Skip to comments.Richard Rogers, Architect Versus Charles, Prince
Posted on 08/14/2010 6:30:21 AM PDT by mattstat
The New York Review of Books, via an article submitted by a man appropriately named Martin Filler has deconstructed Prince Charles dislike of modern architecture.
Deconstruction, in case you did not know, is the postmodern literary process of discovering or inventing words or actions from your victim in order to uphold your preconceived beliefs.
Fillers belief is that modern architecture, and those that create and design that architecture are good. By good he evidently does not mean beautiful, useful, or lasting. Instead, the word translates into ability to win awards. Awards which are created and doled out by men such as he.
Prince Charles, Filler was aghast to discover, disliked the works of architect Richard Rogers, a designer who, bucking tradition, is not a narrow-rimmed glasses wearing, clad-in-black German. Rogers looks like your grandfather, a jolly and elegant old man. You would never guess by looking that this man could have brought so many grotesqueries into the world.
Filler classifies the great Princes dislike of Rogerss designs as mental illness, which itself is caused by inbreeding. Conspicuously, Filler fails to mention his own family tree, so one can only wonder what horrors hang from its branches.
Here is a typical Richard Rogers building. It evokes the feeling of an Edward Hopper painting. There is nothing out of place; everything is perfect; clean lines and a sound structure. And utterly depressing. You can actually feel your happiness leaking away the longer you stare at it. It is ugly....
(Excerpt) Read more at wmbriggs.com ...
Eh. I like a lot of modern architecture; but more the mid-century moderns than today’s work. What one must realize is today’s crap will disappear in 100 yrs just like 100 yr old crap has disappeared, leaving only the good stuff. It’s not fair to judge today by 200 yr old Victorian architecture.
Be sure and go to the link to see some examples of good and not-so-good architecture. I disagree with the author on one point, though. The headquarters of Amalgamated Suppository, Ltd. looks great!
IN this case I agree with Charles, Prince. Rogers’ stuff is utterly derivative and boring...and sad. I wince at the E Court of HR, in Strassburg, the design of the World Trade tower and the amazingly boorish Milleniuum Dome. Those housing units in the photo...yup looks like hard times from Hopper’s art.
More Prince Charles bashing.
I like architecture, and had even thought about studying it, at one time, but I wasn't into the Bauhaus structures that were so popular in the mid 70s. The whole profession seemed to be fixated on modernism, to the detriment of those who preferred the classical designs which used the Golden Ratio.
I found a book a couple of years ago,Get Your House Right: Architectural Elements to Use and Avoid which explains why so many modern homes, even if they are designed to be 'traditional' just don't look right to us, and gives lots of formulas for the correct proportions for doorways, window openings, etc.
This is one reason why I defend Prince Charles against slurs that he’s stupid, etc. He’s very lerned, and very intelligent. SOme of his other views re Islam are totally wrong, but that could change. He is a traditionalist.
Prince Charles is an arrogant nitwit who is occasionally correct about something; a stopped clock is right twice a day, etc. My sincere condolences to his mother, her majesty the Queen, for the nature of her eldest son and heir.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.