No one is saying not to be bold or creative... Just RELATEABLE to the human experience. Cold is COLD! Unfriendly, uninviting and unwelcoming are not environments humans want to linger in. Something like this is kitchy and interesting in a James Bond-Supervillan-Lair kind of way, but not for everyday use.

Furthermore, it is obviously very polarizing with a majority of people in this forum disliking it and as a crosssection of humanity, that translates to a small percentage of people that would actually like it in the real world.

Oh and Sir Novelty is right... It won't age well.

BTW... Shouldn't these be the chairs in the lobby? Complete with a guy in a black Nehru Suit stroking a white Persian cat.
ball-chair.jpg

(Found here: http://zedomax.com/blog/2010/12/11/egg-chairs/ )
 
We don't know what will and will not age well. - There is a risk in being bold, but the risk in some soft curves in the walls does not seem that big to me.

1960's TD Centre this is not!
 
caltrane74 said:
We don't know what will and will not age well. - There is a risk in being bold, but the risk in some soft curves in the walls does not seem that big to me.

1960's TD Centre this is not!
Click to expand...

Did shag carpets age well? Seriously, all you would need for this to be a perfect 1970s 'hip' rendering is a few shag carpets, a few lava lamps, and a fondu set.

Honestly though, when I see these renderings, the first thing I think of is "Hugh Hefner's 70s Shag-pad".
 
Last edited:
The problem isn't that it's bold, but that it is so painfully, kitchily retro. It won't age well, because the style already hasn't aged well.
 
^^ How is this painfully, kitschily (is that a word?) retro? This scheme couldn't possibly be achieved without CAD and other current technologies. The interior design here is entirely a reflection of conditions today.
 
Last edited:
condovo said:
^^ How is this painfully, kitschily (is that a word?) retro? This scheme couldn't possibly be achieved without CAD and other current technologies. The interior design here is entirely a reflection of conditions today.
Click to expand...

While the specifics of the design may require CAD, Roger Dean (best known for his Yes album covers) was designing swoopily curved spaces in the ’70s. The One Bloor lobby looks like it could be one of his creations (although it's perhaps too shiny).
 
^^ The comparison is rather superficial. Roger Dean has a totally different agenda, he operates in a totally different context, and his interiors aren't nearly as complex. Again, CS's interior design couldn't possibly be achieved without CAD and the aesthetic is very much "computer-generated." That situates it in the present. There's nothing retro here.
 
Last edited:
I think the organic approach is very much of a piece with Dean's -- in both cases, the intent is to move away from traditional rectilinear form, and toward something inspired by more natural, fluid shapes. I agree that the actual realization of the One Bloor lobby requires a more high technology implementation, but the overall aesthetic is very much a piece with ’70s design elements.
 
Tulse said:
I think the organic approach is very much of a piece with Dean's -- in both cases, the intent is to move away from traditional rectilinear form, and toward something inspired by more natural, fluid shapes. I agree that the actual realization of the One Bloor lobby requires a more high technology implementation, but the overall aesthetic is very much a piece with ’70s design elements.
Click to expand...

You're casting your net too widely here, taking in anything that's curvy and fluid and putting in the same 70s boat. I think that's off the mark. There may be superficial commonalities but that's it. Dean's and CS's program, context, methods, and materials are completely dissimilar and belong to different eras. CS's design is entirely contemporary.
 
Last edited:
I don't mind the idea of curves and fluidity. In fact, I think the lobby should pick up some of those ideas as it would tie in to the exterior facade of the balconies which personally I very much like. It is just stark and strange and I believe a failed attempt. I would be suprised if this is the final version. Whether colour is added, or texture/feeling is changed, or totally redesigned, I still believe the lobby will undergo "refinement".
Finally, I am not sure I would be too happy if I had purchased and the description of the building when people talked was "you kow the building, the one with the "70's" or the "wierd" lobby. I truly would be concerned that the lobby being so out there would become the identifying characteristic of the condo and this is definately not its strongest point.
 
^^ But you're defining it as "70s" and "weird." That doesn't mean others do. If you were to open up any international design magazine, you'd see that the aesthetic of One Bloor is firmly established around the world, if not in Toronto, which often is behind the eight ball. This is high design, which may be unfamiliar to you and uncommon here but that doesn't make it weird or 70s. CS is pushing the envelope, which is a good thing.
 
Last edited:
Condovo, I think you are overly attached to the idea that anything that requires a computer to generate must be new because computers are new. In logic that is referred to as Modus Ponens. Also known as circuitous logic.

It is Tuesday.
It is raining.
Therefore if it is raining, it must be Tuesday.

Computers were the only way Steven Speilberg could realistically render the dinosaurs in Jurassic Park. However, their evolutionary design could in no way be considered modern. They were designed by nature over 65 million years ago.

Just because a computer is needed to design such complex curves, don't think that some set designer from the movie Barbrrella didn't do a similar job (by hand), back in the 1960's. These colours and curves are clearly a take on that Logon's Run era of design.
 
Last edited:
Furthermore, you would do yourself a favour to look up Googie style and Googie architecture. A style that evolved out of the Jet Age of the 50's.

LAFrog%20SpaceAge1.jpg


LAFrog%20SpaceAge2.jpg

(photos FriedmanArchives.com & RetroFuturism website)
 
^^ Those surface planes perform quite differently than those in contemporary design and at One Bloor. The Jet Age is the Computer Age as much as the Renaissance is the Baroque. The latter may be an outgrowth of the former but the production ultimately is quite distinct. Michelangelo and Bernini both sculpted David, and superficially they're similar, but actually they diverge completely in spirit, method, context. The same holds true for LAX (an aesthetic expression of advanced construction techniques using reinforced concrete) and One Bloor (an aesthetic expression of computer assisted design).
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top