London’s Tallest Buildings: A Bitchy Architectural Critique

The Londonist article, “London’s 100 Tallest Buildings: Bitchily Reviewed,” offers a hilariously cynical and highly subjective appraisal of the capital’s loftiest structures, including a few non-building structures for “diversity.” The authors, claiming “in-depth expert architectural nous,” provide witty, often scathing, commentary rather than formal architectural analysis, warning designers not to sue for their playful insults.

The article’s core definition is a humorous deconstruction of modern urban architecture, critiquing the aesthetic and conceptual failures of many prominent London towers. While not explicitly discussing “benefits” or “risks” in a conventional sense, the reviews implicitly highlight the subjective impact of design choices. Positive remarks are rare, reserved for buildings like the “roundly brilliant” London Eye, the “more lovely and more temperate” Shakespeare Tower, and the “sharp, handsome” Scalpel. The BT Tower is lauded as a “Whovian masterpiece,” and The Shard receives a lighthearted nod for “helping drunk south Londoners find their way home.” The Cheesegrater is even praised for “politely lean[ing] out of the St Paul’s sightline.

However, the vast majority of reviews are unflattering, exposing perceived “risks” in bland, uninspired, or even offensive design. Examples of architectural blunders abound: the Stratosphere Tower is dubbed the “height of ugliness,” Conington Road a “colossal Pantone chart ranging from Bisto to piss,” and Centre Point a “selfish fillet of mid-century land-grabbing.” Other buildings are likened to a “cheese grater” (25 Churchill Place), a “broken Gillette trimmer” (Strata SE1), or a “monstrosity” that elephants don’t deserve to be associated with (One The Elephant). The Walkie-Talkie is depicted as “hunched over in perpetual shame,” while DAMAC Tower Nine Elms is sarcastically attributed to a drunken Minecraft session. The article humorously underscores how many tall buildings contribute to a visually cluttered or uninspiring skyline, often failing to justify their prominent presence.

(Source: https://londonist.com/london/features/londons-100-tallest-buildings-reviewed)