Toronto Bloor Street Neighbourhood Condos | ?m | 32s | Cresford | Northgrave

^You missed the point entirely. I'm refering to quality more than style. If you can't see BSN as a glaring inspired knockoff of a classical style than there is no point to further this discussion. Casa, on the other hand, doesn't remotely stand out as glaringly cheap eventhough it is far from award worthy. In the end, Glass is still glass but EIFS is far, far removed from masonry.
 
cdr108 said:
i would consider the following 'modern classics':

barcelona chair, eileen gray table, eames chairs, tulip chair, corbu chairs/sofas, noguchi table, mies chairs, bertoia chairs, etc.
Click to expand...

Really? A "classic," whether a "modern" classic or a "true" classic, won't ever look dated. Some of these pieces, especially the tulip chair, just won't cut it all the time. The tulip chair, IMHO, looks funky and definitely NOT a modern classic.
 
^How can you target "young, hip women" prosperegal if you like old-fashioned unhip "classics" like BSN?

BSN=really bad louis vuitton knockoff

Casa=good Prada knockoff

BSN is not terrible as far as highrise buildings go; but for its Toronto context (aka surrounded by dreary highrises), it truly is bad news. Casa, on the other hand, is great news, refreshingly different, and down-right "classy!"

BSN is like wearing BUM jeans from Wal-mart while Casa is Ernest Sewn.
 
prosperegal said:
I disagree. In the fashion world, boot cut jeans are more "classic" than say, bell bottoms/flares or skinnies. A nice cardigan, pearls and knee-length skirt will last years (this is actually one of my favourite looks) while a too short or too long skirt is more of a "in the moment" kind of look. I equate all-glass condos with the nasty hoodie sweatshirt, yoga pants and Uggs (or Ugg rip-offs) look of the mid 2000s while buildings like BSN are more like twinsets and pearls.

Since when was "modern" the same as "classic"?
Click to expand...

The problem you're having with successfully equating the whims of fashion to the world of architecture, in linking the recent revival of "classics" such as the twin-set-and-pearls to BSN, or 1 St. Thomas and by extension the reactionary Cheddingtonista insurgency - is that this trend hasn't buried Modernism, which has been with us for a century, informs what our best local architects are doing, and certainly isn't represented by hoodies.
 
prosperegal said:
Really? A "classic," whether a "modern" classic or a "true" classic, won't ever look dated. Some of these pieces, especially the tulip chair, just won't cut it all the time. The tulip chair, IMHO, looks funky and definitely NOT a modern classic.
Click to expand...


all of those pieces have been around for 50 years (+/-) ... how much longer should it take before you will consider these modern classics as 'timeless'?

BSN and CASA both have their pros and cons ... personally, I think one of the better new condos built in the past 10 years, without being too traditional or all modern glass, is Radio City.

good mix of glass with floor-to-ceiling windows and pre-cast, as well as good interior design/floorplans.
 
Last edited:
prosperegal said:
I disagree. In the fashion world, boot cut jeans are more "classic" than say, bell bottoms/flares or skinnies. A nice cardigan, pearls and knee-length skirt will last years (this is actually one of my favourite looks) while a too short or too long skirt is more of a "in the moment" kind of look. I equate all-glass condos with the nasty hoodie sweatshirt, yoga pants and Uggs (or Ugg rip-offs) look of the mid 2000s while buildings like BSN are more like twinsets and pearls.

Since when was "modern" the same as "classic"?
Click to expand...

Modern not the same as classic? Funny since "simplicity is the keynote of all true elegance," and "less is more" are both remarkably similar sentiments.
 
I wouldn't describe anything that's modern as "classic" - they represent different things. We need not be ashamed of modernism.
 
cdr108 said:
all of those pieces have been around for 50 years (+/-) ... how much longer should it take before you will consider these modern classics as 'timeless'?
Click to expand...

A modern classic has to "work", regardless of time period. Tulip chairs don't work all the time.

urbandreamer said:
^How can you target "young, hip women" prosperegal if you like old-fashioned unhip "classics" like BSN?

BSN=really bad louis vuitton knockoff

Casa=good Prada knockoff

BSN is not terrible as far as highrise buildings go; but for its Toronto context (aka surrounded by dreary highrises), it truly is bad news. Casa, on the other hand, is great news, refreshingly different, and down-right "classy!"

BSN is like wearing BUM jeans from Wal-mart while Casa is Ernest Sewn.
Click to expand...


If you read my site, you'd KNOW that we're not 100% funky-hip in a Paris Hilton kind of way....that would make it just like every other lifestyle site out there...

I also disagree that BSN is a bad LV knock-off, while Casa is a good Prada knock-off, since both are brands which have been around for decades. Casa is more like a bad Dolce and Gabanna or another brand which gives many people headaches while BSN is more like Prada or Louis Vuitton.

Casa may "pop" at night when all the lights are on, but in daylight, it looks just doesn't work...it looks like an office building with balconies. Casa is the 20 year old who likes to club at night and will eventually grow into a TWIT/TMIT ("Teenage" Woman/Man in (her/his) Thirties), while BSN is grown-up and mature.
 
Never a dull moment on UT. After many hours catching up on UT from the last 2 weeks while away in Chile and not visiting the forum, BSN was the last P&C thread I got to. I'm not a big fan of BSN, so I was a little disappointed that it was the last thread to read through (in the context of the 'save the best for last' mentality). However, there was a week's worth of very interesting and entertaining posts. Thanks UT.

Now to stay 'on topic', the best thing that BSN has going for it is that, imo, it kinda gets lost in the cluster of high-rises in and around Yonge and Bloor. I don't know whether it's because the height and materials prevent the building from standing out or it just gets lost or hidden from certain vantage points I am at. Casa on the otherhand does stand out because of its height and materials. It's clean and elegant, yet I personally don't find it to be all that special. It reminds of the apartment building in Waterloo off of Westmount just north of Erb (across from Westmount Plaza where Philthy's is), but with a modern twist of floor to ceiling glass walls and glass balconies. Just my 2 cents.
 
Urban Shocker said:
I wouldn't describe anything that's modern as "classic" - they represent different things. We need not be ashamed of modernism.
Click to expand...

Nobody's ashamed, unless of course, you include Pepper79 and prosperegal, since denoting something as 'classic' doesn't necessitate that it live ignominiously in the past. Here, 'classic' is being defined as something which is the object of devotion, with hopes that it will be considered a 'classic' in the future.

And prosperegal, what the hell does "work" mean?
 
Last edited:
ProjectEnd said:
Nobody's ashamed, unless of course, you include Pepper79 and prosperegal, since denoting something as 'classic' doesn't necessitate that it live ignominiously in the past. Here, 'classic' is being defined as something which is the object of devotion, with hopes that it will be considered a 'classic' in the future.

And prosperegal, what the hell does "work" mean?
Click to expand...

Work = something you do for a living. In the case of my online magazine, the "typical" reader has an office job of some sort.
 
ProjectEnd said:
So you're arguing that Eero's chairs can't be considered classics because they don't put in a full 9-5?
Click to expand...

What does that have to do with my magazine? Oh, you mean "work" in the other sense - I thought you were referring to my site's slogan, "In Work... In Life... She Prospers" In this case, "work" = "go" - something which blends well and is never out of style.
 
Using the term "classic" to represent the ultimate - as if it's a set of values that modernism must aspire to - strikes me as odd. I think of classicism as a set of values with historical roots and associations, just as I think of the Gothic as a product of former values.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top