Since it was finished half a dozen years ago, Herzog & de Meuron's 40 Bond Street has become one the foremost icons of the current generation of New York City architecture. Or so the design cognoscenti think. But what about everybody else? Among average New Yorkers, opinions are mixed in this funny video. One guy who definitely does not like the place is a cranky old neighbor from down the block. — New York Observer
21 Comments
It is funny to me how people talk about the buildings. Like-dislike but hardly anybody talks about where they come from, reason behind them and what they do economically, socially and culturally.
I wonder if these attitudes and expectations dismiss any further effort to explore other ways architecture should operate in a larger framework? I wonder how this approach comes back and influences architects' professional services? These buildings are so off the shelf straight consumer products and not much more. Sometimes I wonder why we have architects designing buildings but not marketing people? Or do they already do that? To answer my own question, I think yes they do that..
What people find so interesting in this building is basically 8 ft or so high security screen right there on very public space of New York. In fact regardless of all that cutesy design, it is a very unfriendly and passive aggressive fence.. It reduces architecture to graphic application. And, everybody eat it right up including the so called architectural writer / blogger crowds.
Orhan,
I'm a big fan of your criticism & writing, but I have to say - coming from an academic and a writer such as yourself, its bordering on condescension to call normal people's opinions of architecture "funny." As a "so-called" architecture blogger myself (and practicing designer, and published critic in actual print), for me its refreshing to hear the "man on the street's" reaction to 40 Bond street. Each of these people is bringing up issues we deal with everyday (preservation vs. new development , commercialization of architecture and neighborhoods, a graphic application to keep graffiti at bay) only they're not using an academic language we're used to hearing. And, surely, they're not hyper aware of what they're saying/observing/critiquing.
We as writers and critics should be asking ourselves how WE can communicate better to "average" folks outside of our academic walls, to broaden the conversation and involve a more diverse group of eyes and brains in the picking apart of issues you mention. If they're not talking about it, it's our fault.
Wendy, your last sentence is my sentiment as well and I have a lot of previous pieces to prove it. Maybe I was too winding to illustrate chicken and the egg or our role as architects connecting people and the buildings, in first two paragraphs.
For me, "the social" is paramount and comes first, but not so blindly.
I specifically made a point of elusive fence, stroking people's sentiment about pretty object reference while doubling as a separative and sinister reminder of the fear of other. In this case the city and its people. Architects seems to know that and masked it in multi operational ways, An object hiding the real aim.. A wolf in sheep's skin..
Furthermore, in my opinion, the video itself is dismissive of the people it interviews. It oscillates between making disagreeable comments laughable and more than it makes positive commentary more credible in some really trickery advertisement arts know how... It is not really badass press as the title falsely suggests.
"Cranky Old Neighbor Really Hates 40 Bond Street"
It makes a real mockery about the guy who says this is piece of shit. Then the young sidekick defends the building to "cranky old neighbor" and at the end of the entire video he sends off the "unreasonable" cranky old man with a condescending woohoo.
Less attractive one dislikes the building as more attractive woman likes it"
Black guy dislikes white guy likes, etc..
You need to observe these as well..
But nobody brings out the real issue of gentrification, defensive buildings in public streets etc..
These could be some ideas for decent criticism.
"And, surely, they're not hyper aware of what they're saying/observing/critiquing."
Surely that's condescending. I guess the 'hyper' bit keeps it from being a straight insult.
You forgot to use the word fugly, Orhan. And you lose points for not using every waking moment to educate the public on the complexities of architecture.
yo ya gotta give it up for the hanging gardens of baby-lon
no? whoa!
What people find so interesting in this building is basically 8 ft or so high security screen right there on very public space of New York. In fact regardless of all that cutesy design, it is a very unfriendly and passive aggressive fence.. It reduces architecture to graphic application. And, everybody eat it right up including the so called architectural writer / blogger crowds.
people who "hate" this building it's purely the visceral reaction to the security screen - less people would have a problem with this building if it opened to the street at the first floor. The reaction is that this building is anti-street - might as well put 20' of grass in front.
I agree with the "cranky old guy". ; D
This may be too simplistic, but most people aren't interested in architecture other than to say they "like it" or "it's a piece of shit." No matter what post rationalizations or explanations we architects give to people our built structures, it really just comes down to those two things, doesn't it? To me, it's about as simple as that intuition towards something. We can think our way through a technically innovative piece, but in the end it's all about how it makes us feel.
"Frank Lloyd Wrong" hahaha. That old guy is cool!
Personally think the screen is a piece of shit. I agree with archaalto, but at the same time, I would say that in art and science not all opinions are created equal. Architecture is in a weird position because it is both art and science, but at the same time it is supposed to be "for the public." In NY the way to do that is to put something for the public at street level rather than shove an architectural idea down their throats. When the "architecture" encroaches upon the street, when most NY'ers feel that they own the street, conflict is naturally going to occur. Not sure how they didn't see that one comming.
jla-x puts it best
its a bit off to say its all about security and class. if it were in japan yall would be gushing about the in-between space captured by the architects and how it is so clever for capturing the elusive street of new york city inside the homes. feels a bit like projection to me. sure gentrification sucks and economic differences suck even more but its better than fleeing to suburbia and saying fuck off to to everyone left behind.
i like the building myself. h and dem are maybe turning tricks for the cash on this one a wee bit, but its still better than a lot of the rubbish that consumer capitalism churns out...wanna see batshit security precautions done wrong there are many more and worse examples in NY. i guess this version is troubling because it pretends everything is hunky dory? too disney?
lower screen reminds me of cheap wood fiber acoustic board.
Whoever made that video is retarded. Nobody cares about the opinions of "average New Yorker" any ways. As if they have any say in what gets built. What a farce!
Yo!
sure gentrification sucks and economic differences suck even more but its better than fleeing to suburbia and saying fuck off to to everyone left behind.
But thats what is happening. It's just the poor people and working people who are moving to suburbia. Kinda starting to look like the Hunger Games. NY is on course for a full transformation from a city of neccessity to a city of novelty. Once people started refering to grime as charm it was all over.
I understand that this is inevitable and that we live in a global post-industrial economy but it still is sad to see such a great city turing into a sterile cartoon version of itself. This building strikes me as "gated community." The seagram plaza is for the street, this is for the owner. Not saying its right of wrong, just sayin.
If you look up the process on how those screens were developed, it's basically from NY graffiti, and is repeated as pattering on the cladding, if you don't have eyes for it, you won't see it. Like with any other story within a building, this one doesn't give it all up on a first date.
And as to being closed off from the street, it is not a busy one. Such fencing is typical of NYC, and leaves the front entrance open. If someone wants another brick rowhouse they can go Queens.
If you look up the process on how those screens were developed, it's basically from NY graffiti,
Yeah but it is not graffiti.
Sure it is.
Maybe it isn't graff in a traditional sense, that's why the client didn't hire FX crew to paint another mural.
tectonic? that lady must not be talking about the screen/graf... i def like the green copper/parallelogram(s)[?] though.
What is an "average New Yorker"?
nam..i think that's glass not copper..which is the most interesting part of the building really.
for me what i don't particularly like about the building is that it seems to be a bunch of ideas that don't really fit together.
and if you see the screen in person you know that it doesn't look like fiberboard and it definitely doesn't look cheap...out of place maybe, but def anything but cheap.
"I understand that this is inevitable and that we live in a global post-industrial economy but it still is sad to see such a great city turing into a sterile cartoon version of itself. This building strikes me as "gated community." The seagram plaza is for the street, this is for the owner. Not saying its right of wrong, just sayin."
Have you been to New York? almost every residential building has (and has had for 100s of years) a gate in front of it with some kind of fence... there are residences on the first floor that can be accessed from the street... that fence has gates in it actually which is pretty interesting.
Now if you're saying instead that Bond Street has become a street of ridiculously expensive residences that only the richest New Yorkers can afford then I'll agree with you.
aestehtics aside,i don't see what the fuss is all about. i don't like it but it doesn't come across as aggressive or as carrying a menacing message. compositionally, i don't like it at all. is the green thingie above also part of H&deM's design? i don't get it; usually, their work packs a solid overt punch...i think most of the people interviewed were wise enough to pickup on the design flimsiness and lack of elegance.
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.