adma
Superstar
On the whole, those Victorians are more of contextual than raw architectural interest, anyway; and are pretty infected by 70s-style gallery-zone gentrification antics at that...
|
|
|
Venti de Milo
Banned
Walked by today...did they change and cheapen down the design? (not that there's any surprise, most of Toronto projects are cheapen down). I thought the original design, the north/east side facade, had a little curve outward? Now, the whole thing looks just like a big load of bread, in an ugly way.
Jdot
Active Member
Wow. That question/statement hasnt been posted here before.
I am even guilty of it myself.
Read the previous pages - those curly bits are to be added later on the ends of the existing glass canopy.
I am even guilty of it myself.
Read the previous pages - those curly bits are to be added later on the ends of the existing glass canopy.
syn
Senior Member
I think I like the shield better without the curves of glass on either side. It seems pointless...like they were added so it's officially a "Gehry".
alklay
Senior Member
AGO design a welcoming site to see
TheStar.com -
December 20, 2007
Christopher Hume
It's easy to forget that architecture is as much about solving problems as creating icons.
For a few years now, Toronto has been fixated on icons, and though that's not a bad thing, a building still has to work. Some projects deal with these occasionally conflicting demands better than others; the Gardiner Museum of Ceramic Art, for example, accomplishes both with aplomb.
Despite the hostility it has engendered, the Royal Ontario Museum is more coherent now than ever. It is also a landmark, one that frightens many Torontonians but which is helping define the 21st-century city.
On the other hand, the Four Seasons Centre for the Performing Arts ignores its responsibility to be, if not an icon, at least a presence on the urban landscape. Here's a structure so studiously indifferent to context, it might be described as the architectural equivalent of an extended middle finger.
Then there's the Art Gallery of Ontario. Though it won't reopen until next fall, this will be a project Torontonians can embrace. After its Frank Gehry-designed remake, the AGO will emerge not just as a destination, but a marvellous place to spend time and look at art, and a fabulous building in its own right. With its spiral stairwells, glass-fronted sculpture atrium, Douglas fir walls and light-filled rooms, it couldn't be more welcoming.
As AGO CEO Matthew Teitelbaum puts it, "We wanted an institutional scale but a domestic feel."
Though restrained by Gehry standards, the $225 million overhaul illustrates the brilliance of an architect who has figured out how to move design forward without leaving the audience behind. Unlike, say, Daniel Libeskind, whose angular and aggressive Crystal has alienated so many, Gehry manages to bring the masses with him. His unique brand of populist avant-gardism actually makes people feel good about architecture. It's neither challenging nor demanding. The guiding principles are ease of passage, clarity of orientation and, above all, pleasure.
The new AGO is a building fully engaged with its surroundings; it offers spectacular views to the south from an enclosed staircase and north from the Galleria Italia. Aside from the art itself, the facility has been carefully configured into different zones, each of which can be contained to allow for separate entrances and exits. This means the event space on the fifth floor can remain open after the gallery has closed. Similarly, the restaurant and retail area in the northeast corner can be accessed without going through the exhibitions.
The reason for the expansion, of course, is the huge art collection donated by the late Ken Thomson (along with $70 million). Some say it was a gift that came not with strings but chains. Teitelbaum, however, insists the agreement to put Thomson's holdings on permanent display was well worth it. Eventually, they will be integrated into the AGO's collection anyway.
Some may wonder whether model ships belong in the AGO, but it's a safe bet they'll be hugely popular.
In addition to vast quantities of Canadian art – including 80 Tom Thomsons – Thomson gave carved medieval ivories, silver and, most extraordinary of all, Rubens' Massacre of the Innocents, for which he paid $117 million. "People will come to Toronto just to see the work," says Teitelbaum.
He's probably right, but will they see a picture, or a price tag?
In either case, the main thing is that they come to Toronto and the AGO. After all, the subtext of the project – and the others that comprise the city's so-called Cultural Renaissance – is our desire to play on the world stage. Rest assured that any city would love to have a Gehry building, let alone a resident willing to buy a Rubens at any cost.
TheStar.com -
December 20, 2007
Christopher Hume
It's easy to forget that architecture is as much about solving problems as creating icons.
For a few years now, Toronto has been fixated on icons, and though that's not a bad thing, a building still has to work. Some projects deal with these occasionally conflicting demands better than others; the Gardiner Museum of Ceramic Art, for example, accomplishes both with aplomb.
Despite the hostility it has engendered, the Royal Ontario Museum is more coherent now than ever. It is also a landmark, one that frightens many Torontonians but which is helping define the 21st-century city.
On the other hand, the Four Seasons Centre for the Performing Arts ignores its responsibility to be, if not an icon, at least a presence on the urban landscape. Here's a structure so studiously indifferent to context, it might be described as the architectural equivalent of an extended middle finger.
Then there's the Art Gallery of Ontario. Though it won't reopen until next fall, this will be a project Torontonians can embrace. After its Frank Gehry-designed remake, the AGO will emerge not just as a destination, but a marvellous place to spend time and look at art, and a fabulous building in its own right. With its spiral stairwells, glass-fronted sculpture atrium, Douglas fir walls and light-filled rooms, it couldn't be more welcoming.
As AGO CEO Matthew Teitelbaum puts it, "We wanted an institutional scale but a domestic feel."
Though restrained by Gehry standards, the $225 million overhaul illustrates the brilliance of an architect who has figured out how to move design forward without leaving the audience behind. Unlike, say, Daniel Libeskind, whose angular and aggressive Crystal has alienated so many, Gehry manages to bring the masses with him. His unique brand of populist avant-gardism actually makes people feel good about architecture. It's neither challenging nor demanding. The guiding principles are ease of passage, clarity of orientation and, above all, pleasure.
The new AGO is a building fully engaged with its surroundings; it offers spectacular views to the south from an enclosed staircase and north from the Galleria Italia. Aside from the art itself, the facility has been carefully configured into different zones, each of which can be contained to allow for separate entrances and exits. This means the event space on the fifth floor can remain open after the gallery has closed. Similarly, the restaurant and retail area in the northeast corner can be accessed without going through the exhibitions.
The reason for the expansion, of course, is the huge art collection donated by the late Ken Thomson (along with $70 million). Some say it was a gift that came not with strings but chains. Teitelbaum, however, insists the agreement to put Thomson's holdings on permanent display was well worth it. Eventually, they will be integrated into the AGO's collection anyway.
Some may wonder whether model ships belong in the AGO, but it's a safe bet they'll be hugely popular.
In addition to vast quantities of Canadian art – including 80 Tom Thomsons – Thomson gave carved medieval ivories, silver and, most extraordinary of all, Rubens' Massacre of the Innocents, for which he paid $117 million. "People will come to Toronto just to see the work," says Teitelbaum.
He's probably right, but will they see a picture, or a price tag?
In either case, the main thing is that they come to Toronto and the AGO. After all, the subtext of the project – and the others that comprise the city's so-called Cultural Renaissance – is our desire to play on the world stage. Rest assured that any city would love to have a Gehry building, let alone a resident willing to buy a Rubens at any cost.
Urban Shocker
Doyenne
The AGO is a building that's fully engaged with its surroundings because it offers spectacular views in two directions, and so does the FSCPA, which also has a huge wooden wall, a huge light-filled room, and has been configured into different zones with separate entrances.
unimaginative2
Senior Member
I'll repeat that I'm very excited about the new AGO. Frank Gehry is an enormously talented architect, and I've been extremely impressed with the attention to detail in every one of his buildings that I've visited. My only worry is that the AGO still won't have enough room after the expansion is completed.
JasonParis
Moderator
I have nothing to base this on, but I suspect we might hear talk of a TOMOMA (Toronto Museum of Modern Art) at some point in the next 10 years. If so, that would free some space in the AGO to remain the "contemporary" museum of art as we get a new signature building somewhere else.
unimaginative2
Senior Member
Agreed. I suggest the foot of Yonge as a site!
The AGO's collection is getting big enough that it really could fill two buildings without stretching it thin. I'm kind of surprised that Thomson didn't just go and build/ask for a new building for his collection.
The AGO's collection is getting big enough that it really could fill two buildings without stretching it thin. I'm kind of surprised that Thomson didn't just go and build/ask for a new building for his collection.
Venti de Milo
Banned
Is there a way to combine those 2 abandoned old buildings (next to Elgin theater) and make it a new museum? I find those 2 buildings are such waste...
U2: A new gallery at the foot of Yonge? Where would we house the newly mortgage-poor rich then?
DS: I'm not against another public art gallery for the city, but I'd like to see the Museum of Contemporary Canadian Art on West Queen West expanded significantly before we got another one going.
In regards to the AGO itself, why not next expand upwards over the major exhibition galleries space? Rebuild that bit entirely even from the basement up? A new tower there could turn the under construction south tower into a (mirror image) L shape (as seen from above) and make those relatively small new floors up there more worth climbing up to. I'se just sayin'.
42
Urban Shocker
Doyenne
The Power Plant, which I don't believe has a permanent collection, has a higher international profile than MOCCA and is considered to be this country's leading public gallery devoted exclusively to contemporary art, so it definitely parallels part of the AGO's exhibition mandate.
MOCCA is collecting contemporary art, though I don't think they're in competition with the AGO at quite the same level for acquisitions or exhibitions.
Other institutions are all over the place - for instance, the ROM had an exhibition of work by Charlie Pachter when the Crystal opened, but he's more of a local hero and relentless self-publicist than a darling of the art establishment and maybe the ROM sees him as a cultural phenomenon more than anything else.
The public institutions have carved out niches for themselves, so in theory there's always room for another perspective. But I wonder if it is really all that necessary to set up more taxpayer-funded rivals to the AGO, the Power Plant, and MOCCA given that we also have a very lively local commercial gallery scene?
MOCCA is collecting contemporary art, though I don't think they're in competition with the AGO at quite the same level for acquisitions or exhibitions.
Other institutions are all over the place - for instance, the ROM had an exhibition of work by Charlie Pachter when the Crystal opened, but he's more of a local hero and relentless self-publicist than a darling of the art establishment and maybe the ROM sees him as a cultural phenomenon more than anything else.
The public institutions have carved out niches for themselves, so in theory there's always room for another perspective. But I wonder if it is really all that necessary to set up more taxpayer-funded rivals to the AGO, the Power Plant, and MOCCA given that we also have a very lively local commercial gallery scene?
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
Photo update from this morning:
From Dundas and McCaul.
Different angle.
Glass installation in progress.
Closer look.
Ongoing work at other parts of the glulam framing.
Glass installation 1.
Glass installation 2.
Cranes galore.
Glass installation 3.
Glass installation 4.
Further down Dundas.
And further...
At the other end.
AoD
From Dundas and McCaul.
Different angle.
Glass installation in progress.
Closer look.
Ongoing work at other parts of the glulam framing.
Glass installation 1.
Glass installation 2.
Cranes galore.
Glass installation 3.
Glass installation 4.
Further down Dundas.
And further...
At the other end.
AoD
MetroMan
Senior Member
I can't believe I'm seeing the rendering come to life. This is going to be a gorgeous expanse of glass once it's done. Once the "curled ends" are assembled, we are indeed going to be seeing a "true" Gehry. Can't wait!
MetroMan
Senior Member
42, I doubt they'll do any expansions for at least another decade or two. The neighborhood was up in arms about this expansion so soon after the previous one in the 90's. The AGO came to terms with them with an improved design which included a less imposing facade facing the Grange and with a promise that there would be no more additions.
I'm sure as space demands it, it will happen and like you said, there is a convenient spot immediately north of the new modern art "block".
A new addition could go North of Walker Court with its own spiraling staircase to mirror the one on the south of the court
Something mirroring the squarish titanium clad block on the south end and a vertical glass shield with tears on the top to complement the Dundas facade on the North would look nice and add to the overall glass + titanium of the building.
As it stands now, even though Gehry's making sense of the interior (it was a confusing mess before), the exterior still remains a mish-mash of different styles of different eras.