C
Citywriter
Guest
(This message was left blank)
|
|
|
A
adma
Guest
Wow, somebody else noticed the Bata/Emhart thing...
B
Brighter Hell
Guest
imitation is the sincerest form of flattery
A
adma
Guest
Well, even the building which put John B. Parkin (not yet w/John C.) on the map, Sunnylea Public School, was itself a knockoff of the Saarinens' Crow Island school in Winnetka IL.
Not that there's anything wrong w/any of that--in fact, the "that ain't original" argument is a classic yahoo alibi against architectural/heritage significance.
Look, you wouldn't dis the Mormon Temple in Cardston Alta for being bogus FLW, yould you...
Not that there's anything wrong w/any of that--in fact, the "that ain't original" argument is a classic yahoo alibi against architectural/heritage significance.
Look, you wouldn't dis the Mormon Temple in Cardston Alta for being bogus FLW, yould you...
C
Citywriter
Guest
Who's dissing?
John C.'s designs helped drive the Canadian architectural establishment in its incremental moves to modernism.
But, unlike other imports like Peter Dickinson or, later, John Andrews, he didn't do so with a distinctive design language.
Toronto was a small city and (as the cliche goes) conservative. The familiar vocabulary must have helped Parkin sell corporate clients like Sun Life on the international style.
Toronto embraced the modern slowly, in fits and starts, and you can see the traces of that.
John C.'s designs helped drive the Canadian architectural establishment in its incremental moves to modernism.
But, unlike other imports like Peter Dickinson or, later, John Andrews, he didn't do so with a distinctive design language.
Toronto was a small city and (as the cliche goes) conservative. The familiar vocabulary must have helped Parkin sell corporate clients like Sun Life on the international style.
Toronto embraced the modern slowly, in fits and starts, and you can see the traces of that.
U
unimaginative2
Guest
Edit: Double post
U
unimaginative2
Guest
I think it may have been more a lack of money than a lack of brains. Penn Central was treading water before their imminent slide into bankruptcy. I don't think this is entirely uncommon. I would imagine that many historic structures, particularly in the residential sector, have been demolished for that very reason - lack of funds for maintenance, rather than the opportunity to build something that is a real improvement. Perhaps we need some sort of National Trust type of system to take beautiful but high-maintenance building off the hands of cash-strapped organizations and individuals.
Still, your point is very well taken. I don't really mourn the loss of the Bank of Toronto building because the replacement is easily its equal. Might the opposition to Metro Centre have been more muted if its buildings, particularly those on the Union Station site, were not so indisputably hideous?
A
adma
Guest
Actually, the funny thing about Metro Centre is that its buildings were disputably hideous, i.e. state-of-the-art megastructures with genuine architectural cred (courtesy John Andrews). So it was truly a different situation from the tawdry second-rateness of Penn Station's Luckmanization--perhaps closer to Grand Central's thwarted Breuerization...
U
unimaginative2
Guest
Is that true? I thought that John Andrews was limited to those bizarre, though intriguing, residential buildings that were supposed to go where Cityplace is now.
Mind you, from the renderings I saw, the Union Station site buildings were interesting, with their sweeping concrete bridges. They didn't look very distinguished, however.
Mind you, from the renderings I saw, the Union Station site buildings were interesting, with their sweeping concrete bridges. They didn't look very distinguished, however.
A
adma
Guest
Actually, I should look back at the renderings; don't know about the whole story. I thought Andrews was in charge of the whole master-planned scheme (well, at least the master plan)--after all, the towers, the new Union Station and the CN Tower were part of a whole shebang, right?
Hate to say it, but I can picture a 1971 version of Urban Toronto where there's a NIMBY-hating contingent as vociferous in their support of John Andrews as they are of, say, Peter Clewes today...
Hate to say it, but I can picture a 1971 version of Urban Toronto where there's a NIMBY-hating contingent as vociferous in their support of John Andrews as they are of, say, Peter Clewes today...
G
GeekyBoyTO
Guest
Now, equating the two is a somewhat facetious argument. The scheme (namely Metro Centre) is above all an attempt at Modernist planning, in addition to architecture. Clewes of today wouldn't be practicing the former en masse, if at all.
GB
A
adma
Guest
Doesn't matter; in the context of 1971 and what it might have meant to be a message-board-posting archi-planning-geek then (that's important), I can picture an oh-so-earnest "Go! Go! John Andrews!" spirit sneering at the save-Union-Station crew. You must remember that at this time, it was still felt by many that Modernist planning was "urban" rather than "anti-urban".
Though note that I said "contingent" rather than "consensus"; after all, who knows where Crombie/Sewell/Jane Jacobs-type elements would exist relative to a board like this. (And certainly, had the Web realm at large existed in 1971, they'd be using it to the utmost.) Maybe we would have seen some interesting Jack-Diamondites-vs-John-Andrewsites donnybrooks taking place...
Though note that I said "contingent" rather than "consensus"; after all, who knows where Crombie/Sewell/Jane Jacobs-type elements would exist relative to a board like this. (And certainly, had the Web realm at large existed in 1971, they'd be using it to the utmost.) Maybe we would have seen some interesting Jack-Diamondites-vs-John-Andrewsites donnybrooks taking place...
U
unimaginative2
Guest
I actually agree with you completely, adma. I've often wondered the same thing.
Few seem to realize that what really saved us from Metro Centre was not a preservation movement, but an economic downturn.
Few seem to realize that what really saved us from Metro Centre was not a preservation movement, but an economic downturn.
E
Ed007Toronto
Guest
Interesting discussion. I'd love to hear more about Metro Centre and the politics that took place.
G
GeekyBoyTO
Guest
unimaginative:
What about the shift in the composition of the City Council at that time?
Economic downturns temporary "can" projects - there is nothing to prevent something similiar to Metro Centre in terms of planning style to rise from the same site when the economy is booming in the 80s - and yet that didn't happen. I attribute that shift in attitude at least partly to the preservation movement.
GB
What about the shift in the composition of the City Council at that time?
Economic downturns temporary "can" projects - there is nothing to prevent something similiar to Metro Centre in terms of planning style to rise from the same site when the economy is booming in the 80s - and yet that didn't happen. I attribute that shift in attitude at least partly to the preservation movement.
GB