Sheraton Centre (123 Queen West, new windows & exterior repairs)

[adma]

Well the first step is to acknowledge that not everything is in black and white (move away from the “you either have education/experience or no education/experience” mindset). Things like architectural beauty can be subjective. In that context, a little empathy, humility and openness can go a long way.

And ironically, it's the "a little empathy, humility and openness" argument that's being offered on behalf of *not* unilaterally trashing the Sheraton Centre aesthetic, or "concrete brutal" aesthetic in general--broaden thy scope, etc...

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

And ironically, it's the "a little empathy, humility and openness" argument that's being offered on behalf of *not* unilaterally trashing the Sheraton Centre aesthetic, or "concrete brutal" aesthetic in general--broaden thy scope, etc...

Touche.

AoD

 

[Ayan]

That said, someone with more experience will be more knowledgeable and, therefore, will put forth better arguments with more merit and supporting details. As such, he or she will have more credibility and, thus, will be taken more seriously.

It's crystal clear in this thread, with those in-the-know defending the Sheriton Centre eloquently, with all kinds of compelling points based on a wealth of knowledge, and those not-in-the-know lashing out and making muddled and nonsensical arguments against it, betraying their utter ignorance.

I am not sure which posts you are referring to. Since the beginning of this debate, I have not read a single post that described Sheraton Centre as a beautiful building. I saw some posts discussing the non-aesthetic value of Sheraton Centre while acknowledging/implying that it is not a beautiful building.

I am sorry but replacing “I am right just because I am more experienced and knowledgeable†with “I am right because my opinion is validated by non-existent posts†does not constitute a better argument.

 

[Ayan]

And ironically, it's the "a little empathy, humility and openness" argument that's being offered on behalf of *not* unilaterally trashing the Sheraton Centre aesthetic, or "concrete brutal" aesthetic in general--broaden thy scope, etc...

If you read the posts that immediately preceded the debate as well as the ones around architectural beauty that followed, you will find that posters did not unilaterally trash Sheraton Centre and "a little empathy, humility and openness" was NOT the counter argument that was offered.

I am sorry but selective embellishment should not justify the absence of a better argument.

Note: I edited this post as I initially misunderstood the post I replied to.

 

[adma]

I am not sure which posts you are referring to. Since the beginning of this debate, I have not read a single post that described Sheraton Centre as a beautiful building. I saw some posts discussing the non-aesthetic value of Sheraton Centre while acknowledging/implying that it is not a beautiful building.

Maybe because when it comes to the full discussion, comprehension, and appreciation of built urbanity, the "beautiful building" argument is an insipid Sunday-painter amateur standpoint to take.

 

[CITY_LOVER]

Maybe because when it comes to the full discussion, comprehension, and appreciation of built urbanity, the "beautiful building" argument is an insipid Sunday-painter amateur standpoint to take.

Out of curiosity, Adma, what do you think of this building's base and how it meets Queen Street? (I'm genuinely asking.)

 

[Ayan]

Maybe because when it comes to the full discussion, comprehension, and appreciation of built urbanity, the "beautiful building" argument is an insipid Sunday-painter amateur standpoint to take.

So Sheraton Centre is an ugly building and you have nothing but empty rhetoric to counter! Why am I not surprised?

 

[ProjectEnd]

Out of curiosity, Adma, what do you think of this building's base and how it meets Queen Street? (I'm genuinely asking.)

He's already dealt with that:

Actually, I'd reckon that the vast bulk of that remaining non-"expert" 95% is at worst indifferent, or else Doors-Openny flexible and accepting. And the ones who are really, horribly super-actively letter-to-the-editor rip-it-down incensed over, uh, "concrete aesthetics" are at most, ultimately not much less marginal than the 5% "experts"--and if we may make "merit points" adjustments, in the end, the expert argument still wins out over the cranky-anti argument.

Of course, all is circumstantial--like, if it was a matter of the present-day aspect of the Sheraton Centre vs Snohetta/Nouvel as opposed to the present-day aspect of the Sheraton Centre vs this, we'd be dealing with something quite different. But that's *really* big thinking--in the meantime, with "work needing to be done", a certain deft and not-disrespectful bow to the status quo will do--yeah, the parking ramp up front and the fortresslike Richmond aspect remain problems; but let's not get ahead of ourselves, one thing at a time. It's economical, with a lemonade-out-of-lemons bow to the f*yeahbrutalism tumblr crowd.

 

[Ayan]

Here's an insightful article written by (grunt, gasp and swoon!) an architect!

http://books.google.ca/books?id=GQw...v=onepage&q=concrete toronto sheraton&f=false

 

[ProjectEnd]

So Sheraton Centre is an ugly building and you have nothing but empty rhetoric to counter! Why am I not surprised?

You should really stop. It's getting kind of sad.

 

[ProjectEnd]

Here's an insightful article written by (grunt, gasp and swoon!) an architect!

http://books.google.ca/books?id=GQw...v=onepage&q=concrete toronto sheraton&f=false

Did you bother to read said article? Even the final two sentences?: "Metropolitan structures like the Sheraton Centre are an integral part of the downtown morphology. They are the mountains we inhabit."

Oddly enough, the article is also perfectly summed up by adma's latest post:

Maybe because when it comes to the full discussion, comprehension, and appreciation of built urbanity, the "beautiful building" argument is an insipid Sunday-painter amateur standpoint to take.

 

[Ayan]

Did you bother to read said article?

Did you ?

I must say, some of you will be perfect case studies of cognitive biases!

 

[ProjectEnd]

Enlighten me Ayan, what have I / we missed?

 

[LowPolygon]

Did you ?

I must say, some of you will be perfect case studies of cognitive biases!

How long is it going to take before you acknowledge that you are in over your head?

 

[adma]

Did you ?

I must say, some of you will be perfect case studies of cognitive biases!

I read the book right after it came out. I suppose the "what have we missed" is in McClelland's suggested amelioration of the base--which Ayan, presumably, is embracing as vindication of his argument that it's an imperfect and hence "ugly" building...