News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 9.6K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 41K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.4K     0 

3600 is also quite the place but built in 1990 and not as eclectic. Of course both of these buildings are really in Markham so I have not thought to include them here.
Click to expand...

Please include them. My Toronto includes Markham.
 
"Called 'Nate's Clam Shell.'
QUOTE Toronto Star.

There was also an other "Name".


Regards,
J T
 
TDSB Building at 5050 Yonge - Mathers and Haldenby 1970


Verticality by Jack Landau, on Flickr


Béton brut by Jack Landau, on Flickr

For the record, regarding the name of the 2nd photo - I don't think it is raw concrete but I often get lazy naming photos on flickr
 
It's funny. I know there's no accounting for taste, and there's really no arguing people out of what they like or don't like, but I think they made the right call here. None of the other designs seems iconic to me the way our current city hall does. Maybe it's just because it's what I'm used to, but I don't think so, because I've always really disliked Mississauga's city hall, inside and out, and I was pretty familiar with that for most of two decades. Toronto's city hall ended up in an episode of ST:TNG. I have a hard time imagining Mississauga's city hall, or any of these designs, getting that kind of international (interstellar?) nod.

I'd be really interested to see how that readers poll The Star ran turned out. :)
 
someMidTowner said:
TDSB Building at 5050 Yonge - Mathers and Haldenby 1970
Click to expand...

thank you SMT! that is a great example--i've always admired that building. and you're right, its not concrete but rather that kind of coppery-brown burnished aluminum that was au courant in the late 60's-early 70's.
its the same material Parkin used in 1968, for the base of the Simpson Tower.

 
Lone Primate said:
It's funny. I know there's no accounting for taste, and there's really no arguing people out of what they like or don't like, but I think they made the right call here. None of the other designs seems iconic to me the way our current city hall does. Maybe it's just because it's what I'm used to, but I don't think so, because I've always really disliked Mississauga's city hall, inside and out, and I was pretty familiar with that for most of two decades. Toronto's city hall ended up in an episode of ST:TNG. I have a hard time imagining Mississauga's city hall, or any of these designs, getting that kind of international (interstellar?) nod.
Click to expand...

Well, granted, as an exemplar of 80s-style postmodern neo-historicism, Mississauga City Hall doesn't really befit Trekkie-scifi-geek-style futurism. So it's unfair to use that template of judgment...
 
adma said:
Well, granted, as an exemplar of 80s-style postmodern neo-historicism, Mississauga City Hall doesn't really befit Trekkie-scifi-geek-style futurism. So it's unfair to use that template of judgment...
Click to expand...

You know, I could fire something cute and snotty back, but I'm not out to start a flame war just for the sake of having a flame war. I'm just going to say that my only sin here is daring to have and express a personal opinion just in passing, aimed at no one in particular, and even clearly prefacing it as such doesn't seem to be enough for some people to rein in the urge to use it as a gratuitous opportunity to sharpen their claws. I don't think anyone is justified in taking offense, or that I should have to apologize, over my intimating that the popular appeal of a design, rather than what we're told we ought to like, might be a useful yardstick for judging aesthetic success. If we can't come here and compare notes about what we do and don't like without being slapped down just for doing so, what's the point of this place anyway?
 
It's more a comment on the context you offered, i.e. about "suitability for particular cinematic contexts" rather than raw architectural quality. And unfortunately, other than retro-Gordon-Gekko features, there isn't a lot which Mississauga CH can be readily "adapted to", cinematically speaking...
 
adma said:
It's more a comment on the context you offered, i.e. about "suitability for particular cinematic contexts" rather than raw architectural quality. And unfortunately, other than retro-Gordon-Gekko features, there isn't a lot which Mississauga CH can be readily "adapted to", cinematically speaking...
Click to expand...

Okay, well, if I got you wrong and got my back up when I shouldn't have, I do apologize.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top