Richard Murphy: Why does Charles have to buy fake architecture?

Published on Thursday 9 September 2010 18:27

In SOME ways, this is a very good idea. I believe it is always a good idea to think about a total community in a sustainable way, but generally housebuilders in Scotland do nothing like that at all.

They have to be forced and coerced into building a shop - let alone a school - so the idea of building a proper community, like Knockroon, is a very good thing.

The proposed development includes elements such as a network of "walkable" streets and a range of local amenities for the community - as well as a mixture of tenements, semi-detached and detached houses, some of which they say could be used as retail or office space. I'm not against that.

If this project, which has been designed by London practice Working Group Design, has sustainability as a very strong principle behind it in terms of transport, walking to work and things like that and not having two-car garages everywhere, then better still.

The problem is, that I don't believe in doing fake architecture - I think it's a cultural cul-de-sac. It's always been a bad idea, and it represents in a way a loss of nerve on the part of the developer.

Funnily enough, Prince Charles's predecessors didn't have any problem with patronising modern architects - he's the only member of the Royal Family who doesn't.

Prince Albert patronised architects who were very modern in his day; they were contemporary. He was behind things like Paxton's Great Exhibition Hall in 1851 - known as the Crystal Palace - which was extremely ahead of its time.

Sadly, Prince Charles has broken the royal tradition of architectural patronage by not encouraging contemporary design, but instead has resorted to fake architecture.

I'm sure he wouldn't go out and buy fake pictures, so why does he have to buy fake architecture?"

• Richard Murphy, founder of Edinburgh-based Richard Murphy Architects.