June 19, 2006

Say, why don't you write about architecture more?

Mainly because so much of what passes for architecture nowadays is so self-consciously crappy looking. It's like they're going out of their way to make it homely and obnoxious, sorta like Janeane Garofalo, who would be much cuter if she'd resist the urge to put on ugly glasses, mess up her hair, dress in ugly clothes, and talk.

Sorry, but I've just never been a big fan of creating deliberately ugly things just for kicks or in some misguided effort to affect sophistication.

Lileks' new theater example reminds me of something where those pipe-robots on that urinary incontinence drug commercial might go to enjoy a nice enema. (By the way, I noticed that in the latest one of those commercials, the animators saw fit to include a Toledo flare in one of the scenes!) It's angry and frowny, which makes it so much harder to sympathize and ask, "Why so blue, big guy?"

Anyway, it's crap, but the client's happy, so that's really all that matters.

Right?

Posted by Terry Oglesby at June 19, 2006 12:13 PM
Comments

Another example of how being creative and making something new and interesting is difficult. When is the last time you heard some new music that was different AND interesting? [There is the old fogey factor to consider, though. At least for me.]

You'd think that people with that kind of money would have some sense of aesthetics, but when they tell the architect "I want something different!", the guy being paid gives the client what he wants. The scale model should have been ugly enough to scare the client in Minneapolis, but apparently that was not the case.

Maybe you could blame it on the new 3-D rendering/designing programs, where the models are built on-screen. Showing a building facade at a strange angle could make it look more impressive than it actually turns out to be.

Per Ms. Garofalo, the glasses/hair/clothes have a much smaller affect on her attractiveness compared to the ugly/hateful ideas she spouts.

Posted by: Marc V at June 19, 2006 01:21 PM

Well, they'd just say you don't have an appreciation for true art if you don't like it.

Although they might try to turn it into an objective argument, in the end result is about as pure an example of subjectivity as you could find. It's the way it is for no other reason than someone said "I think that there's real purty like that."

Posted by: Terry Oglesby at June 19, 2006 02:13 PM

Like James I think it's crapptacular but then I've said that about most US building since the late 60's. Anywho I walked through the new Guthrie and as a gimp it's hard to use, the seating is pitched badly too. Maybe I have surcomed to foggydom but I know user friendly this ain't.

Posted by: Tony von Krag at June 19, 2006 08:58 PM

Go and rent the movie "The Matchmaker." Garofalo plays a political aide to a US Senator who travels to Ireland. Don't let that put you off; it's a light, romantic comedy. Of course there are lots of "eccentric" Irish locals and beautiful scenery, too, but Garofalo is about as attractive and likable as I've ever seen her.

Posted by: mike hollihan at June 19, 2006 10:02 PM