Just because a building is designed by a famous architect, doesn't mean it's not crap. So says an opinion piece in AM NY:The glass menagerie
Photo from AMNY.com
Just because a building is designed by a famous architect, doesn't mean it's not crap. So says an opinion piece in AM NY:
8 comments:
Not crap, really. From some angles it looks really cool, from others not so great. The word crap should be reserved for something with the word Fedders on the front.
Maybe he'll incorporate the Fedders design into Atlantic Yards.
Crap is crap.....and the emperor isn't wearing any clothes either!
Some people will believe in anything.....led by the nose of public opinion....if it's "big-brand" named and "hyped" often enough.
They've got no courage to "call a spade a spade"!
Having a Gehry building in your city (even if it's a bad one) is like being proud of sporting an ugly diamond encrusted "pimp's Rolex!
There IS such a thing as "high-quality-celebrity architect-crap".....and (sorry) this is it!
Yeah....if Gehry or Picasso or Rembrandt takes a crap on my front lawn am I supposed to like it......kneel down in prayer or put it on E-bay?
And what about that fake, fraud LeCorbusier? The Cabrini-Green Houses in Chicago were based on his "artistic concepts", plagued with drugs, guns, and whores?
Long live Friedensreich Hundertwasser!
These buildings are getting worse. The architects and those who commission them are so self absorbed that they do not care or notice.
Perhaps one of the reasons is that many people with power and influence today have, shall we gently say, no exposure or acceptance of the values of good taste?
Garish ungainly and ugly. Exactly what you would expect from someone who knows nothing in life but being a stock churner, how to hollow out a company, or sleazily purveys for what passes for popular culture.
They are not giants, nor should we treat them as such. They are little boys with inflated egos.
They need a time out. Ratner, Suna, Davidoff, add to the list as you desire.
I normally don't like Gehry's stuff, but this building is different and I was admiring it even before I knew who designed it. It's a standout, especially in the ugly neighborhood where it's located.
Gehry's buildings are structurally designed to stand up well mainly in warm dry climates where the annual contraction and expansion cycles don't affect the integrity of the complicated sealing systems that are required to acomodate his complex designs.
They will not weather well and prove very costly to maintain , over the long term, in a temperate climate such as ours.
That's BAD DESIGN! It's all about EGO over common sense (both the architect's and NYC's)!
The old Bauhaus School edict...."FORM FOLLOWS FUNCTION"....has been violated in this particular Gehry design.
A building has to suit the climate of its environment.
We're all being taken for a ride.
I love the artistic value of many of Gehry's works as art or sculpture......not as buildings set in the rain and snow belt of the Northeast....where driving rain and cold will , eventually, compromise and penetrate the those undulating multi planed facades!
It's more appropriate for Arizona!
In this case, he's strong on art but weak on engineering....in siting this building in NYC as it would not be suited to our climate .
I wouldn't place a Gehry building in a harsh climate any more than I'd put a Matisse painting on a fire escape at the mercy of the elements.
Post a Comment