In London, the Aquatic Centre designed by Zaha Hadid for the 2012 Olympics is making headlines. Apparently, the jury that selected the project (RECORD, February 2005) was concerned from the very beginning about construction costs and future use, yet still awarded the commission to Hadid, a Pritzker Prize winner, reports The Guardian. The jury—which was jointly chaired by architect Richard Rogers and Patrick Carter, former chairman of the English Sports Council—thought Hadid’s design faced “clear and technical organizational issues” and was not as well developed as five competing proposals, according to reports that the UK-based newspaper received via the Freedom of Information Act, The publication’s architecture critic, Jonathan Glancey, wrote a fiery blog in Hadid’s defense. “If only she had knuckled down and designed something as dull as the Olympic Stadium itself,” he says, “she would be off the hook, smelling not just of chlorine but of roses.” Glancey goes on to say the project is the “architectural saving grace of the bad-tempered, secretive and ill-mannered Olympics project.” He notes that Rogers himself faced similar criticism for a project he designed, the National Assembly for Wales (2006), which was over-budget mainly due to “political interference and ever-rising consultant fees.” Glancey writes, “The trouble is that when costs rise in such a spectacular fashion, and especially when buck-passing politicians and faceless quangoes are involved, it's easy to lay the blame at the door of the architect.”
Image courtesy Lincoln Center
You have 0 complimentary articles remaining.
Unlimited access + premium benefits for as low as $1.99/month.