Convention centre

[cgcsb]

spoil_sport really lives up to his name. And say what you will about the building but a few posts up, you said you can't take me seriously for liking this building. I find that very rude and snobish, and I believe I'm owed an apology.

[spoil_sport]

It's architecture, it's not personal.

[notjim]

and I would agree with you that there is something impersonal about this architecture in particular!

[kefu]

Firstly, I don't know who you're referring to when you use this "better than what's there" argument.
The majority of what has been built along the North Docks has been of indifferent quality, the NCC is a vastly different proposition.
I'm not defending it on the basis of it being better than what's there, I'm defending it on the basis that I think it's a mangificent concept. It's too early to judge the final execution as the building is not finished yet. (Should we judge the new criminal court complex on the basis of its current exterior too?)
Both of these projects - the criminal courts and the NCC - are designed to drag the city back to its locus along the river. Along those quays, we will have Heuston Station, the new courts complex, Guinness, Collins Barracks, the Four Courts, Civic Offices, the Custom House and as a new bookend, the conference centre.
That is what the NCC is attempting to achieve and will to me eyes - at least - be successful in doing so.

[spoil_sport]

Don't forget the Clarence Hotel.....
And lets hope those cable cars get built too....

[spoil_sport]

And as for the criminal courts, look at the McCulloughMulvin website, their competition entry for that was far superior.

[gunter]

Leaving the tilted drum aside for the moment,



I wonder will the NCC host any Star Wars conventions?

[Peter Fitz]

And as for the criminal courts, look at the McCulloughMulvin website, their competition entry for that was far superior.

would tend to agree with you there, pretty high standard of entries for that job overall.

[kefu]

I specifically didn't mention the Clarence and won't dignify the cable car comment.
I must say I admire your overweening sense that whatever you happen to think must be correct, that just because you have an opinion, it is therefore fact.

[spoil_sport]

Look kefu, I'm not going to get personal. I have already outlined what I think of the convention centre and why. And I know I'm not the only one who dislikes it, and I'm sure someone else could put it more elequently than I have.

I just think Dublin deserves better, a lot better.

[shanekeane]

Look kefu, I'm not going to get personal. I have already outlined what I think of the convention centre and why. And I know I'm not the only one who dislikes it, and I'm sure someone else could put it more elequently than I have.

I just think Dublin deserves better, a lot better.

of course it does. that's why the architectural policies of the past must be scrapped. for the last twenty years people have complained about every single scheme of any interest that is mooted because it doesn't subscribe to established formulae. so, for example, the endless tat along the quays or near christchurch or in the docklands can be built without much objection, but when anything comes along to shake up this insipid orthodoxy, it receives floods of complaints. dublin hasn't produced architecture of much note since the 18th century. there's obviously something wrong with the attitude that it has whereby not a single building of any note has been constructed here since we apparently became more prosperous. every time anything radically different or forward looking is proposed, it is shot down. how anybody could object to the conference centre when every other building near it was built seemingly without a similar level of objection is beyond my ability to comprehend. just take a walk around the new business district near glories in barcelona, or around berlin, or around downtown manhattan for that matter to see how completely the docklands has been screwed up. for god's sake, there's nothing of any historical note near the conference centre, there's nothing near it even remotely approaching it in terms of quality, and the docklands is in danger of being the most sterile place in europe without the likes of it, so why don't you and everybody like you just shut the fuck up, and use your limited intellect to object to the annihilation of georgian dublin, and to the continued grottiness of the entire city centre.

[spoil_sport]

"dublin hasn't produced architecture of much note since the 18th century. there's obviously something wrong with the attitude that it has whereby not a single building of any note has been constructed here since we apparently became more prosperous"

Ah come on now. Prize for the most rediculous comment of the day.

[jaysus, what have I got myself into, now I remember why I didn't bother posting any comments before now]

[shanekeane]

"dublin hasn't produced architecture of much note since the 18th century. there's obviously something wrong with the attitude that it has whereby not a single building of any note has been constructed here since we apparently became more prosperous"

Ah come on now. Prize for the most rediculous comment of the day.

[jaysus, what have I got myself into, now I remember why I didn't bother posting any comments before now]

well i'd be beholden to you for an example of a great modern building in dublin.

[spoil_sport]

When I wrote the above comment, I thought: no, he couldn't possibly... could he? and then you did.
I was under the imperssion that this was a platform for those who had a real interest in architecture and planning to share their opinions. (And sometimes they won't agree, but then that's the point) If, shanekeane, your knowledge and appreciation of architecture in Dublin or Ireland is that limited then I dare say that you are not qualified or capable of making a comment on the matter. It is this type of unbridled ignorence that angers me, and I'm sure anyone else who loves architecture and works damn hard for the benefit of the public relm in Dublin or anywhere.
It is against my better judgment to even dignify a comment like that with a response, but it is my own failing and stupidity that I cannot let an argument go.
I feel like I'm under seige here, my original intent was never to be anti-development, or anti-interesting, or anti-iconic, Dublin and Irish architects have produced some magnificent architecture that is up to any international sandard. Infact the real kick in the teath of the conference centre is that it was though better to get some over-the-hill "name" architect to do. There is a big failing there somewhere, either a massive oversight by the DDDA in not recognising some of the countries top architects, or else our top architects are too busy doing regional arts centres and civic offices to roll up their sleves and get involved.
I have no problem with a "monumental" + "civic" + "interesting" + "original" building on the quayas or anywhere. Nor do I have any problem with international architects for that matter, I think the Liebeskind +Mateus projects have made a generally positive contribution to the docklands area.
Perhaps my original assertion "It is the ugliest thing I have ever seen. Ever." etc was a little strong and I apologise for the use of hyperbola, but I still maintain the NCC has more in comon with an American shopping mall, than with the central bank or the "tradition" of "civic monumentalism", or anything else it has been compared to here.
Anyone else agree with me?
I feel like the joker at the end of the Dark Knight after the ships fail to blow each other up.

[shanekeane]

When I wrote the above comment, I thought: no, he couldn't possibly... could he? and then you did.
I was under the imperssion that this was a platform for those who had a real interest in architecture and planning to share their opinions. (And sometimes they won't agree, but then that's the point) If, shanekeane, your knowledge and appreciation of architecture in Dublin or Ireland is that limited then I dare say that you are not qualified or capable of making a comment on the matter. It is this type of unbridled ignorence that angeres me, and I'm sure anyone else who loves architecture and works damn hard for the benefit of the public relm in Dublin or anywhere.
It is against my better judgment to even dignify a comment like that with a response, but it is my own failing and stupidity that I cannot let an argument go.
I feel like I'm under seige here, my original intent was never to be anti-development, or anti-interesting, or anti-iconic, Dublin and Irish architects have produced some magnificent architecture that is up to any international sandard. Infact the real kick in the teath of the conference centre is that it was though better to get some over-the-hill "name" architect to do. There is a big failing there somewhere, either a massive oversight by the DDDA in not recognising some of the countries top architects, or else our top architects are too busy doing regional arts centres and civic offices to roll up their sleves and get involved.
I have no problem with a "monumental" + "civic" + "interesting" + "original" building on the quayas or anywhere. Nor do I have any problem with international architects for that matter, I think the Liebeskind +Mateus projects have made a generally positive contribution to the docklands area.
Perhaps my original assertion "It is the ugliest thing I have ever seen. Ever." etc was a little strong and I apologise for the use of hyperbola, but I still maintain the NCC has more in comon with an American shopping mall, than with the central bank or the "tradition" of "civic monumentalism", or anything else it has been compared to here.
Anyone else agree with me?
I feel like the joker at the end of the Dark Knight when he's waiting for the ships to blow each other up.

let me reiterate, there's nothing even remotely good about anything built in dublin in the last twenty years. not on the docklands, not that rubbishy liebeskind building, not the extension the national gallery, nothing! my argument is that given this complete and utter paucity of anything good in dublin, then the moderate quality of the convention centre is welcome. it seems idiotic to me that this city can be blighted with redbrick barns all over the place, and then when something more interesting is designed, it's criticized because it's not good enough. good enough in comparison to what exactly? when it's finished it will be the best building in the docklands. and i foresee that when every other building on the river in the docklands is torn down in 20 years, the convention centre will be left standing. you are making the mistake of seeing this building as some sort of major statement, even while you criticize that attitude. nothing major about it. i think that if they put a convention centre type building where they built just about anything else in central dublin in the last twenty years, the city would be infinitely better.

[spoil_sport]

Please, just so I can sleep tonight, reassure me, and tell me you have no real power what-so-ever about what does or dosen't get built in this city.

[shanekeane]

Please, just so I can sleep tonight, reassure me, and tell me you have no real power what-so-ever about what does or dosen't get built in this city.

in fairness, it couldn't be much worse could it. just to educate me, tell me one great building built in dublin recently, coz i honestly can't think of one.

[spoil_sport]

I really don't know why I bother....
I'll humour you briefly, though I suspect I know the answer Ill get:
Off the top of my head and in no particular order:
Berkeley Library, Bus Arus, UCD restaurant, Central Bank,
deBlacamMeagher's wooden building temple bar and the the corner building at Castle Street.
O'Donnell+Tuomey's photographic archive in Temple Bar, Ranelagh school and Cherry Orchard school, and in my opinion their almost complete community centre in East Wall is one of the best projects realised in Dublin in recent years.
Though I have my reservations about the it I'll say Grafton's building on Merrion Row, and also worth mentioning is their new university building in Milan, which is a genuinely fantastic project and trully of the highest international standards....
But then apparently a good gimic and a shed load of glass qualifies as architecture these days....
P.S. Oh and I agree re the national gallery extension.

[shanekeane]

I really don't know why I bother....
I'll humour you briefly, though I suspect I know the answer Ill get:
Off the top of my head and in no particular order:
Berkeley Library, Bus Arus, UCD restaurant, Central Bank,
deBlacamMeagher's wooden building temple bar and the the corner building at Castle Street.
O'Donnell+Tuomey's photographic archive in Temple Bar, Ranelagh school and Cherry Orchard school, and in my opinion their almost complete community centre in East Wall is one of the best projects realised in Dublin in recent years.
Though I have my reservations about the it I'll say Grafton's building on Merrion Row, and also worth mentioning is their new university building in Milan, which is a genuinely fantastic project and trully of the highest international standards....
But then apparently a good gimic and a shed load of glass qualifies as architecture these days....

ok, well the berkeley library is good but not GREAT, certainly not of any international note. busaras is somewhat interesting but wasn't built in the last twenty years and is also quite ugly really, the ucd restaurant is not really in dublin city centre, but in any case i dont much like it, and the central bank was built more than twenty years ago and is an ok but not a great building. both the de Blacam and Meagher building are very nice and very interesting, but ultimately if they were built in many other cities they wouldn't merit much notice. it's simply because they are surrounded by mediocrity that they are able to shine.

let me point out that i believe the conference centre is as good as or better than these, but that it is still not a great building. i do however believe that the more moderately good buildings are constructed, the less room there will be for the likes of jury's hotel.

[JoePublic]

Spoil-sport: Sorry, I can let all your other spelling mistakes go, but, I-G-N-O-R-A-N-T

[shanekeane]

Spoil-sport: Sorry, I can let all your other spelling mistakes go, but, I-G-N-O-R-A-N-T

What a complete asshole you are. And a hypocritical one at that.

[notjim]

I'm tired of this "it's better than what's there" argument, what is arround it is pretty ugly, granted, but that's like comparing it to the ugly person who hangs out with uglier pople to make themselves look good. While I cannot think of a good convention centre off the top of my head but it is essentially a place of gathering, like an auditorium, or a stadium, and I'm sure we can muster up a few god examples of those. Again I don't buy the it's beter than other version of its type argument, that dosen't qualify it as good.
"how it fails relative to its function"

I think you might have misunderstood me on this point; I wasn't implying that its function excused ugliness, rather, that ugliness, in the sense of a certain awkwardness and brutality, helped express its function and that there was a virtue in that; further, I don't think that its surroundings excuse a poor building, but, rather, that a certain corporate monumentality is normal to dockland reclamations and therefore, in this case, help establish a sense of this place. I think, while not beautiful in a lyrical sense, it is impressive, muscular, honest and still playful.

[johnny21]

Heres a render for yous!!!:p

[spoil_sport]

I am but a half man without a spellcheck.

[notjim]

I always find it so sad when people are proud of their spelling, it is such an outdated skill; it is like being proud of knowing Morse code or being good at ballroom dancing.