View Single Post
  #280  
Old Posted Jan 31, 2007, 6:33 AM
kenratboy kenratboy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Posts: 1,096
Quote:
Originally Posted by craeg View Post
I sent John a letter voicing my strong disagreement with his article. San Francisco is drowning in mediocrity. This is a once in a lifetime opp. to develop what will likely be the only sites in the city to support these kind of buildings. The last thing we need is more of the same crap. The only buildings in SF which have registered anything on the national scale are buildings which have been outside of the reach of the SF public (de young and federal building)
Yes San Francisco has a gorgeous physical setting. No, that does not mean we have to dumb down our architecture. We have the possibility here of creating something which doesnt exist in SF today - and I hope the people involved in this project get that.
Can you imagine an architecture critic in Chicago championing subtle design for "the most high-stakes land deal in ... in our lifetime"
John King is a joke.
I took it as a call for building something special and carefully designed - not something bland. I think his point is NOT to build something trendy and edgy, but something elegant, timeless, and just amazing.

Obviously, I interpreted his article differently than many of you.
Reply With Quote