What influence has prince charles had on the design of british architecture - Essay Example

What Influence has Prince Charles had on The Design of British Architecture? Prince Charles is one of the severest of critics of modern architecture in the United Kingdom. He started his mission since 1984 when he denounced the practice for the first time. Britain is facing an architectural boom since last two or three decades and according to the Prince it is having a detrimental effect on the environment and beauty of London which has its own architectural history since the very beginning. Prince Charles suggested that the overwhelming number of sky scrappers built at the heart of the city completely deformed its beauty.

He raised debate on this topic terming the building as rash of “carbuncles” on the face of the city. According to him the modern architecture did more harm than good to the city of London. The high-rise office and residential buildings according to him are overshadowing the ecstatic beauty of the historic architecture of the city. He suggested imposing limitations and controlling on the designs of new buildings within 500 yards of historic landmark. The material the modern architects are using and the heights of the new constructions should also be restricted (Lohr, 1987).

His grave criticism about modern architecture attracted a wide range of discussion and debate. According to Ken Shuttleworth, the lead designer of 30 St. Mary Axe also known as Gherkin, the city of London cannot be preserved as a museum. London is now attempting to lead the world in several aspects and at this juncture its economic and industrial growth should not be curbed by imposing some restrictions on the modern constructions needed (Booth, 2008). The Prince has been accused of curtailing the freedom of the modern architects forcing them towards bad design.

In more recent years Lord Rogers attracted criticism from Prince Charles about the high rise buildings. But he is the one who made high-rise living receive support from the Blair Government. The urban policy of the government is now trying to construct more living space in a small area and the concept of high-rise buildings completely suits the bill. The detractors argued that the Prince is taking a generalized view of the whole culture. He wants to design the city according to his own taste and in doing so he is trying to deny the need of the day and the wishes of the younger population for modern architecture.

But the views of the Prince surely enjoy the backing of the mass in terms of its environmental aspect. The modern architecture is surely losing some popularity now a days in Britain. Prince Charles argued that the new constructions are congesting the city depriving it of open and healthy spaces. He warned against the use of architecture as an iconic statement of the city. But in all his doings he attacked the modern architecture in the gravest possible way thereby weakening his own case. He surely is right when he argues against ill designed architecture but he should show some respect towards good designs.

He is wrong in criticizing all the contemporary buildings as a whole. There are some constructions, which can truly earn praise (The Guardian, 2004). What he needs to do is to launch campaigns against the smaller buildings growing like weeds in London.But whatever may be the debate on architecture, whether Prince Charles is supported or not, he surely earned the position of the best-known architecture critic in Britain. A number of planners and developers like to seek approval for their plans from him before trying to bring it in practice.

They even modify their designs to suit his taste. By virtue of his position he surely influences the British architecture though he does not have any official role in this respect. Though this is the matter of long debate still it can be said that Prince Charles has been able to bring a new insight in the process of British architecture. But he may be wrong in restricting the freedom of modern architecture and new ideas for growth. The public also may not support the use of his power of position in influencing the decisions on architecture (Goldberger, 1989).

ReferencesAnonym, (2004, May 17), “Life after carbuncles”, The Guardian, available at: http://arts.guardian.co.uk/features/story/0,,1218271,00.html (accessed on 30 June 2008).Booth, R., (2008, February 1), “Charles does it again: skyscraper boom a rash of carbuncles, he tells architects”, The Guardian, available at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2008/feb/01/design.architecture (accessed on 30 June 2008).Goldberger, P., (1989, November 4), “The Prince, the Architects and a Question of Influence”, The New York Times, available at: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=950DE3D71430F937A35752C1A96F948260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1 (accessed on 29 June 2008).Lohr, S., (1987, December 6), “Critic Charles Spurs Debate by Londoners”, The New York Times, available at: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B0DE1D81F3FF935A35751C1A961948260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all (accessed on 29 June 2008).