CHICAGO | The Elysian | 686 FT / 209 M | 60 FLOORS | COM - Page 89

BVictor1 · #**1761** Posted **Feb 1, 2010, 6:15 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by photolitherland

Let us all pray to Jesus that three new 700 some odd foot towers rise right next to this turd samich.

Yeah, good luck with that one.

Coldrsx · #**1762** Posted **Feb 1, 2010, 8:08 PM**

Not sure what you guys dislike about this tower for it is rather unique in an old style/deco way while departing from much of the boring malaise we see in new highrise design.

To me that feels at home in Chicago and reminiscent of NYC.

chex · #**1763** Posted **Feb 1, 2010, 8:32 PM**

i agree

Nowhereman1280 · #**1764** Posted **Feb 1, 2010, 8:43 PM**

^^^ There isn't a drop of deco in this building. However, it fits in with Chicago historically in at least one way. Chicago has a history of wildly swinging from completely backwards, revivalist designs to radically modern and progressive designs. This building is just another in a long tradition disgustingly backwards architecture that Chicago tends to build between its fits and spurts of raw architectural genius.

Coldrsx · #**1765** Posted **Feb 1, 2010, 10:27 PM**

^deco'ish there sure is.

But I do agree that upon closer inspection it seems to have more of a blend of multiple styles.

wrab · #**1766** Posted **Feb 1, 2010, 11:31 PM**

I'm not feeling the deco either. I'd call it something more like "Neo French Gothic Loire Valley Chateau", but on steroids and in beige.

FlashingLights · #**1767** Posted **Feb 2, 2010, 1:48 AM**

It's not deco at all.

There are no streamlined aspects of any of the machine age inventions. Also I see no angles from modernism, cubism, and futurism and it fails to adopt a primitive style such as Roman, Aztec, Babylonian, Egyptian, etc. of any sort. An art deco skyscraper would be topped off with something more decorative and glamorous even if it was not necessarily heavily ornate.

Maybe the only aspect you could stretch is that there is some french Art Nouveau even that is a huge stretch.

Instead it's a Disneyland stylized version of Haussman's Paris paired with cheap modern fabrication and overall concrete precast blandness.

vandelay · #**1768** Posted **Feb 2, 2010, 3:29 PM**

Ersatz this, fake that, concrete blah blah blah. It's still better than a flat-top glass box any day.

spyguy · #**1769** Posted **Feb 6, 2010, 9:14 PM**

IC360/ flickr

Dr. Taco · #**1770** Posted **Feb 7, 2010, 6:48 PM**

yea! that...thing finally arrived!...

the urban politician · #**1771** Posted **Feb 7, 2010, 7:17 PM**

What is that?

Kippis · #**1772** Posted **Feb 7, 2010, 7:51 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by the urban politician

What is that?

Maybe it's one of a number of pedestals for those rooftop spires we've all been *hoping* that would be put up there?

george · #**1773** Posted **Feb 24, 2010, 1:54 PM**

2-22

The south face finials in place.

evanmack · #**1774** Posted **Feb 24, 2010, 9:38 PM**

Beautiful building.

NYC2ATX · #**1775** Posted **Feb 25, 2010, 7:11 AM**

If it's nothing else, this is one unique-ass building. I really can appreciate it as an interesting addition to an already jaw-dropping skyline.

viewguysf · #**1776** Posted **Feb 26, 2010, 7:22 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by evanmack

Beautiful building.

Oh no--here we go again!

tommaso · #**1777** Posted **Mar 7, 2010, 6:14 PM**

I completely agree w/Staten Island here and I'm from downtown Manhattan. Chicago is stepping up 2 the plate and that's better than most other cities are doing.

Nowhereman1280 · #**1778** Posted **Mar 7, 2010, 6:46 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by tommaso

I completely agree w/Staten Island here and I'm from downtown Manhattan. Chicago is stepping up 2 the plate and that's better than most other cities are doing.

Not to stoke the fire, but that's exactly why Chicago is different, most people here despise the chintzy stuff that is often built in NYC (not saying everything there is crap, in fact NYC has probably built a higher percentage of good buildings than Chicago has in the boom) and don't want it being built here. Unfortunately lots of "bros" and old white guys from the suburbs have started moving into downtown and the near north side and have driven up the demand for this crap.

NYC2ATX · #**1779** Posted **Mar 7, 2010, 11:01 PM**

Well, I AM from Staten Island, so I know all about the bros.

I understand where you're coming from. Admittedly, with the few buildings we've had go up in Manhattan that ascribe to this style, utmost attention to quality materials and details is given, but we still have our fair share of crap buildings. I am most interested in seeing how this building ages, because if it has true staying power, that will help it's case a lot.

Ordo_ · #**1780** Posted **Mar 9, 2010, 2:15 AM**

I'd like to speak for the side of New York that doesn't appreciate this form of architecture. I think Elysian is cheap and shallow, and hardly original in Chicago or anywhere else. I do think its better than its siblings (Park Tower, certainly 10 E Deleware), but I sympathise. I think there is a lot of faux junk being built here too and it is way overappreciated. I shudder everytime someone refers to this style as "deco."

Chicago is not stepping up to the plate, it has always been at the plate. I think Elysian is far from the quality Chicago continually demonstrates.