Architect, Expert Witness, Course Leader
Robert Wakeham, I think the expression "scandalously re-destroyed" is one of the best pieces of language use I have ever witnessed. It may indeed be found that the Notre-Dame loss resulted from negligence, but I tend to think that the Notre-Dame situation is quite different to the potential resolution to the GSA fiasco. The spire is a discrete object which adorns the building. I think it can be changed, although any new idea would have to be measured against the quality and longevity of its predecessor, rather than being approved because it suits the current ephemeral fashion (isn't it great how good post-modernism looks now?). I think that the competition is a good thing, but I do think that the spire should be for aspirers. The eye of the needle test should be applied to the entries, with the rich "stars" being unable to pass through whether on a camel or not. Let the meek inherit the win for once, Emmanuel.
Comment on: ‘Tulip is an abomination’ says Gherkin client
This is truly grotesque monument to previous century male-dominated thinking. What a load of rubbish!
There are some extreme comments from far right architects above, seen by them as normal and apparently justifiable on the basis of a nonsense argument about free speech. It saddens me how much this country has lurched to the right in recent years, as normalised by this nasty Tory government. It is also depressing that the comments above, not in accordance with our code of conduct, are aired by those who think themselves professional. You people really do need to get an education.
Comment on: Reaction to Scruton sacking: ‘It was foreseeable this ludicrous appointment would end badly’
I am pleased to see Scruton gone, after wrongfully calling himself an architect and now after his non-inclusive behaviour. Of course the whole appointment and ideaology behind it were farcical, which is a not unknown position for this government. What I don't understand is why the writer and some of the correspondents go on to talk about London. The coverage of this post was supposed to be UK wide (another ridiculous scenario: can you imagine Scruton telling an architect in Glasgow how to make things pretty there?). So I ask again. Why is anyone talking about London? Are we not clever enough to know when to bypass parochialism?
The aluminium framed windows are certainly better than the uPVC replacements that they replace, and the maintenance issue is a relevant one. I don't know that colour makes much difference to staining. Darker materials stain badly too. The building is an ugly monster that is somehow alluring, and the revision to these minor details doesn't make it significantly less ugly, so I would suggest that there is nothing to see here.