Colony and climate: positioning public architecture in Queensland, 1859-1909

© 2010 Dr. Stuart Andrew KingSince the writing of the first substantive national histories of Australian architecture, the development of architecture in Queensland has been positioned as different from that of the southern Australian states and former British colonies. An essential platform for this difference has been an assumption about the influence of a hot and humid climate contributing to the development of a distinctive, climatically responsive architecture, most notably the traditional Queensland house, or `Queenslander', which developed in the late nineteenth century and has since come to define an image of Queensland architecture,, and indeed Queensland identity. Queensland's nineteenth century civic buildings have received less critical attention in this romantic construction of a historical tradition of climatically attuned Queensland architecture, as historians have grappled to reconcile the representational imperatives of civic structures with the exigencies of a hot place. This thesis examines public architecture in Queensland — Britain's largest nineteenth century settler colony in the tropics — from the separation of the colony in 1859, through to the early years of the twentieth century, subsequent to the Federation of the Australian nation in 1901. The thesis uses a nineteenth century idea of `appropriateness' — defined in terms of design coherence, both within buildings and in relation to their settings — to examine the design choices that impacted the realisation of these buildings. It argues that Queensland's nineteenth century public buildings represent a collective search for appropriate public architecture specific to its colonial context, influenced by colonial aspiration, political and personal ambitions as well as Queensland's position as a settler society in unfamiliar, sub-tropical and tropical surrounds, all which influenced stylistic choice and expression. By locating the issue of climatic response within a broader matrix of concerns, the thesis questions the potentially anachronistic construction of a historical tradition of climatically responsive architecture in the former colony. The thesis contends that it is not possible to understand responses to climate in the public building without first understanding the motivations behind their design