Unsupported browser

For a better experience please update your browser to its latest version.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We'll assume we have your consent to use cookies, for example so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more

Moving on

  • Comment

Memories of the community architecture years were stirred at the London Architecture Biennale, which hosted a Radio 3 debate on whether the Prince of Wales had been good for architecture. Marking 20 years since the Prince's notorious speech at Hampton Court, the motion supporting him was proposed by the urbane Jules Lubbock and the RIBA president George Ferguson. It was opposed by a feisty Amanda Levete (who managed to drag herself back from Portugal, where she had been to see the England/ Portugal quarter-final), and critic Hugh Pearman, on brutally good form as he launched a regicidal blast at the Prince's record. Most of the audience, including ABK's Peter Ahrends, voted against the idea that the Prince had been a good thing. It would have been good to hear critic Jeremy Melvin's view that the Prince sees architecture as an aspect of the Picturesque, which is about control and manipulation of what is seen, while appearing natural. Thus the Prince's declarations about architecture are really a cipher for his loss of control in other areas of his life.

  • Comment

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

Please remember that the submission of any material is governed by our Terms and Conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions.

Links may be included in your comments but HTML is not permitted.