Report comment

Thanks to the Author for a well-(out)spoken article. But it was already obvious 10-15 years ago to any casual observer that Peter Rees, a friend to any developer with millions to invest, represented an aesthetic danger to the City of London. Why only now is he being openly criticised? Why did it take this bloody carbuncle to change so many minds? Why - until now - did so many arse-licking architects, anxious to cosy up to the powerful Rees, sing his praises so shamelessly? And, why on earth is he now misleading young architecture students as a highly-paid tutor at one of London's best schools? Doesn't the Bartlett care about its reputation?