A Daily Dose of Architecture
(Almost) daily architectural musings from New York City
Friday, October 28, 2005
Two buildings have opened their doors, as reported by World Architecture News:

Coop Himmelb(l)au's Munich Academy of Fine Arts.

Norman Foster's Leslie L. Dan Building for the Faculty of Pharmacy at the University of Toronto.
2 Comments:
- At Sunday, October 30, 2005 10:26:00 AM, edifik said...
-
Hello,
Your blog is very interesting and I really like it.
If you're interested in 3D computer generated pictures for architecture or urbanism you might have a look at mine !
http://www.edifik.fr/blog/edifiknews.html
it's in french, but you can easely translate it !
you can also visit http://www.edifik.fr with a few examples of my work. - At Sunday, October 30, 2005 7:56:00 PM, Rajio said...
-
That UofT building, I pass every day on my way to and from studio. Its very much not open yet. (ofcourse, according to the original schedule it should be open by now) but its far from complete.
Don't know where or when this originated, but I couldn't resist passing it along (text version here). Thanks to Scott P. for sending me this.
4 Comments:
- At Monday, October 31, 2005 5:57:00 AM, Midoriiro said...
-
It may well be true... I have a good friend who tells women he meets in bars he's an architect (he is a computer programmer) as he believes they find architects sexier than computer programmers.
- At Monday, November 07, 2005 12:52:00 PM, said...
-
I believe that David Rock was president of the RIBA in 1997, so this article is probably from around that time...it would be nice to have an updated opinion poll to see if we are still the sexiest.
Fab - At Monday, November 07, 2005 12:52:00 PM, said...
-
I believe that David Rock was president of the RIBA in 1997, so this article is probably from around that time...it would be nice to have an updated opinion poll to see if we are still the sexiest.
Fab - At Thursday, November 10, 2005 7:28:00 AM, said...
-
That is hilarious! Coming from a woman architect to all other foolish women out there. . . Maybe architects ARE sexy, but they certainly do not make the ideal life partner. At the end of the day, architects tend to be dedicated to just one thing. Take a guess as to what that may be . . . This might sound like a generalization, but that dedication is an unspoken job requirement.
Thursday, October 27, 2005

Above is a section of a suburban sprawl panorama by Matt Jalbert. More photos at his web page, Exuberance.
(via RUT)
3 Comments:
- At Thursday, October 27, 2005 4:06:00 PM, Redd said...
-
those kind of pictures move me...you have a force ruining the beauty...and you see it in the background.
?is he using "auto-stitcher" to make his panoramas you think? - At Thursday, October 27, 2005 9:10:00 PM, Naked Boy said...
-
Developers suck moose cock.
- At Friday, October 28, 2005 12:55:00 PM, said...
-
its pictures like this, that make me want to bang my head against a steel spiked wall screaming, "Why God must we live in such a faceless place."
Tuesday, October 25, 2005
Not to be outdone by Christopher Carley's Fordham Spire, the Chicago Tribune reports that Paul Beitler and LR Development are proposing "a futuristic, tweezer-shaped broadcast tower looming 2,000 feet over the lakefront...At the top would be several floors for restaurants and an observation deck, and at the base would be a 400-car garage." Designed by supertall maestro Cesar Pelli, the design "isn't Buck Rogers architecture. It's Duck Dodgers design, utterly daffy, a cartoonish version of tomorrow," according to Blair Kamin.
As I posted about months ago, the Fordham Spire is within spitting distance of my office window. Now if I walk to the other side of the office, the broadcast tower would grace that northerly skyline. These two proposals are less than one city block away from each other. Notably, the broadcast tower (aka the "Tweezer" and officially called "Tall Tower" by the creative powers that be) sits directly west of Lake Point Tower across Lake Shore Drive. Lake Point Tower is such a beloved building that until these two proposals, no tower in the Streeterville area could break that building's height. At 645', each tower would more than triple it.
Pardon the crudeness of this graphic, but I couldn't help but fashion a photomontage envisioning these two 2,000 ft neighbors. My eyeball guesswork may even err on the shorter side when compared to this official photomontage. Click image for larger size.

Update: Lynn Becker raises some good points.
14 Comments:
- At Tuesday, October 25, 2005 7:29:00 PM, said...
-
ohmy..thats a pretty ugly observation deck//broadcast tower. seriously whats the point?
http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?threadid=90005
also gotta love the lord of the rings comparison. - At Tuesday, October 25, 2005 10:13:00 PM, said...
-
If I thought that the ‘Tall Tower’ looked OK-but-not-that-wonderful when shown as a stand alone, your graphic made me realize what a HUGE mistake it would be to have those two towers so close to each other. It is terrible in its proposed context – and I’ve come to realize - probably just plain terrible in general . Aside from the revenue generated from the garage/restaurant/observation deck (aka greed), is there any technical reasons why this has to be next to the lake? Without those three elements, would this even get built? Can't we let the suburbs have this one? They could put an 'Olive Garden' at the top of it.
- At Wednesday, October 26, 2005 12:55:00 AM, Frank said...
-
So now Paul has added a letter to the beginning of his name for credibility.
Reminds me of the CN Tower. If he want to do something really cool, build it out in the middle of the lake. And have an underground tram to get there for drinks, dinner, and marriage proposals. Could you imagine seeing it all alone out in the lake? And the views back to downtown from the observation deck would be fantastic. - At Wednesday, October 26, 2005 9:37:00 AM, said...
-
How did the developers miss the fact that Congress is currently discussing the process to end broadcast TV by 2009?
- At Wednesday, October 26, 2005 10:23:00 AM, John said...
-
Relocating it to the lake isn't a bad concept, but then it would cost as much as the Spire. And given that Beitler and LR are proposing this to build tall without spending too much, that's definitely out of the question.
Not only is the proposed location silly - given its proximity to the Spire - but its reason for existence is even more silly. From what I've heard, RBD, Congress isn't working to end broadcast TV by 2009, they're working to ensure HDTV by that date, which still could be broadcast. But given that most people use cable or satellite for their TV reception, building a 2000' antenna is insane.
As far as building in the 'burbs, the suburban NIMBY's will much more up in arms about this than the Streeterville 'hood, which seems to be in favor of the Spire but would never allow the Tweezers. I'm remembering a Simpsons episode where a cellular phone antenna was installed in their house, specifically in Lisa's room. Like that, this proposal will be a work of fiction. - At Wednesday, October 26, 2005 5:00:00 PM, said...
-
good source about Famous architects
- At Wednesday, October 26, 2005 5:38:00 PM, said...
-
Since when is Lake Point Tower a "beloved building?" It is one of the biggest mistakes this city has ever made, enough so that they passed laws that you can't do anything like it (east of Lake Shore Drive) ever again!
I say build the Tall Tower. I, too, don't like the location but I can see this becoming a beloved icon 20 years from now, just as the Hancock is today. They need to make it looks a little more like a skyscraper though, and the lighting at night has to be really cool, or else, I agree, that it will be a mistake. - At Wednesday, October 26, 2005 8:31:00 PM, Bryan said...
-
I think the idea is meant to steal attention away from Calatrava's drill bit. I doubt either the Drill Bit or the Tweezers will get built.
Does Chicago need a 2000' antenna, anyways? And if they do, in downtown?
Clearly a case of "look at me! look at me!" in my opinion - At Thursday, October 27, 2005 9:21:00 AM, edifik said...
-
Love your blog.
mine is talking about architecture and 3d renderings. it's in french.
http://www.edifik.fr/blog/edifiknews.html
or
http://www.edifik.fr - At Saturday, October 29, 2005 4:04:00 PM, Frank said...
-
Do you think Paul is just trying to undermine the possiblity of the spiral getting built out of jealousy?
- At Monday, November 14, 2005 7:12:00 PM, Jim Online said...
-
The bulding may look ugly, but I think it is a marvelous architectural feat. The difficulty lies on the intricate design and it will a big challenge to the crew who will do it. This will be a monumental breakthrough and will encourage a lot of designers to go naive with their designs.
- At Wednesday, November 16, 2005 8:22:00 PM, said...
-
I like both the Tweezer tower and The drill bit. I would be dissapointed if they were not built. They would add a lot to Chicago. These buildings are AMAZING!!! They have to be built!
- At Wednesday, November 16, 2005 8:31:00 PM, said...
-
!!! WOW !!!
These towers are both amazing, I would love to have these built in Chicago. Chicago needs some new buildings and I believe these two would be perfect! I love how Chicago already has the tallest building in the Nation, yet we are topping ourselves. I think it would be nice to have the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd, tallest in the nation.These towers obviousley have "The WOW Factor". - At Monday, December 19, 2005 5:12:00 PM, said...
-
I definitely feel Chicago should top itself, but not with the Fordham Spire. It just doesn't belong in Chicago. I don't mind the looks of the Tall Tower, but I completely object to the location. No towers that big should be built close to the lake, it would create a center point and ruin the openess of Navy Pier and the parks.
1 Comments:
- At Wednesday, October 26, 2005 12:58:00 AM, Frank said...
-
Did you know he sat in on N's thesis? He suggested she should sink Lake Shore Drive underground between North Ave and Oak St on her project.
Monday, October 24, 2005
My weekly page update:

LVMH Osaka in Osaka, Japan by Kengo Kuma.
The updated book feature is The Unsettling of America: Culture & Agriculture, by Wendell Berry.
Some unrelated links for your enjoyment:
Stories in Practice
"Bridging architectural education and practice [by] experimenting with the Blog as a new medium for exploring issues in the practice of architecture." Click on Class Blog-Links for individual pages. (added to sidebar under blogs::architecture)
Inventioneering Architecture
"A showcase for Swiss architectural teaching and contemporary Swiss architecture," with audio and video clips. Ongoing.
onesmallproject
Web page of the forthcoming book Building More, Wanting Less, "inspired by living conditions in the working class neighborhoods of Bangkok, Buenos Aires, Chicago, Colombo, Delhi, Hong Kong, Istanbul, Los Angeles, Mumbai, St. Petersburg, and Singapore."
housingfinance
"The latest news, analysis, thoughts and trade secrets from the editors and readers of Apartment Finance Today and Affordable Housing Finance." (added to sidebar under blogs::urban)
2 Comments:
- At Monday, October 24, 2005 5:24:00 PM, Martha Bridegam said...
-
Thanks for the link to "housingfinance." Actually we're not associated with "Building More, Wanting Less," but the rest is certainly right.
- Martha Bridegam,
Blogmother,
housingfinance - At Monday, October 24, 2005 5:36:00 PM, John said...
-
Whoops. Looks like an error in my copying and pasting. I'll fix that.
Sunday, October 23, 2005
At the 2005 AIA Chicago Design Excellence Awards Friday night, one name stood out more than Brininstool + Lynch, David Hovey, Krueck + Sexton, Perkins + Will, and John Ronan (all multiple winners that night): photographers Hedrich Blessing. As each winning project was displayed on the projection screen at the end of the ballroom, The 75-year old Chicago institution's name accompanied most of the slides, right below the name of the architect. This says two things: most Chicago architects come to Hedrich Blessing for the documentation of the final product, and architectural photography is an important element in the deciding of architectural prizes.
Focusing on the second, photographs are usually required for this sort of prize, given the fact that each jury member could not possibly visit every building submitted. In the case of AIA Chicago, all projects are by local architects but the buildings themselves can be anywhere. While a dream jury might be flown to every submission wherever it may be, the money doesn't exist for such an endeavor. So color-saturated photographs, usually devoid of any human presence, are used to persuade the jury that what they're looking at is a winner.
For the sake of comparison, let's look at one winning building -- the Perspectives Charter School by Perkins + Will -- with an image by a professional photographer and one by yours truly.

Image by Steinkamp/Ballogg Photography

Image by me
Many things are apparent here:
:: The professional composition is more dynamic, especially in terms of the canopy, whose tip appears angle liked the prow of a ship. Definitely this is achieved by the choice of lens, though notice how each image is roughly the same from the angled line in the double-height glass area to the left.Does this mean that if the jury only saw my photographs they wouldn't have given it an award? Without knowing for sure, I'd say it's a possibility. Let's say that were the case, what does it say about architecture awards? How does a jury judge a building if not by photographs?
:: The professional shot involves the context more, setting the school apart from its surroundings.
:: The otherwise gray exterior takes on a dramatic purple glow in the dusk-time professional shot, though I don't know if it's a natural, on location effect or an effect achieved in the processing.
:: The choice for a dusk-time shot also helps add some vibrancy to the shot, whose glass reflections add to the grayness in my shot.
In this case, the awards focus on members of the local AIA Chapter who are responsible for submitting works for consideration. The awards give recognition to those members doing quality work. If those awards are highly influenced by imagery over substance or experience, it lessens the meaning of them.
On the other hand, the Mies van der Rohe Awards for European Union and Latin American Architecture varies in a few ways. Selected "experts" choose the projects for consideration. A jury then selects finalists (around 30), after which they visit as many as possible before making their choices for awarded work and special mention. Extensive documentation is required at each level, including not only photographs but also initial sketches, a complete set of drawings, and explanatory text. Given the responsibilities of the jury, both in dissecting each entry's documentation and visiting the projects, and the biannual nature of the prize, naturally this award carries more weight than the AIA Chicago award.
4 Comments:
- At Monday, October 24, 2005 12:10:00 AM, Lynn Becker said...
-
At a Chicago Architectural Club symposium earlier this year, Hedrich-Blessing's Nick Merrick said this: "People say to me, Nick, these pictures are lying . . . they're so heroic, so pristine that it's not the real experience of the building, and my response was (that) of the thousand of possible realities that you could have, I picked the best possible one."
There's no doubt that the public's perception of modernism has been shaped by the beautiful iconic images shot by Merrick and his colleagues. It also can be argued that some of the public's disillusionment with modernism stems from the disconnect between the images and the buildings as they're actually experienced. What's needed today is less fashion photography, and more photojournalism. For an example, check out the Five Architects exhibition at CAF. It uses videos to illustrate each project. They're fairly no-frill - almost like home movies - but as they move through a structure it gives you a far better, and more realistic feel for what the experience is like than most of the highly idealized promotional photographs. - At Monday, October 24, 2005 10:01:00 AM, said...
-
I have to agree that professional photographer make the buildings look better than in reality.
Most of the time they intentionally isolate the buildings from the surrounding, and when you have the oportunity to visit the building is kind of dissapointing.
I'm not saying that is good or bad.
But todays architecture is more based on images than for the real experience, and critics many times get fooled by those photos too. I think is the Modernist efect influence.
By the way, that is a good question that no many people ask.
Are the architecture critics prompted by the offices to give them good reviews or may be those comments are scripted, like in the computing industry?
Sometimes I've seen monstruosities been very kinded by the reviewer and I just don't get it. That's what brought my attention to the subject. - At Wednesday, October 26, 2005 10:26:00 PM, said...
-
Let me begin by criticizing the photo comparison. For any lens (camera or human eye) point of view is critical. The pysical location of your shot and that of the pro is very different. This is the reason why the cantilever awning is so different as well as the perspectival effect in yours of the side wall which is not present in the pro shot. Try moving about 25 feet to the left next time.
Second, the pro probably used chemical film. You probably used digital. As we all know, the difference in light and color metering(regardless of time of day) is that digital cameras are far inferior to both a film camera and the human eye.
For the rest, we will set aside the strict comparison of two images and I will follow with a series of points.
First, this has nothing to do with Modernism or any other -ism. It is strictly a conversation about the tendency of humans to judge by the eye first of all the senses. This of course presents many problems outside the scope of architecture.
I don't think that any distinction can really be made between substance and image in our society. We exist in a society ruled in totality by the doctrine of image as fact. I see it as a truly successful thing when architecture exists within its time. We should understand that architecture is relatively powerless to induce change. The true poignancy of what we do exists in architecture's ability to comment on and record socieological tendencies and events. It is the art of anthropology par excellance. Image vs. substance? As a professional I see no distinction.
Another problem with documentation: static rendering. As a profession, our understanding of space has evolved in the last ten years beyond the abilities of still photographs to convey poetics. The spatial identity of buildings has now translated completely into the realm of ephemeral nuances and effects that require motion to be realized. And not any motion, the binocular 180 degree field of view of the human eye with the flatness of a 50mm lens is required. Movie cameras are a pathetic substitute for documenting architecture. This may be a large part of the disconnect we feel between the monumental photography effect and reality.
Third, people make a mess of architecture. Any time you photograph a building without people there is something there that isn't most of the time: order. Architecture without people is infinitely charged and uncomfortable. This discomfort leads to a truer perception of proportion and beauty. Its like photographing a stage set without the play. There is a strange and monumental beauty to the thing that only a camera has the ability to capture. This state of architecture in its emptiness can only be described as a truly liminal condition. It is so severe that a true identity statement can be rendered in the starkest lines possible. IF ARCHITECTURE WERE PHOTOGRAPHED WITH PEOPLE IN IT ALL BUILDINGS WOULD APPEAR THE SAME. Humans and their interaction captivate any image and render the rest only a backdrop. How often do you recognize an incredibly important work of architecture in a movie, even though most movies have many scenes shot in, around or near extremely important works of architecture? What use does the concept of image vs. reality have here?
This brings me to a very important conversation. If architecture were rendered closer to reality (meaning mundane) would anyone care to invest in it? Without providing a vehicle for appreciation (a still moment divorced from everyday life and other boring people of which there are thousands in a school, millions in this country and billions on this planet, none of which I care to really have to interact with while trying to enjoy the formal art of architecture) would anyone have the time, patience, or personal resources required to sit there long enough to get bored with people and admire their surroundins? NO.
Architecture as a public art form would die without the ability to express its importance in a manner demanding perfect attention.
This is not making a statement that the public does not feel good architecture is an incredibly important political event. It is merely stating that the public has a dificult time focusing on a given thing in order to evaluate it objectively. If we did away with architecture and everything became a dull grey box with flourescent light people would definetly notice and be unhappy for generations, until they lost hope and went extinct. It makes a psychological difference, it's just that it is such a backdrop that most people experience beauty in architecture on a subliminal level so we have to provide a perfectly clear medium to convey identity messages.
Regarding the actual argument you are making: that one awards banquet is better than another . . . give me a break. That's like trying to say that one faction in the same group of self-congratulatory clique of exclusive high-society morons living off the riches earned by past generations and patting each other on the back while taking turns at the mic is any different from the other group of equally rich, self-congratulating and totally exclusive clique of ass kissers and political satan-weasels. - At Thursday, October 27, 2005 10:44:00 AM, John said...
-
anon1 - Ideally, critics aren't influenced by architects and firms to give good reviews, though in practice this probably doesn't always happen. Herbert Muschamp had a tendency to give a lot of space to Gehry, Calatrava, and other star architects, and in this space he often had nothing but good words. In the past, many critics became champions of young architects and supported them across their careers (Christian Norberg-Schultz and Paolo Portoghesi, as an example). Any scripted commentary is merely a press release and can't be considered criticism. In some rags that might be difficult to differentiate, though I still believe in the power of good criticism, not so much to say "this is good, this is bad" but to open people to different ways of thinking about architecture and the environment. Do you have an example of what you refer to as monstrosities kindly treated by reviewers? I'm curious as to what/who that may be.
anon2 - Thanks for the long reply, though I think you misunderstood my argument (if any, given that these posts don't start with a clear argument so much as a thought or idea that spills out). I'm not praising one award over another as much as I'm saying that how awards are judged is important to their acceptance in the field and by the public. If one award values the actual experience of a building over glossy images, to me that means more.
Also I don't agree with your take on including people in architectural photography, but I probably think about it differently than you do. You seem to think about it in terms of uncontrolled occupation of the space by people, but I think of it in terms of a controlled, compositional way. One reason that photographs don't feature people is that they're usually shot before the building is occupied; it may have some furniture but it's yet to be used. Given that situation, a photographer could use models (in the general sense, not wafish and pretty sense) to bring out certain qualities of the space. I recall some photos of Bernard Tschumi's student center at Columbia University that used a woman in a red dress in almost every shot, a la Schindler's List but in color photographs. I realize that this technique would further what I seem to be rallying against, but it would be an improvement over photographs free of human presence (in some cases but not all; I still think some images are aided by being sparse).
Thursday, October 20, 2005
Dutch newspaper de Volksrant reports that Dutch publisher PCM's new headquarters in Amsterdam is being designed by OMA. Running the article through the always-reliable Babelfish, we learn what PCM wants: "It must become a bldg. of which says people: look, there sits them, there something is going." But looking at the pile of foam below, I can't help but wonder "where something is going?"

Later in the article we learn, "It is a preliminary draft. The actual design must be still developed, in association with the project developer, political and the buurt." Certainly that's true. But what's up with the clunky, tabletop form? Further deciphering of the translation reveals the base is a two-story plinth devoted to public activities; above are the stacked, traditional functions of the PCM; then there's the cantilevered top where "those logos would be appropriate sticking out. You can present see you that you 'breaking news' on the bldg. late." In other words, Times Square in Amsterdam?
Even with a functional basis for the tripartite divisions, I can't help but think OMA either pulled in the C-team for this job or maybe the design hit the presses a bit too soon. After their Seattle Public Library design furthered the gap between Modernists and Traditionalists, OMA seems to be straddling that line. And I gotta say it doesn't work.
(via Archinect)
4 Comments:
- At Thursday, October 20, 2005 7:07:00 PM, Bryan said...
-
Does OMA = architecture for newsworthy sake?
Is top heavy the new cantilever?
I hate buildings with triangular points anywhere in their footprint anyways.
The newsticker sign might be on the table-top facing the curved street on the far right of the image. That's where I would put it. - At Friday, October 21, 2005 11:11:00 AM, brandon said...
-
Looks like a deconstructed tuscan column. sort of reminds me of Adolf Loos' competition entry for the Chicago Tribune building. What a dog!
- At Friday, October 21, 2005 4:54:00 PM, said...
-
I am pretty much convinced now that Rem is full of shit. I don't even consider him an architect.
- At Friday, July 20, 2007 11:46:00 AM, said...
-
buurt is the dutch word for neighbourhood if anyone was wondering about the translation....
Wednesday, October 19, 2005
Just discovered this Archinect discussion (via Design Observer) that had me laughing out loud.
It started with:

Jean Nouvel and Dr. Evil
But then...
Daniel Libeskind and that guy from There's Something About Mary
and...

Frank Gehry and Gonzo the Great
and...

Sanford Kwinter (right, with Rem) and Sideshow Bob
speaking of rem...

Rem Koolhaas and Daniel Emilfork (from City of Lost Children)
but lest we forget the Pritzker Prize winners...

Thom Mayne and Bill Murray
and...

Zaha Hadid and Ursula from The Little Mermaid
and my favorite...

Stanley Tigerman and an Ewok
and finally my contribution...

Carol Ross-Barney trying really hard to look like Isabella Rossellini
Check out the discussion for bigger images and for many more architects separated at birth.
4 Comments:
- At Thursday, October 20, 2005 9:51:00 AM, said...
-
Extremely funny!!!!
Some of them are really good.
That's weird, but we found the funny side of architecture. - At Thursday, October 20, 2005 11:53:00 AM, César said...
-
The first two are extremely close!!!
Funny - At Wednesday, October 26, 2005 7:10:00 AM, B2Architecture said...
-
One more from the UK at: http://b2architecture.blogspot.com/2005/09/14-lookalikes.html
- At Wednesday, November 02, 2005 4:24:00 AM, rem said...
-
Great, especially the one with F. Gehry!!! :)
A couple architecture blogs that just came to my attention, both worth checking out and both added to my sidebar links (under blogs::architecture):
:: mirage-studio
Eclectic blog by an architecture student, with items on Calatrava, anti-smoking ads and even AutoCAD pointers.
:: Architecture Sketches
Just like the title says, sketches from Botta to Utzon.
6 Comments:
- At Wednesday, October 19, 2005 1:42:00 PM, said...
-
I love the concept of the Sketches page, but it is unfortunate that the images posted are too small to see any detail. As a consequence the site is quite superficial, visually.
- At Wednesday, October 19, 2005 2:48:00 PM, John said...
-
For some that's fine. For others, like Murcutt's, that's unfortunate. It would be valuable to be able to read any text that accompanies the drawings.
- At Wednesday, October 19, 2005 5:27:00 PM, Jukka said...
-
I love that! It certainly is unfortunate that the images are so small, but I take what I can take. Bookmarked on the spot.
- At Thursday, October 20, 2005 12:14:00 PM, said...
-
mirage studio is kind of different, at least he post articles on tutorials on architecture computing - e.g. plotting to scale and using photoshop + cad. more on passing down his knowledge rather than another architecture journal.
- At Wednesday, November 02, 2005 3:07:00 AM, said...
-
Found architectureyp from mirage and architectural sketches, got plenty of useful links in it.
- At Wednesday, November 16, 2005 9:23:00 PM, said...
-
Today I found another good architecture-related blog at http://doyouwantcoffee.blogspot.com/
Tuesday, October 18, 2005
The New York Times covers both ends of the spectrum with articles on mega suburban developer Toll Brothers and Shanghai's high-rise building boom.
A visual comparison of the two illustrates China's and the US's apparent dichotomy in viewing land and habitat.

The Toll Brothers view land (what they call "ground") as an investment to be bought up insatiably. If there's a market for real estate, they'll buy the land and develop it. A desirable Toll Brother situation might be covering the remaining buildable land in New Jersey with variations on the Estates at Princeton Grove, pictured above, which is not too far-fetched. The Times piece focuses on the economics, politics, and personalities at play as the Toll Brothers snatch up more and more land for more and more profit, at the expense of any critical thinking (or apparent mention) about long-term energy (covered by Kunstler) or house sizes, among the many questionable concerns with sprawl.

In sharp contrast to the American trend is China's vertical housing developments, the Skyline Mansions in Shanghai pictured here. With an additional 1,000 skyscrapers anticipated beyond its current crop of 4,000 by the end of the decade, China actually shares a similar delusion regarding energy and scale as the US. While many anti-sprawl people might advocate building vertically, the environments created with this method don't appear much of an improvement over suburbia.
What the US and China also share are completely blind, financially-driven developments that ignore quality of life and the environment at community and regional scales, in favor of cushy private realms. McMansions -- be they on a 1/2-acre patch of grass or 40 stories in the air -- serve the individual and family at the expense of these shared realms. My view isn't optimistic though, because both countries are feeding each other along the way, be it through cheap consumer goods or the model of Western society. But rather than contemplating when either bubble will burst -- a fascination of the Times in both regards -- I'm more concerned with the long-term effects of each type of development, from the environment on down to the individual. Which way to build? Neither.
2 Comments:
- At Tuesday, October 18, 2005 2:10:00 PM, said...
-
A middle point is the best ecologic and economic solution.
Hector Corcin - At Tuesday, October 18, 2005 4:58:00 PM, Bryan said...
-
The solution: for me to find. I'll let you know what I come up with.
Monday, October 17, 2005
My weekly page update:

Marrom House in São Paulo, Brazil by Isay Weinfeld.
The updated book feature is The Architecture of Modern Italy: Volume 2, Visions of Utopia, 1900-present, by Terry Kirk.
Some unrelated links for your enjoyment:
The Place Where We Live
"Buildings, Trees, Sidewalks, Glue...A Chicago, IL Blog Dispatched from the 43rd Ward on the Near North Side".
Preservation Institute Blog
A blog about the limitations of modernism, an ever-so-popular topic these days, though I can't say I agree with his reading of the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for additions to historical buildings.
Villard
Appunti di architettura (in Italian).
Saturday, October 15, 2005
Last week saw the beginning of This Old House's latest project on PBS, "a mid-century Modern house for biotech bachelor, George Mabry" in Cambridge, Mass. Though I missed last week's episode, I did catch today's show, where architect Will Ruhl presented a model and some elevations that add to and renovate the existing house. A tour of the Pilot Hill House in Vineyard Haven, also on the show, indicates the architect is skilled in bridging traditional and Modern forms.

Pre-This Old House state

Proposed front and rear elevations
Ruhl's design tastefully adds a third and forth floor, while improving the unexceptional design of the house with a layered complexity that is popular today. The rear elevation's generous glazing will be one of the few pieces preserved, at least visibly, from the old house.
Regardless of the quality of the new and old house designs, it should be an interesting season, as the crew of the TV show educates the viewers on the Modern movement, especially in terms of residential architecture, the most successful and lasting influence of a movement loved by many but abhorred by many, many more. While the show may not convert everybody who watches, it will hopefully give them the knowledge to understand the appeal of Modern and contemporary architecture, beyond merely aesthetics.
Thursday, October 13, 2005
Some selections from my ever-expanding inbox:
2005 Innovation Conference
An impressive line-up for McGraw Hill's conference on innovative building materials, digital fabrication, and their effects on architecture.
Material Skills: evolution of materials
Further exploring new techniques and materials and architecture, the exhibition makes its way to Paris next month.
Solar Decathlon
Designed by students, powered by the Sun (Thanks Eric M.)
Projects on ceramics and architecture
.ekwc's latest call for architects to investigate the "creative potential in the relationship between ceramics and architecture" has a deadline of December 1.
Extreme Makeover, Japanese edition
Not the name of a Japanese TV program where an architect renovates a lucky owner's house - in Japanese, but click on faces for before-and-after pics. (thanks Leslie)
and
Variable Geometry Acoustical Domes
You've got a little under two weeks to catch architect David Serero's installation at the Villa Medici in Rome (above).
1 Comments:
- At Friday, October 14, 2005 3:09:00 AM, Leslie said...
-
Thanks for using the link I sent you.... ^-^
Both Curbed and The Gutter have photographs from last Sunday's New Museum of Contemporary Art groundbreaking, mentioned here last week (unfortunately no exciting photos found for the Spertus groundbreaking).

Yep, that's a Shinto Priest.
Check out The Gutter link for a caption contest, one not nearly as ripe for commentary as this unrelated one at Archinect.










1 Comments:
I recently began to explore the world of artist's blogs and your site immediately became a favourite--one I am drawn to daily! Thank you for some really stimulating and other-worldly imagery. Living in the big city now, I forgot about the "moving houses"...once I read about a house launched into the sea in a story set in Newfoundland, but thought it was far-fetched!...thanks again, cheers, Lucy
Post a Comment
<< Home