raptor
Senior Member
A $1.6B piece of garbage, no less!Is that a defense of this garbage?
A $1.6B piece of garbage, no less!Is that a defense of this garbage?
Mac is fantastic in that it bridges the firm's early Brutalism with an emerging bent towards the 'high tech' which guide its work in the 70s and 80s (by far Zeidler's strongest period, IMO).Many people considered Zeidler's McMaster University Hospital was industrially awful when it was built…
Source
but it has Brutalist dignity.
This, on the other hand, just looks brutal, literally, a health factory I suppose if you know what's going on inside, (and I assume it will be wonderful inside) but there has not even been an attempt made here to give this building any stylistic integrity whatsoever. It is completely bereft of aesthetic endeavour on its exterior, its face to the world.
Eek. Ack.
42
Is that a defense of this garbage?
Why are all the new hospitals going up so crap?
There are more than two gradations in architecture, as in life: not everything is either on or off, there's a lot of space in between. While few will agree with you that the ROM is the quintessential example of great architecture in the city, point is that there are points on the continuum between garbage and great, and that so far, this one looks pretty close to the garbage end. Hopefully there will be some cladding surprises before it's done that will elevate this a little more, (what's up already is not encouraging), but this could have been planned with some thought to mitigating its bulk and applying some attractive cladding, without moving this into starchitect-categorey designs. There is a responsibility on the part of developers, no matter who they are, to provide exterior designs of some quality, and that includes hospitals.It's a hospital. What matters is that it works functionally inside. I don't want a hospital that looks great like the ROM but functionally doesn't work like the ROM as well. Well. My child was born at Humber River hospital. I don't believe that place is going to win any architecture Awards but it was new, clean, and huge. I think those are things that matter more in buildings like this. I grew up going to sick kids a lot. That building was ugly. Toronto General isn't great. It's not like there is a history of hospitals looking amazing so I don't know what the fuss is about. The building has to work. That's all.
The Rom was an example of a building which tried to be aesthetically pleasing from the outside but because of it failed on the inside.There are more than two gradations in architecture, as in life: not everything is either on or off, there's a lot of space in between. While few will agree with you that the ROM is the quintessential example of great architecture in the city, point is that there are points on the continuum between garbage and great, and that so far, this one looks pretty close to the garbage end. Hopefully there will be some cladding surprises before it's done that will elevate this a little more, (what's up already is not encouraging), but this could have been planned with some thought to mitigating its bulk and applying some attractive cladding, without moving this into starchitect-categorey designs. There is a responsibility on the part of developers, no matter who they are, to provide exterior designs of some quality, and that includes hospitals.
42