I do like my architecture but the Shard leaves me cold, viewing platform looks good though. To me it doesn’t fit in the environment its been built in.

It’s a crass, vulgar, insensitive and egotistical statement of Emirati wealth and I can only begin to imagine how much money the investors bunged to London to get planning permission.

Looks awesome imho – glad its on my doorstep.

Now they need to fill it!

Global, +1.

globalti – i think you need to do some research before making statements like that. The shard was granted planning permission in 2003 (i was involved in the Stage C design!) . In 2007 the consortium of four Qatari banks – Qatari Islamic Investment bank QInvest, Qatar National Bank, Qatari Islamic Bank and Barwa – and Sellar Property Group formed a joint venture with each party owning 20% of the issued share capital of the company (i was involved in the JV agreement!).

I want to like it beacause it’s impressively high, but just looks unfinished to me. The top is a real dissapointment, for me, it really needs to carry on and finish in a nice sharp point.

It’s certainly striking, but in a very brutal way – especially as there is nothing else in London like it (although some angular competition is well underway at Leadenhall now). Yes, it doesn’t really ‘fit in’ where it’s been built, but the developers are building lots of other buildings around it, so it does fit in better. This was an area that was looking very tired at best and the regeneration was sorely needed.

I must admit, part of me thinks going up to the viewing galleries should be done, but at the best part of a ton to take the family it’s just silly money.

As an alternative for London skyline viewing, I can thoroughly recommend The Monument just the other end of London Bridge to the Shard. OK, it’s teeny compaired to the Shard, but it’s only three quid for an adult, has great views and is an important piece of London’s history.

Compared to the near Guy’s and St Thomas’s hospital tower next to it…..it’s a thing of beauty. In fact the GST tower was in such bad shape I beleive that the Shard developers paid to have it refurbed too.

globalti – Member

It’s a crass, vulgar, insensitive and egotistical statement of Emirati wealth and I can only begin to imagine how much money the investors bunged to London to get planning permission.
Posted 1 hour ago # Report-Post

Well said that man.

globalti – i think you need to do some research before making statements like that.

Sounds like he has done a bit of research especially with regard to its appearance, btw how was he to know of your pivotal role in its development?

Sounds like he has done a bit of research especially with regard to its appearance,

I think you are confusing ‘research’ with ‘looking at it and forming an opinion’.

Looks amazing, remember going “Wow” when I first caught a glimpse of it. We need more buildings like it

sorry i should clarify, my note was about his statement regarding bungs by the Middle Eastern investors to the planning authorities. I was merely statting they were not involved at the time planning was granted.

Its a temple built to honour the gods of greed.

🙄

It’s a bloody skyscraper sat amongst 10-15 storey or lower buildings!!!! How do you expect it to ‘fit in’ … Explain what you mean by fit in? Would you rather it s brick?

In my opinion it would look horrible finished in a complete point, just wouldn’t have the same effect… Bt has anyone seen the letter a four year old boy who passes it in e train every day, sent to renzo piano telling him it should finish in a proper point… He even drew a picture haha.

It’s a fantastic building in my opinion, can you think of another building like it in the world? Sure there are plenty of skyscrapers but no one has though to do it like that and it’s suc a simple idea!

Now when you look at the Walkie talkie, that is a monster!

I think it looks fantastic – London fell behind other capital cities with regards new and iconic buildings, so great to see the city catch up.

Interestingly, I studied Mies van der Rohe and Ernst Goldfinger at college – some of their work that is now viewed as iconic and of global architectural significance was at the time attacked in a similar way to the Shard. Time will tell, but I reckon in 20 years it will be viewed as a highly significant piece…….

Now when you look at the Walkie talkie, that is a monster!

Now, I like the look of that. We need more curves in buildings!

Explain what you mean by fit in? Would you rather it s brick?

Its all personal opinion, calm down dear 😉

I ” quite ” like it.
I see it most mornings out of LB and watched it grow. I’m of the opinion it’s just a bit unfinished, shame but the top looks like it needs something else.
Impressive structure, mighty build, lacklustre finishing?

Hey, looks good in a sunset though or when the low cloud hangs over the top of it..

I commute along the A24 every day (by bike). When the Shard comes into view just after Clapham Common station, it is one of the things I enjoy most about the journey. The way it looks depends on the quality of light, so it’s appearance is always changing. This week, the early January light has given it an almost ghostly appearance, compounded by the top of the structure which seemed to almost fade into the air as if it was built of dissolving gauze…

I liked it so much, earlier in 2012 I took some piccies…

http://www.flickr.com/photos/dang-nabbit/sets/72157630251465100/

It should serve as a stark reminder to Londoners – a middle finger thrust upwards amongst the other four knuckled down, crouching in reverance – of who’s money really talks in the capital.

We whinge (and rightly so) about the excesses of bankers, and their “more champagne landlord” bonus days as they feed like pigs, wallowing in the delight of another seven figure bonus. But the vulgar wealth of the emirati leaves bankers looking like the shirking dole scroungers with whom they share common ground where morals are concerned. The supercar parades. The drug-fuelled roasting of young girls that would leave footballers disgusted. The £50,000-a-night-suites in London’s finest, where teams will come in and spend a week re-fitting a suite where a goat has been sacrificed on a Friday night. The list goes on.

Every time you look at the Shard and say “Woweeeeeee. Wujalukaddit.”, just remember for a second where that money comes from. And the wealth gap it leaves in its wake. And stare in wonder at it. It’s **** lovely ain’t it?

So, any other financially morally impure buildings we should strike off our list of things that we like to look at, Cromwell?

Everyone’s a downtrodden crusader for moral justice.
Until they want to download a bit of porn, buy an iPad or watch some F1 or footy on the telly.
Get over yourselves.

Oh and BTW:

The drug-fuelled roasting of young girls that would leave footballers disgusted. The £50,000-a-night-suites in London’s finest, where teams will come in and spend a week re-fitting a suite where a goat has been sacrificed on a Friday night.

Huh?

I like it as a building but it’s not right for the London skyline…vulgar is about right in that context. Much more suited to cities like Dubai.

How dull. Are you Charles Windsor?

Its a temple built to honour the gods of greed.

That would be Mammon. Honestly what do they teach youngsters these days?

I likes it.
But I do feel sorry for the roasted young girls and goats.

Even though my tastes lean more towards Hawksmoor, I like it. Saw it for the first time in December from the train into Waterloo and it looked thrilling with its apex in the clouds.

And it is far too restrained for Dubai…

ugly and dischordant IMO

crass, vular, insensitive statement of wealth – meh

ugly though

(who did finance it initially, I wonder ?)

it is ugly, mind

Then again, the French whinged about the Eiffel tower initially so what do I know ?

(except that it’s ugly)

I’m glad it’s in London so the majority of us never see it.

How dull. Are you Charles Windsor?

Who, me? No, I’m the Duke of Cornwall.

Renzo Piano has designed some fantastic buildings, the shard isn’t one of them and the walkietalkie is a shocking building.

I like it…see it most days, not bored with it yet.

I work pretty much next to it. I love it. It is vulgar. It does look out of place. Perhaps it does ruin the London skyline. But then The Eiffel Tower does in Paris (to name just one example). Such conflicts among people is what makes art / architecture so wonderful.

I love iconic buildings – London has some of the best from all point in our history, the Shard may achieve that status.

Personally speaking, I think it looks a little more “robust” than it appeared to be when it was proposed – sort of a dumpy shard rather than an elegant needle.

Still better than Park Hill Flats in Sheffield!

the walkie talkie is rafael vinoly

andyrm – Member

I think it looks fantastic – London fell behind other capital cities with regards new and iconic buildings, so great to see the city catch up.

Interestingly, I studied Mies van der Rohe and Ernst Goldfinger at college – some of their work that is now viewed as iconic and of global architectural significance was at the time attacked in a similar way to the Shard. Time will tell, but I reckon in 20 years it will be viewed as a highly significant piece…….

POSTED 4 HOURS AGO #

I doubt it will still be there in 20 years

^^^ seriously? What do you think is going to happen in 20 years?!

I like it. Some of moral bollocks spouted on here is insane! More so than usual.

I doubt it will still be there in 20 years

Yeah, right! There are pre-fab bungalows still standing fifty-sixty years after they were built, and the O2; basically a big tent, still standing after thirteen years, reckoned to be there for at least fifty. I think you need to get a grip on your sense of timescales.
FWIW, and on this occasion, I’m somewhat astonished at saying this, but I am 100% in agreement with Woppit on this one. Compared to what else there is on the South of the river, the Shard is beautiful, because it tapers away to nothing, and being glass, rather than steel and concrete, it reflects the light around it, constantly changing its appearance. Stand on the South bank and look North, if anyone can honestly say that the skyline looks beautiful, when old, iconic buildings are surrounded and obscured by ugly, rectangular, ranks of mundane office blocks then I’d say they need to go to Specsavers.
Ok, tell me which is the ugly building in this view to the West:

the way that it tapers away is fantastic when you are looking from the ground, the taper gives you a fantastic emphasised perspective from the bottom!