LETTER: Paternoster Square revisited

Roger Houghton
Saturday 13 January 1996 00:02 GMT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

From Mr Roger Houghton

Sir: The fault of the Paternoster Square scheme is not its neo-classicism but its attempt to hide behind a superficial and poorly executed layer of classical style.

The classical orders are as relevant a basis for architectural design 1,500 years after Rome as they were 1,300 years after. Their past use in the British Isles has shown them to be ideally suited to the urban environments and as adaptable to domestic use as to civic.

Yours faithfully,

Roger Houghton

Bath

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in