Toronto Corus Quay | ?m | 8s | Waterfront Toronto | Diamond Schmitt

It is unfortunate for Corus but thankfully they didn't entrust Diamond or Clewes or any 'local' starchitects of Toronto's design establishment with the ROM extension, or OCAD or the AGO or... Their rote boxy design templates would have left us wanting. Instead, these buildings challenge our preconceptions rather than pandering to them, boldly impressing themselves on our tame, polite spaces, and have clearly engaged the public like few others built in Toronto in recent years.

Although the Four Seasons Centre performs its function expertly it is undeniable that the public's expectations for a landmark were not met. If ever a stage was set for innovative design it was here on a drab stretch of University against a backdrop of boxy towers.

Not every building should be bold or innovative as has been said here a million times. It is important to understand the surrounding context so as to respect it when appropriate, but to break from it when so badly needed. Giving us endless reiterations of the same minutely reworked boxy, grey slabs whatever the function and whatever the context implies dogmatic thinking which is not helpful to our public spaces.
 
Last edited:
Those who enjoy opera and ballet, or visit the Gardiner Museum to see their ceramic collections, or will soon hear concerts at the Koerner, or who now study at the new Ballet School, or at the Conservatory, or who will go to events in the Film Centre, or who live in any of the handsome contemporary condo buildings that have gone up recently, or who visit libraries and community centres, are enjoying - or will enjoy - beautiful new buildings designed by our local architects. The office workers of Corus will, too. OCAD is a box; all of the AGO's new galleries are boxes save for Galleria Italia; Grad House is full of box-like rooms, and there's no likelihood that the ROM Crystal will spawn a trend for angular buildings constructed with massive steel beams.

Starchitecture was a high-fashion foreign trend, not a product of our culture. We only got a Gehry because having one would bestow the world class status some craved. We've got a sprinkling of such buildings, and they're nice buildings, and we've incorporated them, but we'll move on.
 
Shocker, you keep referencing Grad House as if it was flawless. Though it has its benefits, I would hardly tout it as the success story you seem to see. The special spaces are on the interior and in the courtyard, or, in other words, spaces where the public generally cannot go. What the street is treated treated to is a series of bunker-like strip windows and a coffee shop which has sat empty for years (but fortunately is now open again).

Good? Of course! Great? Hardly.

Lastly, you seem to argue that architectural power-brokers only exist here and now as part of a larger international trend. There have always been and will always be famous architects; architects who move outside our idiosyncratic world and touch the wider public. The only thing 'new' about starchitecture is the term itself.
 
Last edited:
... and the widespread commodification of architecture, the craving for must-have starchitect novelty shapes, and the sense of we-aren't-worthy insecurity that without them we aren't world class ... that enables it.

Actually, I'm not holding up Grad House as an example of anything other than a building designed by a famous foreign architect that offers the sort of imported spectacle that Tewder keeps telling us he sees as necessary.
 
Again: too much of this this Corus/Diamond-bashing strikes me as so much casual-amateur spiting of Saskatchewan for not being British Columbia (ooh! aah! mountains!)
 
ShonTron said:
argumentum ad nauseum and reductio ad absurdum - that's the name of Shocker's game.
Click to expand...

adma said:
Again: too much of this this Corus/Diamond-bashing strikes me as so much casual-amateur spiting of Saskatchewan for not being British Columbia (ooh! aah! mountains!)
Click to expand...

Oh I fell into the absolutist trap of a US debate:) I'm not bashing Diamond. I like his buildings just fine, but I don't like all of them in all contexts. That's all. And certainly NOT Corus.

This notion that spectacle (and what the hell is 'spectacle really? everything is spectacle!) isn't part of Toronto's context is a little rich when you look at the built heritage here, and all of it not just the cool mid-century post-war stuff that is so fashionable among the design-istas these days... mid-century minimalism being this year's 'black' so to speak...

It is also difficult to believe that 'architecture' is enjoying some new fad of popularity. All through history kings, magnates and patrons of all sorts vied for the designs of the latest and greatest architects, artists, designers and landscapers, and for the status their work confered.

I will also stand by my point that the real challenging ideas in architecture, of late, are being brought here from without rather than fomenting from within. Taste, elegance and adherence to fashion or convention are seldom halmarks of innovative design.
 
At the TSA Design Review forum last night next to nothing was said about foreign starchitects ... or their fanboys ;) hereabouts ... but quite a bit was said concerning the global interest in Toronto that our local design culture has generated as a result of expressing our values as a city rather than copying those of others.
 
I'm not surprised those pesky foreign interlopers weren't discussed. The local establishment was obviously too busy patting itself on the back.

Seriously though... It's nice to hear the discourse and see the passion for these issues in Toronto.
 
Urban Shocker said:
At the TSA Design Review forum last night next to nothing was said about foreign starchitects ... or their fanboys ;) hereabouts ... but quite a bit was said concerning the global interest in Toronto that our local design culture has generated as a result of expressing our values as a city rather than copying those of others.
Click to expand...

You do realize it's entirely possible for a local architect to come up with a creative, innovative design that reflects our values...right?

I don't really care who they got to design this building...as long as they did a good job. Diamond has not created a very compelling design given the context involved.

Of course, you're a Diamond 'fanboy' do you'll defend pretty much anything he comes up with.
 
Shocker....I am beginning to suspect that you are a closet....conservative....:eek:

/and that is shocking...
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top