One of Britain’s most prominent architects, Lord Rogers of Riverside, last night questioned the “authority and objectivity” of the body which makes listing recommendations to the Government.Well, well, will wonders never cease? Margaret Hodge listening to residents for once.
His criticism of English Heritage came after a campaign by leading architects, seeking heritage status for a rundown east London council estate, was rejected by Margaret Hodge, the Culture Minister.
Ms Hodge took the advice of English Heritage before concluding that Robin Hood Gardens was “not fit for purpose”. The estate now faces demolition.
Number of architects living at Robin Hood Gardens…? Zero. Nevertheless:
Lord Rogers said in a statement tonight: “All the British winners of the Pritzker Prize, the highest international award for an architect, agree that Robin Hood Gardens is one of the greatest modern buildings in the UK.What do the residents think?
“There is not one internationally recognised modern architect or academic included in making English Heritage’s recommendation on Robin Hood Gardens to the minister.
We should, therefore, deeply question the authority and objectivity of English Heritage in discussing contemporary architecture of this quality.”
English Heritage had recommended that the building should not be listed and a survey revealed that 80 per cent of residents wanted to be rehoused by the council while the structure was demolished and replaced with new apartments.Well, Lord Rogers, if you like it so much, you live there…
4 comments:
"Well, well, will wonders never cease? Margaret Hodge listening to residents for once."
There must be an election imminent!
Heh! Indeed..
The Pritzker Prize - and most similar prizes - are largely masturbation for the professionals. As far as these wunderkinder are concerned, the rest of us who have to look at, live in or use the stuff erected at enormous (usually taxpayers') expense can get f***ed while the self-described geniuses of the "built environment" play with their toys.
Coming back to Robin Hood Gardens; from one reading of juliam's post (viz. "80 per cent of residents wanted to be rehoused . . while the structure was demolished") it seems that 20% of the current occupiers wish to remain in residence while this crap is torn down: that can't be right can it?
"...it seems that 20% of the current occupiers wish to remain in residence while this crap is torn down: that can't be right can it?"
Perhaps that 20% were so dulled by years of living there that they didn't fully understand the questionnaire!
Post a Comment