Comments on: What Do You Think of This Building? http://blog.designpublic.com/2008/08/25/what-do-you-think-of-this-building-2/ Sun, 21 Mar 2010 05:14:24 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Becky http://blog.designpublic.com/2008/08/25/what-do-you-think-of-this-building-2/comment-page-1/#comment-59488 Becky Wed, 03 Sep 2008 19:53:26 +0000 http://blog.designpublic.com/?p=3581#comment-59488 It's so interesting to read all of the varied opinions on this, especially since my radar did not pick up on it at this late date. Thanks for the gothamist links as well! What does everyone think of that siding material? I'm so over it. It makes me want to see architects rebel against it with big Gothic dark gray stone! It’s so interesting to read all of the varied opinions on this, especially since my radar did not pick up on it at this late date. Thanks for the gothamist links as well!

What does everyone think of that siding material? I’m so over it. It makes me want to see architects rebel against it with big Gothic dark gray stone!

]]> By: Genevieve http://blog.designpublic.com/2008/08/25/what-do-you-think-of-this-building-2/comment-page-1/#comment-59487 Genevieve Wed, 03 Sep 2008 19:36:58 +0000 http://blog.designpublic.com/?p=3581#comment-59487 I loved the old building and don't feel it detracted from the circle by any means. In fact, I think the Time Warner Center is much more of an eyesore... mall store windows are suppose to be the surrounding area that we were trying to "improve" for? ugh. And in the process, we lose an amazingly unusual marble building that, imo, was gorgeous across from the park when it was green. there was a lot of convo about it on gothamist a long while back, if you're interested: http://gothamist.com/2005/02/25/goodbye_quirky_2_columbus_circle.php http://gothamist.com/2008/05/02/the_new_2_colum.php the new one has much less character. such a shame. I loved the old building and don’t feel it detracted from the circle by any means.

In fact, I think the Time Warner Center is much more of an eyesore… mall store windows are suppose to be the surrounding area that we were trying to “improve” for? ugh. And in the process, we lose an amazingly unusual marble building that, imo, was gorgeous across from the park when it was green.

there was a lot of convo about it on gothamist a long while back, if you’re interested:

http://gothamist.com/2005/02/25/goodbye_quirky_2_columbus_circle.php

http://gothamist.com/2008/05/02/the_new_2_colum.php

the new one has much less character. such a shame.

]]> By: Victor http://blog.designpublic.com/2008/08/25/what-do-you-think-of-this-building-2/comment-page-1/#comment-59464 Victor Tue, 02 Sep 2008 15:12:11 +0000 http://blog.designpublic.com/?p=3581#comment-59464 I was in Architecture school at Columbia when they were deciding what to do with the original building. This was the compromise against tearing it down. I actually would have preferred tearing it down to this. I didn't like the first building and this just made it worse. It's an eyesore and takes up valuable space that could be used for something exciting. Instead, we replace one monumental slab of marble with a giant Lego block. Hideous! At least the original had some style. They removed what little style the original had and now it's just a big ugly block stuck in the middle of, to quote an earlier responder, "one of the most beautiful intersections in the country". Another mistake of the preservationists. Just because something is old isn't a reason to either tear it down or keep it. The original building added nothing to the surrounding area and this one just looks really bad, like they really didn't know what they were doing but had to do something. It would've been better to leave it or just tear it down. It adds nothing but an eyesore. I was in Architecture school at Columbia when they were deciding what to do with the original building. This was the compromise against tearing it down. I actually would have preferred tearing it down to this.

I didn’t like the first building and this just made it worse. It’s an eyesore and takes up valuable space that could be used for something exciting. Instead, we replace one monumental slab of marble with a giant Lego block. Hideous! At least the original had some style. They removed what little style the original had and now it’s just a big ugly block stuck in the middle of, to quote an earlier responder, “one of the most beautiful intersections in the country”. Another mistake of the preservationists.

Just because something is old isn’t a reason to either tear it down or keep it. The original building added nothing to the surrounding area and this one just looks really bad, like they really didn’t know what they were doing but had to do something. It would’ve been better to leave it or just tear it down. It adds nothing but an eyesore.

]]> By: Debra http://blog.designpublic.com/2008/08/25/what-do-you-think-of-this-building-2/comment-page-1/#comment-59356 Debra Fri, 29 Aug 2008 21:21:08 +0000 http://blog.designpublic.com/?p=3581#comment-59356 The original is beautiful. I think the redesign was a mistake. It is a very conventional shape, so uninteresting, and then the letters aspect of it is just weird. I don't care for it at all. The original is beautiful. I think the redesign was a mistake. It is a very conventional shape, so uninteresting, and then the letters aspect of it is just weird. I don’t care for it at all.

]]> By: Joey http://blog.designpublic.com/2008/08/25/what-do-you-think-of-this-building-2/comment-page-1/#comment-59354 Joey Fri, 29 Aug 2008 20:53:45 +0000 http://blog.designpublic.com/?p=3581#comment-59354 Although I'm not thrilled with the re-design, I thought the original structure was ugly. I didn't "get" the idea of a predominantly windowless building which faces one of the most beautiful intersections in the country: Columbus Circle. At least they didn't just tear down the original structure like so many developers do in NYC these days. Although I’m not thrilled with the re-design, I thought the original structure was ugly. I didn’t “get” the idea of a predominantly windowless building which faces one of the most beautiful intersections in the country: Columbus Circle. At least they didn’t just tear down the original structure like so many developers do in NYC these days.

]]> By: kds http://blog.designpublic.com/2008/08/25/what-do-you-think-of-this-building-2/comment-page-1/#comment-59316 kds Wed, 27 Aug 2008 15:18:14 +0000 http://blog.designpublic.com/?p=3581#comment-59316 Ouch. I was never especially fond of this building, but I respected that it was unconventional and expressed itself honestly. I had presence. Same goes for some modern painters--even though I may not be fond of it, I wouldn't dare consider painting over it! I could understand the owners of a generic corporate tower being shallow enough to tack on trendy doodads to update their image, but this is a museum of art and design fer Pete's sake! Respect the artist/architect! Ouch. I was never especially fond of this building, but I respected that it was unconventional and expressed itself honestly. I had presence. Same goes for some modern painters–even though I may not be fond of it, I wouldn’t dare consider painting over it!

I could understand the owners of a generic corporate tower being shallow enough to tack on trendy doodads to update their image, but this is a museum of art and design fer Pete’s sake! Respect the artist/architect!

]]> By: Cheryl http://blog.designpublic.com/2008/08/25/what-do-you-think-of-this-building-2/comment-page-1/#comment-59298 Cheryl Tue, 26 Aug 2008 17:33:04 +0000 http://blog.designpublic.com/?p=3581#comment-59298 Maybe it's a joke and they're going to peel off the plastic shell to reintroduct the fabulous original. Maybe it’s a joke and they’re going to peel off the plastic shell to reintroduct the fabulous original.

]]> By: Khurt http://blog.designpublic.com/2008/08/25/what-do-you-think-of-this-building-2/comment-page-1/#comment-59282 Khurt Mon, 25 Aug 2008 13:59:43 +0000 http://blog.designpublic.com/?p=3581#comment-59282 I like it. I can't see the other sides of the building from the photo. What do the letters spell? I just see H and E. I like it. I can’t see the other sides of the building from the photo. What do the letters spell? I just see H and E.

]]> By: Robin Cailloux http://blog.designpublic.com/2008/08/25/what-do-you-think-of-this-building-2/comment-page-1/#comment-59281 Robin Cailloux Mon, 25 Aug 2008 12:46:24 +0000 http://blog.designpublic.com/?p=3581#comment-59281 I actually think it's a fantastic interpretation of the existing building. It would be a bold statement if the new building were located next to or near the current building. But to cover the 1964 building in this new "skin", the wit and humor of the skin is completely lost. Without the original building visible to relate to the new 'building', then I completely agree with your analysis- a sad and sorry loss of a historic building, and part of our own cultural history. I actually think it’s a fantastic interpretation of the existing building. It would be a bold statement if the new building were located next to or near the current building. But to cover the 1964 building in this new “skin”, the wit and humor of the skin is completely lost. Without the original building visible to relate to the new ‘building’, then I completely agree with your analysis- a sad and sorry loss of a historic building, and part of our own cultural history.

]]>