Which of these buildings is the horrible shite that must not be allowed?
Hint, it’s not the grey slabs to the right, the ones that look like a nuclear bunker weathered up through the soil. Because that’s speshul that is.
Which of these buildings is the horrible shite that must not be allowed?
Hint, it’s not the grey slabs to the right, the ones that look like a nuclear bunker weathered up through the soil. Because that’s speshul that is.
They gave the architect a knighthood to stop people saying it looked like a nuclear power station.
It’s a trick question, isn’t it? The answer being, “everything above the water line”.
I presume the comment’s on the back of criticism of the buildings aren’t the concrete nuclear bunkers?
It’s a strange phenomenon that almost any building that stays up long enough becomes part of the “valued architectural heritage”. Although many of them were intensely disliked when first erected.
The LWT Tower is due for demolition. That was an eyesore for years. But now it is a nostalgic reminder of “better days” on the telly and people want it saved.
I think I used to work in the low grey one with the foliage. Well, I say work, I mean was employed.
I think they all should be preserved. If only to point to and tell architects: “See that? If you come up with anything like it, it’s the Chopping Block.”
They’re all eyesores. Just tell Dementia Joe that Pootin’s hiding out there and he’ll demolish them free of charge…
The problem with the bigger high-rise ones is not just that they are an incoherent jumble of forms, it is that they stop people seeing the genuinely beautiful buildings like the Wren churches that used to make most London views delightful.
Too late now. London is mostly a third-world horror so it hardly matters what dreadful buildings are put up. The only point in fighting is to make life a little bit harder for the philistines.
What a pity it isn’t a nuclear power station, C J Nerd.
Lots and lots of nice cheap reliable power!!!
Most buildings in London are much too small for a city. It is a shame the council doesn’t understand what a city is.
Is it 1938 again already?
Hard to say. I don’t see the Parliament building anywhere.
“sour people who would prefer the perfect justice of universal ugliness to an unevenly and unjustly spread beauty.”
Theodore Dalrymple
How long do those glass buildings last? They seem to have to be replaced every 5 years
@BIW
+ You beat me too it, they’e all brutalist eyesores
Knowing what we do about ‘planners’, it’s probably yhe boats or Thames they object too
‘Brutalist’, in architectural terms at least, isn’t related to ‘brutal’, it means constructed with an outer skin of raw concrete (Fr. ‘Béton brut’).