It was depressing, but perhaps not surprising, to see architect Zaha Hadid lauded by the Guardian newspaper.
How on earth can they call her work "egalitarian"? Her oeuvre represents many things, not all of them nice. But no-one could seriously call her designs anything other than elitist, uncompromising and totalitarian.
I am currently reading Museum Without Walls by Jonathan Meades. It is a collation of his writings on architecture and is very enjoyable (although his writing style contains far too many lists). In the chapter on Zaha Hadid he writes:
"Accessibility merely means lowest common denominator populism, commercial opportunism, the subjugation of the creator by market researchers and of originality by second-guessing what the 'people' will find acceptable. Zaha has been fighting all her professional life against the architecture of the market place, struggling to assert the paramountcy of the artist, ie of herself, of an uncompromised vision."
As I said, elitist and totalitarian.
It is perhaps predictable that the Zaha Hadid London Aquatics Centre was commissioned under the New Labour government and paid for by public money.
Earlier today left-wing writer Aaron Peters described the Olympic site as reminiscent of the former DDR.
Despite being a leftie his articles are very readable: http://www.opendemocracy.net/author/aaron-peters
No comments:
Post a Comment