Bob Cox sends this “thumbs-down evaluation of the new Seattle library from Kuntsler.com
Another monumental tech box celebrating the victory of the machine over the human spirit: the new Seattle public library by Rem Koolhaas. The architect’s claim-to-fame is complete abject surrender to the zeitgeist, in this case the (erroneous) belief that mankind is marching off into an evermore deliriously wonderful high tech future — when, actually, the opposite is about to happen. These houses of tech worship will be as mystifying to future generations as the pyramids of Teotihuacan.
Previous
When looking at the picture of the Seattle library scroll to the bottom of the page and click on “previous months.” Many of the selections are hillarious.
I loved this part from the Seattle Library comments, “Koolhaas has named this top floor salon “the living room,” an interesing confusion of typology. Guess what? This is not your home. This is a place of public assembly. But guess what also? There’s only enough furniture for five people to sit down. It’s not a reading room (no chairs and tables). It’s not a lecture room (slanted atrium ceiling can’t be darkened.) What the fuck is it?”
Re:Previous
Here is a link to a previous “eyesore” that is a public library in Michigan, http://www.kunstler.com/eyesore_199804.html“
Bark, Bark
Other than the quite valid criticism of the lack of seating in the “Living Room”, Kunstler strikes me as bitching here purely for its own sake. I find nothing particularly horrendous about the library’s appearance; the circulation desk, in particular, sits quite well with my sense of aesthetics.
Very funny…
I kind of like the gigantic signage, though – the pity is, we all know the patrons *still* won’t read it!
What’s the point?
I’m not sure what the point of all the piling-on is either, except that when there’s something to complain and kvetch about, especially if it’s innovative, someone will come along and complain and kvetch. Mr. James Howard Kunstler’s criticisms strike me as somewhat lame, snide, and snarky, not to mention that they miss the forest for the trees. Although the initial praise for the building went a little (okay, way) over the top, I think that (almost) anything that raises the profile of the public library, and has the potential of encouraging and increasing usership, particularly something as eye-catching as a complete architectural redesign, should be earning applause, not scorn. What if an increase in usership generated by the redesign and the attention it’s gaining helps keep the library from closing once a week every year as it has had to do three times in the last 18 months because of budget cuts? Sure, the new Seattle building isn’t perfect, but what is?
Re:Previous :))
I work for the public library system in Lansing–that’s not the Lansing library I know. The main library in Lansing was built in the ’60s I think and is dated, but not an eyesore (until you look close, see the cockroachs, dirt, etc.
Re:Previous
Me again. Looking at the “public library” in Lansing, that photo may actually be the Library of Michigan (state library)–the photo doesn’t do it justice–it’s actually quite stunning, in my opinion. Others in the Lansing area think otherwise.
Re:What’s the point?
—————–
What if an increase in usership generated by the redesign and the attention it’s gaining helps keep the library from closing once a week every year as it has had to do three times in the last 18 months because of budget cuts? Sure, the new Seattle building isn’t perfect, but what is?
——————-
So, was the idea to solve budget problems by spending millions on architecture? How about spending 1/10 that amount on advertising, community, or (crazy idea) books?