Jump to content

Boris's Tower On The Olympic Park


daveypodmore
 Share

Recommended Posts

1. It looks like a roller coaster. It's strane but not ugly.

2. I think we'll have to wait until its construction finishes to express our opinions better.

1. It would've been better if it were one actually.

2. But at which time you wouldn't be able to remove it.

BTW, why was the previous pylon/totem pole-ish design junked? I mean that wasn't great either but certainly more sane than this one.

Edited by baron-pierreIV
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please read my post again.I was not,of course, referring to the members of this forum (all of whom share an obvious interest in the Olympics) but to the kind of people who write into newspapers,of the sort you quoted.

I'm admittedly not all that keen on the rendering myself but I'm willing to give it a chance and make a more considered judgement after it is built!

It would help if a few more people on here would lighten up a little and concentrate on the planning for the Olympics itself.That is what is important after all! B)

I don't need to read it again, I got the jist the first time. I think you, however, missed my point. You said... "It's just that a lot of these negative comments seem to come from people who hate anything to do with the Olympics"

^^ The point I was making was... there is a lot of negative comments coming from people who LOVE the Olympics, also. It's widespread, irrespective of whether you like the Olympics or not.

The tower is horrific, horrific, horrific. Olympic fan or no fan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Michelle, I honestly thought you were better than to equate internet newspaper comments with general concensus.

The point I was making was, people who post on the Daily Mail are likely to be conservative (right leaning) and those who post on the Guardian website would probably tend to be more liberal in their viewpoint. It didn't matter which website I read, most of the comments were negative and both condemned this project. I agree with a lot of the posters who said, it's as though something has to be nasty in appearance, to be considered a 'masterpiece'.

London is trying too hard. Too hard to be different, too hard to be bold, too hard to stand out. This tower is utterly tragic and needs to be scrapped. But of course, it won't be. It will be built in the name of creativity, when in actual fact its a lump of steel which is utterly pointless. Art? Give me a break!

Edited by Michelle®
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, it is art. Maybe you don't like it but it is art.

"Art," like "beauty" though, is in the beholder's eye. At this stage, it really is very offensive to one's aesthetic sensibilities...not unless of course, if I considered "Transformers" or that genre, high art...which I don't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rob, you're so sensitive. I'd be criticizing this thing no matter where it was being built. You shouldn't feel the urge to always defend everything connected with the London Olympics. Call a spade a spade, regain your credibility.

Hehe. You're funny. :P You're making out as though I like this thing because I defended the fact that it's art, when I've said more than once I don't know what to think of it really.

I'd be torn on it no matter where it was being built, and I'd be questioning your belief that it isn't art no matter where it was being built. Sorry that I disagree with your outright hatred of it, you'll have to live with that. Also, questioning people's credibility because they disagree with your point of view doesn't do much for your own credibility Michelle. Sorry. :(

And I am a big supporter of 2012. But I haven't defended everything connected with it. I still don't like the wings on the aquatics centre much, I've never believed the pledges made in Singapore about the huge boost in sport participation that will follow these Games, I've already said I'd rather the money spent on this was spent on a cauldron tower, I've criticised aspects of the handover ceremony etc.

Edited by RobH
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don’t think it's half as bad as what everyone seems to think. I'm intrigued by the dichotomy of that intricate lattice work warping into more round organic forms. It seems to more or less adhere to the thread of "industrial chic" that has become iconic of modern architecture in London. I dont' know. Seeing as I'm in visual studies, I'm generally much more open minded when it comes to any sort of design whether art, architecture, graphic design, or fashion.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is unfair. I'd say the majority of the members in this forum topic are avid fans of the Olympics, me included. And the majority here dislike this project immensely. We aren't just going to say "yeah this is a great tower/monument", just because it's connected with the Olympics in London. I'll call a spade a spade, and this planned tower is horrific.

Exactly - and we all loved the idea of a landmark tower/sculpture as a permanent legacy too. Trouble is the people who moan about everything means concerns about this tower, both from fans and critics, are just dismissed out of hand and the marketing jargon is taken as truth - we will like it whether we want to or not.

Now, sometimes that's a great attitude to have, as the 2012 logo proves - a couple of years on I think a lot of people wonder what all the fuss was about! In this situation, I'm not so sure.

Does this tower have to go through planning before it can get built, or was outline planning for an unspecified tower granted beforehand allowing them to build any monstrosity on the site?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly - and we all loved the idea of a landmark tower/sculpture as a permanent legacy too. Trouble is the people who moan about everything means concerns about this tower, both from fans and critics, are just dismissed out of hand and the marketing jargon is taken as truth - we will like it whether we want to or not.

Who said that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is, I just can't take you seriously Rob. You have hardly shown yourself to be impartial, when it comes to anything London related. Of course, you are from London, naturally you defend your city and it's decisions, even the poor decisions. That is fine, but don't expect others to roll over. Honestly, I'm not surprised you have found some positive things to say about this trashcan, based on your history. Any criticisms you may have made in the past, have been so utterly minor that they don't scratch any surface.

If you think this is art, then more power to you. Mediocrity has never been so celebrated. Welcome to Britain, welcome to London 2012.

Edited by Michelle®
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is, I just can't take you seriously Rob...

That is fine, but don't expect others to roll over.

You seem confused, and seem to have got yourself into a muddle. I've already said in another post I take your dislike of this as being sincere and completely valid, even though I don't share it. A shame you can't extend the same courtesy to my opinion really. I haven't tried to change your mind once nor have I expected you to roll over. I mean, it's not even as if I like this tower, that's the stupid thing! :rolleyes: I'm not arguing against your point of view and haven't even tried to defend the tower's aesthetics as I'm torn on it. What exactly are we arguing about here? :huh:

Just because I say something is art that doesn't mean I'm saying it's good art. Perhaps we're just arguing over semantics.

My criticisms of London 2012 are minor because the preparations have been remarakably smooth so far. I'm not going to make up criticisms on the fly when I don't see them. On the other hand, I have criticised things when I've seen problems - including, by the way, in this thread where I've expressed my opinion that this tower could overshadow the flame, a criticism nobody else has brought up. Actually, if anything, the posts I've made on this tower have been more negative than positive which rather blows your little theory about "my history" out of the water.

Take my opinions or don't. Up to you. But your last few posts in this thread have been uncharacteristically poor and dismissive of any opinion that doesn't tally with your own. A shame really.

Edited by RobH
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rob, I like your posts... and your views. Just sometimes, I wanna throttle you :) Not because you don't agree with me, but because you appear bias or sitting in your favourite seat, on that fence, which you're often perched on.

Sure, let them build this tower. We can't do much else, until it's up. But I'm confident I won't be rushing to say I was wrong. Unless, it is different from the design I saw.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Blimey, I don't expect you to change your mind when it's built given how strongly you feel about it! I don't know what you expect (or want) me to say though. I don't love it, but nor does it offend my sensibilities as much as it has yours. I'm left in a position where I'm reserving judgement till it's built, but that's not to say I don't have concerns. That seems to have annoyed you for some reason, which is bizarre. Would you prefer I feigned a strong opinion either way instead of saying what I really think?

Just because I like being able to breathe: :)

As I've already said, I think there's a real danger it could overshadow the flame/cauldron tower and not quite work in its surroundings during the Games. That's my biggest concern about it. I think that scaled up it has the potential to be a really interesting "thing" and the fact that it looks so different from different angles makes it interesting to me. I think the artist's past works also give reason for optimism. I'm not sure about the colour and wonder whether, whilst keeping the same basic structure and interesting shape, some tweaks could make it look less busy and fiddly.

There you go, some concerns and some reasons for optimism. None of which will be confirmed till the bloody thing's built. Sorry if that's sitting on the fence to you, but it's not an unconsidered or insincere opinion.

Maybe we'll agree to disagree on whether it's art on not though. I think that's a subject way too big and too philosophical for this particular thread. On that note, I'll leave you with a picture of a horse stuck in a wall

horse.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I think Ive come to terms with it. I was expecting something simple, and ispiring. But this is what we've got. Hopefully it will be better in reality, actually Im sure it will. Its just a tower though, nobody has died, theres a lot worse things happening in the world and the London games arnt gonna be derailed because of it.

Fingers crossed for the mascot launch : )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:rolleyes: Just saw 'Boris's' tower on BBC International....Build it, build it, build it.... :D

Your right, it does look like a lot of pylons bent and twisted together. Still if I get a chance I'm going to climb it.

So much fun will be had on it - viewing, absailing, bungie jumping, climbing, BASE jumping, just jumping... :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If this is indeed the cauldron tower, I would imagine they would allow the public to gather around the base of the tower, maybe together with the athletes... forming a huge crowd. Then the final torchbearer will run from inside the stadium to outside, past the huge crowd and climb up the tower to lit the cauldron.

This would involve the public for the first time in the cauldron lighting, more inclusive and feels really like a public event not only contained outside the stadium!

What about Vancouver? All those people running along side Gretzky in the truck?

At any rate, this thing is a total monstrosity. What the hell is London thinking?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...