Design Observer :: Join the Discussion http://places.designobserver.com/feature/lunch-with-the-critics-the-new-lincoln-center/14538/ en-us Design Observer Group 2010-08-26T18:54:48-05:00 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/1.0 is the mistreatment of Philip Johnson's baclonied foyer- an elegant
and serene space -perfect. Not finding excellence sufficient they added harsh spotlighting that destroys the glow of the original subdued lighting and moved the marble figures up from the lobby, where they sat nicley on the travertine floor and installed them on polished granite pedestals to make them imposing - as if the foyer needed marble monumentality. This hyping of great interior spaces can and should be reversed. ]]> Sandy Malter http://places.designobserver.com/feature/lunch-with-the-critics-the-new-lincoln-center/14538/#comments 2010-08-26T18:54:48-05:00
I wanted to hold my happy comments, until I'd finished reading the review. And now that I have... thank you for putting chairs in their place: at the back of the line. When will designers stop putting it at the front of their line? When will critics stop celebrating wanky-sculptural-world-saving-aesthetic-inspiring chairs, as if its creators were Leonardo da Vincis? The form of chairs has pretty much been perfected, indeed. ]]> M.C. http://places.designobserver.com/feature/lunch-with-the-critics-the-new-lincoln-center/14538/#comments 2010-08-05T07:23:01-05:00
It's interesting that you brought up the High Line, which also usually gets reverential treatment. Of course the concept of the High Line is great, and so is the experience of being up on the High Line. Being architects and architectural critics, we also care about the details, and we seem to agree that those are a little precious and artificial. But then "artificial" is probably a good word in James Corner's design vocabulary.

Perhaps related is the new Brooklyn Bridge Park. Let's see - is a new park by the river opposite Wall Street a good idea? Of course! Does it perhaps suffer some in the details? I'd say so. It also shares intellectualism with Lincoln Center and the High Line, although Van Valkenburgh did make his tilted plane simultaneously artificial and functional. Some of the potentially child-shredding construction details I'm naturally a little more skeptical about, and I thought the water feature looked like it belonged in a miniature golf course - which is not a good phrase in my design vocabulary.]]> John Massengale http://places.designobserver.com/feature/lunch-with-the-critics-the-new-lincoln-center/14538/#comments 2010-07-28T16:30:27-05:00
Autonomous Architecture concepts like "fold the plane," "lift the corner" and "slice the plane" appeal to the intellect, rather than the senses that come into play when you visit the building. I'm sure there is a good intellectual justification for what you correctly call "the Trough," but in reality it has aesthetic and functional problems.

Michael Graves was one of my teachers. He always said there is no excuse for functional problems. If your ideas get in the way of resolving functional problems, he told us, you're not a good architect. ]]> John Massengale http://places.designobserver.com/feature/lunch-with-the-critics-the-new-lincoln-center/14538/#comments 2010-07-28T09:15:01-05:00
I do however love the Grove and the Fountain. Both are spaces that I use for lunching regularly and are real assets in the barren expanse of plaza at Lincoln Center. The bandstand is super awkward, but the sunken area is surprisingly well used and seemingly enjoyed by the masses. They are working toward something that Lincoln Center never really had, human scale, and that I applaud.

I want to give DS+R the benefit of the doubt until everything is actually finished and to be sure, Lincoln Center is no easy beast to tame. I'm glad they got to speak with their voice for Alice Tully, but really what can you do with the big, imposing, mid-century mess that they started with?]]> john http://places.designobserver.com/feature/lunch-with-the-critics-the-new-lincoln-center/14538/#comments 2010-07-27T13:49:10-05:00 zbs http://places.designobserver.com/feature/lunch-with-the-critics-the-new-lincoln-center/14538/#comments 2010-07-27T12:08:06-05:00 jorgepossum http://places.designobserver.com/feature/lunch-with-the-critics-the-new-lincoln-center/14538/#comments 2010-07-27T09:10:09-05:00 jonathan http://places.designobserver.com/feature/lunch-with-the-critics-the-new-lincoln-center/14538/#comments 2010-07-27T01:56:52-05:00 jean http://places.designobserver.com/feature/lunch-with-the-critics-the-new-lincoln-center/14538/#comments 2010-07-26T16:14:48-05:00 the "ditch" in front that you deride provides a much needed break--albeit quite subtle--that separates the entrance from the otherwise overwhelmingly busy broadway traffic. to the west, hudson park employs a similar strategy with gentle berms. they might be small, but they really block out traffic.
point taken about the late 90s folded planes, but you really don't do a good job of communicating how and why circulation is so disjunctive. instead of stating criticism, please illustrate it better.
it would be great if this conversation works better next time! ]]> mike http://places.designobserver.com/feature/lunch-with-the-critics-the-new-lincoln-center/14538/#comments 2010-07-26T14:51:30-05:00