Hi Mike,
Interesting discussion, and although I have never really considered my self an artist, sounds a bit pompous, I do think of myself as a photographer. The term 'fine art' photography also makes me feel a bit uncomfortable, as if I need to convince people of the fact....but that's just me...
I rather think of myself as someone who sees things in a certain way and through photography try to capture what I see....so I am 'just' a photographer...
Regarding the verticals, If I was at the scene I doubt if I would have photographed it any differently except for the cropping, I try to stick to my format and compose carefully, and the verticals. My favourite and most used lens is a 50mm shift on med format and I probably would have had to stand back to be able to get in what you have here which might have lessened the size of the tower a bit. The 50mm is such a 'normal' lens that I seldom have the distortion and perspective problems that the really wide lenses have and give. I almost always set the camera on a level horizon before anything else. So the bulbous top part wouldn't have bothered me much, and if it did I would have tilted the camera slightly, like you have here...but I really think the straight vertical would have been fine...
But for me personally this would have been a B&W image. The white of the building against the darker sky just cries out for B&W....The nice thing about digital is that one can try all the different permutations and see what works best....