THERE is no shortage of fancy design in the six submissions for the George Square project.
But the human element is in short supply.
The plaza is a place for people-watching. "Going for a paseo", as they say in Spain. "Hingin' aboot", as we say in Glasgow. A place to absorb rays, if there is an outbreak of warm weather. Dejeuner sur l'herbe, should the city fathers put some grass and trees back in. Coffee or an aperitif after work in the Grand Café, under cover if (if?) wet.
(No cans of super lager, please. There will be Greggs and Wetherspoon's for the hoi polloi.)
But George Square is for circuses as well as bread. Time for an architectural clear-out, creating space for concerts, the occasional opera, and a big marquee for art shows. And for protestful public meetings, with room for tanks to be deployed.
The biggest improvement would be replacing the ugly brown box-like building in the northeast corner with something magnificently Victorian.
At the same time, cull the old statues. Come on down, Sir Walter Scott! It will be like Big Brother as Queen Victoria, Prince Albert and William Gladstone are evicted from the square. Sir John Moore leaves without a funeral note. I would keep Robert Burns and James Watt and add Billy Connolly.
The square would be pedestrianised with one lane of slow traffic going east and one west. This means more room for pavement cafés and green grun.
The idea of a reflected surface with people walking on water won't work, not in the shadow of the City Chambers, though the concept of a subtle tartan motif underfoot is appealing.
But first we must identify the city council people responsible for the present red tarmac – and make sure they have no say in decisions on the 21st-century George Square.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article