junctionist
Senior Member
The point is that obscuring the Crystal is the wrong direction to take since it was built as a landmark and a defining feature of the streetscape.
The point is that obscuring the Crystal is the wrong direction to take since it was built as a landmark and a defining feature of the streetscape.
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
There is no simple answer to that question - I'd rather have the original architect for this sort of thing.
AoD
Last edited:
I'm not against putting some trees into the plaza though. Building faces across the world have trees in front of parts of them to soften the landscape (including the ROM on Queens Park, and we don't decry their placement there). The juxtaposition of natural and manmade forms is often quite complementary, and there's no way that, even 50 years in, that what they might plant in the plaza here would obscure the massive crystal forms… they'd just moderate views of it.
42
Admiral Beez
Superstar
There's no way the crystal lasts 50 years. I'd say it gets chopped off and a new face is built within the next 25-30 years, tops. IMO, the mood will be that a museum needs to have a grand entrance (as viewed from the inside) not this low ceilinged, white-painted drywall space. That's what I always liked about the old entrance, you had a sense of grandeur, you're entering history. While the new entrance is like a subway, turnstiles would not seem out of place.
pman
Senior Member
There's certainly scope for that, though given the fundamental failure of the crystal as exhibit space I would hope for wholesale demolition. It's happened before. A generic late-70's addition was torn down to make room for the crystal, and Barton Myers' Terminal 2-style AGO building only lasted a dozen years before being demolished for the Gehry addition. At the time of the crystal's opening, then Globe architecture critic Lisa Rochon forecast it would be torn down in a few decades. Fingers crossed. As for your thoughtful comments about the much-loved original ROM buildings, Rochon wrote they were conceived in an age that valued "craft, scale and permanence."
jje1000
Senior Member
The crystal is too expensive to be demolished, barring structural failure.
And even if another donor ponies up more monies, we'll more than likely see the ROM add a new wing (maybe that field south of Varsity Centre? Reworking the existing museum offices and storage building? The Faculty of Music Building? An underground expansion under Philospher's Walk?) or a ROM satellite somewhere else in the city, rather than demolishing the crystal and starting anew.
And even if another donor ponies up more monies, we'll more than likely see the ROM add a new wing (maybe that field south of Varsity Centre? Reworking the existing museum offices and storage building? The Faculty of Music Building? An underground expansion under Philospher's Walk?) or a ROM satellite somewhere else in the city, rather than demolishing the crystal and starting anew.
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
If possible they should move the curatorial centre (filling out the southern part of the H) and open up the space for a southern addition plus courtyard. Highly doubt anyone is going to tear the crystal down - it isn't anonymous like the 80s Moffat Kinoshita QEII Pavilion.
AoD
Attachments
Last edited:
MetroMan
Senior Member
Totally agree. There's no way they're going to throw away the massive investment from Toronto's most expensive philanthropic fundraising project. There's so much more in the ROM where that kind of money could be spent and they're not going to start all over. Who would donate to an organization knowing that their donations might end up in dust even within their lifetimes?
The Crystal has loads of potential. The bones are there. The materials used were often subpar. They need to expand the museum to the south and complete the circuit, finish restoring the old wing and then, maybe refinish the Crystal inside and out with better materials.
jje1000
Senior Member
Nah the crystal needs more than just better materials- it needs a lot of work in terms of circulation and floor plan reconfiguration.
fiendishlibrarian
Active Member
Funny, the march of time has not lessened the feeling of what I wrote more than ten years ago, perhaps even more so now that I'm a resident of the area:
fiendishlibrarian, Apr 29, 2007
#441
[fiendish rant]
Have never put in my opinion on this building, so take it for what it's worth. I'm not going to justify it on any grounds other than a gut feeling. But now that it's more or less complete, I need a moment of catharsis. It's been too long.
I wanted to like this building.
I've really, really tried to like this building.
I've told myself a hundred times that I *should* like this building.
I've argued with myself, during moments of various levels of sobriety while walking that stretch of Bloor, that I *must* like this building. I've read all the threads, taken in all the commentary (ex-Babel, Alvin, etc.) by those more knowledgeable than myself. And I've tried, really tried.
But, but...
...I can't do it. I can't. I really cannot like or appreciate this thing. And now that's it's nearly complete, I can finally articulate it. And everything I feel about it is negative. Whether that's a testament to the building's excellence in the sense I'm not indifferent to it, I don't know. Or care. But I can't stand it.
It's pushy in a rich-asshole-not-signalling-with-his-Porsche kind of way.
It's an obnoxious prick on a cellphone in the booth next to you in a restaurant.
A loud jerk in the library.
A dog that won't shut up while you're trying to read.
A pushy yuppie mom in the checkout line.
It's Nickelback opening for Radiohead.
It's an ugly fat chick baring her breasts at Mardi Gras for attention, *any* kind of attention.
It's a McMuseum.
It's absurd in a Sir Elton John, Sir Mick Jagger sense of the absurd.
It's farting and giggling during a funeral.
It's the Marlen Cowpland of museums, the Pam Anderson of institutions, all nips and tucks and peek-a-boo plunging necklines, fake tans, fake lips, with curiously upright nipples in front of a tired, worn-out body.
It's an absurd haircut your girlfriend gets that you say you like even though you don't because you don't want to lose your shot at some nookie.
It's the jeans that *does* make her ass look fat. You know it, she knows it, but they're $300 dollars, so they *must* look great, right? Right?
It's all those things that feel so, I don't know, so profoundly, mutely, instinctively wrong. All crass and cheap exhibitionism. A Museum Gone Wild. It's Pete Doherty and Lindsay Lohan architecture. A train wreck, sure. Fascinating, a guilty pleasure to partake in, but no one with taste and class would say anyone else should emulate. Not for me, thanks.
Like most benders, it seemed like a good idea at the time.
It lacks grace, or dignity. It spits at history. It wants, Sally Field-like, to really, really like me.
It's the difference between some vulgar trophy wife with fake plastic tits and rings and baubles and a "look at me! look at me!" tainted sheen, and, say, Leslie Feist. It's a bimbo building.
I think it's probably the most ridiculous thing I've ever seen. I laughed when I saw the rendering. I thought it was a joke. I think it *is* a joke. It's the trucker hat of buildings, all empty hipsterism and a monument to transient, fleeting fashion. A vain, pompous monument reflecting a shallow, vapid age. I will always avert my eyes walking by it and pretend it's not there, like a particularly ugly and smelly homeless person.
It feels so fundamentally wrong, insincere, inauthentic and grasping to me. Don't care what the cladding looks like in the sun, or on a cloudy day, or at different angles. You can serve shit on a silver platter at the best restaurant in the city, accompanied by the finest wine, and it's still shit. Still looks like shit, still smells like shit, still tastes like shit. The ghost of Julia Child could prepare it herself, and it can be pronounced "daring" and "bold" and "iconic" and all the Right People gush and rave over it. But shit it is, and shit it remains.
Nope, I can't do it. I may be wrong, I may be wrong-headed. I may be a philistine. Whatever.
I hate this building.
[/fiendish rant]
fiendishlibrarian, Apr 29, 2007
#441
[fiendish rant]
Have never put in my opinion on this building, so take it for what it's worth. I'm not going to justify it on any grounds other than a gut feeling. But now that it's more or less complete, I need a moment of catharsis. It's been too long.
I wanted to like this building.
I've really, really tried to like this building.
I've told myself a hundred times that I *should* like this building.
I've argued with myself, during moments of various levels of sobriety while walking that stretch of Bloor, that I *must* like this building. I've read all the threads, taken in all the commentary (ex-Babel, Alvin, etc.) by those more knowledgeable than myself. And I've tried, really tried.
But, but...
...I can't do it. I can't. I really cannot like or appreciate this thing. And now that's it's nearly complete, I can finally articulate it. And everything I feel about it is negative. Whether that's a testament to the building's excellence in the sense I'm not indifferent to it, I don't know. Or care. But I can't stand it.
It's pushy in a rich-asshole-not-signalling-with-his-Porsche kind of way.
It's an obnoxious prick on a cellphone in the booth next to you in a restaurant.
A loud jerk in the library.
A dog that won't shut up while you're trying to read.
A pushy yuppie mom in the checkout line.
It's Nickelback opening for Radiohead.
It's an ugly fat chick baring her breasts at Mardi Gras for attention, *any* kind of attention.
It's a McMuseum.
It's absurd in a Sir Elton John, Sir Mick Jagger sense of the absurd.
It's farting and giggling during a funeral.
It's the Marlen Cowpland of museums, the Pam Anderson of institutions, all nips and tucks and peek-a-boo plunging necklines, fake tans, fake lips, with curiously upright nipples in front of a tired, worn-out body.
It's an absurd haircut your girlfriend gets that you say you like even though you don't because you don't want to lose your shot at some nookie.
It's the jeans that *does* make her ass look fat. You know it, she knows it, but they're $300 dollars, so they *must* look great, right? Right?
It's all those things that feel so, I don't know, so profoundly, mutely, instinctively wrong. All crass and cheap exhibitionism. A Museum Gone Wild. It's Pete Doherty and Lindsay Lohan architecture. A train wreck, sure. Fascinating, a guilty pleasure to partake in, but no one with taste and class would say anyone else should emulate. Not for me, thanks.
Like most benders, it seemed like a good idea at the time.
It lacks grace, or dignity. It spits at history. It wants, Sally Field-like, to really, really like me.
It's the difference between some vulgar trophy wife with fake plastic tits and rings and baubles and a "look at me! look at me!" tainted sheen, and, say, Leslie Feist. It's a bimbo building.
I think it's probably the most ridiculous thing I've ever seen. I laughed when I saw the rendering. I thought it was a joke. I think it *is* a joke. It's the trucker hat of buildings, all empty hipsterism and a monument to transient, fleeting fashion. A vain, pompous monument reflecting a shallow, vapid age. I will always avert my eyes walking by it and pretend it's not there, like a particularly ugly and smelly homeless person.
It feels so fundamentally wrong, insincere, inauthentic and grasping to me. Don't care what the cladding looks like in the sun, or on a cloudy day, or at different angles. You can serve shit on a silver platter at the best restaurant in the city, accompanied by the finest wine, and it's still shit. Still looks like shit, still smells like shit, still tastes like shit. The ghost of Julia Child could prepare it herself, and it can be pronounced "daring" and "bold" and "iconic" and all the Right People gush and rave over it. But shit it is, and shit it remains.
Nope, I can't do it. I may be wrong, I may be wrong-headed. I may be a philistine. Whatever.
I hate this building.
[/fiendish rant]
Admiral Beez
Superstar
The Crystal's biggest issue IMO is that when you see the outside you expect the inside to look like this...
Instead, when you're in the lobby of the ROM you get this low ceilinged space, there's no sense that you're in the crystal.
old boy
Senior Member
It looked good as a quick sketch as far as Libeskind was concerned it appears. The lousy interior spaces prove the architect was really only thinking about the exuberant visual expression the outside would be. I remember thinking how neat it was going to be seeing a dinosaur through the expanse of angled glass while walking along Bloor. Renders can be so beguiling.
MetroMan
Senior Member
The Crystal's biggest issue IMO is that when you see the outside you expect the inside to look like this...
Instead, when you're in the lobby of the ROM you get this low ceilinged space, there's no sense that you're in the crystal.
This is true. It can also be relatively "easy" to fix in the grand scheme of things. Remove the dino gallery (one floor up and make this a 3 story tall space — the dino gallery just above the entrance is 2 stories high. Or at least, set it back from the entrance so it forms a bridge in front of the lobby.
jje1000
Senior Member
That's not easy to fix because you'd be messing up the circulation and structural support at the same time.
junctionist
Senior Member
It depends on the perspective. Even on day one after the plaza overhaul is complete, the trees will be in the path of many sightlines to the Crystal. The way the existing trees obscure the Queens Park facade seems inelegant and detracts from the ROM's landmark quality. I prefer the landscaping around the Lillian Massey Building on the other side of Queens Park, with shrubs growing along the sidewalk and small trees on the edges of the building face, further from the main architectural features like the portico on Queens Park. The entire facade of the Crystal is important and should be front and centre.