spoil_sport
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
The first scheme wasn’t perfect, but at least it had balls.
Absolutely shameful.
And despite the awfulness of that attic story on the Carlton, what is more concerning is what’s peeking up behind the buildings to the right of it.
Is this for real? Where did that image come from?
“Nope, I think that there is protective plastic covering.”
Maybe…. but if there is, then under that they really are green, with “Ireland” or [sponsers] spelled out in white.
Or at least, so we were told on the recent AAI site visit.“you’ll get a better view on telly. then you only have the match to slag – it is the match you’re going for right?”
You got me… I probably wouldn’t even bother to watch on the telly….
I was there, have to say, from my position, it was only obscured if you were standing up. Though, while technically not obscured, I will say that the truss has a huge presence, and fills the rest of your field of view. It seems to be vastly over-structured for the purposes. The truss hangs down in front of you, and what’s worse, cranks in the most awful places, where a curved or at least more faceted profile would have been better. The bird’s nest stadium, ignoring aesthetics +scale, is essentially the same form, but seems to have a much more elegant structural solution (if you look closely, in the midst of all the random diagonals, there is actually a very simple repeating structural configuration) However Landsdown seems to be based on a modified version of Thomond Park, which worked there to architectural effect, moving the trusses above the roofline, and using the arched form effectively, in Landsdown it seems to be a more haphazard collection of bits. Also I really cannot understand, apart from aesthetic effect, what the louvered cladding actually does, it certainly didn’t provide any shelter from the wind when standing on the top tier.
I have to disagree completely that this thing has any “sheer power and size”. I wonder if anyone not-in-the-know would even notice it. “Design” aside, I find the form very underwhelming, approaching it, viewing it from across the river… it does nothing for me, compared to the (ahem) conference centre bookending the other end of the liffey, which is goddam fugly, it does at least stand out, if not in a good way. These courts, for me have no more presence than the new eircom HQ across the river, or Dundrum shopping centre. I like the glass screen, but the cladding behind it is awful, perhaps using a more intersting cladding behind the glass might have given it different qualities, but as it is…
The structure is crude at best, the cladding is a very thin veneer to hide all the unrefined guts, dressing muton as lamb, and the overall form comes from a late 90s/ early 00s Dutch trendy new architecture hand book when blobs were the future….. but somehow I like it.
Say what you will about the expression… (McCulloughMulvin’s school and FKL’s apartmetnts, both within a five minuit walk in either direction on the same road are from the same family) I was at the AAI site visit for these some months back and would have to say I would give my left arm (I’m right handed) and a big toe for one of those, particularly one with the balcony cut into the sloped roof, or one at that corner…
A few random convention centre pics from a google image search, and a few of them look shit, and that is supposed to prove?
Here are some Flikr links to images of Rafael Moneo’s attempt at one of these things.
Yes its a “box to hold conventions”, but its a lovley box. Refined, elegant and wonderfully composed.http://www.flickr.com/photos/joshewwahh/161541216/sizes/o/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ninaiznaizena/291750542/sizes/l/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/getdown/185627023/sizes/l/A few random convention centre pics from a google image search, and a few of them look shit, and that is supposed to prove?
Here are some Flikr links to images Rafael Moneo’s attempt at one of these things.
Yes its a “box to hold conventions”, but its a lovley box. Refined, elegant and wonderfully composed.http://www.flickr.com/photos/joshewwahh/161541216/sizes/o/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ninaiznaizena/291750542/sizes/l/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/getdown/185627023/sizes/l/This is how the Chineese did it (not holding this up as a brilliant example by any stretch, but certinally better than our lump)
http://www.worldbuildingsdirectory.com/project.cfm?id=184“Feck sake lads it’s a convention centre, it’s supposed to be a box to hold conventions”
Yes it is a convention centre, but it is also one of the most prominant additions to the quays since, well the four courts, surley that is a reason in itself to consider its worth as more than just fulfilling its function, so yes another customs house would be nice (by which of course I mean in a modern idiom, handeled with the same competance and skill)
Convention centre is just a name, its a place of assembly, which puts it in a far broader category of reference, hell even Liebeskind’s thing is better, another quick sacan of the “world building directory” gives us this:
http://www.worldbuildingsdirectory.com/project.cfm?id=1020Again not necessarily my cup of tea, and conext is somewhat different, but at least it exhibits some reasonable skill in execution.
OK, here we go again, but I have to say it looks more like a shopping centre than the iconic symbol of modern justice in Ireland. It lacks presence from a disance and up close, apart from the obvious expense of the materials employed it lacks the kind of dignity or detail one would expect of the supposedly most important public building to be built in Ireland for quiet some time. I see two senarios, firstly this is what HJL think an iconic structure looks like, which is I think the more likley senario and that thereofre this is a poor effort, or alternatively that they said: Gandon’s Four Courts is quiet iconic, lets not compete with that, we don’t need an iconic structure, lets give them something generic, another shopping centre, which is a position I would have far more respect for.
It was actually going well untill they put the cladding on.PS. Don’t get me wrong, as far as shopping centres go, its probably up there, looks quiet well even.
“The slave trade has operated in the middle east for centuries. Its part of their culture…”
And that makes it ok? Britain could claim the slave trade was part of its culture for centuries too.“You are a slave to corporations”
That’s hippie speak if ever I heard it… Of course the “corporations” are in control, you say that like you are trying to teach us something, like you are the first person to discover it, like you have just figured out all for yourself that santa isn’t real and your trying to convince all the grown ups of the huge conspiracy. Of course the corporations are in control, if they wern’t who would be? Its a simple concept called hierarchy, check it out, its been around for some time now. The historical equilivent is religion, it told people how to live, how to be better people, what they should wear, what they can and can’t say. It is the basic organising principal of society, it’s what kept society together, its what led them into wars against other variations of the same theme. And yes unfortunately, some people are better than others, some people are faster, some are smarter, there is, by natural selection, no such thing as equality. But in the western world, religion is redundant (massive generalisation, granted) so someone has to take control; the corporations tell me what is cool to wear, what is cool to say, what is cool to have or have-not. OK, so we take down the corporations, then what?But the relevance of all this to the U2 tower being made taller is?
“architecturally boring as Dublin”
Its no Venice or NYC, granted but we have already had this discussion, the architectural merits of Dublin unfortunately do not normally reveal thenmselves to those of short attention spans, most of its most interesting moments are hidden and subtle, and rely not on a single “landmark” building, but rather a wider composition, an appreciation of the city as a stage set. I would hope that the “ambition and imagination of irish people as a whole” deserves better than to be boiled down to an “interesting building”, or pop culture, disposable architecture.
I really don’t get you. You write something mildly profound; Dublin belongs ot the people, etc, OK, a bit too Barak Obama for my liking (Don’t get me wrong, I love the guy, but there is only one) but I’ll alow it, and then you go Michael O’ Leary on it.P.S: And for the record I’m not defending the shit that has been built in the docklands, I’m not anti-highrise and I’m not from Dublin.
From “James Gandon and His Times”, by Hugo Duffy:
“The distinguished architect whose life we now commence was bore in London on the 29th of Febuary, 1742”
But I’m sure you knew that, johnglas, I apologise if I have offended your sensibilities, but I do not have interest in, nor was not refering to the wider political implications, nor was I citing it as a negative thing. Regardless of who was or wasn’t in power, or who was being repressed (and I am familiar with our own history), Gandon was born in England, therefore a British citizen, like Lord Foster, who, and there is little to argue with here, effectively built all the most important civic buildings of 18th C Dublin, ie those buildings of that period that represent Dublin on postcards, and aside from those few iconic examples, the majority of Dublin’s finest building stock of the same period is British import, albeit tempered with some Irish sensibilities, and prior to that the Brits had probably imported or adapted that from somewhere else.I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, “interesting” does not make good, and yes, to suggest that something meerly “interesting” is good enough, is infact beneath the dignity of Dublin. I am not defending the shit in the docklands, but if you take a 6/7 standard issue, lowest common denominator, docklands style facade and extrude it another 20 stories, it will not really improve matters, the Docklands is not shit simply because it is not highrise, there are far more core and qualitive reasons. There is nothing wrong with highrise, with towers, Dublin has a tradition of towers and landmarks, church spires and domes closing vistas, the chimneys of Guinness, Liberty Hall, etc, I would welcome the U2 tower, albeit without the “U2” and perhaps not a Foster (although, there is strangley a nice balance that Dublin’s most important buildings of the 18C, Customs House, Four Courts, were also designed by a Brit)
I love NY, but New York is what t is. If Canary Wharf is your thing then go THERE, but it is certinally not a vision I would welcome for Dublin.
Interesting to note that architectural quality was never mentioned in that report. (That’s equally a comment on the convention centre itself, RTE’s interest in architecture and RTE’s perception of what people want to hear) Sad that no one involoved seems to care as long as you can move a 40ft container up to the exhibition space.
