Toronto Residences Of College Park Condos | ?m | 51s | Canderel | Graziani + Corazza

Re: Residence of college Park Tower 1 & 2 (ROCP) (UT)

Re: Chihuly. Reputations in the art and design worlds aren't based on who owns the work. They're based on the talent of the artist and the scarcity of the item.

For example, the aesthetic reputation - and financial value - of the Klimts that were famously looted by the Nazi's wasn't tainted by their brush with evil.
 
Re: Residence of college Park Tower 1 & 2 (ROCP) (UT)

Wow - the rooftop is very awkward. I feared as much from the renderings.
 
there's the glass sculpture thing, in the 2nd last photo. at night it's lit from inside and changes colours, kind of mirroring the public art in front of the condo across the street
 
The sculpture looks nice - surely better than the non-functional rotating things across the street.

Re: "Reputations in the art and design worlds aren't based on who owns the work" - surely that needs to be qualified to some extent. Knowing that MOMA had purchased the work of an artist would surely influence their reputation, would it not?
 
MoMA owns work by Ken Danby, so they're not infallible. They've probably got tons of similar schlock, hidden in their basement.

I was responding more to unimaginative2's comment that reputations can be destroyed when examples of art or innovative design are displayed by companies such as MGM Grand, who were trying to move their image "upmarket" with the display of his work. Regardless of whether one considers Chihuly as a great artist with a genuine reputation at all, or merely as a pushy showman, visual art and crafts have been used for political or corporate advancement for thousands of years.

While distinctions between professional galleries and glorified gift shops may not be immediately apparent to the masses, they do exist. I think it ultimately comes down to the work. You can't hang rubbish in a professional gallery without damaging the reputation of the gallery, unless it is done with some artistic or ironic purpose. And great art speaks for itself, wherever found.
 
Liking the top and how it turned out. A little more time and it should be complete and hopefully a cool lighting concept will be used to make this one stand out at night.
 
Every time I walk up Yonge, I'm struck by a feeling that the real shame of this project is the existence of ROCPII. The first tower is so gloriously square - its corners so clean, its edges so defined instead of blurred by balconies like most others, that it makes a wonderful obelisk. Adding a second tower alongside dilutes its shape.
 
I quite like that sculpture- is it really Chihuly? Normally I'm not all that fond of his work. But then again I'm quite fond of some of Ken Danby's paintings :\ One of the evils of becoming too popular as an artist I guess- when their work becomes ubiquitous it is ultimately maligned by many as tosh. Didn't Picasso do the design for a series of dinner plates- among other things?

The building looks pretty good imho. I don't see anything wrong with the design of the roof.
 
That sculpture is not remotely Chihuly.

That roof is remotely awkward. Grazianni & Corazza have made a career out of 'awkward'.

42
 
He has done some stunning works but I'm not fond of his now signature clusters of glass bulbs and tentacles.

I believe G&C also designed the High PArk condo over that old church- that is truly awkward. I was never thrilled by ROCP, but I think a spired roof would have looked tacky.
 
This is how you're supposed to do a roof:

130508590_49107dff86.jpg


The ROCP roof is too abrupt and stubby.
 
The roof looks like it's missing an ~8 storey chunk with a more substantial setback.
 
If you're going to do a wedding cake roof do it properly - DarnDirtyApe's example shows how the style can "say something" with great panache.

Boggy: There was an excellent exhibition, "Picasso and Ceramics" at the U of T Art Centre last year. His pottery was once maligned by critics, but is now getting reconsidered as an expression of his talent as important as the other media he worked in. Artists who expand the range of their work, and branch out into new media, aren't necessarily selling out.
 
Yeh- I agree. I guess my point was their is a general perception that an artist's reputation becomes somehow diminshed and their work less important if it becomes too ubiquitous. Indeed I'm not even sure what 'selling out' means since many-many successful and important artists throughout history have applied their skills commercially in some form.

I missed the Art Centre show :\ I probably should have gone but I'm generally not into ceramic works, and I had recently seen rooms of his works earlier that year at the Paris museum.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top