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

Report this comment to a moderator

Please fill in the form below if you think a comment is unsuitable. Your comments will be sent to our moderator for review.
By submitting your information you agree to our Privacy & Cookie Policy.

Report comment to moderator

Required fields.


No1 Poultry may be ugly but it should still be listed


Why on earth should we take what the Futurists thought back before WW1 as something applicable today or even morally worthy?? They were fascists, they helped found the fascist movement in Italy, and their manifesto also calls out for the destruction of libraries and museums, as well as celebrating violence. Should we adhere to those points as well? Secondly, what does it mean to "take the precepts of Modernism as being valid today"? Are we talking about a building or your religious disposition? We are in fact talking about a specific historical movement over 100 years old that was a response to 19th century politics and intellectual movements. Why does your ideology stop you from destroying buildings if they are universally considered to be eyesores? I personally consider this building to be wonderful. It isn't "beautiful", but it is imbued with 10 times the character of the nameless faceless glass and steel corporate buildings cropping up all over London. This building has personality. And no, Mies's building would have been no better as his style has been meticulously repeated by dogmatic ideologues ad nauseam for the past 80 years to the point that it is cliched, hackneyed, and ubiquitous in any large city today.

Posted date

12 July, 2015

Posted time

8:16 am


Job of the week

AJ Jobs