An updated, postmodern value framework for architecture preservation is needed to protect buildings that are young or ubiquitous as well as those that are exceptional, writes Owen Hopkins.

It's not uncommon for architects and clients to disagree. In fact, it's often better that they don't entirely see eye-to-eye. A lively exchange of ideas and opinions often leads to a better building.
However, it is unusual for a client ? or rather funder in this case ? to disagree so much with one aspect of the design that they leave a letter hidden inside anticipating its future removal and their ultimate vindication. Yet, as was reported last week, this is exactly what happened when a column in the foyer of the Sainsbury Wing of the National Gallery in London was removed as part of Selldorf Architects' controversial remodelling of Venturi Scott Brown's famous scheme. It is hard to imagine any other Grade I-listed building in Britain being treated this way
The letter, from the project's funder, John Sainsbury, who died in 2022, relayed how he thought the column was a "mistake" that "we would live to regret" and how his future self would be "absolutely delighted that your generation has decided to dispense with the unnecessary columns".
Anywhere else this would simply be an amusing incident and example of the age-old tussle between architect and client. But here it brings to the fore once again the argument around the Sainsbury Wing's transformation, of whic...