Doublespeak

Sent by e-mail: 

 

In the news today was an attack on the "meddling" of the Prince of Wales into architectural decisions.

 

The report contained an attack upon the Prince of Wales by someone called Graham Smith who, in a brazen example of doublespeak said:  "We need to know if decisions are being made according to what the public wants and needs or what Prince Charles wants".

 

Graham Smith (who represents an organisation called Republic) is deliberately distorting the truth here, since he must know (if he has even half a brain) that "the public" overwhelmingly wants an end to brutalist architecture constructed on an inhuman scale.  He must also know that the Prince of Wales is fully representing the voiceless and voteless public in opposing the arrogant and undemocratic imposition of offensive architecture despite the wishes of those who have to work in it or live near it.  Real democracy should mean everyone who lives and works within a quarter-mile of a development getting a vote (paid for by the developers) if the building is above a certain scale or involves intrusive styles of architecture (and if the public wants pastiche the public must have pastiche).

 

The choice is not actually between "pastiche" and "modernism".  There would be far fewer complaints if the new buildings being put up were of high quality (Norman Foster is not Mies van der Rohe - not in my opinion anyway).  The gherkins, shards and cheese graters proposed by the intellectual elite do not represent the sort of utopia most people want to live and work in (and for an idea of the utopia most Londoners dream of I would refer you to Hatch End).