NEW YORK l Fashion Building l HEIGHT | 60 FLOORS l 1930 | NEVER BUILT

ethereal_reality · #1 Posted **May 11, 2008, 7:19 PM**

This is an obscure 1930 proposal I came across recently.
It was even going to be MULTICOLORED!

Below is the information on the reverse side of the delineation.

I'm very curious.
Has anyone else ever heard of this proposal, or have any information on it?
I'd love to see a color illustration.

Patrick · #2 Posted **May 11, 2008, 8:16 PM**

Ugly.

the pope · #3 Posted **May 11, 2008, 10:18 PM**

looks like a half assed attempt at "Aztec Deco"?

Scruffy · #4 Posted **May 12, 2008, 12:46 AM**

is that a statue at the top? A temple to the fashion gods?

ethereal_reality · #5 Posted **May 12, 2008, 1:07 AM**

^^^
I wondered the same thing.
Her arms extend into buttresses perhaps.

Wrightguy0 · #6 Posted **May 12, 2008, 8:59 PM**

Full colour?

Dac150 · #7 Posted **May 13, 2008, 12:31 AM**

The only thing I can say about this building is that I'm glad is wasn't built. There have been many great examples of architecture that have came from that era, but this is not one of them.

CGII · #8 Posted **May 13, 2008, 1:23 AM**

It could've been a masterpiece if it didn't look like three different buildings stacked atop another.

Dac150 · #9 Posted **May 13, 2008, 1:31 AM**

It's a gothic looking base, with an art-deco tower, and an Aztec crown. I don't see the attraction, and gladly many others didn't. It amazes me at times what is considered architecture.

Jibba · #10 Posted **May 13, 2008, 2:19 AM**

This could have been really neat as an architectural anomaly, but it would not be so nice as a fully realized work. However, I still think it would have been nice to have it around today as something zany and unique. Perhaps in real life that pale midsection would have better connected visually with the top and bottom sections, but that point is certainly moot now.

James2390 · #11 Posted **May 15, 2008, 12:00 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scruffy

is that a statue at the top? A temple to the fashion gods?

LMAO.

Swede · #12 Posted **May 15, 2008, 8:41 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jibba

This could have been really neat as an architectural anomaly, but it would not be so nice as a fully realized work. However, I still think it would have been nice to have it around today as something zany and unique. Perhaps in real life that pale midsection would have better connected visually with the top and bottom sections, but that point is certainly moot now.

Sums up my view on it well

Imagine Manhattan with all the unbuilts built...

/if anyone's got skillz with the making of the 3D graphics it'd be a great thing to see.

Lecom · #13 Posted **May 15, 2008, 8:03 PM**

If only the middle shaft was as ornate as the top and base...