July 18, 2007
Bad Buildings: Buildings With Balls
Vancouver Central Public Library photo by lindn.
Bad Buildings has always looked around this town of ours and bemoaned its lack of architectural cojones. For the most part, our buildings are safe, functional and dull (Four Seasons Centre, we're looking at you).
Now and again, though, we've been graced (or cursed) with real bursts of boldness—risky designs that challenge the monotone drabness that pervades our built environment. The question is, though, is it enough just to be bold? Is different for its own sake really a worthy end goal?
We would say not. We cast our minds to several examples, here and away, and often shudder at the grandiosity of such gestures, which ring empty and hollow past first rubbernecking blush (we often think of Vancouver's Central Public Library, above, built by Moshe Safdie in the 90s, as the consummate Canadian example: A structure so in love with its forced metaphor—rather obviously, a Roman Coliseum, meant to evoke Classical learning, never mind the fact that coliseums were the site of bloodbaths, not book-learnin'—that it becomes laughable).
But our judgment ends here. Why? Because we want you to decide this week. We're offering up five bold buildings here in our home town, and want you to choose if they're bad or not. What follows is undeniably envelope-pushing; whether they're just bold or not is up to the jury—i.e., you—to decide.
 OCAD photo by plismo. |
1. The New Addition to the Ontario College of Art and DesignWill AlsopJust a few years old, this crayon box in the sky was, at its inception, heralded as daringly whimsical by some, and frivolous junk by others. Whichever camp you fall in, you've got to admit, it's got balls. No doubt on that one. But does it have anything else? What will OCAD look to our eyes in 20, 30, 40 years—a landmark, or a dorky, try-hard eyesore? |
2. The ROM CrystalDaniel LibeskindBad Buildings is on the record for our deep disappointment at the execution of this structure (glass, Danny, not siding—remember???). But its cojones, especially in staid old Toronto, mere blocks from Yorkville, staid old Toronto's personal playground/theme park, can't be questioned. |
 Crystal photo by Swisscan |
 New City Hall photo by neuroticjose. |
3. New City HallViljo Revell, 1965For many, New City Hall, a Finnish import, signaled the beginning of a brilliant (and sadly, brief) era of challenging architecture. With its curving forms and expansive (some say way, way too expansive) signature plaza, Nathan Philips Square, it suggested a very Modern shift for Toronto the Good. We abandoned it fairly quickly, in favour of cheap, early-80s quick fixes, alas, but New City Hall stands as perhaps its most significant symbol. |
4. Graduate House, University of TorontoMorphosis Architects, 2000U of T underwent an architectural renaissance in the early part of this decade, led largely by then-Dean of the school of architecture, Larry Richards. Perhaps the most controversial of them was Graduate House, for which the university commissioned hotshot L.A. architect Thom Mayne, principal of the firm Morphosis. Mayne put a challenge forth to the campus community, and the city at large. Daring? No question. Ballsy? Uh, yeah. But we've heard some other words for it, too. |
Graduate House photo by randysodandy. |
 CBC Broadcast Centre photo by amy allcock. |
5. CBC Broadcast CentreHamann/Scott Associates Architects in joint venture with John Burgee Architects Inc and Philip Johnson, 1993We call it the monolith—a candy-coloured cube that houses most of the CBC's operations (and, since downsizing, a bunch of non CBC-related tenants, too). We've heard others—namely those that work inside it—call it the Borg cube. However you may choose to describe it, a full-block-sized hulk with a 10-storey internal atrium is not architecture as usual in this town—and especially not in the midst of a recession, as was the case when it was built. |
| 
1) OCAD: Love it
2) The ROM Crystal: Indifferent to the exterior but thoroughly blown away by the inside
3) City Hall: Genius
4) Graduate House: Nice as a work of sculpture but an utter failure as a residence
5) CBC: Playful, colourful, inviting, proud
1. OCAD: Still can do without the giant pencils/paintbrushes. They really couldn't just start over with a clean site? The waste of space is appalling.
2. ROM: Deeply disappointed about the cheap finish, but the main exhibition rooms are stunningly light, clean, and modern.
3. City Hall: Great, except it looks a bit dingy, like most of Toronto's concrete-laden structures.
4. Graduate House: What's really daring about it? Conventional-looking except for a giant glass and steel hanging sign. Eh.
5. CBC: Always loved the exterior; adds great colour to the downtown core.
I agree with Jonathan, except on #4. I like the building, but I did not get into grad school at U of T, so I've never seen inside.
1. OCAD: Giant waste of space, as Gloria points out. I understand the architect didn't want to block out some nearby residents' natural sunlight, but suspending a box of facial tissues in the air might not be the most aesthetically pleasing way to do it.
2. Lee-Chin Crystal: I like the original Italianate Neo-Romanesque structure best, and the crystal is basically a giant middle finger extended to the original structure. The underwhelming '80s Terrace Galleries were no tribute, either. I'd like the Crystal a whole lot better if it was built as originally displayed, with glass facia, not aluminum siding.
3. City Hall: Great except for Nathan Phillips Square, which has had all kinds of abominable additions, like the Peace Garden and the utterly pointless stand of flags along Bay Street. Hopefully the Square redesign will eliminate the fugly bits and restore some sense of connectedness to the rest of its surroundings.
4. Grad House: I like the bunker-like windows and the giant overhang (which was supposed to allow students to hang out there and study / people-watch , but which has since been closed, I think). Probably miserable to live in, but it looks neat from the outside.
5. CBC Mothership: Colourful but mostly boring, a yawn-inducing postmodern sibling to the equally boring and unexceptional Metro Hall just north of it.
I feel the same way about the ROM Crystal - that it was much nicer in the first presentations with the glass exterior. It almost looked as though the old building was trapped in ice and I loved how you could still see parts of the old building through it. I was really disappointed as I saw it develop into what it is now.
But I was recently told by a friend of mine that the reason it was changed was to protect the artwork inside from light damage - a reasonable explanation. Can anyone confirm this?
They make glass that filters UVA and UVB light, which is what causes fading. I think the real excuse is they cheaped out. Also, there were structural issues they discovered during the actual building portion that forced the changes.
They're all good and interesting, but I can't get used to the cheapo-looking siding on the Crystal addition. I don't consider OCAD a waste of space, the ground level allows for gardens or a public square and addresses the neighbours concerns about light. It makes it clear what its about, it was one of the boldest projects in awhile in Toronto.
Funny thing about City Hall, with its opening the Eaton Centre planners wanted to knock down the old one and replace it with office towers.
On a boldness scale of 1-10:
1. 8
2. 7
3. 6
4. 6 (for sticking its nose out over the street and screaming out "U of T" )
5. 2
1. I like all the buildings except for this one. Although when you're drunk you could knock on the diagonal rods and that is entertaining.
2. This is my favourite. It's gonna be an icon.
3. Like, but very 80's, which is a disease in a lot of the buildings around Dundas as well.
4. Like.
5. Boring, but cute boring. The inside is obv better.
1 Bold. Not a bad building from the outside.
2 Not bold. Not a bad building from the outside.
3 Bold. Not a bad building from the outside, a little cramped it looked like on the inside when I visited the west tower.
4 Not bold at all. A bad building from the outside, although the courtyard looks interesting.
5 Huh? Not even close to bold. CBC and 'bold' don't match these days, which is too bad. Although I'd rather have our national broadcaster save the money on architecture and apply it to programming.
According to cartoon physics, if a disgruntled armchair architectural critic tried to saw off the Grad House overhang, it'd hang in mid-air while the rest of Grad House fell down, taking said critic with it.
(tongue) Meep-meep. (zzzzzip-p-p-p)
OCAD: clever, too clever by half.
ROM Crystal: torture chamber from Gilliam's 'Brazil'?
New City Hall: still popular after 40 years! The others won't be. Needs more regular sand-blasting is all.
Graduate House: ugly, narcissistic, and what's with the cantilevered sign?
CBC Broadcast Centre: an old joke but yes, "resistance is futile."
I don't think we should criticize 'bold' buildings. It only encourages people to continually 'play it safe'.
I don't think there is such thing as a bad bold building (with the exception of buildings that fail to take into account basic human needs, such as accessibility). Maybe it's ugly, maybe it's not, but at least they -tried- to do something different. Which is more than can be said about the majority of Toronto's building architects.
Nice work so far, people. We're enjoying watching y'all do most of the work!
But you outed us: We wanted to do 5 bold buildings, bad or otherwise, but darned if it wasn't a stretch. CBC snuck in there, but we weren't happy about it. Anyone got any other suggestings for bold buildings around town? Because we were stuck ...
OCAD: Bold but goofy.
ROM: Bold but doesn't match the older part of the building very well. I'm the only person I know who likes it.
City Hall: Bold and classy.
Grad House: Looks like a Soviet prison with a half-finished catwalk attached for no reason. Possibly intentionally ugly in order to encourage grad students to spend more time at the library or lab so they finish their theses quickly.
CBC: Not bold, but distinctive enough.
I can't believe that no one has mentioned that monstrosity of an office building that connects to the North York Central Library. Although the building is primarily offices, it appears to have been designed as a mall. It has an atrium that, in size, is really similar to the Eaton's Centre (from the Queen street level up, looking north), sans the geese and the other floors.
The mall used to have more stores (a computer store underneath the library, for example), but most have closed up and moved on wherever, perhaps wit the store owners realizing how ugly the building is.
It is a true wonder about how the North York Malloffice (rhymes with orifice) Ugmo Building remains open. Income from office rent? Maybe. A grow-op in the basement?? More sensationalistic and therefore, most likely!
The weirdest part about the building is that it's all done up with granite. Who the HECK wants granite somewhere else besides their kitchen counters?? A geological curator for the Smithsonian Museum of Natural History, perhaps? Yes. But ask yourself this: are you a geological curator for the Smithsonian Museum of Natural Hisotry?
Please, please, in this contest of yours, please knock down this one before you do anything with any of the 5 buildings in your list.
What about the TD Centre? Boring box tower? I disagree, here was an architect who was bold enough to reject flash and ornamentation, and created a font for the building and demanded that the stores use it in their signage. Look at the old bank buildings (such as the building that currently houses the hockey hall of fame) which had opulent facades. It set an international precedent. Love it or hate it.
I love the outside of the CBC building-- it's the INSIDE that is a nigthmare. The core of the building is the energy wasting atrium. The studios and office space are all afterthoughts. The offices are also not very creative and surprisingly unwhimsical considering the outside. It's like an insurance office on the inside. Studios and technical spaces are all windowless and full of bad feng shui.
1: Its boldness won't stop it from being torn down in 30 years. Until then we can hope for a paint job.
2: An unfortunate turn of events, the aluminum siding. I haven't see it in person yet (10,000km away) so I suppose I should withhold judgement.
3: Love it. The buildings anyway, the plaza needs work.
4: Utterly unremarkable except for the giant sign.
5: A fine building.
If we're gonna talk ballsy, Robarts definitely deserves a mention. For all the wrong reasons, but few buildings on the U of T campus (Grad House included) announce themselves as much as Robarts does.
As for your picks, it feels almost as if they are in descending order of ballsiness. OCAD is fantastically gutsy, the ROM a little less so, City Hall a little less than that, etc.
I believe the ROM crystal ended up not being all glass because they sketched it and made a model before any engineers actually looked at it. Turns out it wasn't possible to make it all glass.
Also, what's with the bashing of the Vancouver Library? I was just there last week and it's a beautiful building! The inside is amazing, with natural light filtering through to every floor including the basement.
I'm surprised people think that the space below the OCAD addition is a "waste of space". It is open public space which isn't very common along that stretch of McCaul with The Grange and the hospitals looming over eveything. In fact I see it as completely the opposite. If it was built on the ground, would the area it occupies now be the wasted space?
You're dead wrong about the Vancouver library. It's amazing and well-loved by the local residents. Outside of Torontoist, I've never heard it compared to bloodshed... That's quite the stretch.
OCAD: Love it. In my first days in Toronto, I chose it as a destination point for exploration. I thought it was nifty.
Rom Crystal: LOVE IT. Toronto needs more odd, more different, more elegance. The Crystal is all of the above.
City Hall: Also one of my exploration destinations when I first came here. It's iconic of Toronto for those of us not from here. I think it's quite pretty.
Graduate House: Not particularly interesting. It appears to be daring for the sake of being daring. I'm not a fan, but I don't hate it either.
CBC: Externally, it's not much to write home about, but I love the interior.
I'm pretty sure any student of history or fan of Ben Hur/Gladiator/Rome/etc could tell you the Colosseum and amphitheatres were sites of intense bloodshed ... executions, animal hunts, and gladiatorial fights.
If OCAD was built on the ground, would it have been possible to build something slim, with more height (allowing the rest of the ground space to be left for public use? As it is, I'm surprised how much they spent for such limited added capacity. And is there only one fire exit from the hovering building?
Banally put, 20, 30, 40 years from now, there'll be a valid "heritage" argument for all five of them. And those who disagree will be dubbed heritage philistines. Barring a drastic anti-heritage cultural shift, I all but guarantee it.
Such is the case now with Boston City Hall, remember.
Finally a reason to get this off my chest:
The CBC building is just plain horrible.
Ugly, plain and simple.
The awe one experiences inside in the middle is in fact more like FRIGHTENING.
The Atrium at Dundas does this kind of openness much better, but they're both asking for a piano to drop on someone's head.
If they were thinking "how bad can we make this building look?", they succeeded.
If they were thinking 'how we make exciting work look dull and lifeless?" they succeeded.
If they wanted to keep their tricks and gaffes hidden from public view, again, they succeeded.
All the charm of a branch office of the CIA.
TBC - WORST-LOOKING BUILDING EVER.
Vancouver Library - amazing.
On the outside.
Boring, inside.