Monday Links
Brooklyn Museum. Photo by Jan van Raay. Has the Slope Parking Experiment Been a Nightmare? [NY Times] As Bill Evolves, Mortgage Debt Is Snowballing [NY Times] City Point Construction on Horizon [NY Daily News] BBP’s State-of-the-Art Playground [NY Daily News] Slashed Groups Rip $59.1B Budget [NY Post] Subway Delays Up 44 Percent [NY Post]
Brooklyn Museum. Photo by Jan van Raay.
Has the Slope Parking Experiment Been a Nightmare? [NY Times]
As Bill Evolves, Mortgage Debt Is Snowballing [NY Times]
City Point Construction on Horizon [NY Daily News]
BBP’s State-of-the-Art Playground [NY Daily News]
Slashed Groups Rip $59.1B Budget [NY Post]
Subway Delays Up 44 Percent [NY Post]
Yep, excellent photo
well, Jan, I kinda like the entrance,
And this photo is superb !!! Julie
Looks great in this aerial view. Not so great front the street.
I kind of regret never having seen the original monumental stairway, but the late ’30s (?) entrance was dreary, to say the least and always looked like the left-over stump it was. The new glass entrance is wonderful IMO and restores a sense of drama to entering the museum.
There are a number of changes to the Brooklyn Museum I don’t care for very much (such as hanging the European paintings in a poorly lit space and emphasizing the frames, rather than the art) but they certainly got the new entrance right–BRAVO “Roberto”!
bxgrl = montrose morris = NOP
Thanks again, bxgrl. Interesting piece of history: where the entry lobby is now was when new a balconied theater/lecture hall. The idea of a performance space right at the entry was something we wanted to reassert in the design, but in this scheme as a outdoor space that could be integrated ain a new way with the stair-form of the new entry.
If you can get your e-mail to me, I can send you some pics of what the Museum looked like when it first opened, when the stirs were removed, and a couple of nice pics of the bit of “archaeology” that happened when we pulled Lescaze’s black marble off the piers…you can reach me by e-mailing me at Polshek.com. First initial (r) plus last name (young).
“Meaning I don’t cling to something simply because it’s from the past. Which is what the anti-modern people in Brooklyn do so ardently. None of them are able to articulate what is significant or important about a certain building or nearby architecture, the “context” they are so rigid about.”
I disagree. Most people love history in Brooklyn and can very well articulate why they want to preserve as much as possible. It’s a common impulse all over the world. the Europe you admire so much- look at the history. History is a living thing- many of the buildings and neighborhoods being torn up are not just the past, but the present too. Most people who rant about hating modern, are referring to the destruction of quality buildings and craftsmanship, and the human scale of brownstone neighborhoods which are part of what makes Brownstone Brooklyn so wonderful. If you are going to destroy that for a fedders box, or a massive people warehouse like AY will be, then yes they’ll protest vehemently.
But when you build something as well thought out and magical as the new museum entryway, people love it.
To preservationists, is it about preserving original context. To an artist it’s about the integrity of his or her work. McKim, Mead & White created some of the most influential and spectacular architecture of its era, and yet there should be enough flexibility that these buildings can change and grow with our needs. But to tear down a beautiful Beaux Arts apartment building to put up a cheap, badly designed, but trendy looking box is not just artistically and historically unacceptable, it’s shortsighted. Gehry is a perfect example of a name architect who really cares nothing about context or quality. I’d rather keep the most mediocre brownstone than let him put up that travesty he designed for AY.
Re the nazis- you are not understanding what they meant by modern. For them it was the modern world which did not recognize their “superiority” in all things and hence everything was degenerate. But they believed they were the coming New World- I’m just saying that equating love of antique styles and nazism is a little -or a lot- over the top. Hitler could have cared less about style- it was all about selling a political mindset, it was about merchandising.
Roberto- wish you had done all this when I worked there at the end of the 80’s! I just keep going back to the entry way- and of course now that you mentioned amphitheater all the historical stuff comes rushing up and then I also notice how looking up through the glass is like looking through a cloud bank. It’s like this enormous fusion of water, air, history, architecture and earth- and I have to tell you I am not a great proponent of mixing architectural styles at all but this just works so beautifully. And you’ve brought back life to a wonderful institution that was a true forgotten jewel for so many years.
Do you think they should have put rest stops along the old grand staircase? I have visions of the bodies of those who couldn’t make it to the door artfully arranged on the marble steps 🙂
(Sorry if this posts twice but I’m having problems getting posts to appear)
Wrong. The Nazis rejected Modern architecture and design as “degenerate art”.
There is no complex reasoning going on with preservationists here. It’s simple, they hate new things. Every single time preservationists here tell us why modern architecture shouldn’t be built in Brooklyn it’s because it’s different from what has been there. You know, their favorite little phrase “out of context”.
I never said to reject the past. I said I hate sentimentality. Meaning I don’t cling to something simply because it’s from the past. Which is what the anti-modern people in Brooklyn do so ardently. None of them are able to articulate what is significant or important about a certain building or nearby architecture, the “context” they are so rigid about. It’s only about something being different.