To suffer from a split personality is to suffer from a dangerous and disagreeable disease. It lays the patient open to accusations of double-talk, double-think, and double-dealing, not to mention the perils of double-entendre. All these allegations have been made against me by kind friends, or former friends, who find it incomprehensible that I should try to combine in one persona the attributes on the one hand, of a very much committed conservationist; on the other hand, of an equally committed housing boss. I have accepted the challenging invitation to give this lecture in order to defend myself, if I can, against the charge of duplicity.

The fundamental question is this: is there in truth an inherent conflict between the considerations which motivate a conservationist - respect for the past; concern for amenity and the environment; a passionate interest in appearance, aesthetics, and architectural merit - and those other more workaday considerations which must motivate the provider and administrator of publicly-provided housing - practicality, efficiency and above all, economy?

The question would not need to be asked if the theory of functionalism had not been conclusively exploded over the past half-century: I mean the half-baked theory of the early twentieth-century puritans that whatever was strictly functional was bound to be beautiful too. The two may coincide, as for example in simple works of engineering like bridges; more often, as alas in so many office blocks or blocks of flats, the utilitarian is not merely not beautiful, it is egregiously unbeautiful...