Discussion World Forum  


Go Back   Discussion World Forum > Discussion Forums > Architecture & Urban Design

Architecture & Urban Design Buildings, houses, mass transit, density, urban sprawl or anything related to architecture.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old Nov 19th 2014, 12:24 AM
Dominick's Avatar
Dominick Dominick is offline
Globetrotter
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Dying Europe
Posts: 3,837
Default Re: Frank Gehry is still the worlds worst archit

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Palven View Post
I thought that some of the modern architecture in Valencia, Spain, was particularly hideous, and Googled it to see if Frank Gehry designed it, but apparently it wasn't him, but a guy named Santiago Calatrava.
http://www.visitvalencia.com/en/blog...ture-valencia/
Both the name and the building looked familiar and yes:




It's the same dude who designed this new high speed railway station in the Belgian city of Liège (Luik/Luttich). I love it, it's awesome. One has to be inside though to fully appreciate it. The light is phenomenal.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old Nov 19th 2014, 12:31 AM
Dominick's Avatar
Dominick Dominick is offline
Globetrotter
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Dying Europe
Posts: 3,837
Default Re: Frank Gehry is still the worlds worst archit

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael View Post
I'm sure that there are various technical issues/problems that are unique to each different buiding. But that in itself is a pattern. Most of Gehry's buildings seem to suffer from various physical problems, presumably due to the radical shape/design elements. Certainly it would be likely be a 'builder' problem if it was only one or two of Gehry's buildings having those kinds of problems, but that's just not the case - almost every freakin' building of his has major ongoing issues. That can't be just a coincidence.

Btw, the Gehry designed museum in Ottawa (similar to Bilbao in style) is a horror story for upkeep costs since every element of the building is 100% custom. Even replacing a single custom-built window years after original construction can cost $100,000 each which is insane. It also has notorious leaky roof problems and cracking walls (millions of dollars have been spent trying to fix leaky roof, but it still has problems years later).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Donkey View Post
That's a fair point. Though at least in the Cleveland case it has a lot to do with the roof angles and corners and such being built to account for snow and its sliding habits.
Methinks the man is just too much ahead of his time in that the classic building materials are only really suitable for square boxes. He'd need more organic, self-adaptive materials. If they exist already to begin with, they're probably still way too expensive.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old Nov 19th 2014, 11:10 AM
Tom Palven Tom Palven is offline
Cranky Curmudgeon
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 2,043
Default Re: Frank Gehry is still the worlds worst archit

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dominick View Post
Both the name and the building looked familiar and yes:




It's the same dude who designed this new high speed railway station in the Belgian city of Liège (Luik/Luttich). I love it, it's awesome. One has to be inside though to fully appreciate it. The light is phenomenal.
If that structure is functional and doesn't clash too badly with it's surrounds, then fine.
__________________
Voltairian individualist on the Lunatic Fringe of the Radical Center
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old Nov 19th 2014, 04:43 PM
Michael's Avatar
Michael Michael is offline
Administrator
Herder of Cats
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 14,818
Default Re: Frank Gehry is still the worlds worst archit

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dominick View Post
Both the name and the building looked familiar and yes:




It's the same dude who designed this new high speed railway station in the Belgian city of Liège (Luik/Luttich). I love it, it's awesome. One has to be inside though to fully appreciate it. The light is phenomenal.
Yes, that's a fine looking railway station for the 21st century.

I have no problem with modern-looking architecture and the critique against Gehry isn't just because his stuff is 'post-modernist'. The critique against Gehry (et al) is that they design ugly crap that doesn't work well, but are celebrated as celebrities while the general public mostly hates the stuff that becomes an eyesore in their neighborhood.

It is the exact same argument that has always been made against Frank Lloyd Wright. He was an egotistic celebrity who designed buildings that don't work well (one exception for FLW was the Guggenheim gallery which was a good design that worked well).
__________________
Remember what the dormouse said: Feed your head!
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old Nov 19th 2014, 04:45 PM
Michael's Avatar
Michael Michael is offline
Administrator
Herder of Cats
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 14,818
Default Re: Frank Gehry is still the worlds worst archit

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Palven View Post
If that structure is functional and doesn't clash too badly with it's surrounds, then fine.
Exactly. Can't say that about any Gehry building at all.
__________________
Remember what the dormouse said: Feed your head!
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old Nov 19th 2014, 04:47 PM
Michael's Avatar
Michael Michael is offline
Administrator
Herder of Cats
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 14,818
Default Re: Frank Gehry is still the worlds worst archit

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dominick View Post
Methinks the man is just too much ahead of his time in that the classic building materials are only really suitable for square boxes. He'd need more organic, self-adaptive materials. If they exist already to begin with, they're probably still way too expensive.


And that is precisely what makes him a hideously bad architect.

Good architects use viable building processes and functional materials to produce buildings that are functional and generally considered aethetically pleasing.

Egomaniac celebrity architects push the envelope and design buildings that can't actually function given present technology and material science - because it makes them famous and worshipped as celebrities. The billionaire clients of such egomaniac celebrity architects are just hoping some of that celebrity/fame will rub off on them by paying for the hideous monstrosity that is inflicted upon some innocent city and all its residents.

Besides, the media always loves fascists and Gehry's brutally ugly and arrogant architecture is definitely fascistic. That's why it surprises me that you seem so supportive of it.
__________________
Remember what the dormouse said: Feed your head!
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old Nov 22nd 2014, 03:53 PM
Dominick's Avatar
Dominick Dominick is offline
Globetrotter
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Dying Europe
Posts: 3,837
Default Re: Frank Gehry is still the worlds worst archit

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael View Post


And that is precisely what makes him a hideously bad architect.

Good architects use viable building processes and functional materials to produce buildings that are functional and generally considered aethetically pleasing.

Egomaniac celebrity architects push the envelope and design buildings that can't actually function given present technology and material science - because it makes them famous and worshipped as celebrities. The billionaire clients of such egomaniac celebrity architects are just hoping some of that celebrity/fame will rub off on them by paying for the hideous monstrosity that is inflicted upon some innocent city and all its residents.
<shrug>
The economical viability of architecture is just one aspect. If that were always the only consideration, nothing would ever be built except boring square boxes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael View Post
Besides, the media always loves fascists and Gehry's brutally ugly and arrogant architecture is definitely fascistic. That's why it surprises me that you seem so supportive of it.
Fascist?
Albert Speer's shit is fascist, Ceaucescu's People's Palace is, the new presidential palace in Turkey is, but what on earth is fascist about Gehry?
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old Nov 23rd 2014, 10:30 AM
Michael's Avatar
Michael Michael is offline
Administrator
Herder of Cats
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 14,818
Default Re: Frank Gehry is still the worlds worst archit

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dominick View Post
<shrug>
The economical viability of architecture is just one aspect. If that were always the only consideration, nothing would ever be built except boring square boxes.
You just shifted the goal posts.

I pointed to "viable building processes and functional materials", not the economic viability of a building. The economic viability of a building is all about how much rent it generates, not specifically how it is constructed.

The choice of materials and construction techniques is ultimately the choice of the architect/designer. So if a building uses experimental materials and techniques that produce sub-standard results (like perennially leaky roofs or insanely high maintenance costs), that is the fault of the architect/designer. And when an architect/designer creates numerous buildings that have the same problems with perennially leaky roofs and insanely high maintenance costs due to using various different experimental materials/techniques on each building, then I'd say that's a hideously bad architect with serious ego issues.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dominick View Post
Fascist?
Albert Speer's shit is fascist, Ceaucescu's People's Palace is, the new presidential palace in Turkey is, but what on earth is fascist about Gehry?
You are positing that fascism only comes from the politics of the designer or client. I think that is highly simplistic.

I would argue that any architecture can be fascist based on its function and form. To put it simply, any large buiding that serves elite interests and has a physical form that seeks to dominate the surroundings (ie. it says "fuck you" to the masses), is fascist architecture.

In that respect, yes, Albert Speer's monsterous designes for Nuremburg or Berlin were indeed fascist architecture. But so is the palace of Versailles, the great pyramids and the US Capitol building. All of these are buildings that seek to dominate the landscape for the glory of the elite class.

In many ways, classical and neo-classical architecture is the most popular form of fascist architecture, though it need not be if used correctly. The NY Public Library (or Grand Central Station) are good examples of neoclassical style that is not fascist but democratic.

The grand stairway entrance for the NY Library (for example) is a pedestrian-friendly architectural element that invites average people passing by to sit down and chat, or eat lunch there. The similarly grand starway entrance for the US Capitol is not. It is designed simply to awe the spectator/voter. There is nothing friendly about it and average people do not sit on the stairs to eat their lunch. And that's the real difference between 'fascist' and 'democratic' architecture. Democratic architecture is inviting to average people. Fascist architecture is all about glorifying the elite class who owns or uses the building.
__________________
Remember what the dormouse said: Feed your head!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:49 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2008 - 2017, DiscussionWorldForum.com