"I didn't say we should shut Big Ears up"---

"...matters way beyond their purview... Prince Big-Ears burbling on about architecture, sort of thing..."
.,,.,.
I can't see tho, Steve, that you have said anything to disqualify him from commenting. I mean, why "burbling"; you might agree or otherwise with the views he expresses, but that belittling 'burbling' is a desperately & grossly tendentiously pejorative question-beg on your part, in no way invalidating what he says, but somehow implying that he has, for reasons you sedulously avoid sharing with us, not intelligence equivalent to that of the egregiously brilliant Steve Shaw to appreciate the points at issue. You make no concession to the fact that architecture, uniquely among the arts, affects everyone because, unlike all the others, being exposed to its manifestations is not voluntary, or needing to be sought by the participant, but unavoidably visible to all. Which means that anyone has a right to comment on its effect, and those fortunate enough to have a public platform to do so should be judged by what they say, not by how they contrived to mount that platform in the first place. You may think Prince Charles a fool, though, I reiterate, you have produced not a shred of a reason for such an opinion ~~ I wonder what would be his view of your capacities and intelligence? He happens, among all else, to hold an Upper Second degree from Cambridge - and don't try to be smartarse about that: Cambridge examiners don't just give II.1s away to anyone: his brother Edward came nowhere near getting so good a result. & what may be your qualifications, just out of interest, that you appear to think give you the right to speak so slightingly of his capacities and opinions?

I have already expressed my agreement with you about bishops, who are quite a different case, so why drag them into it again?

~M~