Non-snob connoisseur Charles T. Downey asks:
David has some valid and interesting ideas about public architecture, too, so I wonder what he might think about the trend to build new modernist opera houses these days. (Concert halls and museums, too, but that's too much to think about right now.)
Well it shows how far out of the loop I am that I wasn't even aware that there was such a trend.
But my response is simple: if the site is an urban one (or wants to be one) and creating a comfortable walkable environment is part (unstated or not) of the program then the only thing which interests me is how does the building meets the sidewalk? It is of no personal interest to me whether it is "modernist" or "traditional." A good architect can do a pretentious and sloppy job in either style if he/she ignores the street, as did Gehry in Los Angeles or Koolhaas in Seattle. Other than that issue -- how the building meets the sidewalk --the question of my own preference in style of elevation is too personal for me to discuss in public.
Seriously, I like both as architectural styles very much — I like (beef aside) all well-done things. I do not however think much of modernist urbanism, as almost without exception it has never seen a sidewalk it could embrace.
Recent Comments