Scottish outrage?

SIR: I would like to point out the unfortunate omission of the title 'Outrage' from the header of the feature on the new Scottish Parliament in this month's issue (AR November 2004). That the Scottish people have not taken to the streets by the thousand in violent protest at this obscenely irresponsible and most undemocratic [pounds sterling]430 million squandering of their tax money, is quite remarkable.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

While interesting in its origins and intentions, and certainly dexterous in its technical execution, what has resulted is an utterly dreadful building that is worthy of nothing but severe condemnation on multiple levels. It is a cankerous posthumous blot on the career of a very good architect, and Ms Slessor's gentle and rather pandering critique of it is quite disappointing.

On the upside, as a South African, I did enjoy the space given in the same issue to a couple of projects from my native country. I hope that we can look forward to further attention by AR to a fast-growing body of very interesting work happening in that part of the world.

Yours etc

JAMES KELLY 

Santa Monica, CA, USA

Catherine Slessor replies: As a Scot in exile, I am proud that my fellow countrymen are reacting to their new parliament in such a mature and reflective way. Far from rioting, on my visit they were eagerly exploring the building and forming their own judgments about it. It certainly does not please everyone, and its cost is undoubtedly an issue for public concern, but it adds to the continuum of architecture in Edinburgh in a distinctive and dramatic way that would have hitherto been thought unthinkable. Time will tell if it does turn out to be a 'cankerous blot' or something rather better--a bold and enlightened assertion of national identity. My money's on the latter.