• The post you are reporting:
   
  I think it is possible to agree with a number of things, such as the market square is a mess in terms of an ordered, stylish space and the buildings are haphazardly designed. It is also true that the fountain seems a little sad/silly sat in the middle.
  
  That being said the screen has clearly been a success and I feel a brave asset to the the town. It is possible to make statements calling it too modern, an eyesore or just ugly, but what do people expect...it's a TV!
  
  TVs are ugly fixed units that dominate modernity, orientating the viewers and putting them into a semi-sociable trance. In the last ten years I have seen bigger and bigger TVs in people's homes, as technology improves and prices come down. At a micro level I would suggest that 90% of people have a TV that is proportionally more ridiculous then the one in the market square. On top of this is the stupid planning term of 'in keeping' - something that blighted progress since the Town and Country planning act. Apply this to the interior of our home in the way planners apply it to the exteriors ( which I would argue inform one another) and no one would even have a TV...unless of course you lived in a modern building.
  
  Perhaps to please the haters of the Big Screen we should construct one of those cabinets that some people keep their TVs in. My Nan had one; chipboard with a mahogany formica finish.
  
  Or we could take a leaf out of Canterbury's planning approach and construct a Disneyland style Georgian facade in front of it to conceal the reality behind. There is added amusement with this, in that it would feel like we were Lilliputians watching Telly through somebody's window.
  
  I quite like the screen, it's not perfect but it is certainly a success.
  
  I also quite like the Gateway Flats and feel that they are misunderstood.

Report Post

Your Name

Reason