{"id":779982,"date":"2025-03-24T08:31:57","date_gmt":"2025-03-24T08:31:57","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/?p=779982"},"modified":"2025-03-25T08:28:17","modified_gmt":"2025-03-25T08:28:17","slug":"the-queen-elizabeth-ii-memorial-contest-fails-to-reflect-a-meritocratic-britain","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/news\/opinion\/the-queen-elizabeth-ii-memorial-contest-fails-to-reflect-a-meritocratic-britain","title":{"rendered":"The Queen Elizabeth II Memorial contest fails to reflect a meritocratic Britain\u00a0"},"content":{"rendered":"

In 1900, newly-appointed Bishop Francis James Chavasse decided to hold an open two-stage competition for a new cathedral in his diocese. The competition aroused considerable national interest and 103 submissions were received in total, several from some of the greatest architects of the day, including the likes of Charles Reilly and Charles Rennie Mackintosh.<\/p>\n

But neither of them was amongst the five selected finalists and, when the eventual winner was announced in 1903, there was widespread shock that he was a 22-year-old unknown architect whose only previous commission had been a pipe-rack. His name was Giles Gilbert Scott and his winning design for Liverpool Anglican Cathedral stands as one of Britain\u2019s greatest churches. But if his competition had followed the same route as the current Queen Elizabeth II Memorial contest, he would not have been allowed to enter in the first place.<\/p>\n

Last month, it was announced that five architects had been selected<\/a> for the shortlist to design a memorial to history\u2019s second-longest serving monarch. The shortlist features some of the foremost designers of the day including Norman Foster, Thomas Heatherwick and WilkinsonEyre. But, unlike Liverpool Cathedral, and unlike most architectural competitions, none of the finalists has yet submitted a single design for their brief.<\/p>\n

Instead, the shortlist was compiled on the basis of previous projects and multidisciplinary aptitude. How on earth \u2013 for a project of this immense national, historical, cultural and aesthetic significance \u2013 should the decision be based on a shortlist of designers, rather than designs?<\/p>\n

Surprisingly, within the extensive annals of royal memorial history, this approach does have some precedents. The last memorial of this magnitude was triggered by the death of Queen Victoria in 1901 and, when it was announced that the competition for her stupendous memorial in front of Buckingham Palace was to be similarly limited to five selected architects and a preordained sculptor, there was public outrage. Even the RIBA, which has not publicly commented on Elizabeth II\u2019s memorial, convened an extraordinary meeting to formally protest.<\/p>\n

Part of the reason for this hostility was because the decision to limit entrants violated the long-established 19th century tradition of holding open competitions for major civic architectural projects. Some of our most famous public buildings were designed in this way, including Manchester Town Hall, Leeds Town Hall, Liverpool\u2019s St George\u2019s Hall, the Foreign Office, the Royal Exchange and the V&A. Even the design for one of the most famous buildings in the world, the Palace of Westminster, was selected in this manner, as was our most recent royal memorial, the Diana Memorial Fountain.<\/p>\n

While many of the winners of these competitions were established architects, others, such as 29-year-old Cuthbert Brodick of Leeds Town Hall and 25-year-old Harvey Lonsdale Elmes of St George\u2019s Hall, were unknown and unestablished. Closed competitions therefore would have robbed Britain of some of the most memorable contributors to our urban landscape and architectural heritage. On a project as nationally symbolic as the late Queen\u2019s memorial, are we really saying that a 21st<\/sup> century Britain supposedly committed to social mobility and cultural inclusivity is less willing to endorse these values through the virtuoso ingenuity of the unknown artist than our 19th century forbears?<\/p>\n

The unfortunate conclusion some will draw from the current competition is that it says more about an establishment keen to award gongs to its acolytes than it does about either Elizabeth II or the country she served for 70 years. Others might defend it, as a 1901 Times<\/em> editorial discussing the Queen Victoria Memorial did, on the grounds that \u2018the best artists often decline to enter open competitions\u2019. Others may even share the disdain about the open competition process voiced by none other than Norman Shaw, who, despite being one of the judges of the Liverpool Cathedral competition, complained to his wife that the entries were \u2018really a very poor show, a few men strong, but the overwhelming number just twaddle\u2019.<\/em><\/p>\n

What is certain is that in 200 years time, when people visit St James\u2019s Park and gaze up at the Queen Elizabeth II Memorial, not a single one of them will be more interested in the shortlist than they are in the design. It is a pity we do not share their preference.<\/p>\n

Ike Ijeh is a writer and architect and also head of housing, architecture & urban space at Policy Exchange<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

In 1900, newly-appointed Bishop Francis James Chavasse decided to hold an open two-stage competition for a new cathedral in his diocese. The competition aroused considerable national interest and 103 submissions were received in total, several from some of the greatest architects of the day, including the likes of Charles Reilly and Charles Rennie Mackintosh. But …<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":81462,"featured_media":780031,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_oasis_is_in_workflow":0,"_oasis_original":0,"ep_exclude_from_search":false},"categories":[745],"tags":[1288,2744,101398],"yoast_head":"\nThe Queen Elizabeth II Memorial contest fails to reflect a meritocratic Britain\u00a0<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"In picking designers rather than designs, the architectural competition for this new national memorial somehow manages to be less progressive than those of the Victorian era, writes Ike Ijeh\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/news\/opinion\/the-queen-elizabeth-ii-memorial-contest-fails-to-reflect-a-meritocratic-britain\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_GB\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"The Queen Elizabeth II Memorial contest fails to reflect a meritocratic Britain\u00a0\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"In picking designers rather than designs, the architectural competition for this new national memorial somehow manages to be less progressive than those of the Victorian era, writes Ike Ijeh\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/news\/opinion\/the-queen-elizabeth-ii-memorial-contest-fails-to-reflect-a-meritocratic-britain\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"The Architects\u2019 Journal\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2025-03-24T08:31:57+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2025-03-25T08:28:17+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/cdn.rt.emap.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/4\/2025\/03\/24083029\/AJ-A-Monument-for-a-Monarch-1024x682.webp\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1024\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"682\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/webp\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Ike Ijeh\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Ike Ijeh\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Estimated reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"4 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/news\/opinion\/the-queen-elizabeth-ii-memorial-contest-fails-to-reflect-a-meritocratic-britain\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/news\/opinion\/the-queen-elizabeth-ii-memorial-contest-fails-to-reflect-a-meritocratic-britain\",\"name\":\"The Queen Elizabeth II Memorial contest fails to reflect a meritocratic Britain\u00a0\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2025-03-24T08:31:57+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2025-03-25T08:28:17+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/#\/schema\/person\/5d889404f402300f450f1805eb4668fa\"},\"description\":\"In picking designers rather than designs, the architectural competition for this new national memorial somehow manages to be less progressive than those of the Victorian era, writes Ike Ijeh\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/news\/opinion\/the-queen-elizabeth-ii-memorial-contest-fails-to-reflect-a-meritocratic-britain#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-GB\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/news\/opinion\/the-queen-elizabeth-ii-memorial-contest-fails-to-reflect-a-meritocratic-britain\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/news\/opinion\/the-queen-elizabeth-ii-memorial-contest-fails-to-reflect-a-meritocratic-britain#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"The Queen Elizabeth II Memorial contest fails to reflect a meritocratic Britain\u00a0\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/\",\"name\":\"The Architects\u2019 Journal\",\"description\":\"Architecture News & Buildings\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":\"required name=search_term_string\"}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-GB\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/#\/schema\/person\/5d889404f402300f450f1805eb4668fa\",\"name\":\"Ike Ijeh\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-GB\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/536471182d775918652114ceef875836\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/aafb392aea741888fc9ecd8424547edd?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/aafb392aea741888fc9ecd8424547edd?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Ike Ijeh\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/author\/ike-ijeh-2\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"The Queen Elizabeth II Memorial contest fails to reflect a meritocratic Britain\u00a0","description":"In picking designers rather than designs, the architectural competition for this new national memorial somehow manages to be less progressive than those of the Victorian era, writes Ike Ijeh","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/news\/opinion\/the-queen-elizabeth-ii-memorial-contest-fails-to-reflect-a-meritocratic-britain","og_locale":"en_GB","og_type":"article","og_title":"The Queen Elizabeth II Memorial contest fails to reflect a meritocratic Britain\u00a0","og_description":"In picking designers rather than designs, the architectural competition for this new national memorial somehow manages to be less progressive than those of the Victorian era, writes Ike Ijeh","og_url":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/news\/opinion\/the-queen-elizabeth-ii-memorial-contest-fails-to-reflect-a-meritocratic-britain","og_site_name":"The Architects\u2019 Journal","article_published_time":"2025-03-24T08:31:57+00:00","article_modified_time":"2025-03-25T08:28:17+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1024,"height":682,"url":"https:\/\/cdn.rt.emap.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/4\/2025\/03\/24083029\/AJ-A-Monument-for-a-Monarch-1024x682.webp","type":"image\/webp"}],"author":"Ike Ijeh","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Ike Ijeh","Estimated reading time":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/news\/opinion\/the-queen-elizabeth-ii-memorial-contest-fails-to-reflect-a-meritocratic-britain","url":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/news\/opinion\/the-queen-elizabeth-ii-memorial-contest-fails-to-reflect-a-meritocratic-britain","name":"The Queen Elizabeth II Memorial contest fails to reflect a meritocratic Britain\u00a0","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/#website"},"datePublished":"2025-03-24T08:31:57+00:00","dateModified":"2025-03-25T08:28:17+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/#\/schema\/person\/5d889404f402300f450f1805eb4668fa"},"description":"In picking designers rather than designs, the architectural competition for this new national memorial somehow manages to be less progressive than those of the Victorian era, writes Ike Ijeh","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/news\/opinion\/the-queen-elizabeth-ii-memorial-contest-fails-to-reflect-a-meritocratic-britain#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-GB","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/news\/opinion\/the-queen-elizabeth-ii-memorial-contest-fails-to-reflect-a-meritocratic-britain"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/news\/opinion\/the-queen-elizabeth-ii-memorial-contest-fails-to-reflect-a-meritocratic-britain#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"The Queen Elizabeth II Memorial contest fails to reflect a meritocratic Britain\u00a0"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/","name":"The Architects\u2019 Journal","description":"Architecture News & Buildings","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":"required name=search_term_string"}],"inLanguage":"en-GB"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/#\/schema\/person\/5d889404f402300f450f1805eb4668fa","name":"Ike Ijeh","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-GB","@id":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/536471182d775918652114ceef875836","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/aafb392aea741888fc9ecd8424547edd?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/aafb392aea741888fc9ecd8424547edd?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Ike Ijeh"},"url":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/author\/ike-ijeh-2"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/779982"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/81462"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=779982"}],"version-history":[{"count":8,"href":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/779982\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":780072,"href":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/779982\/revisions\/780072"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/780031"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=779982"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=779982"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=779982"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}