1 St Thomas (Lee Development, 29s, Stern)

[Urban Shocker]

But, since Clewes and his culture has been mentioned, here are a few easily-Googled quotes from him about the outlook and approach that aA takes:

"Housing makes cities. Theory's rediscovery of the city and its reification of urbanism over the past three decades has been inversely proportional to practice's involvement in mass housing. While residential construction constitutes over 80% of building activity in North America, this activity occurs beyond the purview of the salon. The housing problem was once a fundamental project of the Modern Movement. Reeling from the failures of post-war urban renewal initiatives and recently discredited as a valid policy issue by neo-liberalism, housing has been left to the vagaries of the marketplace. The hegemony of the development industry and the commoditization of dwelling have silenced design culture. At the present moment, housing has lost its architectural cachet.

******

We embrace the messiness and vitality of the contemporary city, and are willing to navigate the complexities, challenges and compromises necessary for its construction. We enjoy the scale, ambition and essential optimism of developers. In no small part, the general awfulness of our cities is due to the studied refusal of committed architects to involve themselves in their dreams."

 

[Zephyr]

“(Robert A. M. Stern’s) work, like that of many architects active today, emerges out of a kind of nostalgia for a world gone by - it is not for nothing that he read (F. Scott) Fitzgerald and listened to Cole Porter. But it is terribly easy to translate all of that into a cry for a past that will never come again; such a cry can never be satisfied, and if that is all that is motivating an architect, the results will only be empty sentimentality.”​

This quote is from Paul Goldberger. It is within a piece he wrote in April of 1982, and which is currently reprinted in today’s Friday the 13th edition of the New York Times. At that time, Goldberger was the NYT’s Architecture critic, he has since moved on to the New Yorker.

Probably looks like he is writing another negative article about Stern, doesn’t it? There were several such negative articles written about Stern during that period, filtering down into a cadre of unrest surrounding his then attacking style. In passing, Goldberger mentions the “excessively polemical” style of Stern during that preceding, less mature period, when his actual work may not have been sterling enough, forcing Stern to rely on the strength of his words to convey his ideas rather than his work. (You may now be convinced that this Goldberger is an absolute apologist for modernists.)

The article was entitled “The Maturing of Robert Stern” from a series of so-called "Architecture Views". And in spite of all the preceding build up, Goldberger's article must be classified as more praiseworthy of Stern than dismissive, provided it is the mature Stern that you are focused upon. Stern bestowed on himself later, the title of “modern traditionalist”, and marks his move away from “postmodern architecture" - a label that we said he coined - with the very works that Goldberger highlights here. Such are the benefits of hindsight, since Goldberger still referred to Stern's changing style by that earlier name of postmodern.*

Below is more typical of Goldberger's overall tone - critical but largely praiseworthy:

“At its best, Stern's work suggests positive directions … a movement … toward something less flamboyant, less desperate to thumb its nose at what has come before. We are dealing in his current work with ideas as much as before, but with ideas that find their best expression in built form, not in words, and that is an important distinction.

“It is clear now, as it has never been before, that Robert Stern's contribution is an important one.”​

For those anxious to read the entire article, or have spoiled my introduction by having already read it, Goldberger’s “thumb its nose at what has come before” is a reference to postmodern advocates' bad form toward all things "modernist". This was after a decade, the 1970s, when more than the work was under attack, but also the architects that created it or bold enough to stand-up and defend it. This needs to be emphasized, because it is assumed in the article, but may be somewhat vague when read with today's perspective.

In the twenty-five years since the Goldberger article was published, Stern's faux-historicism made him wealthy, famous, and influential. In short, his maturing has made him into a celebrity, not just in architecture but well beyond it. By contrast, in the early 1980s, he was widely perceived in the profession as a former firebrand, under the influence of Robert Venturi's writings and work, slowly adding to a still meager architectural portfolio.

1981 Photograph – Robert Stern on left
(with famed History of Art in Architecture Professor at Yale University, Vincent Scully, foreground right)​

We must give him his due - Stern has come a long way by looking back. You might say that in his case "history does pay" ... or something resembling that.

CLICK HERE TO ACCESS P. GOLDBERGER REPRINT​

______

* - To avoid any further confusion, "postmodern" existed as a term used in several other disciplines at least as far back as the 1940s, but its specific application to architecture began with Robert Stern.

 

[Bogtrotter]

Mr. Stern's gift is in his ability to avoid being weak or sentimental - to give these emotions larger and more truly architectural, as opposed to verbal, expressions. His houses emerge out of more than mere nostalgia; they emerge out of an understanding, and a love, for architecture, and increasingly his buildings are works of architecture first, pieces of nostalgia second. It is a striking irony, really - as Robert Stern comes more into his own and becomes more concerned with issues of pure architectural form, he also moves back more directly into history.

Which is how many of buildings come across to me, as opposed to sentimental recreations. Again I'm personally not so sure he was entirely successful with 1St.Thomas, but as many people have noted- they like the building and it seems to fit.

 

[Zephyr]

A Followup to Goldberger that will never happen

"Mr. Stern's gift is in his ability to avoid being weak or sentimental..." Goldberger

Yes that is the rest of the quote to counter what I highlighted in blue as a teaser. I couldn't bring myself to use the rest of it, but it was there for others to read ... if only you hadn't brought it over to this thread. C'est la vie.

You have to understand, that Paul Goldberger and Robert Stern are not unconnected. They were friendly then, and they are more so now - collaborating in recent years on books, and being found at each others' forums, etc. What I found fascinating about the Goldberger reprint is that he could be balanced enough to acknowledge the criticism of Stern in 1982, while championing the new found maturity that was leading to more important architectural efforts. Goldberger admits to taking a great deal of criticism for his article at that time, but in retrospect, he shouldn't have, what was there was prescient in its own way.

Then I thought of a counter to the counter. In 1998, when Stern accepted his new position as dean of the Yale School of Architecture, I vaguely recalled an article that I had read in the Yale Alumni Magazine a few months later in 1999, I tracked it down finally about two weeks ago, and I'll quote the relevant passage for this post below:

One alumnus of the School says that while he has reservations about Stern's architecture, he believes he will succeed as dean. 'Like every serious architect, I was shocked by the appointment,' says the alumnus, who knew Stern at Yale. 'In my eyes, he's the Martha Stewart of architecture, and represents the commercial takeover of postmodernism. But on second thought, what's clear to me about Bob is that he has succeeded at everything he's ever done. The last thing he'd want to do is fail as dean of Yale.'*​

The smouldering cinders are present, but they are doused by this Yalie's open mindedness. But just a short time later that year, the New York Times in its "House and Home" features section, put out the following:

Robert A M Stern, Dean of Yale School of Architecture, (designed) a duplex loft for himself in downtown New Haven; it has a stridently modern look that appears calculated to win over students, some of whom felt he was too tradition-bound for the job.**
​

Now I had the complete picture of my fantasy. I envisioned Stern in his 1999 New Haven duplex loft with its "stridently modern look" (which I would probably like), not reading F. Scott Fitzgerald and/or listening to Cole Porter as before, but reading MoMo's Introductions to Modern Design and/or listening to Miles Davis' minimalist jazz.

However, it would not surprise me if this fantasy turned out to be somewhere on the right track. Architects look and listen and evaluate many things as they determine their own particular path. And I always believed that curiosity is a major component of intelligence.


__________________________________________
* "Blast From the Past," by Mark Alden Branch, March 1999, Yale Alumni Magazine.
** "AT HOME WITH: Robert A. M. Stern; A Dean's Remodeling Job: Himself", by Julie V. Iovine, Thursday 1.July.1999, New York Times "House and Home" Currently accessible only through the NYT Archive.

 

[3Dementia]

I for one am fed up with all the log cabins being constructed in Muskoka, Kawarthas, Haliburton... they are so yesterday even though they suit the context.

 

[interchange42]

This one sure needs to catch up with the times!

42

 

[3Dementia]

Can't believe that P. Clewes is getting work in Portugal.

 

[interchange42]

It is rather amusing that the best site I could find for that Taylor Smyth cottage on Lake Simcoe is one from Portugal. The page also tells you it's one of their most read articles. Bom para eles!

42

 

[JasonParis]

July 21st...

 

[Hydrogen]

Not to say that it is a fault of the building, but the contrasty black on white finishes still bother me.

 

[casaguy]

What's not to like? From EVERY angle this building looks awesome.

 

[Zephyr]

1 ST Debate (Work in Progress!)

For young Joe Canuck in 2040, he'll think this building was from 1940 something. He may say. "I love the way this city continues to preserve its past," looking up the sides of One St. Thomas. If I'm alive and there to witness some facsimile of this, I shall probably not have the heart to tell him the truth.

 

[adma]

Then you might as well suggest that Trinity College is commonly thought of as 1850something (on Hoskin, I mean)

 

[Tewder]

Dane: I haven't heard anyone here arguing that neo-Modernist buildings of the type designed by Peter Clewes should be "the only thing that should be put up..." What we are doing is assessing the value of pastiche buildings such as 1 St Thomas as vehicles for expressing the spirit of the age we live in, and by extension questioning the place in design history of Robert A.M. Stern.

Why is one 'neo'-modernist rather than pastiche, while the other is pastiche rather than neo-deco?

 

[wyliepoon]

For young Joe Canuck in 2040, he'll think this building was from 1940 something. He may say. "I love the way this city continues to preserve its past," looking up the sides of One St. Thomas. If I'm alive and there to witness some facsimile of this, I shall probably not have the heart to tell him the truth.

I wonder what the Ancient Egyptians have to say about that. Aside from anomalies like the Amarna period, Egyptian art did not change very much for 3000 years.

(Note to Zephyr: I don't want to discuss Egyptian art.)