Re: Re: libeskind / Manuel Aires Mateus on the docks

@johnglas wrote:

it is crap and was always going to be crap. I’m thinking of bowing out of making any posts (awwwww!) because the extent of architectural establishment wishful thinking

Daft is a nicer word than crap. I don’t thing crap is really the right word here anyway. I would save ‘crap’ for the buildings that they just didn’t bother making any attempt to do anything with. I think this is a diferent situation. This one looks more like the product of a lack of self criticism. One of those ‘big idea’ buildings (‘it will be as if hewn from a seven storey block’) handed out by the master to a ‘B’ team of atelier believers, where nobody has the confidence, or the critical faculty, to put their hand up and say, ‘Manuel, is this not going to be a bit stupid?’

I’m sorry I don’t share the common belief (RoryW and others) that this would have been fine, if it was just chunkier, as per the original renders.

On the architectural establishment point, I think I alluded earlier to an interesting piece in the March RIAI journal, where Sean O’Laoire, did come out with a pretty blunt rebuke Mr. Libeskind, which mightn’t be any big deal coming from ordinary Joes like us, but, is a bit of a departure for the guys at the top, given that they’re likely to have to share an awards podium or two during the term of his presidency.