2009 Pug Awards - Now Love it, LIKE IT, Hate it

[pugawards]

Hi Everyone,

The 5th Annual Pug Awards (The People's Choice for Architecture) launched it's online voting yesterday. In the past you've had the option of "Love It" or "Hate It", to add for more accuracy this year we've added "Like It" to your options.

Please take the time to vote at www.pugawards.com

Thanks
Tim

 

[khris]

I voted yesterday.
There were some buildings on there we did not cover on UT, surprisingly.

 

[grey]

We finally get to dish out some justice for Toronto Life Square.

Watch it win the contest for most beautiful new building anyway

 

[Hipster Duck]

I hearted the AGO, Minto Midtown, 1ST and the Max Gluskin house but that's it.

There were some real puglies this year.

 

[torontoguy]

I've mentioned it before to the organizers, but I think there should be a category for public space and art, or landscape architecture more broadly, not just buildings per se.

 

[grey]

I do appreciate the middle "i like it" category and the ability to go back and change your vote this time around.

 

[khris]

I've mentioned it before to the organizers, but I think there should be a category for public space and art, or landscape architecture more broadly, not just buildings per se.

That would be a good idea. Maybe they just want to stick to buildings.

I do appreciate the middle "i like it" category and the ability to go back and change your vote this time around.

I really like this too.
The site is much improved this year.

TLS got a big ole hate it from me haha.

 

[Granny]

After looking at the choices in North York, I've resigned myself to what sliver of hope I had for the area is now totally lost. Thank's a whole hell of a lot Mel, what you started up there.

 

[Archivist]

Every year I post the same thing, but I really dislike the Pug Awards.

- They encourage web-browser armchair architectural comment, where people make judgements based on a few images (albeit, images that are much improved over past years). I don't think this is a useful way of making such judgements, as the context in which a building appears is very important.
- The judgements that can be made, including this year's addition of "like it", really don't allow one to say anything interesting about a building. Like, what exactly is wrong with it - if you don't like it. I've always felt there are two quite distinct ways to appreciate a building - from a purely aesthetic point of view (is this a beautiful building?) and from a city-building point of view (is this the right building in the right location? Is it permeable to the neighbourhood in which it exists? What does it offer to its setting? Is it too large, too tall, or too small? Is an office building or a residential building more appropriate on this site?). For me, both of these are interesting, but the Pugs allow no place for this kind of basic distinction. For instance, some low-rise buildings on major streets are ugly to me, but I welcome them anyways because in their built form they will certainly add vibrancy to the setting in which they exist. What do I do with the Pugs on that? There's really nothing interesting to say about a building given three options.
- Though they've moved from this I will never forgive their first years when they were the Pugly awards and they seemed designed to encourage bitching, which I think is the last thing the city needs. Now they're called the "Pug" Awards, which is a silly and stupid name for architectural awards in the first place, but they are saddled with it from a historical perspective.
- Finally, I'm actually quite strongly disinterested in populism when it comes to architectural critiques anyways, and in any given year it is not uncommon for buildings that I think are good additions to the urban fabric to be under-ranked to lesser buildings.

(end of rant).

I have to say, the issues like those above are best discussed over time by many people who can make longer comments and arguments about the way our city is taking shape. Frankly, with the existence of UrbanToronto and the great folks who post here, who need the Pugs? They're completely irrelevant, and in my mind do more harm than good.

 

[CDL.TO]

Interestingly, a lot of the maps are wrong. For example, one of the Cityplace projects is marked as being located at Hurontario and Britannia.

 

[GraphicMatt]

Voted pretty much because I wanted to be contrarian and tell TLS that I LOVE IT.

 

[Urban Shocker]

So it'll get at least two votes then!

And I just hated the AGO.

 

[adma]

- Finally, I'm actually quite strongly disinterested in populism when it comes to architectural critiques anyways, and in any given year it is not uncommon for buildings that I think are good additions to the urban fabric to be under-ranked to lesser buildings.

(end of rant).

I have to say, the issues like those above are best discussed over time by many people who can make longer comments and arguments about the way our city is taking shape. Frankly, with the existence of UrbanToronto and the great folks who post here, who need the Pugs? They're completely irrelevant, and in my mind do more harm than good.

Though I actually sort of "like them" for that very same populist reason, i.e. as a barometer of what the untutored "other side" thinks.

"Like them" is in quotes, of course.

 

[Urban Shocker]

Here's what Core's Babak Eslahjou had to say about the Pug's after he "won" one last year:

Do you see any value in the Pug Awards which is based on the “People’s Choice�

I don’t mind the idea, but I am not hot about it either. I think that on its own, there is a problem, to just have a people’s choice awards. I think people’s choice awards in conjunction with other awards by peers and colleagues are more interesting to see and compare.

Do you think the public/people should have this type of forum/opportunity to state whether a building is good or not?

I think that the public choice is over-rated and after all, George Bush was a public choice and you can take it from there. I actually live by the idea that 90% people do not have good judgment/sense. I know I am going to get into trouble with this statement but it is one of the ways that it explains to me all the screwed up things that happens to this world. As a collective of people, we have made a lot of bad decisions in the past, whether it is in politics or other areas.

When you look at the project that won for me, this renovation of a warehouse ( Argyle Authentic Lofts at 183 Dovercourt Rd), I think that people have a certain sense of old world comfort and charm and I think that “that†is what really drove the award. It was something that they could relate to and were charmed by. But I don’t think the general public has the tools required to evaluate architecture. It’s tough because the same thing goes for paintings and music and other art forms. Only about 2% of the world’s music is played on radio and there is a lot of interesting music out there that nobody ever hears. We do have good radio, don’t get me wrong, I am a fan of Jazz FM and CBC Radio, but I think the proportion of population that listens to good radio is less than 10%. Same goes for art. I think you have to take “people’s choice†with a grain of salt and not put a lot of emphasis on it and take it for what it’s worth. It is the people’s choice and we can leave it at that.

Overall, a trained eye can make a better assessment of what they are looking at.

In the end, who’s remarks/opinions would hold more merit, the public’s or private/corporate?

I think that people love buildings for a variety of reasons and I even think that architecture may not be one of those things! I hate to say it but [the public chose the loft building] not because of what I did; we just fixed it up and put a couple stories on top, so architecture may not necessarily be part of the equation as to why people like something and that is why I tend to go with the judgment of my peers. It is very important to me as to what other architects think of my work.

On the other hand, I also believe that the voters within the Pug Awards may be mostly of the business and if that is true, then I am happy about it. I do think it’s important, for me, to get confirmation from my peers and clients.

 

[grey]

I'm impressed by the humility of Babak's response. I'm in total agreement with him and Archivist.

I'd be more interested in seeing something like the Architectural Review Panel's meeting minutes or general impressions on recent projects.