Both, and more. The great man advised that “To take a photograph is to align the head, the eye and the heart. It’s a way of life.” Henri Cartier-Bresson.

Yes to all those questions – and maybe human nature and socialism has certain incompatibilities. As they used to say ‘if a man is not a socialist at 20, he has no heart, and if he is still a socialist at 30, he has no head’.

Perhaps the dichotomy between socialism and capitalism which began with Marx is misconceived? Maybe we are in a post-Marxian period and need a whole new economic theory on which to build philosophical discussions about the nature of society?

Do democracies provide sufficiently plenipotentiary powers for good urban design? Alas, no, but thank goodness they don’t. As Churchill remarked: “Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.” (from a House of Commons speech on Nov. 11, 1947) . As discussed elsewhere on this blog, I think Rogers is a good architect but a bad urban designer, And as an aspiring socialist I think he should have responded to the offer of a barony with ‘thanks, but no thanks’. Then he could be on the list of people who have declined a British honour Churchill, for example, declined the offer of becoming Duke of London..

So is Richard Rogers in the postmodern sense of ‘and/both’: good and wise and good at design with the ability to climb greasy poles? If so London would be fortunate to have his services in urban design. Does a Baron-ship give you the necessary ‘plenipotentiary powers to take important decisions’?