Tulip approved

So tweets City AM’s Christian May.

Everybody is now bitching about this Thing, just like they did with the Eiffel Tower. Do “we need” it? Blah blah. Well guess what: I want it. And more to the point the people paying for it and wanting to build it want it.

Although, I did agree with the Dezeen commenter who said that maybe a Tulip is not the sort of thing you want in the middle of one of the world’s great financial districts.

LATER: Julia H-B:

Like all of London’s new skyscrapers, I’ll hate it.*

*Until I love it.


Originally posted at Brian Micklethwait’s Old Blog

One thought on “Tulip approved”

  1. A couple of comments – from Michael J and me:


    At Canary Wharf, the planning laws don’t quite allow developers to do what they want, but they can build towers that are functional and don’t require developers to demonstrate that the designs have “architectural distinction” before they are built. As a consequence, a fairly generic skyscraper cluster (which I rather like) has been built.

    In the City, you must demonstrate architectural distinction, and as a consequence we get buildings that look like giant sex toys.

    Posted by Michael Jennings on 03 April 2019


    I actually like both arrangements.

    At least in both places stuff is getting built.

    Posted by Brian Micklethwait on 03 April 2019

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *