Re: Re: “Modern” Protected Structures in Dublin
Very much so.
when I look at the B of I in Baggot Street, the phrase that comes to mind is: How did they get away with this?
The B of I is a well executed 1970s provincial version of Mies’s 1950s Seagram Building in New York. It’s not a re-interpretation of Mies, it’s a cut-down copy of Mies. Seagram is three blocks on a plaza, so Baggot Street is three blocks on a plaza. The composition of blocks is different, but the design is modular, so the heights are arbitrary, the number of bays are arbitrary. If you tried this today, you’d be up in the High Court tomorrow.
I must agree. As much as I drool over this complex, I’ve never quite understood the unflinching regard in which Tallon is held purely in respect of this building (noting the quality and imagination of his other work). Essentially if you could copy n paste back in the 70s, that’s what this would be called. Of course the devil is in the detail, which Tallon executed exquisitely, but so too did Mies. Perhaps the genius is being so informed in the language of Mies, which is unquestioningly apparent. But an important distinction to make nonetheless.
As an aside, I find it faintly irritating that (some) of the stars of the built environment and arts only come out of the woodwork to defend a flagship case like this one, when countless other proposals which so erode the character of the city, and urban centres nationwide, slip through unchallenged on a daily basis. Fair enough, this is the Custom House of modernisim, but a greater input and indeed holding to account of fellow members of the architecture and plannng sectors in Ireland wouldn’t go amiss for the other 364 days of the year.
Indeed in that vein, it was refreshing to note Shaffrey Associates dedicating considerable time and professional expertise submitting against the Clarence development. More enlightened and principled input like this from architecture and planning professionals please.