James 500 words

HRH The Prince of Wales: A Vision of Britain: A Personal View of Architecture

This particular book by Charles Philip Arthur George (a prince) is basically in his opinion ‘[a book] to try and create discussion about the design of the built environment; to rekindle an alert awareness of our surroundings; inspire a desire to observe; but, most of all, to challenge the fashionable theories of a professional establishment which has made the layman feel he has no legitimate opinions.’ I find it interesting as to what would be the relevancy of such a book, if it is the personal view of one person who also acknowledges has no expertise in the area.

Not many books have a front cover which when illustrated is irrelevant to the subject area. Charles Philip Arthur George takes up half the cover pulling a most peculiar facial expression and dithering his right hand to take up more of the cover blocking that out of focus architecture in the background. It’s understandable though as like Charles Philip Arthur George says he is a layman and lacks expertise on the matter.

On the inside flap we are told of how in 1984 Charles used ‘hard-hitting phrases’ for the first time about his views on modern architecture in some speech in 1984 (this book came out in 1989). His words ‘alerted the nation to his deep concern about the effect some modern architecture has had on the environment and on people’s lives.’ So this book is really nothing more than one person’s opinions. His issues lie within modern architecture and how it doesn’t fit in or disrespects architecture of the past with its presence or scale. He has an issue with contemporary architecture and believes ‘it can and should be something as admirable of the past. What should not be missed is Charles’ idea of an architectural Ten Principles (terrible attempt at pun?) ‘- a set of ‘sensible and widely-agreed rules, saying what people can and what they cannot do’.

Obviously this book only exists for one single reason, the man’s status. The book exemplifies his lack of any understanding of what feels like everything, and not just architecture. He seems unsurprisingly very much out of touch with people’s lives and priorities. I have no idea if this book was a successful seller on it’s release, but when its current second hand value is nearly 300 times less than it’s cost of postage (1p www.amazon.co.uk), I doubt that it is regarded as a relevant book. It greatly suggests that had he the power to dictate over the country this one man’s desire would be priority over that of his subjects. Although he does actually try to interfere with the development of certain buildings, and does sometimes prevail.

The point is, what is the importance and relevancy of a man’s status if they did nothing to achieve it. If it gives them some power and somehow entitles them to a (false) sense of importance, what is the benefit of that and why should that be a given?