Posted on 11/07/2007 8:36:36 AM PST by steve-b
Gehry’s buildings all look like they’re snapshots of a structure in the process of collapsing, so this surprises me not at all.
That freaking monstrosity looks like the town of Whoville.
Dr. Seuss’ widow should sue.
We were at De Gaulle last month. The signs said construction work to serve you better. I think keeping the roof up would be good service. LOL!
Art is a reflection of Zeitgeist. What we see here is deconstructed architecture for a deconstructed culture.
Yes because those “ENGINEERING STUDENTS” and “ENGINEERING PROFESSORS” are too busy doing useful work to make a building. That’s why they hired someone else to do it.
“In the 2006 academic year, MIT faculty and researchers disclosed 523 inventions, filed 321 patent applications, received 121 patents, and earned $42.3 million in royalties.”
and from: http://entrepreneurship.mit.edu/mit_spinoffs.php
“MIT students, alums, and faculty have founded over 5,000 companies. Approximately 150 new MIT-related companies are founded each year. These companies account for employment of over 1.1 million and annual sales of more than $230 billion.”
“If the companies founded by MIT graduates and faculty formed an independent nation, the revenues produced by the companies would make that nation the 24th largest economy in the world”
Here’s another of his stoopid designs here in Cleveland. It’s like lookin’ at the reflection of a building in a Funhouse mirror. Really clever Frank!
http://weatherhead.case.edu/lewis/
Hmm...out here in snow country the norm is a steep roof, usually metal. You learn very quickly not to stand under the eaves in springtime.
These structures do have a certain avant garde visual appeal if you like that sort of thing. The problem is that it makes function tend to follow form instead of the other way around. When that happens you have to adjust to the building instead of it adjusting to you. Bottom line - suck it up, buttercup, you approved the plans.
OTOH, those who wonder why a world-class engineering enterprise such as MIT could get whacked by this might recall that teaching ain't doing. Universities with world-class computer science departments still hire professionals (many without degrees) to run their infrastructure. Gaudy is great but somebody's gotta make the terlits flush.
One might suspect that none of MIT's real engineers had anything to do with it - shoemaker's children and all that.
Wow! How can you blame the architect when you assent to the construction of such a hideous glob? Whomever’s signature accepted the design is at fault for the problems of that monstrosity.
And pointing out a design error, oops "oversight" - holy (blank) - get ready for a fight. Even getting a ceiling lowered a couple inches in a stinking closet is like .. trying to get a pony from Santa.
Architect's ... Arggggggggghhh!
“Dr. Seuss’ widow should sue.”
Suess-like, indeed.
I don’t expect they did have any input. But looking at the aerial shot in 21, one would expect somebody to ask of the professors, “Can this work?”
That’s really not the point. The point is, how much of the $300M was taxpayer dollars ?
A more functional building could have been built for much, much less.
The construction industry has to endure the problems caused by the usage and religous devotion to these “top” architects that incorporate what some critics have called a gee-whiz nature to many elements or the overall design. The detailers and the engineering consultants are stuck with trying to detail-out the actual construction documents for the design prima dona that comes up with this stuff.
It will end up being blamed on his roof consultant, structural engineer or some other underling he has on his team and the issue of refusal to retreat from a stupid design will never arise as it should.
These idiots are catered to on lots of jobs and it is the fault of Owners trying to impress each other or the community at large and wasting money in the effort.
A University Construction-Engineering and Facilities Department has engineers and architectural types within its staff that know what they are buying and they should have had the emergency brake applied when a design like this is submitted. Instead, they chose to accept the potential problems thinking that the Architect has insurance and now this thing will be a lawsuit mess with the poor Contractor drug in because he will be sued as well, I am sure, in some sort of cross claim or contributary liability suit.
No, no, I liked the way you phrased it the first time better :-)
“This Old House” went to that building for a visit. Steve is such a dunderhead!
The wasted space, and the hard-to-use spaces on the interior are just,,,well,,,STOOPID Frank!
>>”MIT is a national treasure. They do more to increase our economy than just about any other institution:
That doesn’t save them from stupid decisions.<<
No and this one sure seems to fall into the “they should have known better” category.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
