HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #261  
Old Posted Dec 10, 2008, 8:58 PM
CGII's Avatar
CGII CGII is offline
illwaukee/crooklyn
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: rome
Posts: 8,518
Quote:
Originally Posted by AdrianXSands View Post
the gropius tower should've been built. this tower is a disgrace to the city's architecture history and modernist fundamentals.
not to mention it's ugly.
Yes, we should demolish anything that conform to the philosophies of your preferred architetural style.

What kind of thinking is that?
__________________
disregard women. acquire finances.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #262  
Old Posted Dec 10, 2008, 9:26 PM
Tom Servo's Avatar
Tom Servo Tom Servo is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,647
Quote:
Originally Posted by CGII View Post
Yes, we should demolish anything that conform to the philosophies of your preferred architetural style.

What kind of thinking is that?
modernism isn't a mere architectural style.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #263  
Old Posted Dec 10, 2008, 9:32 PM
CGII's Avatar
CGII CGII is offline
illwaukee/crooklyn
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: rome
Posts: 8,518
Quote:
Originally Posted by AdrianXSands View Post
modernism isn't a mere architectural style.
Right, so let's start condemning anything that doesn't fit your world view.
__________________
disregard women. acquire finances.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #264  
Old Posted Dec 10, 2008, 9:51 PM
stormkingfan stormkingfan is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: PhilaPA
Posts: 503
You tell him, CGII!!

Br'klyn!!!!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #265  
Old Posted Dec 10, 2008, 10:05 PM
Ch.G, Ch.G's Avatar
Ch.G, Ch.G Ch.G, Ch.G is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,138
Quote:
Originally Posted by DecoJim View Post
Perhaps its just that Mr. Sands enjoys being an iconoclast and is amused by all the reactions to his "outrageous" adherence to modernism at all costs.
ding ding ding
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #266  
Old Posted Dec 11, 2008, 3:31 PM
Atomic Glee's Avatar
Atomic Glee Atomic Glee is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Posts: 614
Quote:
Originally Posted by CGII View Post
Right, so let's start condemning anything that doesn't fit your world view.
Behold the mindset of the modernist zealot. The architect is God, he can do no wrong - unless the architect doesn't want to do bare concrete, steel, and glass boxes. Then, the architect is an evil and talentless hack who is depriving the world of High Holy Modernism, which is the only acceptable architectural path.

That's because people like Adrian have decided that "of our time" means "modernism and modernism alone," which is ridiculous.
__________________
Fort Worthology | Hello Panther
"I'll probably be some kind of scientist,
building inventions in my space lab in space."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #267  
Old Posted Dec 17, 2008, 7:04 AM
TANGELD_SLC's Avatar
TANGELD_SLC TANGELD_SLC is offline
The World Is Welcome Here
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: SL,UT
Posts: 884
Personally, I think we ought to incorporate more art, motifs and symbolism in our buildings nowadays.
I used to really like the ideal of "less is more", but now I think it's a bucket of shit. Nobody knows how to do it right any more, and we should start a NEW modern style rather than the 1950-80's crap that people still call "modern" It's lazy people with NO imagination WHATSOEVER that like the less is more junk because it's an easier, cheaper design.

It's not modern, it's ugly mementos from the 20th century, when style and beauty nearly died in architecture. I say NEARLY, because there are a few good buildings from that period, but not many.
__________________
Espavo!

Plyg, Metrosexual, & AVENian
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #268  
Old Posted Dec 17, 2008, 8:12 PM
America 117 America 117 is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 613
edit
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #269  
Old Posted Dec 17, 2008, 8:57 PM
Jibba's Avatar
Jibba Jibba is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,650
Quote:
Originally Posted by TANGELD_SLC View Post
It's lazy people with NO imagination WHATSOEVER that like the less is more junk because it's an easier, cheaper design.
Nope.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #270  
Old Posted Dec 17, 2008, 9:03 PM
Cbautz's Avatar
Cbautz Cbautz is offline
Senior Bezerkeleyite
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Chicago
Posts: 972
[QUOTE=TANGELD_SLC;3978535] It's lazy people with NO imagination WHATSOEVER that like the less is more junk because it's an easier, cheaper design.
QUOTE]

__________________
Architect and Urban Planner
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #271  
Old Posted Dec 17, 2008, 9:13 PM
dawn. dawn. is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 207
Was it not Mies van der Rohe who coined the phrase "less is more"? Correct me if I am wrong, but I strongly doubt he was a lazy man lacking imagination.

It would be nice to see more art, motifs, and symbolism incorporated into ALL architecture. However, I disagree that "modern" buildings are missing these things.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #272  
Old Posted Dec 17, 2008, 11:54 PM
Zerton's Avatar
Zerton Zerton is offline
Ω
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 4,271
Quote:
Originally Posted by TANGELD_SLC View Post
Personally, I think we ought to incorporate more art, motifs and symbolism in our buildings nowadays.
I used to really like the ideal of "less is more", but now I think it's a bucket of shit. Nobody knows how to do it right any more, and we should start a NEW modern style rather than the 1950-80's crap that people still call "modern" It's lazy people with NO imagination WHATSOEVER that like the less is more junk because it's an easier, cheaper design.

It's not modern, it's ugly mementos from the 20th century, when style and beauty nearly died in architecture. I say NEARLY, because there are a few good buildings from that period, but not many.
This is a very uneducated comment. I would try to explain things to you but it would take too long.
__________________
If all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed, if all records told the same tale, then the lie passed into history and became truth. -Orwell
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #273  
Old Posted Dec 18, 2008, 5:24 AM
TANGELD_SLC's Avatar
TANGELD_SLC TANGELD_SLC is offline
The World Is Welcome Here
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: SL,UT
Posts: 884
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawn. View Post
Was it not Mies van der Rohe who coined the phrase "less is more"? Correct me if I am wrong, but I strongly doubt he was a lazy man lacking imagination.


It would be nice to see more art, motifs, and symbolism incorporated into ALL architecture. However, I disagree that "modern" buildings are missing these things.
I was NOT talking about van der Rohe. I'll talking about Mies van der Rohe wannabes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TANGELD_SLC View Post
Nobody knows how to do it right any more
I'm not saying all are missing symbolism, I'm talking about the cookie-cutter office boxes you can find in any city around the world that anybody could think up that are boring and utterly unremarkable.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zerton View Post
This is a very uneducated comment. I would try to explain things to you but it would take too long.
PM me then.
__________________
Espavo!

Plyg, Metrosexual, & AVENian
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #274  
Old Posted Dec 18, 2008, 1:06 PM
delts145's Avatar
delts145 delts145 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Downtown Los Angeles
Posts: 15,049
Quote:
Originally Posted by TANGELD_SLC View Post
Personally, I think we ought to incorporate more art, motifs and symbolism in our buildings nowadays.
I used to really like the ideal of "less is more", but now I think it's a bucket of shit. Nobody knows how to do it right any more, and we should start a NEW modern style rather than the 1950-80's crap that people still call "modern" It's lazy people with NO imagination WHATSOEVER that like the less is more junk because it's an easier, cheaper design.

It's not modern, it's ugly mementos from the 20th century, when style and beauty nearly died in architecture. I say NEARLY, because there are a few good buildings from that period, but not many.
In many ways you are right TANGELD, particularly with many of the so-called 'international style' knock-offs. IMO, beauty can be constructed in every style.

However and unfortunately, the international style and it's subsequent progeny have encouraged the cheapest possible finish in far too many cases. Often, the aesthetics of a developer's project goes unchecked by a particular council. Only those functions that are related to specific codes and utilitarian functions are checked off. The finished beauty of a tower is not a priority. Instead, the lack of visual beauty becomes a means of producing the biggest profit at the expense of architectural and civic pride.

.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #275  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2009, 5:05 AM
deja vu's Avatar
deja vu deja vu is offline
somewhere in-between
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: West Michigan
Posts: 1,359
The Pittsburgh post-Gazette Building

not terrible, but I wouldn't miss it either.



(photo by me)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #276  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2009, 5:15 AM
volguus zildrohar's Avatar
volguus zildrohar volguus zildrohar is offline
Flat Top Is My Enemy
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: The City Of Philadelphia
Posts: 15,944
Philadelphia:

Penn Center Plaza



There are two of these buildings and they wouldn't be so bad except for the fact that they occupy a prime central location downtown and are so bland and featureless they make you want to scream at them.
__________________
je suis phillytrax sur FLICKR, y'all
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #277  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2009, 5:20 AM
deja vu's Avatar
deja vu deja vu is offline
somewhere in-between
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: West Michigan
Posts: 1,359
yeah. same with the post-gazette building.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #278  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2009, 5:23 AM
volguus zildrohar's Avatar
volguus zildrohar volguus zildrohar is offline
Flat Top Is My Enemy
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: The City Of Philadelphia
Posts: 15,944
It's kinda crazy with these bloody things. They were the first of the Penn Center buildings, which brought Philadelphia into the modern office building era. If there's any decade that needs its architecture stripped ofrom the face of the planet it's that boxy 50s crap. You can save a few.
__________________
je suis phillytrax sur FLICKR, y'all
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #279  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2009, 5:37 AM
Jasoncw's Avatar
Jasoncw Jasoncw is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Detroit, Michigan
Posts: 349
I had heard that Gropius did an entry before I actually saw the image of it, and I was excited and ready to say "too bad that wasn't built" but then I saw what it was supposed to look like, and I think we're better off how it was built. Maybe if he would have chopped off all of those stylistic balconies and massing it would have been better.

Though I do think the Saarinen entry was the best out of all of the images I've seen, and a lot of the entries are really bizarre. But I think that sort of gives context to our own time, since in the future the blobs of today will look just as absurd (if they don't already, imo).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #280  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2009, 6:13 AM
Exodus Exodus is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,859
Quote:
Originally Posted by volguus zildrohar View Post
Philadelphia:

Penn Center Plaza



There are two of these buildings and they wouldn't be so bad except for the fact that they occupy a prime central location downtown and are so bland and featureless they make you want to scream at them.
You are right, not really a bad building, but bad location. They just don't seem to fit in where they are at. It's like the Kennedy Sq. Bldg. in Detroit, it would be ok in Southfield, Troy, or Dearborn, but not in the heart of Downtown Detroit.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 9:07 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.