After the emergence of Making Dystopia, the history of modern architecture by James Stevens Curl published by Oxford University Press last autumn, the journal Prospect, in the U.K., held an online debate about architecture. The debate question was “Has Modern Architecture Ruined Britain?” Click the link to read the three rounds between Professor Stevens Curl’s “yes” and the “no” propounded by Senior Lecturer Barnabas Calder, author of Raw Concrete: The Beauty of Brutalism. Readers can then vote for either position. A yes is for traditional architecture and a no is for modern architecture.
Voting over the first few days since the debate was published had the modernists in a huge lead but the classicists are chipping away. As usual these days with polling, the result will not accurately reflect opinion but will serve for bragging rights. It seems that Hugh Pearman, the Brit architecture critic associated with RIBA, the Royal Institute for British Architects, is trying to round up votes for the mods. So I am doing the same for the trads.
[Update: Between Jan. 31 and Feb. 7, the results have swung from No leading 92-8 percent to Yes leading 62-38 percent. The deadline for voting is Feb. 26.]