Kildare Civic Offices
- This topic has 44 replies, 17 voices, and was last updated 20 years ago by
.
- Posts
it is not surprising that this new building is not apreciated by everybody , as henghen and peng moooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooovvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvveeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddd awwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrooooooooooooooooooooooooooooommmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm the bland miiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiidddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddlllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee.
ground@shadow wrote:
BTH, way off beam, you don’t have to be an initiate to “understand” or “appreciate” the finer aspects of architecture. This building is far from being the epitome of Architecture with a big A unless A stands for Attitude or possibly Ambition. However with every Ambition there must be the means by which this might be attained or at least attempted. Too much of this building looks like it wasn’t even on the radar let alone in the office. In case there is a response, yes I have seen it, up close inside and out……
@Bren88 wrote:
johniwhite, correct me if i am wrong, but some of your comments suggest that you have not seen this building outside of photos. I suggest you do as they do not do it justice. You asked if architects care about the inside of buildings, have you seen the inside of this one. And its not just a slanty box. Go and have a look for yourself, walk around it. You’ll probably still hate it, but you’ll have a better reason
Bren, this is exactly what I meant in my previous comment. I’m definitely not suggesting that an understanding of radical architecture is elitist or only open to people with architectural backgrounds. All I was saying is that I have a big problem with people severely criticizing a building that they have not even seen in the flesh. Obviously in shadow’s case his opinion is well considered and backed up with actual experience of the building. I don’t agree with his assessment of it’s merits but I respect his views!
I think that architecture, in general needs to be seen on site, as plans, photos, models, 3D graphics and sketchs rarely show a build ing its true light
The real problem i have with this project is its context.
It may have worked much better as a beautiful object in a field with its long axis actually pointing at something of note. Instead the axis now seems quite arbitrary pointing to the hotel behind and with the route between the two main buildings blocked to pedestrian by the ramp area.On the other hand, it is a beautifully detailed and engineered building of great merit. Its just a shame the inventive detail did not follow further to deal with its urban context.
But this building has such an irregular plan, different people would see its direction in different ways. From visiting the building, i’d consider it to be pointing more towards the historic building on the same site. The remains of the barracks and archway. Hopefully these will be better taken care of now that the CC is in such close proximity.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
