Buck House was built to serve the Buck family as they endeavoured to re-establish quality wine production at the Te Mata Estate vineyard in the Hawke's Bay. The vineyard was first established in the 1880s by the Chambers family. In the 1970s Te Mata Estate Winery Ltd brought new ideas and expertise to the vineyard. It produced its first vintage in 1979. In 1980, wanting more involvement in vinyard production, the Buck family moved to Coleraine, which is a portion of the vineyard named after the Irish home of John Buck's forbears. Athfield Architects were engaged to design the building as the Buck family had formed a close relationship with the Athfields while living next door, in Wellington. The design process is reported to have been consultative and interactive. Ian Athfield also worked closely with Ian Dickson, the project architect. The building was completed, to international acclaim, in 1980. The Buck family continue to live in the house, and work the vineyard. Te Mata estate is regarded as one of New Zealand's outstanding wine properties, and Buck House has come to symbolise the renaissance of the estate. The building has an important place in the history of architecture in New Zealand. It has been acknowledged as the culmination of a body of work of one of New Zealand's most important twentieth Century architects. Ian Athfield was the 2004 recipient of the New Zealand Institute of Architects Gold Medal, the highest honour bestowed by the New Zealand Institute of architects for an outstanding contribution to the practice of architecture demonstrated through the production of a consistently high-quality body of work over a period of time. The medal citation goes on to identify important works: 'From public projects, such as Wellington's Public Library and Civic Square and the Nelson Polytechnic Library, to commercial buildings, such as the Hewlett-Packard Building and Telecom House, to private residences such as the Buck and Custance Houses, he has exhibited mastery on all the fronts on which New Zealand Architects operate'. Athfield is renowned for innovative and challenging work that has a strong focus on social issues. His practice has received more than 60 awards, and he has been awarded an Honorary Doctorate in Literature by Victoria University of Wellington, and named an Alumni Fellow by Auckland University. Buck House has not only been identified as an important exemplar of Athfield's work, but also an exemplary New Zealand Modernist work. It was selected by the founding members of DocomomoNZ as one of 19 places that best represent the Modern Movement in New Zealand. This group of academics and cultural commentators was led by Dr Julia Gatley and Dr Paul Walker, who considered that the building was the fruit of decades of exploration of modernity in New Zealand. Its subsequent publication in The Modern Movement In Architecture: Selections from the DOCOMOMO Register, ensured its international recognition as a key expression of New Zealand's Modern Movement. New Zealand exponents of modernist architecture pursued many lines of enquiry, including a search for a pioneering vernacular. Justine Clark and Paul Walker note that 'During the 40s and 50s the pioneer past was recuperated in the search for a modern New Zealand vernacular. History was not merely a general context: it was the very ground on which the new New Zealand architecture had been built'. Buck House develops this exploration in its human scaled forms that are reduced to a (putative) functional minimum. Elements like the expressed timber structure and considered massing of forms, are also reminiscent of the expression of the local developed by the Group architects and John Scott, for example. The DocomomoNZ editorial group suggest that: Sitting in rolling, vineyard country this fine house's picturesque composition of hips and gables, dormer windows, verandahs and high chimneys, is reminiscent of New Zealand's ad hoc colonial vernacular. As such it could be taken as the end of a line of enquiry concerned with establishing a particularly local architecture but in a modern idiom. This inquiry began in New Zealand domestic architecture in the 1940s. However, the references the design of the Buck House are not only to this. The white plaster with which it is covered has an altogether different quality. This has been hypothesized as referring to a particular tradition in the locality of large, white houses. But it is consistent with Athfield's penchant for multiple reference. In addition to drawing on the work of early New Zealand modernist architects the building also references more orthodox conventions of architectural modernity. The white sculpted forms, controlled fenestration and minimal detailing draw on traditions established by architects such as le Corbusier. While referring to the restrained and stark works of the Modern Movement, Athfield paradoxically calls on the romantic, organic language of Antonio Gaudi. The Spanish references hold further associations for Hawkes Bay residents, where the Spanish Mission style has been so popular in the twentieth century. The use of plaster, terracotta, exposed timber structure, articulated forms, and planning that addresses climatic conditions, draw on the architecture that has been so successfully translated from Spanish colonies in America to the climate and environment of the Hawkes Bay. Thus Buck House embodies ideals of the International Style, while also drawing on New Zealand modernist traditions, and local architectural ideals (ie the Spanish Mission style). As well as binding together a number of traditional idioms, the innovations of this ground breaking house have also been recognised. In German magazine Hauser, Karl Johantges suggests that Buck House makes a radical departure from the New Zealand penchant for the domestic shoebox, an archetypical detached, inexpressive box, among many identical suburban boxes. He suggests that the architecture of the building responds strongly and directly to the needs of the Buck family, and that the formal expression of the idiosyncratic pattern of inhabitation is a radical departure from the patterns in New Zealand architecture developed in Victorian and Edwardian times. Wendy Buck confirms that the design process involved many discussions about family processes and practices, and that she was surprised that her views about the house were taken so seriously. More than twenty years after the completion of the house, the Bucks consider that the house still meets their needs. Their children have left home, but return, and the house easily accommodates many permutations of family inhabitation. In Architectural Digest Athfield suggest that 'With houses, it's the relationship between people that comes first. You can't start with an idea of how people should act or what a house should look like'. Karl Johantges also points out the strong relationship of the house to the vineyards in which it sits. The strong linear geometries of the rows of vines which drape the landscape, are echoed in the draped and plastered fabric of the building. The building responds to the curvaceousness of the landscape, with the linearity of the chimneys breaking the strong linearity of the vines. The broken and soaring roofline also echoes the craggy peaks on the ridges that are such a distinctive geographic feature of Havelock North. Buck House has been recognised in international literature as an outstanding example of twentieth century New Zealand architecture, but also features prominently in local architectural surveys. Peter Shaw's survey of New Zealand architecture dedicates a paragraph to the house: Of the so-called 'architect-designed' houses, one of the most widely acclaimed is Ian Athfield's Buck House (1980). Once again Athfield's studied asymmetries and use of white plastered forms smoothed over dormers, gables and chimneys are evident. It is interesting to note that some other white houses, notably Anscombe's washpool (1935) in Spanish idiom, and Gummer's Arden (1926) and Tauroa (1916) are in the area yet Buck House remains an outlandish architectural object positioned quite naturally within the context of the gently sloping site. The house is further proof of this architect's combination of inventiveness and respect for tradition.' Its association with important New Zealand wines, and the owner's pivotal role in the 1980s growth of the wine industry in New Zealand, have also served to increase the profile of this building. The building is featured on the label of Te Mata's Coleraine Cabernet/Merlot, for example. Keith Stewart asserts: [Buck House] is a bold image of sophisticated elegance which has featured in television and magazine advertising and has attracted the attention of architecture and style magazines locally and in the United States and Europe. It has featured on the cover of a book on the New Zealand house, and as a much-used image of winegrowing culture in this country has become a strong motif for New Zealand wine. Buck House has been widely published, both nationally and internationally. It is one of the most recognisable houses in New Zealand, and represents an important movement in architecture.

Style The house was designed for the Buck family, comprised of Wendy, John and three sons. It draws on the architectural traditions of modernism, Spanish mission style, and a rural vernacular. The style of the house is celebrated for its innovativeness, with the articulated, domestic-scale forms responding strongly to the context of the vineyards, the ridge behind the house, the climate, the needs of the clients and local and national architectural concerns. The building was designed by Ian Athfield and Ian Dickson (project architect), who identify key design intentions as : ·articulated masses which express the internal workings of the building ·response to the geometries of the vineyard environment ·design to appreciate the climate and light of the Hawkes Bay The building is a complex composition of cube-like forms, hips, gables, verandahs, curved chimney forms, and semi-enclosed spaces, punctuated with simple fenestration. The complexity of the form of the building is contrasted with the simplicity of the materials and plain white colour. Layout and Key Spaces It is formed by two wings, which pivot about a central kitchen/family space, the wing to the east serving the children and utility functions, and the wing to the northwest serving the adults and auxiliary living areas. The house is made up of a ground floor containing a double garage, laundry and bathroom, conservatory, kitchen, family space, dining room, living room, bedroom and bathroom. The upper level contains 3 bedrooms, a play space, store, study and open air roof walk. Each space is limited to the smallest space within which its function can be achieved, with built in furniture specifically designed for any residual space (eg the bedroom wardrobe fits under the study stairs). The planning is precise and compact. Landscaped areas to the north and south of the house are also an integral aspect of the building design and functionality, and resist any suggestion that the house is a closed coherent box. These courtyard style gardens also reference the enclosed courtyards of the Spanish Mission tradition.