Toronto CHAZ | 150.87m | 47s | 45 Charles Ltd | P + S / IBI

And on the whole, as many a comment thread on newspaper websites proves (even for the "respectable" papers), there are limits to online "have your say" populism before anyone with half a brain turns off. So, if one enters a discussion as the equivalent of an unseasoned freshman undergraduate in an upper-year graduate seminar programme...believe me, it shows, all the more so when you dig in your heels and assert your "right to your opinion".

If the actual building of a city worked that way, then any old yokel should have a right to build the malformed, out-of-scale mongrel neighbourhood eyesore and the concerns of neighbours, planning departments, etc should be regarded violations of "freedom of urban speech", or something. Especially if said yokel offers a "why me, and not that POS" argument, pointing across the street to sume Shim-Sutcliffey glassy thing.

Oh, and one other rule of thumb to keep in mind (esp. re these Minneapolis Masonic Temple-type arguments): for better or worse, McMansions are a reflection of a sort of "architectural discernment". Like, Versailles or Fontainebleau aren't any less masterful or worthy of contemplation for their plastic, misunderstood suburban imitators...
 
Last edited:
I am also a brutalist convert. Before I had studied or read anything about architecture I might have had the same opinion as jetsbackincacnada re. this building... I was completely ignorant about the history or value of concrete and the experimental use of the material in the post-war period. I suspect jetsbackincanada has very little understanding or knowledge of architectural history, and like many ignorant people, uses the currently-popular "elitist" label to try and discredit educated people who might actually know what they are talking about.

Adma nailed it with the two images of forest hill houses (is the first on Ardwold Gt?). Canada is an amnesiac culture with an extremely low level of public connoisseurship regarding everything, not just architecture. We don't value our history & don't even bother to learn it. Subsequently, Central Toronto is turning into one of the most generic, banal cityscapes on earth. Just like with the Nicholas condo, I feel it's hard to get too excited about yet another iteration of a glass-clad 30-something-storey tower when we are going lose interesting layers of the city's built fabric to see it built. I suppose that's just me being an big ol' elitist.
 
adma said:
So, if one enters a discussion as the equivalent of an unseasoned freshman undergraduate in an upper-year graduate seminar programme...believe me, it shows, all the more so when you dig in your heels and assert your "right to your opinion".
Click to expand...

Your low self-esteem and need for exterior validation is showing.
 
I looked it up..

and no, being a Brutalist /:confused:convert doesn't make you better than other people, it doesn't make you a high priest, and it's not a form of nobility... So step off your high horses, all of this could have been avoided if you had just answered my query, instead of being a F#$^%$ A_____!!!
You people are really obnoxious....the Don Cherry's of Brutalism, bloviating your hyper-inflated opinions, from your self absorbed ego....
Get over it.....It's actually kind of sad...just as much, or more architecture fails, as is successful.....Toronto got lumped with a lot of bad post war architecture, and you insecure Canadians, are trying to worship it as "world class" , perhaps trying to convince yourselves of that standing....
I don't need to worship at the feet of a crappy grey bunker to feel good about Toronto, and no self respecting preservationist, should have to ridicule others opinions to make theirs seem legit. The loss of this building will NEVER BE LAMENTED, by anyone, other than a few self appointed high preists, at Urban Toronto.
Adma, your arguments are lame, and poorly thought out, I only hope your career choice, doesn't reflect your debate abilities, cause you are pompous and full of yourself. I went from respecting your posts , to feeling unwelcomed, and ready to discredit any concrete blather that your oral cavity utters. Hope your not a teacher.....
A building should be judged by its own merit, not by the resume of who built it, or it's standing in a certain school..... IT's STILL NOT A BEAUTIFUL BUILDING!! ALL YOUR CONDESCENSION WILL NOT MAKE IT SO. If you like it so much, buy it , live in
it, and love it. Just try to leave room for me not to like it...anyway don't you got some "people to blow up"!!!!!!!
 
UrbanFervour said:
I am also a brutalist convert. Before I had studied or read anything about architecture I might have had the same opinion as jetsbackincacnada re. this building... I was completely ignorant about the history or value of concrete and the experimental use of the material in the post-war period. I suspect jetsbackincanada has very little understanding or knowledge of architectural history, and like many ignorant people, uses the currently-popular "elitist" label to try and discredit educated people who might actually know what they are talking about.

Adma nailed it with the two images of forest hill houses (is the first on Ardwold Gt?). Canada is an amnesiac culture with an extremely low level of public connoisseurship regarding everything, not just architecture. We don't value our history & don't even bother to learn it. Subsequently, Central Toronto is turning into one of the most generic, banal cityscapes on earth. Just like with the Nicholas condo, I feel it's hard to get too excited about yet another iteration of a glass-clad 30-something-storey tower when we are going lose interesting layers of the city's built fabric to see it built. I suppose that's just me being an big ol' elitist.
Click to expand...

The city from Dundas north to Bloor is already banal and horrid. Why does someone who doesn't share your appreciation for concrete need to be ignorant?
 
Jets... You have done an admirable job defending your position and I salute you.

It comes down to one thing:

You asked an honest question and never got an answer and only received patronizing condescension and insults for your trouble. That is the ultimate insult which is the most infuriating aspect of certain Academics that troll this site.

You will also notice that not one of those Academics who appreciate Brutalist aesthetics have actually given their reasons for feeling so. By that, I mean THEIR OWN PERSONAL reasons. Like "because I like the way the concrete looks on a sunny morning" or "The stark nature of the large elements speak to the underlying confidence of the design and I can relate to that" Blah blah blah... They only regurgitate information they learned from someone else. All you ever get is them pointing to someone else's opinion ie: a link to a webpage or a book on the subject or the name of an architect... not THIER OWN personal opinion, but someone they have learned from.

It is typical of Second-rate Academics and Pseudo-intellectuals, to reiterate what was learned, but never form their own opinion. That stems from the fear that if they did form an opinion, they will be laughed at, belittled, or mocked the exact same way they enjoy doing to others. Therefore, if they only speak the party line, they can't be judged. It also speaks to their underlying inferiority complex, with the belief that even their own opinions are not worthy. (Hence their extreme disdain for those with less education to form an opinion... If their own opinion is worthless how can someone who didn't study it have a valid opinion?)

I laugh every time those few choice members on here look down their noses to comment before trying to just answer the question posed of them. As our new member MLiPreti astutely pointed out, their...

low self-esteem and need for exterior validation is showing.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Also...

If one really wanted to take someone under their tutelage and educate another to enjoy something they held so dear...Insulting them and belittling them is not the best way to start. This demonstrates the true nature of these people:

They really don't want everyone to have their same opinion. They don't want to bring you into the fold. They need to keep you as an outsider in order to support their image of superiority. God forbid if everyone agreed with them. Who would they then have to look down their noses at? How would they ever boost their fragile egos and low self-esteem?

Anyone with a stable ego and realistic viewpoint, would be able to admit that SOME Brutalist structures are good and some are bad. and still others are in the middle ground. Vehemently defending ALL of anything is obsessive and irrational. A reasonable person is able to see reason.
 
Last edited:
Traynor

Well said my friend....appreciate your thoughtful response, it was more insightful, and informative, than all their belittling drivel. I will know to not address his royal aloofness anymore, or dare to disdain his Imperial presence with my childish rantings!!!:rolleyes:
Enough said. Some people just have to be jerks!!:mad:

If you have to convince me that something is beautiful....it probably isn't....ancient proverb......
 
Last edited:
WeirdFishes said:
I feel bad for Casa units facing North East. Many units will be screwed to the East with Chaz and now all of the units view of the North Rosedale valley will be blocked for the most part. Lets hope this tower will at least be nice to look at.
Click to expand...

It looks like now all of the units to the east of Casa will be blocked by Chaz.....

45 CHARLES ST E

OPA / Rezoning 11 239516 STE 27 OZ Ward 27
- Tor & E.York Jul 15, 2011 --- --- --- ---

Rezoning application for an addition 8 stories to existing approved 39 storey residentil condo development. future height 47 stories. 14 additional parking spaces. See existing building permit - 11 101340 BLD and 06 198325 STE for previous application
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It's an application, but I'll bet they'll get it, or most of it.
 
Traynor said:
Also...

If one really wanted to take someone under their tutelage and educate another to enjoy something they held so dear...Insulting them and belittling them is not the best way to start. This demonstrates the true nature of these people:

They really don't want everyone to have their same opinion. They don't want to bring you into the fold. They need to keep you as an outsider in order to support their image of superiority. God forbid if everyone agreed with them. Who would they then have to look down their noses at? How would they ever boost their fragile egos and low self-esteem?

Anyone with a stable ego and realistic viewpoint, would be able to admit that SOME Brutalist structures are good and some are bad. and still others are in the middle ground. Vehemently defending ALL of anything is obsessive and irrational. A reasonable person is able to see reason.
Click to expand...


Great respnse Traynor, very well put. Should have been said on other threads as well. I love architecture - I always have and always will - but I'm the first to admit I don't know everything about it and would welcome the knowledge others may already possess. Some would do well to check their attutudes at the door.
 
Traynor said:
Also...

If one really wanted to take someone under their tutelage and educate another to enjoy something they held so dear...Insulting them and belittling them is not the best way to start. This demonstrates the true nature of these people:

They really don't want everyone to have their same opinion. They don't want to bring you into the fold. They need to keep you as an outsider in order to support their image of superiority. God forbid if everyone agreed with them. Who would they then have to look down their noses at? How would they ever boost their fragile egos and low self-esteem?

Anyone with a stable ego and realistic viewpoint, would be able to admit that SOME Brutalist structures are good and some are bad. and still others are in the middle ground. Vehemently defending ALL of anything is obsessive and irrational. A reasonable person is able to see reason.
Click to expand...

Brings to mind that Marshall Macluhan quote about the media being the message which was so well described in the Globe. It basically said that its not the content of media that matters but rather how a new medium changes who we are / act. These sort of sites are normally very civil (remarkably so) but there's no real hesitation to attack people because ultimately we only know one another abstractly. Attacking someone isn't reeaaallyy attacking someone. Personally I am sometimes shocked at what I've said to people on this site whereas in person I am much more cautious and respectful. But on the whole its a great exchange of information - and as often as not dropping the niceties is part of the fun and gets viewpoints out there without a lot of pre-amble. And to be honest, knowing insults are abtract (attacking the avatar), means they dont sting too much.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top