http://blog.archpaper.com/wordpress/archives/3844 Quicks hits and big thoughts from The Architect's Newspaper Thu, 09 Feb 2012 02:44:03 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 http://blog.archpaper.com/wordpress/archives/3844/comment-page-1#comment-22260 Sarah Tue, 01 Sep 2009 13:16:44 +0000 http://blog.archpaper.com/wordpress/?p=3844#comment-22260 As for the "ponderously wooden effort from Frank Gehry" that you speak of, this pavilion is much less elegant and frankly I consider it an eyesore...and that is BEFORE you take a look at the landscaping. Last year's pavilion was much more appropriate for the site and MUCH more easier on the eyes. This pavilion does not compare to the craft of last years. As for the “ponderously wooden effort from Frank Gehry” that you speak of, this pavilion is much less elegant and frankly I consider it an eyesore…and that is BEFORE you take a look at the landscaping. Last year’s pavilion was much more appropriate for the site and MUCH more easier on the eyes. This pavilion does not compare to the craft of last years.

]]> http://blog.archpaper.com/wordpress/archives/3844/comment-page-1#comment-14765 D. Hopkins Mon, 27 Jul 2009 16:05:15 +0000 http://blog.archpaper.com/wordpress/?p=3844#comment-14765 I'm certainly not defending the British, the "landscaping" (or whatever you call that) is a drag. But, what's up with using what appears to be concrete slabs as a foundation for the structures? With all the options that are available is that really the best they could do? I’m certainly not defending the British, the “landscaping” (or whatever you call that) is a drag. But, what’s up with using what appears to be concrete slabs as a foundation for the structures? With all the options that are available is that really the best they could do?

]]>