Jay Fitzgerald complains about the Downtown Crossing plans:
I’m all for sprucing up Downtown Crossing and appreciate the city’s efforts to do so. But, frankly, I’m getting tired of the BRA ordering up/suggesting yet another ‘modern, glass and steel complex.’ Glass, glass, glass. Steel, steel, steel. I know it’s horribly bourgeois of me to say so, but I’m tired of Mark Maloney’s obsession with glass and steel and ‘modern materials.’ I’m not a ‘red brick’ Bostonian. But I do think the best architecture magically complements its surroundings and then boldly takes off in new directions. All of this ‘glass and steel’ emphasis, in my opinion, is a simplistic vanity of those desperately trying to prove they’re hip and not bourgeois, making them only less hip and more bourgeois.
John “who are you calling unhip and bourgeois?” Keith responds,
If not brick or glass and steel, then what? Concrete? Adobe? Hay?
I see what John’s saying. There are limited building materials available, and it seems strange to blame the materials and not the design.
And yet… there is a certain constellation of “sleek”, “modern” design cliches that foreground the use of steel and glass, with open spaces and large exposed surfaces. I can point to some good examples of this style (Harvard’s latest medical research center in Longwood), some OK but uninspiring ones (Aquarium T stop), and some travesties (the remodeled entrance to the wonderfully International Style Boston Company building). Even working within the precepts of non-traditionalist architecture, there are so many other design vernaculars available. Why not copper? patterned concrete tiling? stone? I’m not an architect, so it’s not like I’m suggesting any particular building aesthetic to follow, but Jay’s right that the BRA folks have latched onto a cookie cutter template of New New Boston design.
Note that I’ve been less than impressed than Jay with the Downtown Crossing plans. I shouldn’t imply that I think spending money on urban beautification is wrong. I just think the motives here are dubious. Downtown Crossing actually functions fairly well as a vibrant urban area; it’s just the mayor, and some retailers want it upscaled, i.e. with fewer of the poorer, nonwhite shoppers and loiterers who populate the district during the day. If there’s a serious urban planning initiative to make it more vibrant, I’m all for it. Upscaling, though, seems wrong-headed.
No comments have been added to this post yet.