195 replies to this topic

[Stone]

Well, I expect some may disagree with me. But it seems that one of the gravest dangers to society that has come out of the computer culture is not uncaring moderation of food forums, but the ease at which architects can use computer programs to design pretty much anything that can be pushed, pulled, and twisted with CAD-like software. Add to this advances in building materials and a complete abdication of responsibility by city planning offices and we are slowly destroying old neighborhoods and creating cartoonish landscapes that should never appear outside Dr. Seuss.

Almost complete on the Lower East Side is the "Blue" building:





17 stories of luxury condos. What inspired it? Perhaps the architect saw a piece of broken plastic on the ground. It's asymetrical, boldly blue, choppy, and looks like a piece of space garbage that dropped out of the sky. Sure, it would be interesting as a model in the foyer of an architects studio. But should any city have to live with this thing for generations? The LES, one of the cities last enclaves of history -- especially immigrant history -- is being shit upon by these abominable odes to architectual ego.

[Blondie]

Great minds think alike, Stone.

[Rail Paul]

Architecture seems to move in trends. During the 1960s, a wall of huge high rises rose on Sixth Avenue in the 50s. Stevens, Exxon, Time Life, Paine Webber, etc. People hated them. Now they're classics.

Yet, their open courtyards and generous setbacks offer a change from similar office buildings on Park Avenue in the upper 40s and 50s.

I like the look of the Richard Meier glass buildings on West Street, among which is the Perry Street restaurant. There's an openess to the waterfront, and a harmony with neighboring brick maritime buildings from the 1860s and 1870s.

[omnivorette]

I hate that Blue thing. And I hate that thing on Astor, across from the subway. And I hate all these all-glass things everywhere.

[Maurice Naughton]

Well, I expect some may disagree with me.

Heavens to Betsy, you do?!!! Whysoever so? Howsoever come? Experience, maybe.

[Lippy]

Blue building, designed by Bernard Tschumi.

Tschumi was the Dean of Columbia's school of architecture, planning and preservation for a number of years, including the time I was in the preservation program.

Architectural design is driven by technology, e.g., the skyscraper was not possible until the invention of a usable elevator. The radical new forms we are seeing, and, for the most part, hating, are driven by the technology of CAD - computer-aided design. Young architects find buildings like these exciting. Whether the rest of us will come 'round in 30-50 years, I can't say, although I can't say no unequivocally, either.

[omnivorette]

I like the thing that Zeckendorf is building on CPW.

[Lippy]

That's Robert A. M. Stern, who was the head of the preservation program at Columbia at the same time Tschumi was dean. Stern is now the dean of the school of architecture at Yale. Stern is very successful, of course, but it is possible that he will be remembered more for producing the invaulable five-volume series on the history of NYC architecture than he will be for any of his buildings, as pleasant and easy to like as they are.

(BTW, he was a very tough teacher. If you've survived a critque by Bob Stern, you're ready for anything.)

[lovelynugget]

Its fugly twin.

The Westin Hotel in Times Square. With an even uglier mustard-colored goiter at the base.

[Lippy]

It seems fine to me in Times Square, where cacophony is appropriate.

[lovelynugget]

I disagree. It's ugly for anywhere.

[Lippy]

That's what they used to say about the Eiffel Tower...

[Blondie]

I disagree. It's ugly for anywhere.

I agree with lovelynugget. I can't find anything aesthetically redeeming about it.

This is no Eiffel Tower.

[Lippy]

Architecture is about more than aesthetics, though (although that is what strikes us first.) It's also about meaning, social commentary and cultural values that change over time. The Eiffel Tower is a good example of that kind of change. We think it's a beautiful symbol of Paris at its most romantic. When it was built, it was a technological marvel. Aestethics had nothing to do with it. We came 'round.

[Stone]

Well, I would better understand the meaning, social commentary and cultural values of this box if it were built by Stalin:


The problem with ugly architecture, unlike bad books, movies and food, is that we are all stuck with it for generations.