If I had chosen to settle in University City solely for the brilliance
of the architecture that Penn might someday build for my amusement ...
I'd have moved out of town a long, long time ago. Maybe to Barcelona, or
Sydney, or back to sweet home Chicago, where ordinary folks truly
respect a nice new public building.
Such enthusiasm is wasted in Philadelphia, whose classic architectural
tradition is based on predictable, pompous mediocrity from previous
epochs-- the sort of boring stuff our "historic districts" are based on.
Not that I'm against them; in fact, I settled here precisely because I
preferred this mediocre old-timey style to Chicago's jumpy ambitions.
Philadelphia Dull is pleasing to the eye and it works as a lifestyle
too. Sacred, however, it is not.
Back to Penn. It owns some buildings erected in the 19th c. that are
beautiful and important. It owns many buildings erected in the 20th c.
that are garishly functional. Such is life in a rapidly-expanding
21st-c. university district. The latest architecture of Houston and Baku
and Bangalore probably isn't much prettier. But having an expanding
economy beats having a contracting economy.
-- Tony West
That story about Irvine's history is an urban legend. It was actually
designed by prominent architect Horace Trumbauer
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horace_Trumbauer), who was also
responsible for the Keswick Theatre, the Public Ledger Building, and
campus buildings for Hahnemann, Jefferson, Duke, Harvard, and the
Tyler School of Art.
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: Wilma de Soto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I went there on Sept. 26th for GI because it’s moved to the 4th floor
in the Perelman Center.
They have built and named new streets in order to enter the Free
Parking Garage for Patients. (try to find it!)
It was quiet, not crowded and easy to get through because it’s not
quite finished.
Still, it is ugly, forbidding and most certainly not pedestrian
friendly as most of Penn’s modern buildings.
Gee, everyone thought Irvine Auditorium was poorly designed, but he
forced them to construct it because he became rich and donated money
despite not making it at Penn’s School of Architecture.
I also hate that Lego building at 40th & Chestnut Sts.
On 10/24/08 4:21 PM, "[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
Beloved friends and neighbors:
Inga Saffron wrote an article in the Inquirer berating the
architectural design of Penn's new Perelman Cancer Center across
from CHOP.
One of the reader comments -- as follows -- could well have been
written about our own monstrous consequence of Penn's lack of
architectural sensitivity.
Inga Saffron is an architecture critic, and what she has done
is appropriately critiqued the style of this building, not its
internal qualifications as a treatment center. Pandering for
sympathy is not going to change the fact that
architecturally, this building doesn't do its job. Yes,
hospitals have to accommodate vehicles, but in a city any
building has a responsibility to do its part relating to its
surroundings. This building may do its job as a hospital, but
it completely ignores its surroundings and the city, and pays
only attention to its insular purpose. As architecture it has
failed.
*Al Krigman
*reminding you that you read it first, here, on the */popu-list/*
----
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
<http://www.purple.com/list.html>.
