Urbantoronto Architectural Critique Clichés

[Parkdalian]

I've noticed some recurring criticisms in the "Projects & Construction" thread. I think it's interesting that some of these criticisms are generally accepted as "true." By posting this list of "Architectural Critique Clichés," I'd like to encourage us to consider whether they are true and to try to come up with new ways of thinking about these topics.

(This is not to attack any particular poster - I think we all tend to think in catchphrases, and I've certainly used some of these clichés.)

-"Another glass box."
-"Pre-cast. Ugh!"
-"The building doesn't meet the street."
-"It should be taller! Toronto needs taller buildings."
-"The height doesn't match the street's context."
-"Oh no! The Cheapening!"
-"What a historicist facade. Buildings built now should be modernist in design."
-"Why does everything have to be grey?"
-"Toronto looked better in the [insert previous decade]."
-"This looks nothing like the render!"
-"Spandrel panels look so cheap."
-"I hate when they just use the facades of historical buildings."
-"All of the new buildings look the same."
-"Another green-glass condo."

Can you guys think of other things that keep coming up as criticisms? And are these faults with the buildings, or with our perceptions of them? If they are faults with the buildings, *why* are they faults with the buildings?

 

[Hairy Yeti Poo Balls]

If anything I think we need to be more critical of our architecture. For a city that has so many art lovers you'd think we could produce more visionary buildings. Our skyline is pretty dull overall with few pockets of beauty. We need more varied ideas among our design firms and could use more international design competitions. Whenever we have international design competitions though we always have a Canadian firm among the top candidates and tend to go with them, which defeats the whole purpose in the first place.

 

[Parkdalian]

I'm not really concerned about whether the city is ugly or beautiful. I'm just interested in the way we talk about this stuff cause the way we talk about it presupposes that certain things are beautiful or not beautiful.

 

[nrb]

If anything I think we need to be more critical of our architecture. For a city that has so many art lovers you'd think we could produce more visionary buildings. Our skyline is pretty dull overall with few pockets of beauty. We need more varied ideas among our design firms and could use more international design competitions. Whenever we have international design competitions though we always have a Canadian firm among the top candidates and tend to go with them, which defeats the whole purpose in the first place.

Haha I wanted to add a quote like this to the op. The constant whinging about toronto 'mediocrity' is fucking exhausting.

 

[adma]

Haha I wanted to add a quote like this to the op. The constant whinging about toronto 'mediocrity' is fucking exhausting.

Ah, you've just grabbed Hairy Yeti by his Poo Balls...

 

[Urban Shocker]

-"Another glass box."

Regardless of how well it fits in with - or expands - the existing context, or how well designed it is, this criticism is reserved for a contemporary building that is deemed to automatically fail because it isn't non-rectilinear.

 

[Urban Shocker]

-"Pre-cast. Ugh!"

I didn't like that precast, therefore I don't like all precast.

 

[Urban Shocker]

-"The building doesn't meet the street."

... like, for instance, the Star of Downtown does - sagging out to the sidewalk like a great de-boned chicken. All buildings must "meet the street" to be considered successful - the TD Centre being but one example of how terribly wrong things can go when not "meeting the street" with a big skirt-like podium.

 

[Urban Shocker]

-"It should be taller! Toronto needs taller buildings."

I'm 14 ... no, wait, I'm 15 ... no, no, wait ... I'm 45 but I'm still acting like I'm 14 ... and ... and ... I like great big tall things that stick up in the air ... and look longer and taller than the other big tall things that aren't as impresive ... and ... and ...

 

[Urban Shocker]

-"The height doesn't match the street's context."

I tell ya', they should never had put that spire on the Cathedral in the 1870s.

 

[vegeta_skyline]

Damn your on a roll, I almost feel bad to break it up.

And are these faults with the buildings, or with our perceptions of them? If they are faults with the buildings, *why* are they faults with the buildings?

The fault is largely with our perception. Thy shall not envy thy neighbor, pfft might as well throw that one out of the book for the amount of times it happens. We all want what we don't have and what some else does. What Toronto doesn't have but London or New York or Amsterdam or Shenzhen and so on has. Something new and unique is visionary, doing the same old thing is less risky and more profitable but boring.

 

[Canuck]

If the theory goes: Toronto is currently building mostly mediocre high-rises, then this can only hold true if we're measuring ourselves against some standard.

Is this an internal standard (of the ol' "c'mon boys, we know we can do better on the next one") or an external standard (as in, why can't we be building more high-rises like city "X").

If it's an external standar... than who is the standard? What city is currently consistently building high-quality high-rises?

Seriously. Who?
Dubai? Chicago? One of the Chinese-boom cities?

If we have an external standard- who is it?

 

[adma]

If it's an external standar... than who is the standard? What city is currently consistently building high-quality high-rises?

Seriously. Who?
Dubai? Chicago? One of the Chinese-boom cities?

If we have an external standard- who is it?

Sana'a

 

[Urban Shocker]

Sana'a

... in which case, this whine would also apply ...

-"All of the new buildings look the same."

 

[TrickyRicky]

Are those buildings made of cookie? Because they look delicious.