Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertWalpole
That's interesting. However, for those not brave enough to venture onto 126th and 2nd Ave., these crappy McSams fit the bill.
|
Good point.
My opinion is that this sort of
non-architecture is completely appropriate given the location and overwhelming need for lower priced rooms. The building practically disappears into it's environment, a feat not as easily accomplished as one might think. The surrounding neighborhood is a completely discordant mix of practically every architecture style popular in Manhattan over the last 100 years.The drab exterior seems to hint
just enough at all these disparate styles, from pre-war brick to mid-century box, 80's po-mo, and the newer stuff as well.
If every new tower were some glassy, dazzly, eye-catcher, the city would be a lot less interesting in a few ways. Obviously there would be an even more affluent consumer base, to pay for all the expensive materials and odd shaped floor plates the construction documents called for. Secondly, an excessive amount of "fancy" new construction would alter the city's character in an undesirable way. It would be like adding excessive seasoning to a soup halfway through the cooking process, permanently altering the flavor and ruining the wonderful synthesis that had begun to emerge.
The proposed towers Carnegie 57, Hotel Pennsylvania, Tour Verre, etc. will all bring plenty of (much needed) dazzle to midtown. However, there are already plenty of new glassy buildings to impress us, just let this one quietly serve its need.
Prev
Gene Kaufman actually respected the street wall in these examples?! What the hell happened? Out of the dozens of McSame's that he's plopping around the city, he's never done that before.
Linear Mode
