adma
Superstar
How ya gonna do that? Tear down the Grange?
|
|
|
Portrait Gallery in Toronto?
- Thread starter FutureMayor
- Start date
turdrockfromthesun
Banned
Shift some items!
The place is being renovated.
I'm sure a couple of acres can be found.
Use what is built or is getting built!
See if any sculptures that are currently 'inside' but meant to be outside can be placed outside.
Use the already existing bricks and mortar. Crazy talk, I know...
Any room in the Grange to hang, say, Canada's national portrait gallery - crazy talk, eh?
RE 'the Grange" - get the offices out, hang the National Portrait Gallery!
The Grange (Toronto)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
The Grange The Grange is a historic Georgian manor in downtown Toronto, Canada. Today it is part of the Art Gallery of Ontario. The structure was built in 1817, making it the fourth oldest surviving building in the city. It was built by D'Arcy Boulton Jr., one of the town's leading citizens and part of the powerful Boulton family that played an important role in the Family Compact. Originally it was considerably west of the city, but over time the city grew and Boulton sold his considerable land holdings surrounding the manor at great profit.
The house was inherited by Darcy's son and Toronto mayor William Henry Boulton. When he died in 1874 the house passed to his widow. She remarried to the prominent scholar Goldwin Smith, who lived in the building for many years. Upon his death in 1910 the building became the home of the gallery. Since then the gallery has been expanded a number of times and the original manor makes up only a small part of the structure. The building also served as the first home of OCAD. Today it mainly houses offices of AGO employees.
The expanse of lawn to the south of the building, what is left of the grounds, is operated by the city as Grange Park. Also on the old grounds is St. George Church, which was founded by the Boultons and which burned down in 1956. Only the tower and original Sunday school building remain.
RE the AGO:
Art Gallery of Ontario
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Art gallery of Ontario)
Jump to: navigation, search
Art Gallery of Ontario (AGO)
Established 1900
Location Toronto, Canada
Director Matthew Teitelbaum
Curator Dennis Reid
Website Art Gallery of Ontario
.The Art Gallery of Ontario (AGO) is an art museum on the eastern edge of Toronto's downtown Chinatown district, on Dundas Street West between McCaul Street and Beverley Street. With 486,000 ft² (45,000 m²) of physical space, the AGO is one of the largest art museums in North America.
Its collection includes more than 68,000 works spanning the 1st century to the present-day. It includes an extensive collection of Canadian art, which depicts the development of Canada's heritage from pre-Confederation to the present. Indeed, works by Canadian artists make up more than half of the AGO's collection. The museum also has an impressive collection of European art, such as major works by Thomas Gainsborough, Anthony van Dyck, Emile Antoine Bourdelle, and Frans Hals (all donated to the AGO by FP Wood), and works by other renowned artists such as Pablo Picasso, Auguste Rodin, Vincent Van Gogh, and Edgar Degas.[/u] In addition to these, the AGO also has one of the most significant collections of African art in North America, as well as a contemporary art collection illustrating the evolution of modern artistic movements in Canada, the United States, and Europe, including works by Andy Warhol, Claes Oldenburg, and Jenny Holzer. Finally, the AGO is home to the Henry Moore Sculpture Centre, which houses the largest public collection of works by this British sculptor. Moore's bronze work, Two Large Forms (1966–1969) greets visitors at the museum's entrance.
I'd say that the Canadian art content can be reduced a tad for the portrait gallery.
The place is being renovated.
I'm sure a couple of acres can be found.
Use what is built or is getting built!
See if any sculptures that are currently 'inside' but meant to be outside can be placed outside.
Use the already existing bricks and mortar. Crazy talk, I know...
Any room in the Grange to hang, say, Canada's national portrait gallery - crazy talk, eh?
RE 'the Grange" - get the offices out, hang the National Portrait Gallery!
The Grange (Toronto)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
The Grange The Grange is a historic Georgian manor in downtown Toronto, Canada. Today it is part of the Art Gallery of Ontario. The structure was built in 1817, making it the fourth oldest surviving building in the city. It was built by D'Arcy Boulton Jr., one of the town's leading citizens and part of the powerful Boulton family that played an important role in the Family Compact. Originally it was considerably west of the city, but over time the city grew and Boulton sold his considerable land holdings surrounding the manor at great profit.
The house was inherited by Darcy's son and Toronto mayor William Henry Boulton. When he died in 1874 the house passed to his widow. She remarried to the prominent scholar Goldwin Smith, who lived in the building for many years. Upon his death in 1910 the building became the home of the gallery. Since then the gallery has been expanded a number of times and the original manor makes up only a small part of the structure. The building also served as the first home of OCAD. Today it mainly houses offices of AGO employees.
The expanse of lawn to the south of the building, what is left of the grounds, is operated by the city as Grange Park. Also on the old grounds is St. George Church, which was founded by the Boultons and which burned down in 1956. Only the tower and original Sunday school building remain.
RE the AGO:
Art Gallery of Ontario
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Art gallery of Ontario)
Jump to: navigation, search
Art Gallery of Ontario (AGO)
Established 1900
Location Toronto, Canada
Director Matthew Teitelbaum
Curator Dennis Reid
Website Art Gallery of Ontario
.The Art Gallery of Ontario (AGO) is an art museum on the eastern edge of Toronto's downtown Chinatown district, on Dundas Street West between McCaul Street and Beverley Street. With 486,000 ft² (45,000 m²) of physical space, the AGO is one of the largest art museums in North America.
Its collection includes more than 68,000 works spanning the 1st century to the present-day. It includes an extensive collection of Canadian art, which depicts the development of Canada's heritage from pre-Confederation to the present. Indeed, works by Canadian artists make up more than half of the AGO's collection. The museum also has an impressive collection of European art, such as major works by Thomas Gainsborough, Anthony van Dyck, Emile Antoine Bourdelle, and Frans Hals (all donated to the AGO by FP Wood), and works by other renowned artists such as Pablo Picasso, Auguste Rodin, Vincent Van Gogh, and Edgar Degas.[/u] In addition to these, the AGO also has one of the most significant collections of African art in North America, as well as a contemporary art collection illustrating the evolution of modern artistic movements in Canada, the United States, and Europe, including works by Andy Warhol, Claes Oldenburg, and Jenny Holzer. Finally, the AGO is home to the Henry Moore Sculpture Centre, which houses the largest public collection of works by this British sculptor. Moore's bronze work, Two Large Forms (1966–1969) greets visitors at the museum's entrance.
I'd say that the Canadian art content can be reduced a tad for the portrait gallery.
H
Hydrogen
Guest
'Shame on Canada'
Architect slams government's handling of portrait gallery
Maria Cook, The Ottawa Citizen
Published: Thursday, March 13, 2008
Major cultural institutions "should not be victims of party politics," says the high-profile British architect who designed plans for the Portrait Gallery of Canada at the doomed Wellington Street site.
"Shame on Canada and shame on the present government for reversing the previous government's decision," Edward Jones wrote in an e-mail to the Citizen that criticizes the federal government's controversial bidding process for a new location for the gallery.
"A wealthy country like Canada should pay for its own institutions without subsidy from the private sector," he says.
After cancelling the project begun by the Liberal government, the Conservative government last year unsuccessfully tried to place the gallery in Calgary. Then, last November, it announced a competition inviting private sponsors in nine cities to bid on the national institution.
In his e-mail, Mr. Jones noted that the Royal Opera House redevelopment in London was introduced by Margaret Thatcher and completed by Tony Blair.
Prior to the portrait gallery's cancellation, the federal government had spent at least $9 million and some renovations had taken place, although construction of the extension had not yet started.
"We won an international competition for this project," Mr. Jones says. "We made countless transatlantic flights; we attended many, many meetings with (Canadian Heritage) and the National Capital Commission.
"In the spirit of goodwill, we made a very large financial loss on this project -- the result, working with Public Works and the director and staff of the Portrait Gallery of Canada was in our, and the opinion of others, a fine, contemporary contribution to the architecture of Wellington Street."
Now, Ottawa is competing with Vancouver, Halifax, Quebec City, Montreal, Toronto, Winnipeg, Edmonton and Calgary for the right to have the gallery, which is part of Library and Archives Canada.
Mr. Jones is the designer of the elegant Ondaatje Wing at the National Portrait Gallery in London, which won rave reviews. His firm is responsible for several significant cultural projects in Britain, including the Henry Moore Institute in Leeds and London's Royal Opera House. He also designed the dramatic Mississauga City Hall when he worked in Toronto during the 1980s.
Mr. Jones was selected in 2003 to renovate the former United States embassy at 100 Wellington St., across from Parliament Hill, and to design an addition in the parking lot west of the building. His team included Stephen Teeple, an award-winning Toronto architect, and Ottawa architect David Cole. A selection committee considered proposals from six other joint ventures.
Bids for the new gallery location are to be submitted by April 16. And the process is far different from any undertaken to create a national institution.
In the normal course of events on a public project, there is an architectural competition and the selection process is geared to finding people with demonstrated design skills and relevant experience -- such as Mr. Jones. Developers are not involved because the Crown typically owns the land and the project is managed by Public Works.
This time, design is not even on the list of criteria. Under the competition terms, developers do not have to submit a design or come forward with an architectural/engineering team. The proposals will be judged on four criteria: a "prominent, accessible and suitable location," developer expertise and financial capability, financial support from the private sector and community, and the financial deal on offer.
In other words, the government will select a city, site and developer without a requirement for a design team with credibility. It is seeking an arrangement with a developer entirely on the basis of a financial and site proposal.
It is the same process used in procuring leased office space.
Ottawa's submission comes from Claridge Homes.
Neil Malhotra, of Claridge, said he believed it would be a fair selection process and that the government wants a building of good quality.
"It's not going to the cheapest bidder," he said. "The government doesn't want it in a suburban (shopping) power centre. We wouldn't go through the effort if there wasn't some opportunity for Ottawa."
Claridge has filed an application with the city for two 26-storey residential towers with a gallery designed by well-respected Montreal architect Dan Hanganu. It would be built in what is now a parking lot bounded by Lisgar, Nepean and Metcalfe streets in the heart of downtown. Although Claridge didn't have to produce a design, it has allowed the public to see a preliminary image that shows an origami-shaped gallery at the base of two slim towers.
In Mr. Jones's view, the "profitable highrise building sits patronizingly over what I assume is the Portrait Gallery of Canada sitting apprehensively below."
At a public meeting last week, there was opposition to the height and scale of the condo project. Some people said they want the rezoning for additional height to be conditional on winning the competition; if Ottawa loses, they did not want to be left with tall towers and no gallery. The zoning report is expected to come to city council on April 9.
Ralph Wiesbrock, regional director of the Royal Architectural Institute of Canada, says it is shocking that the federal government would exclude design and designers from the proposal requirements.
"It is hard to fathom how a project that will house a major component of our country's history could be developed without any attention to the quality of the building or space that it is housed in," he says.
© The Ottawa Citizen 2008
Architect slams government's handling of portrait gallery
Maria Cook, The Ottawa Citizen
Published: Thursday, March 13, 2008
Major cultural institutions "should not be victims of party politics," says the high-profile British architect who designed plans for the Portrait Gallery of Canada at the doomed Wellington Street site.
"Shame on Canada and shame on the present government for reversing the previous government's decision," Edward Jones wrote in an e-mail to the Citizen that criticizes the federal government's controversial bidding process for a new location for the gallery.
"A wealthy country like Canada should pay for its own institutions without subsidy from the private sector," he says.
After cancelling the project begun by the Liberal government, the Conservative government last year unsuccessfully tried to place the gallery in Calgary. Then, last November, it announced a competition inviting private sponsors in nine cities to bid on the national institution.
In his e-mail, Mr. Jones noted that the Royal Opera House redevelopment in London was introduced by Margaret Thatcher and completed by Tony Blair.
Prior to the portrait gallery's cancellation, the federal government had spent at least $9 million and some renovations had taken place, although construction of the extension had not yet started.
"We won an international competition for this project," Mr. Jones says. "We made countless transatlantic flights; we attended many, many meetings with (Canadian Heritage) and the National Capital Commission.
"In the spirit of goodwill, we made a very large financial loss on this project -- the result, working with Public Works and the director and staff of the Portrait Gallery of Canada was in our, and the opinion of others, a fine, contemporary contribution to the architecture of Wellington Street."
Now, Ottawa is competing with Vancouver, Halifax, Quebec City, Montreal, Toronto, Winnipeg, Edmonton and Calgary for the right to have the gallery, which is part of Library and Archives Canada.
Mr. Jones is the designer of the elegant Ondaatje Wing at the National Portrait Gallery in London, which won rave reviews. His firm is responsible for several significant cultural projects in Britain, including the Henry Moore Institute in Leeds and London's Royal Opera House. He also designed the dramatic Mississauga City Hall when he worked in Toronto during the 1980s.
Mr. Jones was selected in 2003 to renovate the former United States embassy at 100 Wellington St., across from Parliament Hill, and to design an addition in the parking lot west of the building. His team included Stephen Teeple, an award-winning Toronto architect, and Ottawa architect David Cole. A selection committee considered proposals from six other joint ventures.
Bids for the new gallery location are to be submitted by April 16. And the process is far different from any undertaken to create a national institution.
In the normal course of events on a public project, there is an architectural competition and the selection process is geared to finding people with demonstrated design skills and relevant experience -- such as Mr. Jones. Developers are not involved because the Crown typically owns the land and the project is managed by Public Works.
This time, design is not even on the list of criteria. Under the competition terms, developers do not have to submit a design or come forward with an architectural/engineering team. The proposals will be judged on four criteria: a "prominent, accessible and suitable location," developer expertise and financial capability, financial support from the private sector and community, and the financial deal on offer.
In other words, the government will select a city, site and developer without a requirement for a design team with credibility. It is seeking an arrangement with a developer entirely on the basis of a financial and site proposal.
It is the same process used in procuring leased office space.
Ottawa's submission comes from Claridge Homes.
Neil Malhotra, of Claridge, said he believed it would be a fair selection process and that the government wants a building of good quality.
"It's not going to the cheapest bidder," he said. "The government doesn't want it in a suburban (shopping) power centre. We wouldn't go through the effort if there wasn't some opportunity for Ottawa."
Claridge has filed an application with the city for two 26-storey residential towers with a gallery designed by well-respected Montreal architect Dan Hanganu. It would be built in what is now a parking lot bounded by Lisgar, Nepean and Metcalfe streets in the heart of downtown. Although Claridge didn't have to produce a design, it has allowed the public to see a preliminary image that shows an origami-shaped gallery at the base of two slim towers.
In Mr. Jones's view, the "profitable highrise building sits patronizingly over what I assume is the Portrait Gallery of Canada sitting apprehensively below."
At a public meeting last week, there was opposition to the height and scale of the condo project. Some people said they want the rezoning for additional height to be conditional on winning the competition; if Ottawa loses, they did not want to be left with tall towers and no gallery. The zoning report is expected to come to city council on April 9.
Ralph Wiesbrock, regional director of the Royal Architectural Institute of Canada, says it is shocking that the federal government would exclude design and designers from the proposal requirements.
"It is hard to fathom how a project that will house a major component of our country's history could be developed without any attention to the quality of the building or space that it is housed in," he says.
© The Ottawa Citizen 2008
FutureMayor
Active Member
Wishing for a Waterfront Proposa;
It would be nice if Waterfront Toronto came forward with an application with a development team for a site on East Bayfront.
That would be an instant major cultural site on our waterfront.
Louroz
It would be nice if Waterfront Toronto came forward with an application with a development team for a site on East Bayfront.
That would be an instant major cultural site on our waterfront.
Louroz
urbandreamer
recession proof
Instead of scattering artistic energies why not build a Toronto Portrait Gallery near the ROM or AGO? Either along U-Avenue or Bloor West. Maybe one of those dead office buildings along Bloor St W?
junctionist
Senior Member
There's already so many cultural institutions by the ROM, that we could add one or two to what could be a very attractive location by the lake.
EnviroTO
Senior Member
This decentralization strategy totally looses the fact that putting all these museums and galleries in the capital creates a destination which is greater than the sum of its parts. By having all these facilities in one place it makes Ottawa a bigger destination and the number of people visiting the individual museums will be greater than if they had been isolated from one another. How many people are going to go museum and art gallery hopping in Calgary? When you go to Ottawa or Washington the attractions are the government buildings, monuments, and the museums. You don't travel to Ottawa to watch a rodeo and you don't travel to Calgary to see a portrait gallery.
If the cities of Canada want to have a successful tourist industry they need to brand themselves rather than try to be all things for all people. Sure, you can have smaller cultural institutions to support the local population, but I don't think having an institution which doesn't fit the "brand" and expecting it to be a national draw is going to work. People will not travel from other countries to see the Opera House. If they run out of things to do they might check it out but for the most part it serves the local population. The Opera House isn't in the Toronto brand. Only a significant expense could change the Calgary brand to include a portrait gallery... it would need to be a significant enough facility to garner international or at least national attention... something a office space bidding proces isn't going to do.
Ottawa's brand is the capital and includes museums. Calgary's brand is "the west" including the stampede and the rockies. Toronto's brand is the urban city and its brand includes the CN Tower and could, if we focus on it, include movies and theatre considering the successful film festival. I don't think Toronto should be trying to get a portrait gallery. I think Toronto should improve the walk of fame, promote the film festival, get a museum related to the global film industry and ensure none of the live theatres close down and market Toronto as a more international Broadway or Hollywood. I think the release of Indian films in Toronto speaks to what is possible. Toronto is the most ethnically diverse city in the world... there are ways to tie that in to attractions that appeal to a global tourist audience. I don't think a portrait gallery can fit into a larger vision in Toronto.
If the cities of Canada want to have a successful tourist industry they need to brand themselves rather than try to be all things for all people. Sure, you can have smaller cultural institutions to support the local population, but I don't think having an institution which doesn't fit the "brand" and expecting it to be a national draw is going to work. People will not travel from other countries to see the Opera House. If they run out of things to do they might check it out but for the most part it serves the local population. The Opera House isn't in the Toronto brand. Only a significant expense could change the Calgary brand to include a portrait gallery... it would need to be a significant enough facility to garner international or at least national attention... something a office space bidding proces isn't going to do.
Ottawa's brand is the capital and includes museums. Calgary's brand is "the west" including the stampede and the rockies. Toronto's brand is the urban city and its brand includes the CN Tower and could, if we focus on it, include movies and theatre considering the successful film festival. I don't think Toronto should be trying to get a portrait gallery. I think Toronto should improve the walk of fame, promote the film festival, get a museum related to the global film industry and ensure none of the live theatres close down and market Toronto as a more international Broadway or Hollywood. I think the release of Indian films in Toronto speaks to what is possible. Toronto is the most ethnically diverse city in the world... there are ways to tie that in to attractions that appeal to a global tourist audience. I don't think a portrait gallery can fit into a larger vision in Toronto.
St. Even
Active Member
^^^You had me going there until you suggested "selling the film festival."
On the one hand you talk about the benefits of centralizing cultural centres to create a destination greater than the sum of its parts, but on the other hand you want to get rid of the one event that garners more international media attention on the city than any other, and replace it with a museum on the global film industry?
Global film museum is a great idea, but better as a complement than a replacement to the film festival.
On the one hand you talk about the benefits of centralizing cultural centres to create a destination greater than the sum of its parts, but on the other hand you want to get rid of the one event that garners more international media attention on the city than any other, and replace it with a museum on the global film industry?
Global film museum is a great idea, but better as a complement than a replacement to the film festival.
Archivist
Senior Member
I believe he meant "selling" in the sense of "promoting".
St. Even
Active Member
Man that makes a helluva lot more sense when I read correctly....tnx
Tewder
Senior Member
Good post EnviroTO. Who is going to travel to Toronto to see a National Portrait Gallery? This museum belongs in the nation's capital along with the National Gallery, the Museum of Canadian Civilization, the War Museum, Parliament Hill, the Mint, etc, etc... This is why people travel to Ottawa in the first place, including school kids from across Canada, and this audiance is far more likely to take in these sorts of sites. In Calgary, or even Toronto for that matter, these portraits would likely just hang in empty galleries gathering dust.
Urban Shocker
Doyenne
If we really are the centre of the universe then it makes sense for us to have everything here.
EnviroTO
Senior Member
Yes, I definitely meant selling as in promoting.
wyliepoon
Senior Member
I'd actually prefer Toronto to be "all things to all people" in terms of tourist attractions. Branding has its good points, but I think branding Ottawa as a city for museums, or Calgary as a city for cowboys or Toronto as a city for films is rather un-democratic. Who determines what a city should be branded as? What about those people who aren't interested in the city's brand, such as Calgarians who don't want to be cowboys or Torontonians who prefer art museums over films?
I think Toronto is near the point where it can host just about any kind of tourist attraction, as long as it is prominent and managed properly (not like the Olympic Spirit Centre). Toronto's large population and cultural diversity means that it can support cultural institutions like museums far better than other Canadian cities that have smaller populations and less cultural diversity. Toronto is home to a number of medium-sized museums like the Hockey Hall of Fame, the Gardiner and the Bata which survive in this city, but might be in trouble if located in a smaller city.
In an age where a lot of cities are trying to snap up their own satellite Guggenheims and Pompidous, Toronto should really be using every opportunity to bring more museums and cultural institutions to the city.
I think Toronto is near the point where it can host just about any kind of tourist attraction, as long as it is prominent and managed properly (not like the Olympic Spirit Centre). Toronto's large population and cultural diversity means that it can support cultural institutions like museums far better than other Canadian cities that have smaller populations and less cultural diversity. Toronto is home to a number of medium-sized museums like the Hockey Hall of Fame, the Gardiner and the Bata which survive in this city, but might be in trouble if located in a smaller city.
In an age where a lot of cities are trying to snap up their own satellite Guggenheims and Pompidous, Toronto should really be using every opportunity to bring more museums and cultural institutions to the city.
EnviroTO
Senior Member
The problem with not having a brand is that Toronto becomes any city. Toronto becomes a Singapore or a Taipei rather than a Beijing or a Kyoto... a nice city which doesn't have the draw of places with a well defined brand and a city containing attractions which are identical to what can be found elsewhere. Creating 10 small unrelated attractions isn't going to draw the same number of people that 10 small related attractions or one large attraction could. By default our population will lead to small attractions in the city, but there needs to be an effort to create a cluster of related attractions or a large attraction which one of a kind in scale in order to capture the minds of tourists around the world. As nice as the Opera House or a Portrait Gallery may be, nobody in Europe will hear about it.
There are two ways that I can think of for the brand to be defined. One happens naturally because one or two attractions stand out as being one-of-a-kind, by being the largest of its kind, or by being the most influencial or presitigous of its kind. The other is a forced branding where a lot of money is spent to create something which gets global press coverage and leaves something in the city that people will come to see.
If we simply say we have everything then nothing specific stands out.
There are two ways that I can think of for the brand to be defined. One happens naturally because one or two attractions stand out as being one-of-a-kind, by being the largest of its kind, or by being the most influencial or presitigous of its kind. The other is a forced branding where a lot of money is spent to create something which gets global press coverage and leaves something in the city that people will come to see.
If we simply say we have everything then nothing specific stands out.