“In Britain no one wants to take any risks,” thundered David Chipperfield, the aforementioned shortlisted architect. Richard Rogers agreed: “There should be more exciting buildings in this country.”

But it was the president of the Royal Institute of British Architects, Jack Pringle, who hit the nail on the head: “[In Britain] it’s all about making the business case... Everything has to be justified in a terribly Presbyterian way.”

The business case is all-conquering. Fearful of a repeat of Wembley Stadium or the Scottish Parliament, the Government, Private Finance Initiative contractors and developers are interested in only four words: on time, on budget. Design is just the cherry on top.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



From <Fear of risks and aversion to spending shackle UK architects> July 27, 2007

Refference.

There is a curious anomaly at the heart of this year's Stirling Prize shortlist. Although officially awarded to “architects of the building that has made the greatest contribution to British architecture in the past year”, four out of the six shortlisted are, well, not precisely in Britain. They’re in Portugal, Germany and Spain – far-off lands about which British architects fantasise, where money combines with risk-taking and great architecture is created.

Britain may be experiencing its biggest building boom in two decades, fuelled by public projects such as the Olympics and massive private speculation. But precious little of what is being built could truly be described as great.

Take David Chipperfield, with two buildings on the shortlist: one for this summer’s America’s Cup, in Valencia, and the magnificent Museum of Modern Literature in Marbach am Neckar, Germany. For years this architect, regarded as the finest of the generation below Lord Rogers and Lord Foster of Thames Bank, has failed to get a break in his own country. He’s almost given up.

It’s not that good architecture isn’t being built in Britain. The two projects on the shortlist actually in Britain exemplify this. Glen Howell’s Savill visitor centre at Windsor Great Park is well loved, but has only one, unoriginal trick up its sleeve – its rolling, wooden lattice roof. Only Haworth Tompkins’s new Young Vic – a warm, gently radical replacement for the 1960s “temporary” theatre, has anything new to say. But is it great, truly great, architecture?

The problem is simple. Although Britain is home to some of the most admired architects in the world, those behind its building boom – generally government or private developers – simply don’t want to take risks. Fair enough after the Scottish Parliament and Wembley Stadium disasters.

But if you want truly great architecture, there are two stark truths that no architect dares to mention, but which anyone who watches Grand Designs could tell you. It costs money. Lots. It takes time. Lots. And then some more for when things go wrong. And they always do. It’s a lesson Britain rarely heeds.

---------------------------------------

NO WONDER ON THAT YOUTH VISION FORUM,
NO ONE SUGGESTED THAT GUY WHO WANTED TO STUDY ARCHITECTURE OVERSEA TO COME TO BRITAIN！
SO CRUEL MAN.