bad architecture vs good architecture?
shot this last month in Oviedo Spain, a typically designed building by the spanish architect Calatrava
from an esthetical point of view you can say wow what great architecture, the building on the top seems to float
it has fantastic lines etc etc
I took this shot from a building across it, somehow worked my way passed security got to the 10th floor and started ringing doorbells
This old lady opened the door and in my basic spanish I explained her that I wanted to take a shot of the building
she let me in, I took some shots and asked her if she liked it.
for at least 10 minutes she chewed my ear of as to how bad this building was from the perspective of someone who lives near it
the building was too close as you can see to other residences, it was totally overbearing for the whole neigborhood
their was a football field previously and somehow i understood that the city goverment needed money
and sold it to a developer who contracted the "starchitect" calatrava
they probably thought if Bilbao can do it so can we!!
I think that many of the most famous designers have ceased to take an interest in the practical effectiveness of
their buildings because they have become obsessed with their status as ‘artists’ or starchitects
What needs to be taking into account is not just the estheatics but structure, psychology, sociology, community planning, and of
course the many aspects of visual design. Apparently many the modern “starchitects have forgotten many of the pieces
that result in a well-rounded building.
an other example; Frank Gehry’s Los Angeles Philharmonic building; This sculptural phenom, clad in polished aluminum,
reflected so much light into nearby apartments (raising the temperature by a reported 15 degrees) that Gehry’s
building had to be covered with an unattractive fabric.
btw photo still needs retouching
