03-09-2013, 10:54 AM
1
Architectural Blunders - Why?
I have just been reading about the 'walkie scorchie' in Fenchurch Street that is melting cars due to the intense sunshine reflections from the building's glass frontage. Given how everything needs planning permission - how was this not even considered?Even worse, why spoil the look of the beautiful old buildings that surround it? That monstrosity of a building looks completely out of place and the sort of thing a very young child would draw.
I would nominate this as one of the ugliest buildings I've ever seen!
Any others that you would nominate and like to see torn down as they are an eyesore to the environment they are in?
03-09-2013, 11:49 AM
2
Re: Architectural Blunders - Why?
With out a doubt Blues Point Tower is the ugliest, most inappropriate building in the world. Stuck on Sydney harbour it has absolutely no architectural merit whatsoever and was the reason they introduced building controls round the harbour. It is a hideous eyesore and has been there 50 years
In comparison your building is quite beautiful BV.
03-09-2013, 12:27 PM
4
Re: Architectural Blunders - Why?
When I look at some of the old Victorian and Edwardian buildings here and then compare with the hideous things they are building around them I do wonder where we went wrong. How can we have lost the art of making beautiful buildings when we now have the technology to make them much easier than they did back then ?03-09-2013, 09:53 PM
6
Re: Architectural Blunders - Why?
Originally Posted by Bruce
->
With out a doubt Blues Point Tower is the ugliest, most inappropriate building in the world. Stuck on Sydney harbour it has absolutely no architectural merit whatsoever and was the reason they introduced building controls round the harbour. It is a hideous eyesore and has been there 50 yearsIn comparison your building is quite beautiful BV.
And nope - your tower block is not as bad as that awful leaning tower in London!
03-09-2013, 10:07 PM
7
Re: Architectural Blunders - Why?
I nominate STONEHENGE, people come from all over the world to see the grey stones, lured by spectacular pics of romantic rosy skies , rosy sunrises and sunsets.The reality is it's boring and always raining there. Its next to a very fast road fenced off & reachable through a grotty old underpass. Or you can brave the traffic & view it for free by pressing against the wire fence.
Apologies to any Druids amongst us, I'm speaking aesthetically ,subjectively & mean no disrespect to it's historical importance or its guardians.
04-09-2013, 01:55 AM
9
Re: Architectural Blunders - Why?
Well! I can't speak. Stonehenge and the Egyptian pyramids were a feat of engineering in their day several thousand years ago which even today can not be matched without massive lifting tackle in the form of plant and other heavy lifting vehicles that could transport the stones, some of which are 500 tons in weight from a different part of the UK, and which wasn't available then.So, they can hardly be compared to that ugly building in the photo which towers above wonderful, and more beautiful architecture and which was probably thrown up in a matter of months made from glass and steel, and with absolutely no master craftmanship in its making.
Absolutely horrible. Don't architects have any pride in their work these days? Answer - no! Do they care about the architecture where they're building? Answer - no!
Edit: I visited Stonehenge many years ago before it was fenced off, and to walk around them and touch them was very mystical indeed. They were fenced off because of "bleep-holes" (no, I'll say it - arseholes), who chose to carve things like "Karl luvs Shaz" on them and other defacements and yet, there they had stood for 4000 years before chavs with knives came along.
|
|
