Report comment

Whilst it is important, if not essential, that architects recognise the past, both in architectural design and construction techniques, does this really mean that everything 'modern' is bad and everything 'pre-modern' is good? Building methods and techniques have constantly evolved since man first provided shelter - why should our generation be the first to ignore new opportunities? Corbusier designed high buildings because the technology was available for him to do so (he also designed very modest single one and two-storey buildings as well) We cannot seriously imagine that had these technologies been available to previous generations of architects that they would have ignored them. By the way guys, lime plaster eventually loses its key, wood rots and getting your hands on wattles these days is sheer hell!