Once again, Witold Rybcznski takes a potentially interesting conversation about architecture and turns it into a personal celebration of the banal.
I think his last paragraph is totally flawed. We know Frank Gehry's name because he's in the media. Did the avarage American in 1792 know the name of James Hoban, architect of the White House? I would imagine so, at least in respect to how far-reaching media was in those days.
And who says that designing a building to achieve significant visual impact necessarily means that it was not designed with high quality to endure the ages? His commentary is so slanted it resembles Libeskind's Denver Art Museum far more than it does the "steadfastness and enduring quality" of the White House.
Thanks, Witold, for another yet self-serving article praising/contributing to the blandness of the architectural environment. Bellagio critique, anyone?
2 Comments
Once again, Witold Rybcznski takes a potentially interesting conversation about architecture and turns it into a personal celebration of the banal.
I think his last paragraph is totally flawed. We know Frank Gehry's name because he's in the media. Did the avarage American in 1792 know the name of James Hoban, architect of the White House? I would imagine so, at least in respect to how far-reaching media was in those days.
And who says that designing a building to achieve significant visual impact necessarily means that it was not designed with high quality to endure the ages? His commentary is so slanted it resembles Libeskind's Denver Art Museum far more than it does the "steadfastness and enduring quality" of the White House.
Thanks, Witold, for another yet self-serving article praising/contributing to the blandness of the architectural environment. Bellagio critique, anyone?
Give him the Bizness LB
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.