What do you think does he have a fair point or not we should move with the times?

Question

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/afp/20080131/tuk-britain-royals-architecture-a7ad41d_1.html

Thanks.

Answer 1

As long as the skyscrapers are kept in the Docklands area and there is a distinct difference between 'old/historic London' and the 'city London' with the skyscrapers then I think they are a good thing.  Docklands is looking great these days, the regeneration of the area is great for local communities and is cleaning up what was once a run down part of London.  I can understand Charles love of the old style architecture, but as long as the two areas remain separate and each maintain their unique style then I think it works and makes London more interesting.  A find example of where old meets new/ East meets West is Singapore where you'll find old Colonial buildings adjacent to city skyscrapers and then the more traditional Chinese/Indian architectural influences too.  The key is to keep it all tasteful and with good flow.  So yes, I think we need to move with the times.

Answer 2

I think he has a point sparks...we have so many odd shaped buildings here in London whilst alot of the older buildings which are far nicer are just being pulled down or left in a state of disrepair.

Answer 3

Forget about buidings & architecture, Sparkle.

As a crown prince, as a man, he himself failed miserably. His character was at fault - and when character is lost, everything is lost.

And whatever he says pales into insignificance.

I c that u r very active today, Sparkle, but as the system is very slow here, I am moving over to Yahoo Messenger now. C u later.

Answer 4

He is definitely right as we should be preserving our heritage and our historical buildings which are among the best in the world.  He is right to call it vandalism because that is what it is.  I am fiercly protective of anything historical because once it has gone it has gone never to be regained.

Answer 5

Yes and no really I can understand his point of view but is it what everyone else wants to see.

Answer 6

move with the times

make youtube videos http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJH3VMxrk...

Answer 7

On  this i am in total agreement with him, they have devalued what was once one of the most beautiful parts of London, and the thought of any more monstrosities is horrible, they should look at the whole picture, they have copied NY as an example and where it seem to fit well there, it doesn't work here. I hate all that so called modern architecture and would pull it down in an instant.

Answer 8

I'd think that London is ruined anyhow,B. Mind you Leeds is not much better with all of these new flats that they are building everywhere!xx

Answer 9

I agree with Prince Charles

Answer 10

Hi, Sparkles.  I must admit (although unusual) that on this occasion he is right in what he says.  City's characters have been changed by ugly monstrosities called artistic.  London is the most visited city in the UK and it's attraction is the historical building and original composites.  Where I live there is a law that any facial structure must not be removed or damaged but external buildings.  All the shop have there original features since 1917 with the exception of additional of glass fronts.  I say leave London as it is and that is cultural, rather than ugly buildings.  Best wishes,   Peter

Answer 11

I totally agree with him, it seems easier nowadays to build new buildings, rather than restore existing ones, it really pisses me off!