Sir – Re: Oxford’s latest planning proposal: courtesy of Herzog de Meuron at the Radcliffe Observatory Quarter location.


Obviously our Swiss architects are determined to bring Oxford into line with the latest in architectural fashions as constructed by the executants of the Guggenheim Museum of contemporary art as laid out at Bilbao, Spain, doubtless to impart an appropriate international aura to what is mooted as an academy for
geo-politics which happens unfortunately to be proposed for an Oxford location.


In the abstract, the interiors are all well and good, but in their global orientations the architects have omitted the Oxford location, with its overwhelming connotations of history and heritage that are not dependent on the latest architectural persona and does not need the imposition of alien, unsympathetic forms fashioned from repellent materials such as plate glass.


Have the Oxford authorities considered the visual contrast of the mass of glass stacked against the OUP’s immaculate local limestone?
Oxford has no need of such modernist carbuncles no matter how transparent they may appear.
Oxford officialdom’s profligate past is catching up with it. How many times have questionable planning decisions been waved through with no thought for ultimate impact on the character of Oxford.
There is the instance of the Saïd Business School, foisted on an unappreciative Oxford.
And Bill Bryson’s bête noir, the warden of Merton’s lodging, has attained a notoriety which had to be addressed by the college who resorted to a fundamental facelift of the college façade.
T. Bintley, Abingdon