TheKingEast
Senior Member
I'd rather them keep these buildings and build on vacant land instead (parking lots).
I'd rather them keep these buildings and build on vacant land instead (parking lots).
jetsbackincanada
Banned
Wow, even though I showed you respect and asked you to explain your stance, you still retort with a pompous superior attitude?? Concrete buildings are all horrible, third world ghetto slabs, they're blights, and knowing that, your case seems laced with as Traynor said " your knowledge of it..."
< and as far as Concrete Toronto goes, why read about a style and era that reminds me of cold war lunacy, and suburban track housing, where inner city design was ignored as it wasn't being built for the important wealthy people, I would rather read 1, 000 books and articles about Art Deco, and marvel at their refinement, and grandeur. No one would argue the value of Chrysler/ Terminal/ 40 Wall/ heck even Commerce Court North is gorgeous.... that ??? I see little to marvel about...and thats why I asked you?
In my "sunday painter ammateurism", I thought it was a local jailhouse.....or a low income housing project....O wait...
khris
Senior Member
You are really hot helping your case by saying such things. The style of architecture is called Brutalism. Brutalism is by no means all slabs, or third world. In fact, some concrete houses are very very expensive. Try reading up on architecture a bit before making such statements.
Check this out for example: http://www.wallpaper.com/architecture/architecture-overview-concrete/3178
Check out photos of the Washington D.C. Metro.
Habitat 67 in Montreal.
Last edited:
Conrad Black
Senior Member
Well you certainly are the right person to talk about pompous.
Mike in TO
Senior Member
jetsbackincanada
Banned
I'm no idiot, thank you very much, and ugly is ugly, third world metropolis' are filled with these creatures. Again , If you like it that's fine.....just not my thing.
This forum is so polarizing at times, people line up to pile on, in any argument, sometimes just to side with someone. it seems??...
Concrete is not a beautiful building material, and Chaz is a far more interesting building, even with moderate execution it will shine all over that beige turd.
I've studied skyscrapers on my own for a long time, yet, I'm not so arrogant, as to like something cause I'm told to, or cause it's expensive....that would make me a wine snob, and having worked in that industry for a long time, not all expensive wines are great, and not all vintages are great, but your telling me, all brutalist concrete bunkers are worthy of praise? (stick out your pinkies, and sashay about the ball room now)
jetsbackincanada
Banned
As far as I'm concerned Traynor is one of the best contributers to this forum, and through his talents, gifts and lats, has brought more delight, than all the concrete in Toronto, and most of the other opinion givers out there combined.
Traynor
Senior Member
To quote a portion of that article:
At one time this was considered Avant-Garde and progressive thinking as well:
(Found here: http://fooyoh.com/iamchiq_fashion_accessories/4148228 )
How long did that design aesthetic hold up? Just because its old and it happened at some point in history, doesn't make it automatically beautiful or valuable. There has to be some balance to the preservationist "Save Everything" attitude. There has to be a scale of 1- 10 where the tipping point is 5 and at least one of those point numbers includes the vote of the general population.
Also the idea that using concrete "seemed like" a good idea is also a troubling and not very self-assured stance on which to base future urban planning. It smacks of hopping on a trend in hopes of being taken seriously on the World-stage and diminishes Toronto to a Me-Too city. Ironically, contrary to the intention of pushing Toronto to the forefront of urbanism and progressive design, that attitude makes us look like a poor country cousin trying to impress the big-city relations.
At one time this was considered Avant-Garde and progressive thinking as well:
(Found here: http://fooyoh.com/iamchiq_fashion_accessories/4148228 )
How long did that design aesthetic hold up? Just because its old and it happened at some point in history, doesn't make it automatically beautiful or valuable. There has to be some balance to the preservationist "Save Everything" attitude. There has to be a scale of 1- 10 where the tipping point is 5 and at least one of those point numbers includes the vote of the general population.
Also the idea that using concrete "seemed like" a good idea is also a troubling and not very self-assured stance on which to base future urban planning. It smacks of hopping on a trend in hopes of being taken seriously on the World-stage and diminishes Toronto to a Me-Too city. Ironically, contrary to the intention of pushing Toronto to the forefront of urbanism and progressive design, that attitude makes us look like a poor country cousin trying to impress the big-city relations.
Last edited:
jetsbackincanada
Banned
...and just like wine, it's ok to like what you like, even if it's a 14 $ cab.
WiddleBittyKitty
Felis catus
It's polarizing because there are people like you here that -
1) Declare that ugly is ugly, and that your take on a building couldn't possibly be wrong. Appreciation of aesthetic and historical quality is subjective, not objective. If you could learn that, then this forum might not be so polarizing.
2) Seem to think that everyone who thinks differently from themselves is obviously being tricked by others into joining some kind of herd mentality. You are also deeply suspicious of "learning".
3) Characterize those who disagree with you as effeminate: "stick out your pinkies, and sashay about the ball room now".
Sorry, but that kind of attitude not only makes you arrogant, even while you claim you are not, and it displays both your ignorance and mean spiritedness.
This forum is not about Traynor's lats. When he talks about others being pompous, all I can see is his narcissistic avatar pic. It's ludicrous. Nobody doubts his deft way with PhotoShop to create great panoramic montages of the future, but I do not worship at his altar the way he does himself.
jetsbackincanada
Banned
The pinkies comment, was elitist not effeminate. 
Like the wine snobs, who think that expensive means good somehow. Geesh you read what you wanted to hear.
I straight up said , everyone's entitled to their own opinion, READ IT!!
If you look back I was called " Sunday Painter Amateur"...or sumthing???
I asked quite respectfully ( I thought?), as to avoid this exact pissing contest, and was dished a plate of elitist, condesending, opinion, stated as fact....and Traynor's pompous?
I gave Adma credit, by acknowledging his long term contributions, and thought he would share his thoughts, instead I got scolded??? Ugly is in the eye of the beholder, if i think a pair of shoes is ugly, a 3, 000 $$ price doesn't change my mind. It's ok to not like, what's not to your tastes.
Like the wine snobs, who think that expensive means good somehow. Geesh you read what you wanted to hear.I straight up said , everyone's entitled to their own opinion, READ IT!!
If you look back I was called " Sunday Painter Amateur"...or sumthing???
I asked quite respectfully ( I thought?), as to avoid this exact pissing contest, and was dished a plate of elitist, condesending, opinion, stated as fact....and Traynor's pompous?
I gave Adma credit, by acknowledging his long term contributions, and thought he would share his thoughts, instead I got scolded??? Ugly is in the eye of the beholder, if i think a pair of shoes is ugly, a 3, 000 $$ price doesn't change my mind. It's ok to not like, what's not to your tastes.
UrbanAffair
Senior Member
Wow! A bit harsh no? I don't think I've heard "suckers" used since the 80's. Anyway my comment wasn't about the building it was about the innuendo in Drum's comment but anyways....
khris
Senior Member
The pinkies comment, was elitist not effeminate.
I straight up said , everyone's entitled to their own opinion, READ IT!!
If you look back I was called " Sunday Painter Amateur"...or sumthing???
I asked quite respectfully ( I thought?), as to avoid this exact pissing contest, and was dished a plate of elitist, condesending, opinion, stated as fact....and Traynor's pompous?
I gave Adma credit, by acknowledging his long term contributions, and thought he would share his thoughts, instead I got scolded??? Ugly is in the eye of the beholder, if i think a pair of shoes is ugly, a 3, 000 $$ price doesn't change my mind. It's ok to not like, what's not to your tastes.
You can't possibly really think everyone is entitled to their own opinion, and then bash people for having an opinion. That's just ridiculous.
And I am not siding with anyone. I've been a fan of brutalism for years. You obviously don't know anything about it though, or how beautiful concrete can look, so I'm not going to bother trying to show you anymore, as you clearly are stuck in your ways.
And is this you: http://twitter.com/#!/benmyers29/status/91177812735696896
Sure sounds like it.
jetsbackincanada
Banned
Nope
But it's kinda funny. ^^^
I was the one bashed, for my opinion first of all, and second,...I am less convinced than ever, of the need to preserve that. I've heard nothing about it's great lines, or massing, or it's incredible lobby. ?? From the images I've seen, start the bull dozers baby!!
But it's kinda funny. ^^^
I was the one bashed, for my opinion first of all, and second,...I am less convinced than ever, of the need to preserve that. I've heard nothing about it's great lines, or massing, or it's incredible lobby. ?? From the images I've seen, start the bull dozers baby!!
Last edited:
adma
Superstar
Yeah, so it's the jetsbackincanadas of the world who'd take something like this
and replace it with this
Incidentally, re the former...
and replace it with this
Incidentally, re the former...