In a message dated 3/25/00 12:57:54 PM, [log in to unmask] writes:
<<From The New York Times of March 26th, 2000:
"In 1983 the Schermerhorn Row block [a Federal style row of 1811 brick
warehouses] was restored - or perhaps over-restored. In 1983 Paul
Goldberger, the architecture critic for The New York Times, said 'One of the
city's real treasures, a vibrant pile of buildings that seemed almost to
pulsate with the memories of the generations of riverfront commerce it
contained, the row has been turned ... into something flat and dull.' "
The restoration architect, Jan Hird Pokorny, thinks Goldberger's remarks were
shallow and unfair. Both he and Jack Beyer - who is now doing further work on
Schermerhorn Row - say that the 1983 restoration was fine, and neither would
do it any different today, if given the opportunity.
Yet, to my eye also, the restored Schermerhorn Row is indeed "flat and dull".
Can anyone on the list better analyze this discrepancy?
Christopher Gray (deckhand, SS James Davidson, 1969)
>>
Christopher-
Sorry my last post got away before I finished...anyway as I was saying the
answer is simple: You are right and he (Pokorny) is wrong. I am going to
take a step out onto some very thin ice now. I have never seen this project
and am not familiar in the least with it, however, I have worked with
architects in the past and I am familiar with "them". Of course he says he
wouldn't do it any differently now, if he did, how would that look to his
clients? i.e., If he didn't get it right in 1983, what would make them think
he is going to get it right this time? I think (guess, bet, speculate, have
a hunch) that Pokorny is the victim of an AIA "myth" that has been
perpetuated in this country for the last 75 years...
AIA Mythical Belief #1: The architect is at the top of the food chain, ergo,
he cannot be wrong, mistaken, specious, faulty or otherwise questioned as to
the veracity of a given decision.
You asked for an analysis, and that is mine for what it is worth. I feel
that if Pokorny could bring himself to a point where he was not threatened by
criticism, he would probably be a better architect for it and ultimately make
more of an impact in the world of architecture than he is making now. My bet
is that the new work on Schermerhorn Row will look just as dull and flat and
he will defend it with equal vehemence. And for any of you that I haven't
manage to piss off:
I hate it when I open construction documents and find architect spelled
"Architect" i.e. with an upper case "A", and contractor spelled with a lower
case "c". Who makes up this stuff anyway?
Just for the record, I count several architects among my friends, but they
probably wouldn't own up to it.
Mark
|
