CHICAGO | One Bennett Park | 837 FT | 68 FLOORS

[LouisVanDerWright]

Originally Posted by rlw777

30 Park Place is entirely precast.

Personally I don't mind the precast sure it would be nice if 451 was clad entirely in limestone but this isn't 15 central park west they're not going to get $88 million for the penthouse. This isn't a Rolls Royce here it's a Mercedes and like it or not Mercedes still comes with faux-wood accents.

Trump Tower is a Mercedes, this is a Buick...

[HomrQT]

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

Trump Tower is a Mercedes, this is a Buick...

Does Chicago have any 'Rolls Royce' buildings then? I thought the Trump Tower was it. Would the Spire have been it then?

[BVictor1]

Originally Posted by HomrQT

Does Chicago have any 'Rolls Royce' buildings then? I thought the Trump Tower was it. Would the Spire have been it then?

No, it would have been the Bentley.

[SamInTheLoop]

Originally Posted by pilsenarch

^The total hate on precast is without foundation. This city is chock full of precast clad buildings that are performing fine, designed in both contemporary and pomo vocabularies.

Meanwhile, it would be very difficult to identify a traditional building clad in stone that hasn't had to undergo significant and costly maintenance to preserve its facade.

and, as has been mentioned, Stern does not control the budget... I'm sure he would be delighted to detail the entire building using 4" thick limestone... the craftsmen/technology does exist, it's the money that is the only issue...

I get what you're saying here, and I'm inclined to agree to an extent . It brings me back to a point I've made before. Some folks here seem to almost be implying that Stern's awfulness as a designer - and the coming atrocity (hypersensitive pomo-sympathizing forummers - start your moaning now!) of 451 Grand - comes down completely to him being an enthusiastic designer of precast towers, and 451 itself being precast schlock. To this I say - really? Look at the overall composition of the tower, it's awkwardness, it's strange transitions it's mishmash of hacked-up vaguely nostalgic-feeling neo-deco/pomo/new-classicist/poo-poo historicist 'styling'. It just looks bad - from a distance, you won't be able to tell if it's stone or precast, yet you'll be able to tell that it's a Robert AM Lagrange turd tower.

Think about NBC Tower again - and I'm glad you brought this one up again, LVDW. Adrian Smith is one of those very rare designers who could (in a previous life, mind you) do aesthetically passable pomo (during the period of pomo, when it was a 'valid' movement, in other words, now it's just part of architectural history, RAM Lagrange has yet to get that particular memo!). It is most certainly not just because there's a stone veneer on the facade! It's because the overall form, composition, massing, etc etc etc work - because Smith is a very talented designer. Does anybody here think that Stern is remotely talented enough to have designed something in his bs nostalgic/sentimental/neo-historicist vocabulary as high-quality, as pleasing aesthetically (regardless of details of actual facade cladding) as NBC Tower??

Of course not!! Because he's just a design hack. He doesn't understand how to compose buildings - particularly tall buildings, but buildings in general.......the buildings he craps out are as clumsy as you'll find today, as far as high-profile towers in the early 21st century......

[vandelay]

Since you're reflexively lumping Stern with Lagrange, why don't you re-read Blair Kamin's warning on Lagrange:

"A lot of skyline-watchers are going to reflexively dismiss the Elysian... Nearly 100 years after modern architects promised to remake the world with their revolutionary creations of steel and glass, most of America still prefers to live in colonials, Georgians and other types of traditional design. If all we do is laugh at traditionalism, rather than figuring out how to do it better, then the joke's on us."

If you're unable to see differences in style and ability between Lagrange and Stern, then the joke remains on you. Even if you can, and you simply think traditionalist buildings can't use modern materials like precast, while modernist buildings can, the joke is still on you.

Even if you just hate it out of reflexive modernist fanaticism, the joke is definitely on you because unless the Chicago real estate market takes it down, or some other unforeseen act, this tower is going to go up.

[Cyprose]

Ah yes, the classic populist argument, the last refuge of those with no other leg to stand on.

Since Americans love to decorate their eclectic georgian/colonial/second empire mishmash mcmansions with Kinkades, then that must mean that he is a far greater painter then any of those old world "masters".

Am I playing this game right?

[vandelay]

Originally Posted by Cyprose

Ah yes, the classic populist argument, the last refuge of those with no other leg to stand on.

Since Americans love to decorate their eclectic georgian/colonial/second empire mishmash mcmansions with Kinkades, then that must mean that he is a far greater painter then any of those old world "masters".

Am I playing this game right?

That's not his argument. His point is reflexive dismissal and hatred by an architectural faction is useless bloviating and whining, as evidenced by this thread. Constructive, non-hyperbolic, and well reasoned criticism will improve the dialog on architecture, and maybe even improve the standards of architecture. But a secondary point may be that fanatics will simply sneer at a style they despise, with no interest in improving an architecture they consider illegitimate.

But nice try in presenting a strawman argument. So, to answer your question, no.

[rlw777]

Originally Posted by vandelay

That's not his argument. His point is reflexive dismissal and hatred by an architectural faction is useless bloviating and whining, as evidenced by this thread. Constructive, non-hyperbolic, and well reasoned criticism will improve the dialog on architecture, and maybe even improve the standards of architecture. But a secondary point may be that fanatics will simply sneer at a style they despise, with no interest in improving an architecture they consider illegitimate.

But nice try in presenting a strawman argument. So, to answer your question, no.

Amen. I find that when people learn an appreciation for an art form they almost never dismiss an entire genre or style within that art form. Criticism and appreciation must go beyond ones personal tastes.

[LouisVanDerWright]

Originally Posted by rlw777

Amen. I find that when people learn an appreciation for an art form they almost never dismiss an entire genre or style within that art form. Criticism and appreciation must go beyond ones personal tastes.

Oh really? I don't know many people who are into classical or jazz, but also think Disco is on the same level. I don't know many foodies who occasionally find a dish served at McDonalds or Burger King on par with a Michelin rated restaurant...

In my experience more exposure to an art tends to deepen one's appreciation of the more complex flavors, sounds, or theories of an art. That also means they tend to more quickly call out the pretenders and knock offs out. I used to like pomo a lot as a kid, but that's before I understood it, before I knew about materials, before I had an eye for details, before I could understand the philosophical progression of an art. I still appreciate the finer examples of the style for what they are, but these disneyland knockoffs do absolutely nothing to advance the art and are almost entirely regressive.

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by Cyprose

Since Americans love to decorate their eclectic georgian/colonial/second empire mishmash mcmansions with Kinkades, then that must mean that he is a far greater painter then any of those old world "masters".

Thomas Kinkade is cheesy, so all landscape paintings suck unless you happen to have an authentic historic Bierstadt or Turner. There is no reason to ever paint actual scenes again after Pollock and Rothko! All paintings shall be solid blocks of color, no representation allowed.

It's frustrating to me that several forumers keep switching arguments. One day this building sucks because Stern is a shitty designer, but theoretically a good traditional building (NBC) is possible. The next day, all traditional buildings suck and there is no possibility of quality, regardless of the designer or materials. There's no consistency to these arguments other than a blind rage.

IMO Stern can design in these styles about as well as anyone alive. His efforts to be historically accurate are frequently hamstrung by developer demands for un-historic features like balconies and parking garages. Overall this building is a good one, and reminds me of the work of Raymond Hood or Hugh Ferriss.

[untitledreality]

Originally Posted by ardecila

There's no consistency to these arguments other than a blind rage.

On the internet no less.

[pilsenarch]

^^ agree with ardecila

[LouisVanDerWright]

Originally Posted by ardecila

It's frustrating to me that several forumers keep switching arguments. One day this building sucks because Stern is a shitty designer, but theoretically a good traditional building (NBC) is possible. The next day, all traditional buildings suck and there is no possibility of quality, regardless of the designer or materials. There's no consistency to these arguments other than a blind rage.

Just in case this was directed at me, my latest comment was not necessarily my personal opinion on this style, but rather a rejection of the notion that somehow we are not allowed to dismiss entire genres if we find them revolting. I don't feel that way about architecture, but I feel that way about certain foods and musical styles. It's just an absurd statement that every genre of art has redeeming qualities, no, some things simply don't. Stern can design decent neo-classical buildings if given the right budget, but Related has already said that won't be the case here. This building will suck as a result.

[vandelay]

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

Oh really? I don't know many people who are into classical or jazz, but also think Disco is on the same level. I don't know many foodies who occasionally find a dish served at McDonalds or Burger King on par with a Michelin rated restaurant...

I used to like pomo a lot as a kid, but that's before I understood it, before I knew about materials, before I had an eye for details, before I could understand the philosophical progression of an art.

Again you're making the argument that traditionalism is for childish and unsophisticated tastes, which is why the unwashed masses like it, just like fast food. That's just rank snobbery. You used to like post-modernism as a kid, but your tastes changed. They say converts make the best zealots.

But going back. Let's stick with the food analogy. Let's say Lucien LaStern is a hamburger man. Just because a restaurant serves a hamburger doesn't make it McDonalds. I think any foodie will agree that a Michelin rated restaurant can serve a hamburger. Any foodie can also agree that a hamburger can be as satisfying and delicious, if not more so, than some act of molecular gastronomy, or whatever the latest fad is. And just because it's a hamburger doesn't mean you can't apply the newest techniques to create it. And of course the flipside is true as well, just because a food is at the cutting edge and 'philosophically deep' won't make it delicious.

The way some people talk here, the only acceptable restaurants in town are like Alinea or Moto, or a rare French restaurant using only Escoffier's tools and recipes. What a lousy restaurant scene.

The ugly truth is that tastes vary, and even the most sophisticated, educated, and philosophically deep people might prefer living in a burger. Just look at Norman Foster.

[jsbrook]

Originally Posted by rlw777

30 Park Place is entirely precast.

Personally I don't mind the precast sure it would be nice if 451 was clad entirely in limestone but this isn't 15 central park west they're not going to get $88 million for the penthouse. This isn't a Rolls Royce here it's a Mercedes and like it or not Mercedes still comes with faux-wood accents.

You're right. I was wrong on 30 Park Place. Agreed that precast is not the end of the world. In the short term anyway. 30 Park Place is still looking good. Now. Doesn't it age far worse than actual limestone? As will this building?

[SamInTheLoop]

You know, the more I think about it, this project's design isn't all that bad - its............oh, wait - shit, I'm in the wrong project thread again. No, this one still sucks rancid ass - as much as ever! It's an embarassment as an architecture and design-proud city to be getting an AM Lagrange such as this (no, it's far from our first such embarassment, but that hardly excuses us from our responsibility to harshly criticize additional transgressors.

While I'm here, let me try to dispell some of the nonsense that's been spewed recently in (very weak) support of this schlockfest:

Cyprose's post was spot-in in the aspect it covered: Popularity - or for that matter the price for which a unit or units in a building sell for - has noting at all to do with design quality or merit. It has to do with....well...popularity (substitue "demand" in some cases). Two entirely different things not to be conflated, except for idiots and charlatans. Blair Kamin's unfortunate verbage in his write-up of the Elysian (on the broader 'merits' of historotrash design) was most unfortunate for him, and we can only infer that idiocy was behind it, or schiesterism (charlotanism), or some combination of the two, which is entirely possible.

The one mistake some of you are making in this contemplation of style/genre is ignorance of time. To say that there are a small number of buildings from the 80s/early 90s that actually did postmodernism well is not to suggest that if that same building/buildings (the example of NBC Tower) were built today, it shouldn't be mocked ridiculed - and most importantly the designer lambasted. The statute of limitations on being able to get away with PoMo for new construction without being professionally tarred and feathered (by the critic community, by peers in architecture and design) has long ago run out. Time is up, the clock has expired - the art form has moved on. It's an interesting genre of the (late) 1970s - (early-mid) 1990s, but ultimately a horribly failed one, and one that is best - and will be - left confined to that historical period. If someone were to design and build an NBC Tower (or substitute other PoMo of similar 'quality') today, it would be wholly without the merit of the same exact design from the 1980s or 90s, as it's just not appropriate for our time (or any time in the history yet to be written post-late 20th century)...we're past that, we've moved on from that sorry period.

Now, a separate issue, has to do with Robert AM Lagrange (this amalgamation is the opposite of reflexive - it's carefully considered, and an assessment that there is actually much less difference - much, much less - quality and merit-wise, between a Lagrange and a Stern than a lot of folks here seem intent on convincing themselves) and his actual talent level. It's pretty darn low. AM Lagrange would never (in the PoMo period) have been capable of design on the Adrian Smith level.......he's utterly incapable of producing and conveying that sort of aesthetically pleasing and well proportioned composition......his 'career', as it is, demonstrates this utter, acute lack of ability ever so clearly.....

[Chi-Sky21]

So no new news in 17 days yet you still feel the need to come and rant about this again? Might i suggest you take up chess or something?

[SamInTheLoop]

^ Please make the mental adjustments necessary to get accustomed to it. This will be ongoing - it may not be continuous, yet continual over the course of the project. Anything less than a fairly constant drubbing, then the collective forum of this supposedly design-forward city hasn't done its job here......

[Notyrview]

Sam, I appreciate your rants. Please continue. We should not go gentle into that blight.

[rlw777]

Originally Posted by SamInTheLoop

^ Please make the mental adjustments necessary to get accustomed to it. This will be ongoing - it may not be continuous, yet continual over the course of the project. Anything less than a fairly constant drubbing, then the collective forum of this supposedly design-forward city hasn't done its job here......

As usual incessant bitching justified by poorly conceived platitudes. Don't kid yourself you're just trolling here.