If my quickie Google search is right, it was Steve Martin who uttered the line "writing about music is like dancing about architecture" Cute as it is true ... but only to a certain extent. The truth of it lies in the obvious incommensurability of words and aesthetic experiences. Art criticism often suffers from a strained quality. Could it be because it tries to reach and envelope something with words that exists beyond words?
Case in point:architecture. It's been said that it is the last controversial art. We publicly disagree about it and do so with a great deal of emotion. Some of this emotion will come through tonight once we reach ROM's Crystal. The occasion for tonight's discussion about architecture in Toronto are this year's PUG awards. For the 4th year, Torontonians -- though there is no reason why non-Torontonians should feel excluded from voting - are given the choice to express their blunt feelings about 21 buildings which have opened their doors to the public in 2007.
I brought together 6 individuals who make their living unpacking their blunt feelings about architecture by trying to find as many words as it is necessary to do justice to the objects described.
Here's a sampling of some words used tonight: "sweet number". " facade respond to the streetscape", "belongs to the choir", excessive thematization", "dubious connection to the sky", "disneyland of loftness", "dynamic modulation".
Possibly the most memorable line of this evening's discussion was when Rodolphe el-Khoury from the UfT prefaced his remarks about ROM's Crystal by quoting his friend who warned him that to defend the Crystal in Toronto is like coming to "defense of a child molester".
But there is another resonance that hovers around Steve Martin's line about dancing and architecture and that its that all aesthetic judgments are personal and there is no point in discussing them. It's a stupid and lazy idea and I hope that tonight's program will serve as an appropriate antidote.
Re the opera house, i love the auditorium, wonderful acoustics. but hate the foyer, especially that Ikea wall of slats around the upper floors. Maybe someone could paint a mual on it? Dvora Levinson
posted by night on 26 May 2008 at 9:26 PM
I guess 'facade respond to the streetscape' tore it. The jargon in the Roadshow is a lot more palatable and belongs 'to my choir' because of its 'dynamic modulation'.
posted by rexway on 26 May 2008 at 9:35 PM
We must remember that what a building is designed to be or to look like , can often be compromised by budgetary constraints at no fault to the architect. For example, a school that I taught at was built to be a large open-concept school with a vast central welcoming area , however the classroom sizes suffered because of it.
posted by iceman on 26 May 2008 at 9:38 PM
I kind of like the new ROM addtion
Justin Battle
posted by JJBatts on 26 May 2008 at 10:25 PM
The new ROM building is cool! though I think theres a lot of things wrong with it. Seems like they added alot of competing lines on the roof and sides and shouldve kept the clean simple brushed aluminum look without all the crossings. The way it jutts out from the old building is not a smooth of a transition of styles, and speaks of a big bold traffic jam of linework/ big blatent competition of shape dynamics. The prefer the old styles because the jaw dropping craftsmanship which the modern design has trouble reflecting. I think calling it a crystal is impoper phrasing as a crystal has more balance and power in its image,and in its function fact is the addition has been there a long time and I didnt hear a gleek about it. If I found a crystal and drew its reflection, I would try and show why the lines and shapes of crystals have power of and then make an archetectural representation of it. maybe Im just pissed off cause I wanted to design it, but then again my familly doesnt have as many factory slaves assembling ninja turtles paying the buying the design priviledge rights.
posted by JJBatts on 26 May 2008 at 10:59 PM
It used to be wonderful going down to the Gardiner/Lakeshore in the west end, driving into Toronto and actually seeing Lake Ontario. Even the sleazy hotels didn't obscure the view and anyone could walk along the shore without "private property" fences in the way. The "powers that be" have sold out to developers and given away view and access to a few for increased tax base. I don't care if the architecture is the equivalent of one of the Seven Wonder's (which it isn't), what has been stolen from the larger community can't be replaced. Rose
posted by rmb on 27 May 2008 at 1:27 AM
Thanks for tonights edition of the Agenda! As mentioned, our popular media rarely discusses Architecture. Please help raise the bar, but surely WE can do better than aligning ourselves with the Toronto centric PUG Awards. WE like Shelties best !
posted by icarus on 27 May 2008 at 2:19 AM
Watched the Agenda on Architecture last night with great interest but those architects - other than the Councillor who mentioned how user-unfriendly a building was to his little boy -never once mention people! Despite their amusing adjectives to describe what a building is to them, they nevertheless seem so cold and clinical to me. Buildings (and planning) should be designed with people in mind. We are badly in need of parks and green space around these buildings and how people live, work and play should surely be the prime requisite when drawing up a new architectural wonder. Are architects just there to satisfy their personal artistic dreams - even if the building doesn't make sense - or should they be a practical and useful tool in the shaping of our cities in which people have to live?
posted by Survivor on 27 May 2008 at 9:35 AM
The York teacher of Swiss background gave the most telling but brief information on the superior Swiss system on planning of group thought to develop buildings not just developer driven that is prevalent in Toronto. Maximize coverage, forget history, ignore the neighbourhood, insult the eyes, block the view, creare for one purpose, use minimal standards of constuction, maximize density thus profits, short range view not long, basterdize buildings are the existing trends with no change expected even if 17000 architects are coming. Tornto will certainly give them a topic to discuss,
Great show on a not often enough discussed topic.
posted by George Taylor on 27 May 2008 at 11:41 AM
I agree with rose/rmb. The lakefront is a disaster. Who the heck is responsible for allowing the awful towers to be built right on the water front blocking everyone's view of the lake. This is a crime. It seems that money has been the only consideration when it comes to building permits in Toronto. How many cities are lucky enough to be right on a lake - very few - yet we've botched it. The only buildings south of the Gardiner should be 2 or 3 stories and should be few to leave room for open spaces for people. If i were king or Toronto i would get the wrecking ball and knock down every tower south of the Gardiner. Furthermore, who the heck thinks that all-glass towers are aesthetically pleasing? They are awful. There should be a bylaw that states that buildings cannot be taller than they are wide. Toronto had nicer buildings in the '50s than it does now, but many of those wonderful buildings were torn down and replaced by awful glass towers - just go to your local library and look at the many books which show you our lost heritage.
posted by afmc on 27 May 2008 at 2:25 PM
I've always loved walking through my neighbourhood in Toronto admiring the houses. My sister and i would spend so much time talking about what it was about the architecture that captured a feeling or why it was so inspiring. Toronto is full of gorgeous buildings i am more aware of this now that i live in BC. BC has gorgeous views of mountains valleys and the Ocean sunsets are epic, but the paneled houses are the majority, which isn't that great. there are beautiful homes that aren't paneled but the architecture still lacks in inspiration, even those multimillion dollar homes. I have seen one house in Whistler that has me staring at it with amazement out of 7 years only one house has captured my heart. I have come to the realization to what it is....the wasted space of the bigger homes, 90% of these homes are build with huge logs creating a great feel and flare but its very limited and EVERYONES multimillion dollar home looks the same, YAWN. Back to Toronto, the older city, the gem that everyone is jealous of, i hope these new buildings no matter how big bring that loving feeling to all the eyes. Lake Shore west is a huge strip of openness hopefully the architecture will reflect that beauty. Someone mentioned a high school build with cell like class rooms to accommodate the rest of the building. The hallways were "futuristic" with the tinted windows running down and around the halls. The architecture in the class room was psychological draining because it hadn't any windows. Creating a feeling of gloom through out the school even the teachers felt this, one can tell by their lack of enthusiasm...everyone wanted to have a class in the cold portables, even if your coat and hat was needed in the winter.
posted by gab67 on 27 May 2008 at 3:06 PM
As rmb has mentioned above, I remember well the 'vista' look of Lake Ontario when approaching from the west. It was quite beautiful, and I delighted showing it to visitors. No more. Now we see a ghastly wall of cement, aka condos, as far as the eye can see, some of them right up to the shore of the lake.
Nothing, of course, remains the same, but why have we allowed the heart of this city to be run by developers? At the very busy main section of HarbourFront, one can stand literally one block away from Lake Ontario, on Queen's Quay, and not even see the lake. Is that not absurd? How did our beloved politicians ever allow that to happen?
Back about 35 years ago, we had lofty plans to develop the harbour as the envy of the world, something to cause spasms of envy in other port cities around the world. Now it's just one dirge-like hymn to development out of control.
The greatest unobstructed stretch of Lake Ontario, a genuine 'people place,' is the Beaches area in far-east Toronto, abutting Scarborough. Unfortunately, it's about 12 kilometres from downtown, and, ergo, not exactly top of the list for tourists. Even Torontonians find it inconvenient to get there by the TTC.
I am a Torontonian born-and-bred, but I've been to many cities around the world. Our harbourfront looks prettty sick by comparison to, say, Sydney Harbour in Australia (or even Sydney Harbour in Cape Breton Island). Given a magnificent vast natural resource such as Lake Ontario, it is criminal that we have allowed it to become a condomaniacal version of Miami Beach north.
posted by grog on 29 May 2008 at 2:34 PM
*You must have a FREE TVO account in order to comment on posts
Don't have an account?
*You must have a FREE TVO account in order to comment on posts
Get a behind the scenes take on each night's show from the producers of The Agenda.
Erica Balch (is a producer on The Agenda with Steve Paikin. Follow Erica on Twitter.)
Judy Brake (is a senior producer for The Agenda with Steve Paikin.)
Mark Brosens (is an associate producer on The Agenda with Steve Paikin. Follow Mark on Twitter.)
Hilary Clark (is a producer for The Agenda with Steve Paikin. Follow Hilary on Twitter.)
Stacey Dunseath (is a producer for The Agenda with Steve Paikin. )
Alan Echenberg (is The Agenda with Steve Paikin's Ottawa bureau chief. Follow Alan on Twitter.)
David Erwin (is the packaging director for The Agenda with Steve Paikin. Follow David on Twitter.)
Sandra Gionas (is a producer for The Agenda with Steve Paikin. Follow Sandra on Twitter.)
Daniel Kitts (is a producer for The Agenda with Steve Paikin. Follow Daniel on Twitter.)
Melissa Martin (is a producer for The Agenda with Steve Paikin. Follow Melissa on Twitter.)
Meredith Martin (is a producer for The Agenda with Steve Paikin. Follow Meredith on Twitter.)
Mike Miner (is a producer on The Agenda with Steve Paikin. Follow Mike on Twitter.)
Stavros Rougas (is an associate producer on The Agenda with Steve Paikin. Follow Stavros on Twitter.)
Yasmina Sekkat (is an associate producer for The Agenda with Steve Paikin. Follow Yasmina on Twitter.)
Wodek Szemberg (is a senior producer on The Agenda with Steve Paikin. Follow Wodek on Twitter.)
Allison Buchan-Terrell (is an associate producer on The Agenda with Steve Paikin. Follow Allison on Twitter.)
The Agenda with Steve Paikin Allan Gregg in Conversation Big Ideas
Think Again
Subscribe to all Blogs
PUG Awards Website
Great idea..too bad about the PuG Awards website. For myself, it mirrors the argument on TVO's-'The Agenda' (Mar.26 show) regarding the ROM entry. Is the interior intentionally roughly hewn as a statement or did the developers just screw it up?
Still, love the project.
Sincerly,
Patrick D.
Thunder Bay
posted by PD on 26 May 2008 at 9:22 PM