From: tsm@fastmail.ca   
      
   On Feb 18, 2026 at 11:00:04 AM EST, "Wilson"  wrote:   
      
   > On 2/18/2026 10:36 AM, Julian wrote:   
   >> On 18/02/2026 15:28, Wilson wrote:   
   >>> On 2/17/2026 6:20 PM, Tara wrote:   
   >>>> Tara  wrote:   
   >>>>> On Feb 17, 2026 at 4:24:25 PM EST, "Julian"    
   >>>>> wrote:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>> I’ve got a new thriller out this week, under my pen name of S.K.   
   >>>>>> Tremayne. I am pleased with the book, and I believe it’s   
   >>>>>> entertaining. I   
   >>>>>> am also aware that, in a tough and competitive market, that may not be   
   >>>>>> enough for it to succeed. I am even more aware that readers might   
   >>>>>> decide   
   >>>>>> the book is dreck. They might give me one star reviews, and no sales.   
   >>>>>> Then the book will crater, my publishers will probably abandon me, and   
   >>>>>> my nice career will drift to an end.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> And that, of course, is how it should be. No one in any career is   
   >>>>>> entitled to a free ride. That especially applies to people who get   
   >>>>>> to do   
   >>>>>> a desirable, creative job such as novel writing. Whether you’re a   
   >>>>>> writer, actor, director, sculptor or musician – if you want that   
   >>>>>> enviably fun creative profession, you live and die by public approval;   
   >>>>>> and if you are bad, goodbye.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> Unless, of course, you are an architect. I was reminded of this   
   >>>>>> peculiar   
   >>>>>> anomaly by last week’s furore over the latest architectural wart to   
   >>>>>> attach itself to London’s battered face: the already notorious   
   >>>>>> ‘Belgrove   
   >>>>>> House’, that now dominates a prime corner of Euston Road, where it   
   >>>>>> sits   
   >>>>>> right next to King’s Cross and St Pancras.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> I presume it has been situated in London after the original design was   
   >>>>>> rejected by a horrified Uzbek government, as being too ugly for   
   >>>>>> Tashkent.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> If you have not seen it yet, the best way to get a sense is to look at   
   >>>>>> photos like the one here.   
   >>>>>> https://x.com/ianvisits/status/2020440287785443433   
   >>>>>> Briefly. The second best way is for me to describe it, but that is   
   >>>>>> actually quite hard. Because it’s difficult to verbally capture this   
   >>>>>> weird, stupid and meaningless collision of styles, materials,   
   >>>>>> dimensions. The closest visual analogy, to my mind, is one of those   
   >>>>>> plates piled high at a hotel buffet by an idiot: with a splodge of   
   >>>>>> curry, some sauerkraut, five potatoes, some lemon pie, a lamb cutlet,   
   >>>>>> smoked herring, and several cheesy crackers, and everything banal and   
   >>>>>> tasteless even before you smush them together.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> In short, the building is appalling, and it’s not going to get better   
   >>>>>> over time. It is a dud. A turkey. A calamitous flop. It is the   
   >>>>>> Millennium Dome. It is Fyre Festival. It is Triangle, the BBC soap   
   >>>>>> opera   
   >>>>>> set on a North Sea ferry route. It is Raise the Titanic. It is Harry   
   >>>>>> Hill’s I Can’t Sing. It is Keir Starmer’s prime ministerial   
   career,   
   >>>>>> rendered in concrete and plastic. It is my first novel, Absent   
   >>>>>> Fathers,   
   >>>>>> which got a cheque for zero pounds zero pence, as a computer could not   
   >>>>>> believe an author could sell so few copies, so sent a cheque anyway.   
   >>>>>> Finally, it is the architectural equivalent of Via Galactica (1972), a   
   >>>>>> space-themed musical with actors on trampolines, which lasted seven   
   >>>>>> performances.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> But here’s the thing. For all the creative disasters listed above,   
   >>>>>> someone responsible paid a price. Even the lavishly coddled Millennium   
   >>>>>> Dome project damaged careers. And yet, if you design and erect a   
   >>>>>> hideous   
   >>>>>> building, equivalent to these aesthetic catastrophes, you pay no price   
   >>>>>> at all. And this despite the fact that, unlike a rubbish novel, you   
   >>>>>> can’t chuck a bad building in a bin. No, the building squats there,   
   >>>>>> for   
   >>>>>> decades, blighting the lives of everyone who must look at it. And   
   >>>>>> given   
   >>>>>> that this particular building is situated in one of the most   
   >>>>>> conspicuous   
   >>>>>> sites in the capital, opposite two of its grandest railway stations,   
   >>>>>> that is going to be a lot of people.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> Worse, there’s a decent chance the architects of this carbuncle   
   >>>>>> will get   
   >>>>>> an award. Because that’s what they do in architecture world. They have   
   >>>>>> hideous ideas, then they force them on the rest of us, and then they   
   >>>>>> give each other prizes. Until, about 40 years down the line, everyone   
   >>>>>> accepts the obvious truth, and the pile of ugliness is finally   
   >>>>>> demolished.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> If you need proof, just look at the lists. Salford’s laughable   
   >>>>>> Centenary   
   >>>>>> Building, Britain’s very first Stirling Prize winner (in 1996), was   
   >>>>>> set   
   >>>>>> to be knocked down just 30 years later, to much applause. The Tricorn   
   >>>>>> Centre Portsmouth won the Civic Trust award in 1967 and yet was   
   >>>>>> demolished in 2004. Pimlico Comprehensive School collected a RIBA   
   >>>>>> prize,   
   >>>>>> then it was flattened in despair. Gateshead’s Trinity Square car park   
   >>>>>> was recognised as a ‘most outstanding modernist building’ by the   
   20th   
   >>>>>> century society after it was blasted to hell. Add to this, our own   
   >>>>>> Belgrove House: yes it won a World Architecture Festival Award in   
   >>>>>> 2023.   
   >>>>>> Yes, they’ve already given it an award. Perhaps they got excited by   
   >>>>>> the   
   >>>>>> potential ugliness. In any other art form, failure is failure. In   
   >>>>>> architecture, terrible failure makes for a garlanded career.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> Clearly, what is needed is some kind of disincentive for architects. A   
   >>>>>> way to punish them for the pain they inflict. Or they will keep   
   >>>>>> inflicting this pain on us. We need the equivalent of West End reviews   
   >>>>>> so bad they close a dismal show, thereby bankrupting producers.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> So who are the Guilty People responsible for Belgrove House? Who   
   >>>>>> should   
   >>>>>> we hold to account? It’s invidious to name names, but the names are   
   >>>>>> Simon Allford, Jonathan Hall, Paul Monaghan and Peter Morris, and they   
   >>>>>> are the leading partners of AHMM Ltd. But for the rest of us AHMM will   
   >>>>>> be the company responsible for ruining the views of St Pancras and   
   >>>>>> King’s Cross. That’s the company responsible for ruining the views   
   >>>>>> of St   
   >>>>>> Pancras and King’s Cross.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> Unsurprisingly, AHMM disagree. Simon Allford told The Spectator:   
   >>>>>> ‘Belgrove House is a 21st century landmark building sitting   
   >>>>>> confidently   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)