Is not aging or functioning well... While it definitely has some "wow" spaces and some slick engineering, you can tell that most of the budget was poured into the structure and skin and not into finishes or details. A couple years ago, I tried studying for a few sections of the ARE here and found it to be too noisy and uncomfortable. I think this editorial is a bit harsh, but I agree with many of the points:
Well, Rem did say "Superficiality is the new depth," right? What kind of buildings should we expect from a man who says that?
Not to say that i disagree with rem, in a way I do, but it sounds to me that alot of these problems with the main reading spaces could be solved by making little "reading alcoves", that aren't like study cubes, but more like a comfy couch-in-a-cube. Rem's buildings are notorious for pushing the boundaries of program and in some instances completely re-thinking them. The library should have realized that when they hired him, the end product would likely be so extreme as to be deemed unlivable by some. Frankly, it sounds like the shoulve asked a firm like Williams + Tsien to design it, but they wanted to push the boundaries and took a big risk with Rem. Wether or not the risk pays off only time can tell.
Yeah, I don't know, but that student center he designed for the Illinois Institute of Technology campus here in Chicago isn't fairing the ages well either. And the detailing sucks monkeys, which is pretty ironic and sacrilegious on a Mies campus.
OMA's Seattle Library...
Is not aging or functioning well... While it definitely has some "wow" spaces and some slick engineering, you can tell that most of the budget was poured into the structure and skin and not into finishes or details. A couple years ago, I tried studying for a few sections of the ARE here and found it to be too noisy and uncomfortable. I think this editorial is a bit harsh, but I agree with many of the points:
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/ae/309029_architecture27.html?source=mypi
thanks for the post
i tried to read that article while at the library. it was so uncomfortable though i had to leave and head over to shtarbucks
Well, Rem did say "Superficiality is the new depth," right? What kind of buildings should we expect from a man who says that?
Not to say that i disagree with rem, in a way I do, but it sounds to me that alot of these problems with the main reading spaces could be solved by making little "reading alcoves", that aren't like study cubes, but more like a comfy couch-in-a-cube. Rem's buildings are notorious for pushing the boundaries of program and in some instances completely re-thinking them. The library should have realized that when they hired him, the end product would likely be so extreme as to be deemed unlivable by some. Frankly, it sounds like the shoulve asked a firm like Williams + Tsien to design it, but they wanted to push the boundaries and took a big risk with Rem. Wether or not the risk pays off only time can tell.
bump
anyone notice all the casework has gone to sh*t? is that an OMA design problem, or an LMN detailing problem?
Yeah, I don't know, but that student center he designed for the Illinois Institute of Technology campus here in Chicago isn't fairing the ages well either. And the detailing sucks monkeys, which is pretty ironic and sacrilegious on a Mies campus.
i hear a lot birds crash into the glazing of that student center at IIT.
the birds thing is @ helmut jahn's dorm
Nouvel's Cartier Foundation has a ton of dead birds in front of it as well. It's as much the fault of Chateaubriand's tree as the double glass skin.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.