Slog News & Arts

Line Out

Music & Nightlife

« The Politics of Color-Balancin... | Lunchtime Quickie »

Tuesday, March 4, 2008

Water World

posted by on March 4 at 11:52 AM

What Steven Spielberg will miss this August:
3watercube-1.jpg What should we do at the sight of such a building? Laugh a little or laugh a lot? How can we take it seriously? Water as a leading motive for a structure? You must be kidding me. You must be kids. A grownup does not play such childish games with architecture.

RSS icon Comments

1

How is this boyish? Explain yourself.

Posted by Mr. Poe | March 4, 2008 12:09 PM
2

Animal cells as a motive for structure?

Posted by Sandy | March 4, 2008 12:09 PM
3

Charles, buddy ... you are obviously brilliant, but terribly, terribly annoying.

Posted by beardo | March 4, 2008 12:15 PM
4

not "water as a leading motive for a structure", but use. It does house a pool afterall. It's a duck. And an exploration of a rather unique structural system. A rather elegant one at that.

Posted by cmaceachen | March 4, 2008 12:19 PM
5

I love this! This is a very cool building - especially since it's basically just a box.

Posted by Will in Seattle | March 4, 2008 12:22 PM
6

Oh, okay. Just change the whole damn sentence. Whatevs.

Posted by Mr. Poe | March 4, 2008 12:24 PM
7

It looks like the Chinese pirated one of Microsoft's Vista wallpapers, the image of the all the rocks. I actually like that wallpaper and it is currently the backdrop for my desktop.

Posted by obamatron | March 4, 2008 12:42 PM
8

what you see as childish, i see as imaginative. certainly imagination has a place in pushing new ideas in architecture?

Posted by infrequent | March 4, 2008 12:43 PM
9

mr poe, five words: Who Lived in A Shoe.

Posted by charles mudede | March 4, 2008 12:43 PM
10

For a building that houses a pool, I'd say it's fitting. It's not one of those sweeping, epic monuments that the Olympics have been known for generating (and bankrupting once, if ever, finished: see Montreal), but it's an interesting piece of both design and engineering.

Designers' info

Posted by Tdub | March 4, 2008 12:49 PM
11

@7 ha! that's good.

@9 okay, i see what you are getting at. i certainly wouldn't take a shoe seriously. i guess i just don't view this as that silly. the death-star hotel? i'd agree to the childishness of that.

Posted by infrequent | March 4, 2008 12:50 PM
12

What should we do with your specious questions, Chuck? Laugh a little or laugh a lot? Yo, Dan, it's really past time to get rid of this transparent in-house troll.

Posted by Yutang | March 4, 2008 12:52 PM
13

@7 ha! that's good.

@9 okay, i see what you are getting at. i certainly wouldn't take a shoe seriously. i guess i just don't view this as that silly. the death-star hotel? i'd agree to the childishness of that.

so why is this building a shoe? that is your opinion, and it is one of those things that probably cannot be explained. probably similar to why i don't fully like the seattle library.

Posted by infrequent | March 4, 2008 12:53 PM
14

I don't see the problem with this building Charles, also, why can't we get a little information in the post, so we don't have to follow neverending hyperlinks through the tubes?

Posted by Brian | March 4, 2008 12:53 PM
15

Are you calling me an old woman?!

Posted by Mr. Poe | March 4, 2008 12:53 PM
16

sorry for the double-post!

@9 i want to add that your response @9 was brilliant. much like the original post, you have an opinion you feel is so obvious that it need not be dissected any further. the shoe response was brilliant. unfortunately, when i see the pool, i don't see a shoe. i don't think one can explain it any further, though. it's like arguing if someone is beautiful or not.

Posted by infrequent | March 4, 2008 1:06 PM
17

Charles, obviously you only post to piss people off instead of bring up good debate about Architecture.
Jen Graves posts "Now Hanging" which presents art to go see but no comment on if she thinks it is good or not because what one person likes another will hate.
When you write

What should we do at the sight of such a building?

or

How can we take it seriously?

You assume that we are all thinking like you do.
We don't.

Posted by -B- | March 4, 2008 1:14 PM
18

Looks like a bowling alley.

Posted by jhell | March 4, 2008 1:39 PM
19

The color glow is a gimmick, like the football stadium in Munich that obviously inspired it. But from the inside, the lattice structure is pretty amazing. Perfect for a swimming arena.

Posted by Fnarf | March 4, 2008 1:47 PM
20

we think: we are delighted when we look at it. though it is a duck, it doesn't lie - it contains water.

just like i experience delight every time i look at the burned-out street of dreams.

Posted by max solomon | March 4, 2008 2:08 PM
21

it's a voronoi tesselation. more photos here:
http://www.dezeen.com/2008/02/06/watercube-by-chris-bosse/

Posted by holz | March 4, 2008 2:13 PM
22

The only problem with it is that once you get above freezing much, it is very hard to get water to hold at right angles.

Posted by NapoleonXIV | March 4, 2008 2:34 PM
23

I think it's lovely. I don't see why architecture should have to be "taken seriously," much like life itself. What's wrong with a playful design, especially one so well-thought-out and appropriate to its purpose?

Posted by Rebecca | March 4, 2008 2:37 PM
24

Does anyone know what function Charles serves at the Stranger, beyond his obvious talent for riling up Slog comments? I'm serious, I want to know.

Posted by Nutburst | March 4, 2008 3:27 PM
25

Nutburst@24: he writes the Police Beat.

Posted by Emily | March 4, 2008 3:32 PM
26

So it's official: Charles has less of a sense of humor than the Communist Chinese!

Or is it less of a sense of whimsy? Wasn't he railing against whimsy a month or two back?

Maybe he'd approve if it were shaped like a big titty?

Posted by CP | March 4, 2008 4:08 PM
27

I agree with Charles. I'm sure he's thrilled. It's a gimicky building unworthy of housing a bowling alley.

Posted by toasterhedgehog | March 4, 2008 8:32 PM
28

The building is amazing. Has Charles even read ANYTHING about the design or materials used in the grounbreaking structure? It is environmentally one of the most brilliant structures ever built. Look at the architecture in this city - lame, lame, lame.

Posted by MH | March 5, 2008 12:02 PM
29

The building is amazing. Has Charles even read ANYTHING about the design or materials used in the grounbreaking structure? It is environmentally one of the most brilliant structures ever built. Look at the architecture in this city - lame, lame, lame.

Posted by MH | March 5, 2008 12:02 PM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 14 days old).