Time Magazine's Most Anticipated Building of 2007 - Page 5

Tom Servo · #81 Posted **Mar 21, 2007, 4:43 AM**

*SIGH* I don't get it.
This building will be amazing, and I can't think of any better to anticipate than this. Architecture has become SO bad that when great architecture like this appears, people don't know what to do.

Most people on this website seem to be more impressed by precast concrete residential highrises or 2000 feet of shinny glass than anything with any amont of architectural value. Oh well. I guess you can all just cross your fingers and hope that Burj Dubai makes it to the top of next years list.

holladay · #82 Posted **Mar 21, 2007, 5:31 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by AdrianXSands

*SIGH* I don't get it.
This building will be amazing, and I can't think of any better to anticipate than this. Architecture has become SO bad that when great architecture like this appears, people don't know what to do.

Most people on this website seem to be more impressed by precast concrete residential highrises or 2000 feet of shinny glass than anything with any amont of architectural value. Oh well. I guess you can all just cross your fingers and hope that Burj Dubai makes it to the top of next years list.

Just be careful what you say on here. They'll attack you for being elitist. lol

BnaBreaker · #83 Posted **Mar 21, 2007, 5:39 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by realm0854

Just be careful what you say on here. They'll attack you for being elitist. lol

No, 'they' won't, they'll call you out for considering your subjective opinion on a subjective matter to be superior. This is the misunderstanding you and I (and others) were apparently involved in. After reading your response to me your comments make more sense and I understand them more.

Tom Servo · #84 Posted **Mar 21, 2007, 5:43 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by realm0854

Just be careful what you say on here. They'll attack you for being elitist. lol

I am elitist though. Sorry, but most people only like tall shinny things; most people don't know what good architecture is.

BnaBreaker · #85 Posted **Mar 21, 2007, 6:59 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by AdrianXSands

I am elitist though. Sorry, but most people only like tall shinny things; most people don't know what good architecture is.

Plasticman · #86 Posted **Mar 21, 2007, 4:06 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by BnaBreaker

I suppose I can appreciate the fact that some people are in love with this structure. I can even submit that there is perhaps something about the structure that my untrained eyes simply miss. What I do not understand, however, is why, if one is not a fan of this structure, they are deemed laymen who simply 'can't wrap their feeble minds around the genius of it'. Why can't I just not like the damn thing?

I still haven't wrapped my feeble mind around Museum Plaza in Louisville yet.

Once complete, you know MP will top the list for that year.

Basically when a bland or hideoulsy ugly building makes some "list" I picture a bunch of elitist architects standing around with glasses of brandy and basking in the rays of each others pseudo-intellectualism.

KCtoBrooklyn · #87 Posted **Mar 21, 2007, 4:07 PM**

Here are some nice pics just posted by Tosspot in My City Photos
Probably won't change anyone's minds, though.
http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=127803

Plasticman · #88 Posted **Mar 21, 2007, 4:09 PM**

With those pictures it looks like some attempt at futuristic but in reality is a cold, cold, lifeless shell with lines of people faintly smiling pretending that they understand its intent.

KCtoBrooklyn · #89 Posted **Mar 21, 2007, 4:19 PM**

The intent of the museum is obvious.
If you don't understand, then read the article in metropolis

http://www.metropolismag.com/cda/story.php?artid=2536

I can completely understand people not enjoying the asthetic of the building- I didn't at all for quite some time. It definitely helps to experience it in person. But even if you don't like the look of the building, the intent and concept is what makes this structure important.

woodrow · #90 Posted **Mar 21, 2007, 4:29 PM**

KCtoBrooklyn -
You beat me to the link.

You know, it isn't cold, and it isn't cold due to the fact that it is surrounded by, and part of, the sculpture park. As to the interiors, what those few photos do not show well is the inter-related aspect of outside and inside.

As I noted before, aside from the galleries, this addition forces the museum goer to look outside. In the N-A building, a patron has to make an effort to look outside. With the Bloch Building addition, same patron will have to make an effort NOT to look out on the gardens and sculptures and N-A building.

john_mclark · #91 Posted **Mar 21, 2007, 4:58 PM**

it looks more like a memorial from the outside

Urban Sky · #92 Posted **Mar 21, 2007, 7:24 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Plasticman

I still haven't wrapped my feeble mind around Museum Plaza in Louisville yet.

Once complete, you know MP will top the list for that year.

Basically when a bland or hideoulsy ugly building makes some "list" I picture a bunch of elitist architects standing around with glasses of brandy and basking in the rays of each others pseudo-intellectualism.

That's funny, because that's exactly what I was picturing.

phillyskyline · #93 Posted **Mar 21, 2007, 8:21 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by vid

What the fuck is she looking at!?!?!?!??!??!?

She's prolly looking for the entrance! haha... I like the clean design & the illuminating effect. Gotta see it in person to get the full perspective.

Evergrey · #94 Posted **Mar 21, 2007, 8:48 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Plasticman

I still haven't wrapped my feeble mind around Museum Plaza in Louisville yet.

Once complete, you know MP will top the list for that year.

Basically when a bland or hideoulsy ugly building makes some "list" I picture a bunch of elitist architects standing around with glasses of brandy and basking in the rays of each others pseudo-intellectualism.

best post yet

tackledspoon · #95 Posted **Mar 21, 2007, 9:34 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by KCtoBrooklyn

Here are some nice pics just posted by Tosspot in My City Photos
Probably won't change anyone's minds, though.
http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=127803

Those pictures are beautiful. I really hate the striation, but I love the massing and the way the buildings interact. The article really sells it for me- the lighting set-up is fairly ingenious and the way it appears to glow at night is beautiful.

Derek · #96 Posted **Mar 21, 2007, 9:58 PM**

Time's most anticipated building looks like an ugly funky toilet

CGII · #97 Posted **Mar 21, 2007, 11:25 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Derek loves SD

Time's most anticipated building looks like an ugly funky toilet

That would be 2 Penn and MSG in New York.

ignatius · #98 Posted **Mar 22, 2007, 12:22 AM**

I live a few blocks from this contraption and was highly critical in early construction. It's atrocious looking from a distance during the day but at night when lit up, walking around the area is a surreal experience. The way site lines change while walking, the spooky shadows from the glow, the contrast to the original building... it's as if the sun gods of the Incas have placed warrior souls to protect the place. It must be seen in person and not judged on pictures. The area is spatial and dynamic while walking, not a clump of static objects.

But during the day it does look like Walmart shacks, at least from a distance. I haven't walked around it during the day. Apparently it is designed to have similar 'parallax' effects from sun reflections.

It's good to see KC do something this controversial, but I would rather have had something that looked better during the day. It does remind us of the importance to understanding individual subjectivity. It's tough to visit and leave this space w/out it brewing up a strong opinion. This heated discussion seems to be what the architect wanted. And the fool is those who judge before witnessing it in person. (I was one of them during construction.)

woodrow · #99 Posted **Mar 22, 2007, 1:15 AM**

Well said.

I don't think they look like shacks during the day, but then I haven't seen them on a super sunny day. I was there on a rainy, misty October day, and I liked the glass - wet and shimmery and shiny. I haven't even seen them at night, but it seems widely held that they look great.

These photo's, found on flickr, by ChrisM70, were taken on a day similar to the one when I was there (it was mistier though)

http://flickr.com/photos/chrism70/se...7594332335178/

They look good in early morning, late afternoon, cloudy days and at night. I have wondered about them in strong KC sunshine. My least favorite photo's were taken mid day in the summer.

I still LOVE the massing and relationship to the original building.

The best Ignatius comment -

Quote:

It does remind us of the importance to understanding individual subjectivity.

That noted, I do wonder how many who have dismissively written it off would change their opinion if they visited it?

Awkab · #**100** Posted **Mar 22, 2007, 1:49 AM**

I've never been to KC, but am visiting next month. I look forward to seeing this addition in person...from the night photos, I think it looks amazing!