"Bay Street is awash in banality" by Christopher Hume (Toront...
Popularity Report
![]() |
|||
![]() |
|||
![]() |
|||
![]() |
|||
![]() |
|||
![]() |
URL Tag Cloud
Bookmark History
Saved by 1 people (0 private), first by anonymouse user on 2008-04-07
- Lampertina on 2008-04-07 - Tags cities , architecture , christopher_hume , toronto , critique
Public Sticky notes
Highlighted by lampertina
Still, it's hard to wander around this city and not become convinced that the quality of architecture has deteriorated badly in recent decades. That's not to say there aren't spectacular things being built; it's more that the level of design of the non-landmarks, the background buildings, of the urban fabric has never been worse.
Perhaps it's that only the best of the past survives, but by contrast the bulk of work done by architects today is appalling. Let's be honest: Most people dislike contemporary architecture passionately and often for good reason.
Highlighted by lampertina
on 2008-04-07 by lampertina
True, at some point you get sucked into nostalgia -- but there's no denying that the illustration for this article shows "commie block" architecture at its worst, a sort of computer-generated churning out of floor plates, and a totally graceless "meeting the street" kind of interaction. The buildings just scream "fast & cheap" and "fuck you," too.
Highlighted by lampertina
Highlighted by lampertina
Highlighted by lampertina
on 2008-04-07 by lampertina
Ah, the resonance of Richard Sennett and Jane Jacobs, clearly. Well, it seems that architects (or the developers that hire them) don't necessarily read.
To a great many contemporary architects, this must seem precious and all rather beside the point. Their job is to deliver their client's bidding as cheaply and painlessly as possible, and to hell with the rest.
And the city, why should they worry about that, it's not their concern?
Highlighted by lampertina
Condo critic
THE LIBERTIES, 717 BAY ST.: This nasty slab sums up the ethos of a generation of architects that may be well trained, but was certainly poorly educated.
There isn't a single element of this complex here that engages us at any level; more disturbing, there wasn't meant to be.
It comes to us as one of those poor architectural creations unloved by those who gave it birth. Its justification is strictly an economic one.
Highlighted by lampertina
Highlighted by lampertina
on 2008-04-07 by lampertina
- exactly: this is what I meant by my comment above. (Over?)-reliance on CAD (computer aided design) produces monsters.
The miserable green metal columns that support the glass canopy clutter the sidewalk and the building. You just want to get past it as fast as possible.
The frontage on Bay and Gerrard Sts. has been broken up into a series of bays that reach up from a four-storey base.
The bricks are beige and the results aren't pretty.
GRADE: D
WHAT DO YOU THINK? Email us at condocritic@thestar.ca
Highlighted by lampertina


Public Comment