WiddleBittyKitty
Felis catus
I think it was pretty clear that it was aimed at you.
Toronto 88 Scott Street | 203.9m | 58s | Concert | P + S / IBI
- Thread starter yyzer
- Start date
TheKingEast
Senior Member
It's a pretty silly post then. Not surprising since some people lose their minds and act like condescending dingbats when aA is brought up. At least @wolfewood made the effort to respond with something worthwhile. Good on him/her for not acting like a condescending blowhard.
UrbanAffair
Senior Member
Personally I like aA, because even if they produce a lot of similar design, they do that design very well, and tend to use superior materials to many other Toronto architects. That said the defensive partisan crap is an unfortunate lapse in the decorum of an otherwise wonderful forum.
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
I have no problem with historicalist architecture at a modern (i.e. gargantuan) scale - if you are Robert Stern. Otherwise, don't bother. And P+S definitely isn't Robert Stern.
And those "cutout" boxes (like the one at CHAZ) just look real awkward, breaking what could otherwise be a handsome verticality. And that's the problem with firms like P+S - adding bits and pieces that basically wrecks the parti (if it was present at all).
AoD
And those "cutout" boxes (like the one at CHAZ) just look real awkward, breaking what could otherwise be a handsome verticality. And that's the problem with firms like P+S - adding bits and pieces that basically wrecks the parti (if it was present at all).
AoD
Last edited:
ptbotrmpfn
Senior Member
it will all come together in the end. And the boxes will make sense when the top portion crown is completed. I find they add interest and from inside make for grand rooms in the sky.
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
What goes on in the crown wouldn't make any difference as to whether the boxes "makes sense" - it is an intrusive element to the design, which was done in a completely different language.
AoD
maestro
Senior Member
C'mon. No one here isn't fully aware of your personal mission to bash aA whenever the moment arises. For that reason, I believe my post is pretty level headed.
ADRM
Senior Member
TheKingEast
Senior Member
If you're not fawning over the greatness of aA there are about 4-5 posters that run in here and revert to condescending crap like you posted. There is this air of superiority among a few of you aA bots that I find rather unsavoury and really brings down the forum. You have no problem bashing other firms, though. aA does some great work but they do have some duds. If this is offensive to you then I'm sorry.
You just called a member a bot, but you're sorry if that's offensive?
42
42
someMidTowner
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Error. Does not compute. aA good. Power down.
TheKingEast
Senior Member
With any non-positive post about aA it's the same people crying foul, but they have no issue bashing other firms. Just an observation. All I did was ask a poster to list some examples and look at how that turned out. You have picked your side though so I'll move on.
maestro
Senior Member
You are the great defender of architectural mediocrity. That's one hero I'm just not yet ready to submit to.
It's largely in your head. There's maybe one that fawns over aA.
wolfewood
Active Member
Yeah, I'd say there's two people who get annoying or rude when defending aA and, when considering the constant whinging about "bland glass boxes" etc. etc., I can see why it would get tiring for them. Especially when the quality of material and design is so clearly better with aA. The designs are simple but they rarely offend whereas the same definitely can't be said of P&S, IBI, Kirkor, Graziani & Corazza, Turner Fleischer and so on. When they're producing quality work on the level of aA (or HPA and Quadrangle, if aA's modernism is too bland for you) then maybe people won't get as frustrated about the anti-aA comments.
TheKingEast
Senior Member
Ha!