spoil_sport wrote: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.