Prince Charles Sticks His Nose In June 16th, 2009
Lloyd's of london
Architect Rogers angry at Prince
BBC: Tuesday, 16 June 2009
The architect Lord Rogers has said he believes Prince Charles has broken the “constitutional understanding” governing the role of the monarchy.
Last week, Lord Rogers’ plan to transform Chelsea Barracks in west London was dropped after the prince told developers it was “unsympathetic”.
The architect told the BBC there could be “a dangerous political clash” unless the power of the royals is re-examined.
Clarence House declined to comment on Lord Rogers’ remarks.
I’ve been following this story over the past week with great interest and the behaviour of Prince Charles makes me extremely angry.
Quite simply, he is not qualified to comment on the subject of architecture and, by intervening in this way, is abusing his constitutional role.
I happen to have great respect for Lord Rogers who I think has made some stunning work, I also happen to have read his book Cities For A Small Planet which is a really insightful look into the relationship between people and the built environment.
I’ve also read some of what the Prince has said and I think he is lacking in his understanding of architecture in so many ways. To effectively say ‘old is good, new is bad’ is completely missing the point. The Georgians and Victorians built some absolute rubbish and there was probably more slum housing then than there is now. Would he also argue that the Great Court at the British Museum, designed by one time Lord Rogers architectural partner Sir Norman Foster, is a poor example of architecture? I would doubt it.
For me, poorly designed and constructed buildings are not a matter of style, I happen to live in a 1950′s council built block which is built to excellent specifications and is a joy to live in.
I also feel that had the Georgians or Victorians had the engineering capabilities and the advances in materials we have now, they too would have been building much more ambitious projects.