[loz]

Prince Charles is under attack from architects this week after apparently using his influence to block a building project designed by Lord Rogers, a well known proponent of modern glass & steel, and inside out designs.

Whereas Prince Charles prefers a more 'classical' design.

BBC NEWS | UK | Prince under fire from architects

Meanwhile Lord Rogers has himself spoken out telling the BBC
BBC NEWS | England | London | Architect Rogers angry at Prince

there could be "a dangerous political clash" unless the power of the royals is re-examined.

Two questions?
1. Is Prince Charles right? Should classical designs be prefered to modern architecture? Which do you prefer?
2. What's it to do with Prince Charles anyway? When did he become the arbiter of architectural taste? His he overstretching his authority?

[IronGiant]

Originally Posted by loz

Prince Charles is under attack from architects this week after apparently using his influence to block a building project designed by Lord Rogers, a well known proponent of modern glass & steel, and inside out designs.

Whereas Prince Charles prefers a more 'classical' design.

When did he become the arbiter of architectural taste?

In his own mind quite a long time ago:

In the annual lecture at the Royal Institute of British Architects (R.I.B.A.) this year he referred to his previous lecture 25 years ago when he apparently gave many people the impression he wanted to start a "style war" between supporters of classic and modern architecture or "drag the world back to the 18th Century".

In a joke about giving another lecture in 25 years' time, The Prince said he would probably have "shuffled off this mortal coil" and they would not have to worry about his "inconvenient interferences", before saying “unless of course they prove to be hereditary!”

[MikeTV]

I am wondering if this is just sour grapes on behalf of the architect concerned. As far as I am can tell, he hasn't actually interfered in the process, other than to express an opinion. Isn't he allowed to express an opinion? It is the Quatari establishment and their company that has dropped the proposed design. It hasn't even got the local planning proposal stage yet.

[Decadence]

If I had Charles' influence and did not approve of something I would definitely have the project stopped in favour of something more to my taste. I think he is right. As for some "dangerous political clash" I am not sure if two posh people should abuse the British Government for their own ends...Lord Rogers should just shut his pie-hole and admit he was bested...it's a simple food chain scenario and Charles is at the top of the pile.

[loz]

Originally Posted by MikeTV

I am wondering if this is just sour grapes on behalf of the architect concerned. As far as I am can tell, he hasn't actually interfered in the process, other than to express an opinion. Isn't he allowed to express an opinion? It is the Quatari establishment and their company that has dropped the proposed design. It hasn't even got the local planning proposal stage yet.

The suggestion is that he did more than "express his opinion"

A former planning minister said the prince had set a "very dangerous precedent" by using his contacts with the Qatari Royal Family to intervene.

The Middle Eastern owners withdrew their planning application on Friday.

The decision followed a direct intervention by the prince, who wrote to the chairman of Qatari Diar, urging him to consider alternatives to the modern design created by Lord Rogers's firm of architects.

[Isobutane]

Considering some of the disgusting, gray, dilapidated architecture that is all too prevalent in British cities, I am glad he's got the balls to stand up to these stupid lefty utopian do-gooders who think the only way to create any harmony between different sections of society is to build ugly, repulsive concrete monstrocities.

I personally think classical arcitecture looks much nicer than this modernist stuff, why do town planners want everywhere looking like a council estate?

[eric pisch]

he should mind his own business and stick to talking talking to trees and using the services of the royal privy

its no wonder in the insular and ultra privileged lifestyle that he leads that he cant stand anything that's less than 1000 years old

he hates the gherkin, well i love it, i see everyday driving into London and it looks great and its a giant middle finger up to elitist snobs.

[loz]

Originally Posted by Isobutane

Considering some of the disgusting, gray, dilapidated architecture that is all too prevalent in British cities, I am glad he's got the balls to stand up to these stupid lefty utopian do-gooders who think the only way to create any harmony between different sections of society is to build ugly, repulsive concrete monstrocities.

That's true. But I don't think "ugly, repulsive concrete monstrocities" is something Lord Rogers is famous for...

[eric pisch]

Originally Posted by loz

That's true. But I don't think "ugly, repulsive concrete monstrocities" is something Lord Rogers is famous for...

exactly

i think the phrase some of the most amazing and interesting buildings of our time would be more apt

Work

[Decadence]

None of those are my cup of tea...looking at them all together, "one trick pony" springs to mind.

[JAMFish72]

No, he's not right to meddle! In fact, I'd tell the big-eared chump to eff off - right to his face as well.

[eric pisch]

Originally Posted by Decadence

None of those are my cup of tea...looking at them all together, "one trick pony" springs to mind.

thats why they have other architects

like Sir Norman Foster

Foster + Partners

[loz]

Originally Posted by eric pisch

thats why they have other architects

like Sir Norman Foster

Not many architects designing Space Ports
Spaceport America

[Decadence]

Originally Posted by eric pisch

thats why they have other architects

like Sir Norman Foster

Foster + Partners

Some of that stuff is good, some of it is similar to the other guy...I should have been an architect, reckon I could do better if I knew more about how buildings are put together.

[loz]

You can see Lord Rogers and the Prince Charles commissioned design for Chelsea Barracks side by side here

From the pictures I have seen, I don't particularly like either of them...

[Decadence]

That other one looks like a prison/industrial revolution era factory...awful.

[loz]

Or what about the Death Star Hotel

[eric pisch]

Originally Posted by loz

You can see Lord Rogers and the Prince Charles commissioned design for Chelsea Barracks side by side here

From the pictures I have seen, I don't particularly like either of them...

not enough pics to really tell from the lord rogers one, brief does come into it as well

Charles one looks like his dream prep school where once again he can haze fags all day long

[Wild Weasel]

Originally Posted by Decadence

Some of that stuff is good, some of it is similar to the other guy...I should have been an architect, reckon I could do better if I knew more about how buildings are put together.

You don't need to know how they're put together. Just be an arty-farty and ideally wear a bow tie. Architects employ teams of structural engineers to handle the details.

[Newton's Ring]

Not really read the thread and whilst I can't really comment on whether the Monarchy should involve themselves in these matters; here's my two cents - Prince Charles is right; IMHO classical architecture always tends to stand the test of time.

I guess it was more than just his opinion but he allowed to have one, isn't he.

And I like the Big Eared, Ruddy Cheeked Royal.

[Decadence]

Originally Posted by Wild Weasel

You don't need to know how they're put together. Just be an arty-farty and ideally wear a bow tie. Architects employ teams of structural engineers to handle the details.

You're saying I don't need any qualifications if I can draw a decent looking building? Someone sign me up!!

[Wild Weasel]

Originally Posted by Decadence

You're saying I don't need any qualifications if I can draw a decent looking building? Someone sign me up!!

No, if you can draw a decent looking building you'll never get very far.

[loz]

I actually wanted to be an architect when I was young.
I spent countless hours drawing buildings, laying out city plans, and such, building models in lego...

But when it came down to it, I couldn't face the prospect of spending 7 years graduating to end up at the town hall designing roundabouts...

My son's friend is going through it though, currently studying at Cambridge.

But I still fancy designing my own house.

[pandemic]

He should keep his opinions too himself. Actually the architect should sue him for using his influence to get the developers to cancel the project. The building was actually very nice and would have complemented the older buildings.
I'm sure if a major multinational had proposed the building and he stopped it. They would be taking legal action.

[Grrrrrowler]

I am sure there are far more worthwhile things that he could do with the vast pots of money and high public profile we give him...

His opinions on architecture are no more valid than yours or mine - it's just that he chooses to use his position as a public figure to try to give credence to his.

Why don't we ask the Princess Royal for her opinions on the great 'Broadband Tax' debate?

[krish]

Originally Posted by Grrrrrowler

Why don't we ask the Princess Royal for her opinions on the great 'Broadband Tax' debate?

... or Prince Harry on the BNP?

[Steven]

Originally Posted by Grrrrrowler

I am sure there are far more worthwhile things that he could do with the vast pots of money and high public profile we give him...

His opinions on architecture are no more valid than yours or mine - it's just that he chooses to use his position as a public figure to try to give credence to his.

Why don't we ask the Princess Royal for her opinions on the great 'Broadband Tax' debate?

I think you will find that Prince Charles was merely using his own arrogance to trump that of Lord Roger's. The Prince of Wales is quite entitled to speak up for the heritage of this country - if not then what is he there for? We all know what Prince Charles is for. I am still trying work out what Lord Roger is for for

[loz]

Originally Posted by LFC_SL

The Prince of Wales is quite entitled to speak up for the heritage of this country - if not then what is he there for?

I don't think anyone was complaining about him speakin up per se, it was more about is actual direct action of writing letters to the Prince of Oman to get him to cancel the project, and whether it was right for him to exert such influence. He is not the decider of public taste, the planning committee is.

And as for heritage, in this case it was a new build. Nothing was being protected. Its just an old army barracks that is due to be demolished whatever ends up replacing it.

[Steven]

loz, I answered that point although perhaps too subtlety. Lord Roger relied on his own influence and Middle Eastern money to push the development through. It is rather the kettle calling the pot to cry when Lord Roger finds that somebody else can pull rank on him and use his own influence by writing a letter to his friend

As far as I am aware the neighbours did not particular care for the proposed development either. That is not to say I care - I just wanted to offer some balance to the usual Royal-bashing which for the purposes of this thread was not very well directed

[J1mbo]

Isn't the truth (as so often) somewhere inbetween?

In using his influence with foreign royals the prince may, on this occasion, have somewhat overstepped the mark. His derogatory comments about some of the countries better examples of modern architecture (the Gherkin is an excellent example) are also frequently irritating.

However he is quite correct to champion the cause of the classics - far too many of Britains most attractive buildings have been destroyed over the past 50 years, leaving many of the UK's towns and cities resembling nothing more than vast, tatty retail parks. It is no suprise that nearly all of the more desirable residencies in the country are Victorian, Georgian or even older, yet we STILL continue to tear these down.

Personally I think it should be the law that ALL new builds must seek to reflect or compliment their surroundings - how many McDonalds, Tescos and 'business parks' are hideous pre-fab eyesores that appear to have been air-lifted into unsuspecting communities?

The problem with the Princes solution is that his designs could be easily descibed as pastiche, since it is almost impossible to replicate, say, a Georgian town house in exact detail for at the very least cost reasons.

The Barrack design is clearly supposed to resemble the avenues and crescents of Bath and parts of Chelsea and Nottinghill - viewing them for above doesn't really give a good impression, though I suspect the whole pastiche thing is probably in full effect.

Originally Posted by Isobutane

Considering some of the disgusting, gray, dilapidated architecture that is all too prevalent in British cities, I am glad he's got the balls to stand up to these stupid lefty utopian do-gooders...

I was agreeing with all your post until we got to this sentence which is both factually incorrect and incredibly juvenile.