[barrytron3030]

[in advance, dear moderators, if something like this exists, please help a blind man out!]

WE ALL LOVE TORONTO. i think that's obvious. but let's be honest, this city has dropped more than a few bombs over the years. some buildings have destroyed neighbourhoods, some are oddities, and some are just plain butch!

here are my top FIVE, "1" being the worst, with brief commentary, i encourage you to join in with appropriate angst!:

1. Toronto Life Square: http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2108/2308776056_a6aac1fb25.jpg
Don't think this comes as much of a surprise. firstly, it is really nothing other than a vehicle for advertisements. ugly ones at that. secondly, it is unoriginal (hello nyc, london, tokyo) this is not the toronto we love. next, the outside, with its puke grey painting, fake industrial and fake fans (jesus christ!) is absolutely vomit-inducing. lastly, it is massive and shows its ugly ass (parking lot) to everyone. special sympathy goes to ryerson which will have to deal with this beast even after their master plan.

2. Robarts Library: http://www.raisethehammer.org/images/brutalism_01.jpg
Sorry brutalism lovers, but this is ugly!
Fort Book, The Peacock, The Ministry of Truth. Whatever you call it, it is an eyesore on the city. It completely overwhelms anything and everyone around it, its concrete devouring any object that touches it. this building is particularly disturbing as it finds itself on st george campus, one of the cities most beautiful neighbourhoods. U of T is a gem as far as beauty and city-building goes - unfortunately, Robarts is not.

3. the Westin Hotel: http://www.globalhotelindex.com/jpg/2552013.jpg
my god is this thing ugly. another one of toronto's concrete monsters it concocted when it was going through its drug-riddled teen years. i think i may be over-exaggerating on this one but it probably ranks so highly on this list because of its eternal prominence on the waterfront. i hate that the most famous view of our city has this thing glaring back at the audience!

4. The Sheraton Hotel/ The Manulife Centre: http://www.rickshaw.org/images/Sheraton Center Toronto Hotel IMG_0181_41x1.jpg and http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3003/2400498951_3ef9a5f1db.jpg?v=1207757418
two more ugly sisters from george orwell's playbook. i put these two together becuase of their similar structure and use of materials, that is, use of one material, CONCRETE! don't get me wrong, concrete can be done right, but not here! these buildings are brutal, imposing and simply dated. they look like they are glaring at you in anger. they get even more criticism because of their respective locations. the former is sadly located on one of our most beautiful streets, across from our most prominent public space. the latter finds itself on one of the city's busiest corners, inappropriately surrounded by the swanky yorkville.

5. the Toronto Star building: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped..._Building.JPG/200px-Toronto_Star_Building.JPG
this beauty is here for similar reasons to the Westin hotel. i think we can all agree she is an eyesore. christopher hume must close his eyes every time he goes to work.

thank you all. please feel free to add your own and slam me for my slander!

 

[isittimetomoveyet]

I dont agree with Toronto Life Square, it could've been much more, yes, but it is not in the same category of horrid as the others you listed.

I would really love to see them revitalized. I know that the City has set aside funds for old buildings to 'green' themselves, and in some cases, this could involve a complete makeover of the exterior of the building. I wonder if any of these would be available for such a purpose, for these buildings in particular?

And lastly, dont forget about that terrible Bay/Eaton's/Whatever up by Yonge and Bloor... that building need to GO!

 

[junctionist]

Not another one of these threads. And talk about an indignation to architecture, judging buildings as if they were models in beauty contest. These critiques amount to nothing but the adjective "ugly". And who calls a building "dated"? I suppose Old City Hall is simply dated, yet what's the problem?

These threads end up as shallow lists of what everyone considers "ugly" with no consensus. Perhaps only Toronto Life Square can be more universally judged as a poor building, both on the cheap exterior and interior layout.

 

[barrytron3030]

junctionist, with all respect, please read this (unfortunately lengthy) response to your concerns:

you critique this thread as being overly subjective, and producing shallow lists...

but every architecture appreciation thread on this forum is equally subjective. i have the right to call a building ugly just as much as any other forum member can call a building beautiful. you're right, there is no consensus in this thread, but i don't see any inherent problem in that truth. when do we, as forum members, ever have a consensus on what makes a building beautiful? junctionist, neither you nor i have any monopoly over the objective truths of aesthetics. and your critique of this forum in particular, as being irrelevant, relies on equally arbitrary premises as my own.

i agree that i use vague terms when desscribing these buildings, but i did not want this thread to become overly serious. i could very well write 500-1000 words on each building, properly critiquing them, with philosophical references, but that would be too much for this forum,

also, the fact that you begin critiquing toronto life square negates your claims against me. why does TLS solely deserve criticism? that is an arbitrary claim. yes, most forum members do not enjoy that building, but i could suggest most forum members also do not enjoy the westin hotel. critiquing architecture is not like, say, the study of ethics, whereby universal intuitive responses provide legitimacy to moral claims. this thread is mostly concerned with aesthetics, and at the very least politics, and therefore, subjective assertions should be welcome. remember, allowing opposite opinions is a precondition of rationality itself.

i see so much criticism of style, form and structure in all the other threads. some of the comments are downright rude, angry and spiteful - and not even to the buildings, but to other forum members! why not concentrate that here?

the idea of this thread was not to be hateful, if anything it's just supposed to be fun. like i said, we all love toronto...i even love the "ugly" buildings. the fact that none of these buildings are going anywhere also adds to the irony. if anything, this forum can act equally as a discussion of urban development and improvement.

someone's signature on this forum has a quote from gauguin (sorry, can't remember who), "the ugly is sometimes beautiful...the pretty never."

JUST HAVE FUN - if this thread is truly inappropriate, may the mods please take it down. i do hope no one has been offended.

 

[yyzer]

I also wonder, what is the point of this thread?....

/don't mind the Roberts Library, actually...at least it is unafraid to be brutal..

 

[TKTKTK]

I also wonder, what is the point of this thread?....

To be fair, what's the point of any thread here? Ending hunger?

/don't mind the Roberts Library, actually...at least it is unafraid to be brutal..

TLS sucks, but the idea isn't wretched. Sometimes the advertising will be insipid, but occasionally it'll be interesting. I don't see anything wrong with an agglomeration of it Before TLS we had the billboard row along the Gardiner (I used to love that as a kid for some reason), so I hardly think concentrating advertising is a copy-cat move.

In other news, we did just do this thread a couple weeks ago - maybe we could revive it? Archivist and I, I'm sure, still have words to exchange over Sixty Lofts

 

[junctionist]

junctionist, with all respect, please read this (unfortunately lengthy) response to your concerns:

you critique this thread as being overly subjective, and producing shallow lists...

but every architecture appreciation thread on this forum is equally subjective. i have the right to call a building ugly just as much as any other forum member can call a building beautiful. you're right, there is no consensus in this thread, but i don't see any inherent problem in that truth. when do we, as forum members, ever have a consensus on what makes a building beautiful? junctionist, neither you nor i have any monopoly over the objective truths of aesthetics. and your critique of this forum in particular, as being irrelevant, relies on equally arbitrary premises as my own.

i agree that i use vague terms when desscribing these buildings, but i did not want this thread to become overly serious. i could very well write 500-1000 words on each building, properly critiquing them, with philosophical references, but that would be too much for this forum,

also, the fact that you begin critiquing toronto life square negates your claims against me. why does TLS solely deserve criticism? that is an arbitrary claim. yes, most forum members do not enjoy that building, but i could suggest most forum members also do not enjoy the westin hotel. critiquing architecture is not like, say, the study of ethics, whereby universal intuitive responses provide legitimacy to moral claims. this thread is mostly concerned with aesthetics, and at the very least politics, and therefore, subjective assertions should be welcome. remember, allowing opposite opinions is a precondition of rationality itself.

i see so much criticism of style, form and structure in all the other threads. some of the comments are downright rude, angry and spiteful - and not even to the buildings, but to other forum members! why not concentrate that here?

the idea of this thread was not to be hateful, if anything it's just supposed to be fun. like i said, we all love toronto...i even love the "ugly" the buildings. the fact that none of these buildings are going anywhere also adds to the irony. if anything, this forum can act equally as a discussion of urban development and improvement.

someone's signature on this forum has a quote from gauguin (sorry, can't remember who), "the ugly is sometimes beautiful...the pretty never."

JUST HAVE FUN - if this thread is truly inappropriate, may the mods please take it down. i do hope no one has been offended.

I'm thinking that a serious discussion could be a lot more interesting and perhaps shape some new perspectives on the buildings. There was a similar thread of 14 pages or so awhile back. The fact is that the buildings in question are large and important (or new) buildings which aren't going anywhere, so it helps to lose the angst and look and them more thoroughly and seriously.

I did not criticize the forum; I'm confident that certain people who post here would enjoy such discussions. Surely everyone has an opinion and freedom of expression exists. But improvement only happens when the problem is more explicit than the vague labels of ugly/beautiful. And since such a thread has been done before and included the same buildings, pardon my weariness.

I exclude Toronto Life Square because we know it had a limited budget which resulted in obviously cheap details on the exterior like the fans. It's a dull and forgettable grey building because it's supposed to be covered in advertising for that "media square" feel a la Times Square. To criticize it is to criticize the media square. Surely if, for instance, the AGO had planned on covering its exterior with advertising, they wouldn't have paid Frank Gehry to design it. The interior of TLS has also received criticism. It's clearly deliberately the least ambitious building on the list and can therefore be seen in a more objective light.

I don't deny anyone's right to self-expression, however I will also exercise my right to criticize the criticism respectfully. Such is the nature of public discussion.

 

[adma]

I dont agree with Toronto Life Square, it could've been much more, yes, but it is not in the same category of horrid as the others you listed.

Well, it's the only thing not concrete/Brutalist. Though some may argue that puts it into an even worse category of "horrid".

Funny how nobody's yet quibbled with the choice of Manulife--the apartment part, at least, might well be the *best* Brutalist high-rise in Toronto...

 

[jks]

Those two buildings at Bloor/Yonge, the Bay, and the CIBC have got to go. They're actually not that aesthetically bad, but their location makes it so. Yes, the robart's library is complete crap, a friend of mine who goes to the U of T said that they made it to look like a turkey. I don't really see how, but OK. The Toronto Start definitely needs a new headquarters, their tower is terrible, but for some VERY strange reason, I really like the Westin Harbour Castle. idk, Brutalism is one style I either love or hate depending on the building. Then again, relating to the thread title, I think Big Box Stores, and those atrocious strip malls all over the city should be redeveloped.

 

[Archivist]

I love Manulife, so I'll chime in and say how great it is. Big, hard but elegant all in one.

What I really hate, more than anything, are these endless threads of the worst buildings in the city everytime some newbie comes along. Where are the moderators when you need them? Can we close some of these? I hate to say this, but they are

so

tedious.

 

[barrytron3030]

archivist, would you be equally upset if this was an appreciation thread?

yes i'm a newbie. but i've watched this forum long before i became a member. i love toronto just as much as anyone here. and i think i have valid points/insight for the forum in general.

please link me to some more sophisticated and reserved threads in which the discussion is more constructive, stimulating, and coherent.

i think these threads are fun and invoke discussion. please read my above posts in which i try to justify my position. if you still disagree, that's fine. also, if you don't like this thread, avoid it.

 

[khris]

Doesn't this topic exist already? *shrugs*

 

[theman23]

Those two buildings at Bloor/Yonge, the Bay, and the CIBC have got to go. They're actually not that aesthetically bad, but their location makes it so. Yes, the robart's library is complete crap, a friend of mine who goes to the U of T said that they made it to look like a turkey. I don't really see how, but OK. The Toronto Start definitely needs a new headquarters, their tower is terrible, but for some VERY strange reason, I really like the Westin Harbour Castle. idk, Brutalism is one style I either love or hate depending on the building. Then again, relating to the thread title, I think Big Box Stores, and those atrocious strip malls all over the city should be redeveloped.

It was a peacock, I think. It is easier to see in this photo:

 

[ShonTron]

What I really hate, more than anything, are these endless threads of the worst buildings in the city everytime some newbie comes along. Where are the moderators when you need them? Can we close some of these? I hate to say this, but they are so tedious.

I agree that there's too many of these threads, but sometimes I admit to enjoy some of the talk. I don't think there could be a clear-cut single ugliest building, or a short list, but there are bad buildings.

There's a thread already for ugliest highrises (and lowrises). I'll just direct people there. There's surprisingly some good discussion there, I particularly like the qualifiers and thought that are so often missing from these types of threads (like TV ugly vs ugly ugly). In a few days, if there's new activity there spurred by this thread's closing, I'll merge this into it.

This thread is closed. If you must discuss this topic, go here, at least containing the discussion to one or two threads:
http://urbantoronto.ca/showthread.php?t=7924

Thanks!