betjeman
said of his poems that had been put to music and dance by others: he
admired the effort, but thought that it added very little. In a
similar manner, this book by Coote can be acknowledged as a good
effort, perhaps adding as much to architecture as Betjeman spoke about the music and dance adding to his work.
It has to be acknowledged that writing for children is one of the
most difficult things to do successfully. It requires less effort,
and more inspiration; a sheer delight with the enterprise: something
seriously childlike in its being. In this sense the books will always
relate to the adult, the child at heart, without any clever, self-conscious distortion, any predetermined, carefully-structured
strategies and games, or any silly puns.
Robin Boyd Architect
3 January 1919 - 16 October 1971
# NOTE:
Even Google is
confused with ‘Robyn Boid’: ‘Showing results for: Robin
Boyd’ - as if it is being helpful.
P.S. All images have been selected from Google Images.
MORE EGG SHAPED CHAIRS & BUILDINGS
JUST FOR THE STORY PUNS
Math-egg-matics?
Scrambled eggs?
A 'three-minute' egg: soft centre?
Just a yolk? (Punning is contagious).
Hard-boiled egg?
Egg cup?
Egg- aggerated?
EGG-CITING!
BUT DO THEY SUIT EGGS?
NOTE
28 February 2020
A point of further importance is this: that the traditional oral literatures interested not only all classes, but also all ages of the population; while the books that are nowadays written expressly "for children" are such as no mature mind could tolerate; it is now only the comic strips that appeal alike to children who have been given nothing better and at the same time to "adults" who have never grown up.
5 APRIL 2021
SEE:
and
