826 opens up its second Los Angeles area center, designed and built by archinector, Scott Mitchell. 826 is a "free literacy and writing center for kids that was started by author Dave Eggers in San Francisco," with centers in New York, Chicago, Ann Arbor, Seattle, and Boston. 826 is always looking for volunteers and tutors.
7 Comments
Well done Scott!
these are the kind of projects i would like to see more of coming out from current architectural efforts, rather than some 1 layer rendering wannabes that the world is saturated with. that facade tells more about future than some kind of max me out art-lite for architects. time to bifurcate the 'design' wealth towards the real world.
project has multiple layers, social agenda and everyday beneficiaries.
congratulations for getting it going/done. this is really good and trumps all of la's new best.
I agree - this is one of he most interesting projects I've seen recently. The tweaking of the rules to get a retail-fronted space is wonderful, and this one is so cool looking! In Philly drug sales often happened out of similar little fake corner groceries, but imagine if an underworld of literacy and design could operate out of these little pretend stores instead...
Would love to see more pics!
love the slogan. reminds me (obviously for those of you who remember the 80s) of buckaroo banzai.
maybe eggers is a fan?
that would fit.
also love that 'time travel mart' plays well off of the real name of the place - echo park.
Orhan, why the negative tone about everything else happening architecturally in your city? Sure the premise of 826 is great, and that its done essentially pro bono, but I've met Mr. Eggars and I'm pretty sure he wouldn't share the single-mindedness of what constitutes relevant architectural experimentation that your comment suggests. There's plenty of room for this type of approach (and plenty of followers in AFC, Public architecture etc, ectc), to coexist alongside the digitally driven stuff -- remember architecture accounts for like 5% to 10% of building! I don't see why one approach needs to trump the other...
where i say i am discriminating against digitally driven architecture is exactly driven by saturated mixmax down to developers brochures promising artist lofts to homeless, if you stretch a little like i do with love.
when you say digitally driven, do you mean something else?
sorry, i don't feel to be supportive about everything put out. i am not always about, 'you get an A for effort.'
using digital generation does not make auto good development.
right now i am studying everyday economics and have a bigger sympathy for the everyday walk. however, i can be convinced upon delivery, away from privileged conditioning and self claims of minor uncharted territories. we might need better papers?
a lot of the work came out since the 80's became or marginalized as art before it became architecture. what do you say about that?
and here is an unlikely support for the digital work from me; i feel it is being used for decorative purposes undermining its great potential and developmental qualities. maybe that is why i am pissed off. it is neither art nor architecture. design art? what the hell is that going to cause, millenium style houshold items for the photoshoot? thanks. i reserve the right to not want it.
you must know what i am talking about.
i am not the enemy bothands. i am with the real value. and that is why i am in support of the above type enterprises.
mr. eggers? not my issue, what he thinks about what i might think respectively on positive state of architecture. i don't see any conflict. this is not a permanent condition in the light of moving cities.
different approaches are human nature. value is quantifiable.
positive is right now, normative is what is ought to be. i am positive for now.
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.