“bold” does not mean “good”
Building looks fine to me. If "bold architecture" means ostenatious, masturbatory acts like the EMP, which so poorly relates to its context and surroundings, then no thanks.
This post means nothing without a picture of the original atrocity pre-remodel, you incredulous hack.
Let's not set up false dichotomies. The question isn't the MAD building vs EMP. The question is the new MAD building vs the building's old incarnation, now lost:
EMP is a red herring.
Oh, my gosh, that was the funniest building in New York. I loved it. The new one, meh.
"Nothing makes me more nervous than the confident call for bold architecture."
Really Chuck?... NOTHING?...
Edward Durrell Stone's original Huntington Hartford Museum building was inarguably flawed, inarguably imbued with a personality like no other, and inarguably functional as a museum. The interiors (infinite applications of rare woods and stone) were astounding in a Morris Lapidus sort of way, and a pleasure to spend time within.
The new building is an overdesigned cologne bottle.
The original building was ugly and had no sense of context. The new one is pleasing to look at and fits better with its surroundings. QED.
Q.E.D. is an abbreviation of the Latin phrase "quod erat demonstrandum" which means literally, "that which was to be demonstrated". The phrase is written in its abbreviated form at the end of a mathematical proof or philosophical argument, to signify that the last statement deduced was the one to be demonstrated, so the proof is complete.
As a kid growing up in NY, before I knew anything about architecture, I loved the original building. And after I learned about architecture, I still loved that building. It had so much character and charm. The new building has neither.
Bold means they're depressed and want something to cheer them up.
Architecture is not always the answer.
It's architectural design compares favorably to The Double Bacon Hamburger Fatty Melt, however I suspect it doesn't taste as good.
....and a palm tree or two would be very thoughtful.
Wonders will never cease: Charles Mudede writing something so intelligent (and correct) as
"Nothing makes me more nervous than the confident call for bold architecture. Such a call has one meaning beneath (or sustaining) all other apparent and not apparent meanings: that a “bold architectural statement” is by nature (or in essence) alone good. But “bold” does not mean “good”; also, a building does not have to be controversial to be good; and finally, a building is not good just because it generates lots of talk. (Some buildings we need to pass over in silence.) And “safe and inoffensive” buildings can be good buildings."
Who'd a thunk it?
frank gehry is awesome. you are dumb.
I thought the new building was bad until I saw the picture of the old one. From all the positive comments the previous building must have worked better at street level because this view makes it look like an oppressive monolith, better as prison than art museum. If the window pattern at the top was continued throughout, it wouldn't be so bad.
I definitely prefer the buildings on each side to either building on this lot.
@9: If you have to explain the joke, it's not funny any more.
it's still miles better than the boring, cost-engineered to death, "office tower" he delivered for SAM.
"Much has been the talk of this building"
Did Yoda write this?
Um... am I the only one who thinks the photo on the bottom is bloody awesome? I don't even know what it is and I want to go to it.
The new building really does look like a Taiwanese parking garage.
I completely agree, Charles (& @4). The EMP (in this rendering) looks like something a Gehry building pooped when Frank took it out for a walk.
Comments are closed on this post.