LEAN-TO
LEAN-TO is a sculpture by multidisciplinary artist Shezad Dawood. Unveiled at 10 Station Road, Cambridge, in July 2024, the piece explores the idea of sections meeting and morphing in space, to become a kind of fantasy meta-architecture - while also remaining discreet and functional.
Dawood was drawn to certain key architectural moments and instances across the City of Cambridge, and then chose how these elements might come together both structurally and aesthetically - like a 3-dimensional jigsaw puzzle.
LEAN-TO is designed to be a place of meeting or a coffee break that references the array of architectural styles and movements that have contributed to the iconic visual language of Cambridge.
A 3-mile walking tour of the buildings referenced can be completed in just over 1 hour as shown on the map below. You can also find out more information on each building and Dawood’s rationale for its inclusion as part of the sculpture.
Route map of the buildings that inspired the sculpture. Click on a number to find out more.
1. Katharine Stephen Library
Architects: Joanna van Heyningen OBE and Birkin Haward. 1981 - 1982
“I really like its post-modern crazy linearity and brick arrangement – its geometric clarity is so visually striking.” Shezad Dawood.
Katharine Stephen Library was designed to store the Newnham College’s collection of around 6,000 rare books, manuscripts and artefacts. This example of postmodern architecture gets it’s general form from the College’s first library, designed by Basil Champneys in 1896-1898, which has a barrel-vaulted roof, window seats and a gallery with a metal balustrade. Van Heyningen and Haward’s building repeats the vaulting and proportions of the earlier building.
2. Queen’s College Hall
Architects: Sir James Burrough. 1449 - 1875
“I love the explosion of joinery and colour, the intricate detailing that shows the extensive working and reworking throughout most of its 600-year life.” Shezad Dawood.
Queen’s College holds many layers of change. The underside of the medieval roof of the hall had been concealed in the 18th century, and was subsequently re-exposed in the 19th century; the decorative scheme was built up over time, including 18th century panelling and the addition in the 19th century of an extravagant chimney piece, stained glass, a richly detailed encaustic tile and stone floor and an elaborate polychrome scheme for the walls and underside of the pitched roof.
3. Fitzwilliam Museum
Architects: George Basevi. 1834 - 1848
“You can’t really, whatever your taste, avoid how iconic the Fitzwilliam is for visitors to the city.” Shezad Dawood.
In 1834, British architect George Basevi won a competition to construct the museum with his neo-classical design—a popular style at the time, inspired by classical Greek and Roman architecture. Basevi died before the building was finished and fellow architect Charles Robert Cockerell completed the work in 1848.
4. Judge Business School
Architects: John Outram. 1995
“Outram was so of their moment, brilliant and amazing, it wouldn’t be done now, the crazy floating staircases become like a post-modern puzzle block game.” Shezad Dawood.
The floating staircases and balconies in the Gallery, were arranged like opera boxes, to express Outram’s vision of a space for interaction and collaboration. The idea for incorporating large break-out areas originally came from Sir Paul Judge, who wanted the interior of the School to stimulate a networking environment.
The revamped building won the 1998 David Urwin Award for Best Building of the Decade.
5. David Attenborough Building
Architects: Arup Associates led by Sir Philip Dowson, and Nicholas Hare Architects. 1968 - 1971, redesigned 2012 - 2016
“I like that this brutalist building has been repurposed for sustainability - setting up an interesting conversation about adapting and repurposing buildings for the future.” Shezad Dawood.
This brutalist icon, designed by Arup Associates in the 1960s was restored and re-invented by Nicholas Hare Architects as a cross-disciplinary conservation campus and sustainability exemplar. The architectural interventions adapt the building to its new purpose and an innovative sustainability strategy delivers a low energy outcome whilst preserving the integrity of the original Sir Philip Dowson design.
6. Fitzwilliam College
Architects: Denys Lasdun. 1963
“The crazy scallop motif seems really ahead of its time, having been completed in 1963, it is quite a marvel of precast concrete engineering.” Shezad Dawood.
Fitzwilliam College’s central building was the first piece of the masterplan that Lasdun designed and completed for the college. The building is the social heart of the campus and provides dining and social areas for students and staff to gather as well as the primary location for conferences, presentations and other ceremonies.
7. Churchill College
Architects: Richard Sheppard, Robson and Partners. 1960
“I am interested in the different elements that sit perched on top of one another, speaking to the juxtaposition of modern materials like brick, wood and concrete seen across the college.” Shezad Dawood.
Churchill College has a striking Modernist design, the straight lines and concrete are softened by the surrounding grounds and the shuttered concrete beams that bare wood markings. The final scheme takes the form of 10 irregular courts arranged in a staggered loop around a central open space, at the centre of it is the Winston Churchill Archive and the largest dining hall in the university.
Proposed Churchill College Library
Architects: James Stirling and James Gowan. Competition held in 1959 won by Richard Sheppard, Robson and Partners’
“I really wanted to include Stirling and Gowan’s proposal for Churchill College as I harbour a love for unrealised projects but also to reflect on what a pivotal moment for British Modernism the Churchill competition was.” Shezad Dawood.
The 1959 competition brought Churchill College to be considered by many to be a watershed moment in British post-war architectural history. Stirling and Gowan’s plan created a 150m x 150m court framed by a 2-storey perimeter wall of student residences elevated above an earth bund, creating an internal environment that was private and enclosed. However, although the original jury described it as ‘impressive,’ its geometry and great scale did not lend itself to the phased development that was sought in the brief.