Thursday, July 05, 2012

Shard



Compare and contrast

7 comments:

mikesview said...

Father, I think (and so does my dear wife) that the shard is lacking in any virtue whatever. That's a polite summary of our view. Does that mean that we are, to quote Fr. Z's blog, 'unreconstructed, ossified manualists'?
By the way, what exactly ARE unreconstructed, ossified manualists?

Terry Nelson said...

I actually love it. But I also appreciate your comparison to the other tower - Babel.

bob said...

can't see any similarity, either theologically or physically.

Whether anyone will want to work up there is another matter.

It could be more of a white elephant than the first Canary wharf tower; poor gov't bearocrats had to be shipped out to that forgotten peninsula.

Paul, Bedfordshire said...

Does make it easy to find london bridge station if you've lost your map though ;-)

Nicolas Bellord said...

The fact is that some 50 or 60 years ago the skyline of London was dominated by Church towers and steeples. To-day it is dominated by the towers of the financial services industry. Both point to heaven but with different concepts of what heaven is.

nickbris said...

The view from the top when the viewing gallery is open next year will be well worth the £20 fee.

To go up that pile of scrap in Stratford they are going to charge £15.

It is not intended to be HQ for a Mega-Bank but there is a good chance that only Bankers could afford the luxury apartments.

I never did understand why St Pauls was considered to be the most beautiful building in the Universe and that views of it should always be protected;it is Fat and Ugly. I have become prejudiced since they started charging for entry.

The Fact Compiler said...

Having been in the Gherkin I suspect the views will be fabulous.

Yours

The Fact Compiler UOM