Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil McAvity
It's astounding how people at this site will argue anything. There can be one tiny little cloud off in the distance and because of that, they will argue that the sky isn't really blue.
EAP for example, has a top that is reminiscent of the rocky mountains which even lights up at night to simulate the snow-capped tops of the nearby mountains. Even Suncor (which few people, myself included, would consider an architectural masterpiece) has an unusual shape and is also located diagonally on it's lot which makes for some interesting geometry.
Yet a featureless glass box like Brookfield is better?
Amazing
|
Likewise, that a different opinion is immediately construed as arguing. I have my favourite style too however, I appreciate all forms of expression. Simplicity isn't banal. Mediocrity is. I don't read too much into the architectural inspiration either. It usually cheesy and self aggrandizing.
These towers have their pros and cons. I don't find any exceptionally better than the rest of the pack. They are just different from one another.
The one thing I have learned meeting architects is that simplicity is much harder to pull off than complex geometry. The subtleties stand out more. You can get away with a lot less. You see it on SSP as well. Fans of skyscrapers, architecture, urban form are a lot more forgiving of a mediocre complex form that is seen as unique than a well crafted simple "box" that is seen as commonplace. The odds are exact duplicates don't exist for either.
Prev
Linear Mode
