about the newly announced winning entry for the Barnes Museum in Philly. He raises an interesting point about the state of "public" projects in U.S., and questions why so often projects which will dramatically affect the public are not affected by the public. Discuss
3 Comments
so why is that museum moving if its old location is so great?
also, i'm concerned that opening the discussion about what gets built to too wide an audience would result in the built product getting watered down. design by consensus generally has unlikable results....
Chase, the old location is financially non-workable for the institution to survive on ticket sales. It is severely limited in how many people are allowed to come see it at one time, because it is located in a (wealthy and IMO snobby and spoiled) residential neighborhood who hates the traffic it generates. In addition, it is such a hassle to get to/deal with as a visitor that it sees only a fraction of the visitors it could attract in a mainstream location.
The Barnes Foundation should do what the Barnes Foundation wants, like Mr. Barnes did when he was alive. A private institution serving the public doesn't have to answer to the public about design. Besides, what's the beef with Williams + Tsien? Everyone knows they do good work.
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.