Other nations launch architecture competitions and unveil their designs with much fanfare in what has become a kind of Olympics of architecture and art. Not you, Mr. Canada. You farm out the commission for the Canadian Pavilion at World Expo 2010 in Shanghai to a circus corporation. Oh, Canada. Hewer of wood and drawer of water. You dumb cluck. You allow a monumental nation-branding building to be conceived without an architect.
Other nations launch architecture competitions and unveil their designs with much fanfare in what has become a kind of Olympics of architecture and art. Not you, Mr. Canada. You farm out the commission for the Canadian Pavilion at World Expo 2010 in Shanghai to a circus corporation. Oh, Canada. Hewer of wood and drawer of water. You dumb cluck. You allow a monumental nation-branding building to be conceived without an architect.
There are 8,000 licensed architects in Canada. But, don't expect to find a single architecture firm's name attached to the Canadian Pavilion in Shanghai. That's because an in-house "creator" at the Cirque du Soleil has authored the concept. Think about it and laugh at the sad clown act we're offering at the biggest exposition ever staged in the world.
This is too bad -- I guess the RAIC isn't much better than the AIA at making architecture matter to people. But I have to admit that when I read her description of the proposals by actual architects, they hardly sounded much better. This is most likely because Expo pavilions aren't actually great venues for architecture: no need to stand the test of time, no need to support any program other than the viewing of (mostly) oversimplified nationalistic schlock.
Still, shouldn't there actually be a law that would require the federal govt. to at least have some RFP and bidding process for this?
Maybe Canada didn't use an architect of their own because a friggin Canadian architect (Clive Grout Architect Inc of Vancouver!?!?!?) designed the goddam US pavilion for Shanghai.
Talk about an insult and a travesty; especially when you consider the banal corporate design is actually worse-looking than the one above by that Cirque du Soleil "creator" -- so much for getting an architect...
i'm with bothands....sadly a non-architect circus act has created a more inspiring entry than the pathetic boring un-inspired US pavilion by an actual architect. i like the argument about having a competition and an architect involved....sadly those two things need to be done right as well (please US, when will you learn that short-listed firms with previous experience does not mean a true competition)
Checkout New Zealand's Pavillion (http://en.expo2010.cn/a/20080603/002119.htm) the land of democratic design processes and 100 % pure visionary architecture. No competition, no fan fare, designed by ex tv scenographers, project managers, number crunchers and the architecture firm de jour of the commissioning body New Zealand Trade and Enterprise, last seen in a mediocre turnout at the 2005 expo in Aichi Japan. $32 million worth of mediocrity. Remember the worlds fastest indian? Oh well nothing like letting opportunity slip by in the name of safety, security and old school ties.
Bearing in mind the project is sponsored by the kiwi fruit industry, weirdly returning the Chinese gooseberry home and the NZ coal industry, putting a foot forward towards a sustainable carbon neutral future, the designers could have come up with something far more creative. Maybe more in Line with Romania's green apple pavillion (http://en.expo2010.cn/a/20090505/000002.htm) Just switch the apple with a kiwi fruit and add a couple of smoke stacks. Go NZ. Yes we can.
Jan 19, 10 3:16 am ·
·
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.
4 Comments
This is too bad -- I guess the RAIC isn't much better than the AIA at making architecture matter to people. But I have to admit that when I read her description of the proposals by actual architects, they hardly sounded much better. This is most likely because Expo pavilions aren't actually great venues for architecture: no need to stand the test of time, no need to support any program other than the viewing of (mostly) oversimplified nationalistic schlock.
Still, shouldn't there actually be a law that would require the federal govt. to at least have some RFP and bidding process for this?
Maybe Canada didn't use an architect of their own because a friggin Canadian architect (Clive Grout Architect Inc of Vancouver!?!?!?) designed the goddam US pavilion for Shanghai.
Talk about an insult and a travesty; especially when you consider the banal corporate design is actually worse-looking than the one above by that Cirque du Soleil "creator" -- so much for getting an architect...
i'm with bothands....sadly a non-architect circus act has created a more inspiring entry than the pathetic boring un-inspired US pavilion by an actual architect. i like the argument about having a competition and an architect involved....sadly those two things need to be done right as well (please US, when will you learn that short-listed firms with previous experience does not mean a true competition)
Checkout New Zealand's Pavillion (http://en.expo2010.cn/a/20080603/002119.htm) the land of democratic design processes and 100 % pure visionary architecture. No competition, no fan fare, designed by ex tv scenographers, project managers, number crunchers and the architecture firm de jour of the commissioning body New Zealand Trade and Enterprise, last seen in a mediocre turnout at the 2005 expo in Aichi Japan. $32 million worth of mediocrity. Remember the worlds fastest indian? Oh well nothing like letting opportunity slip by in the name of safety, security and old school ties.
Bearing in mind the project is sponsored by the kiwi fruit industry, weirdly returning the Chinese gooseberry home and the NZ coal industry, putting a foot forward towards a sustainable carbon neutral future, the designers could have come up with something far more creative. Maybe more in Line with Romania's green apple pavillion (http://en.expo2010.cn/a/20090505/000002.htm) Just switch the apple with a kiwi fruit and add a couple of smoke stacks. Go NZ. Yes we can.
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.