condovo
Senior Member
Diamond + Schmitt never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity. Predictable, joyless, orthodox D + S building. Too bad this wasn't handled by Kohn Shnier or Will Alsop.
Last edited:
Good design to the rescue - though, as the ever-modest Jack Diamond pointed out in his talk at the Reference Library a few months ago, architects can at best enhance a dynamic that is already working and can't create a social dynamic through design.
Success stories such as the Regent Park School of Music, which may move into this place, are part of the existing local dynamic. There's something nicely democratic in the shared forms of sensible Modernism that our best local firms work with - applied equally to aA's nearbye Regent Park condos, KPMB's ballet school, D+S's Community Health Centre at Dundas and Parliament, or their unpretentious, practical, and popular new home at Queen and University for Canada's leading opera and ballet companies.
But there is no existing local dynamic here. It's entirely new. That's the promise of Regent Park's renewal that's being squandering here à -la-Corus Quay. Also, this is an art centre for crying out loud. Enough already with sensible Modernism.
Diamond, being the It Boy of cultural building design right now, will doubtless produce a centre that works as well for Regent Park's artists and audiences as Washington's celebrated Harman Hall does for that city, or the new Mariinsky Theatre will do for the arts community and audiences in St. Petersburg.
condovo:
Where did you read that renewal of Regent Park equate to having crazy architecture? Come to think of it, another well known renewal project in Toronto - St. Lawerence - is filled with examples of sensible Modernism and it is working just fine, thank you very much.
AoD
Well, it's likely users will decide only once the building's a fait accompli. The idea is to generate discussion now, before it's built, to produce something better. Hopefully, such a process is underway though it appears to be a done deal. And, of course, just by its scale, the promise of Regent Park, like the waterfront, extents well beyond the immediate neighbourhood to the rest of the city too. Surely, Toronto has enough serviceable pieces of architecture already.condovo:
The point being - just how does a serviceable piece of architecture lead to the promise of Regent Park being squandered? The last time I checked, the main promise is liberating the ghetto, no?
As to the building being playful or otherwise, I'd rather leave it up to those who will be using it to decide.
AoD
Well, likely users will decide only once it's a fait accompli. The idea is to generate discussion now, before it's built, to produce something better.
And, of course, the promise of Regent Park, like the waterfront, extents well beyond the immediate neighbourhood to liberating the rest of the city too.
Surely, Toronto has enough serviceable pieces of architecture already.
Better for everyone.Better for whom, may I ask?
Well, perhaps it should have been handled by a more capable firm.The organizations that have put in significant time and resources to come up with the plan - or someone who really haven't had much of a stake in the outcomes other than the lack of eyecandy? And in case you haven't noticed, this is a stimulus project - time is of the essence.
I've already argued that point in the posts above. You may want to refer to the discussion on Corus Quay as well.And just how did the project as proposed lead to that liberation being forestalled?
Both private and public sectors are fair game for criticism.And quite a crop of atrocious one in the private realm too, perhaps more would be gained from directing one's energy to deal with THAT sector?
AoD
I doubt Kohn Shnier's Claude Watson School for the Arts, for example, had a Gehry-sized budget.Like seriously, the litany of complaints on this what, $28M community level project sounded like someone who wanted to get a Gehry for a community centre but not wanting to foot the bill for it.
Better for everyone.
Well, perhaps it should have been handled by a more capable firm.
I've already argued that point in the posts above. You may want to refer to the discussion on Corus Quay as well.
Both private and public sectors are fair game for criticism.
I doubt Kohn Shnier's Claude Watson School for the Arts, for example, had a Gehry-sized budget.