Quote:
Originally Posted by galleyfox
The John Ronan design has some Silicon Valley vibes and might become dated as quintessential 00's and 10's.
I think the Obamas chose the design they did because there is something very reminiscent of East Africa and other neighboring cultures in it.
Perhaps in another context, we wouldn't be thinking "tomb" but rather "temple" like the stone churches of Ethiopia.
And perhaps the conversation the building has with its surroundings is in fact meant to be opposotional. The Classical Temple design of the MSI isn't exactly free of its own negative connotations.
 |
Thanks for those examples, galleryfox. Those certainly helped broaden my snap-judgement image of common 'western' mausoleums - and what I assumed commenters on my posts were referring to.
I still don't like that it's used a a pejorative towards the design. Plenty of world wonders are mausoleums.
And I totally forgot about the Ronan design. If you allowed me choose back then, I would have certainly chosen the sleek, glassy design. But looking at it now, it feels so...bland and corporate (no thanks to Apple's HQ, I'm sure). And it does feel dated. There's something about the current design that feels both modern and ancient at the same time. Which does give it a more temple-like feel. It's not a place of mourning like you'd expect at a tomb, but a place of civic reverence, reflection, and respect.
I've really had a hard time articulating why I like the current iteration as much as I do, because I reflexively feel like I shouldn't. There's something about the audacity and boldness of this direction that the other proposal lacked. Had that onward been built I'm sure I would have liked it, too. I'm easily impressed by bright and shiny buildings, but I feat might have been another corporate glass box - in ring form.
I think I'm rambling now.
Threaded Mode