Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I just don't like the boxes and besides them most people areound the world would be hard pressed to name even one. New York has just more famous buildings
You are entitled to an opinion... I am just saying your opinion is worthless if you fail to see the quality of Chicago's architecture.
Oh and as Urbanologist correctly noted, there are just as many boxes (in fact probably more) in Manhattan as there are in Chicago. Have you ever strolled down 6th, 3rd or 2nd Avenues? Or even Park, in the 40s and 50s?
Nope. Not that many ugly boxy buildings in New York.
NYC has more international style box buildings than Chicago just look it up in Emporis.com. Anyone calling the style ugly what does that say about the city who has more of them? The so called "box" style was established in NYC not Chicago. IMO, I don't think all international style buildings are ugly. WTC, I thought complimented the NY skyline nicely. It's too bad they didn't rebuild them. I know I'm not the only one who wished they were rebuilt.
To be accurate not all Chicago's buildings are boxes since it has other styles that predate the international style. Mezter says it reminds him of downtown Houston. If he has been to Chicago he will know that Houston lacks what you see in this photo. NY wasn't the only city with classic skinny skyscrapers. Chicago has some too but not as much. http://i1109.photobucket.com/albums/...0r/michave.jpg
Last edited by JMT; 07-14-2012 at 01:00 PM..
Reason: This thread isn't about Houston.
You are entitled to an opinion... I am just saying your opinion is worthless if you fail to see the quality of Chicago's architecture.
So I am entitled to an opinion but it is worthless if it is different than yours. Funny.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fitzrovian
Oh and as Urbanologist correctly noted, there are just as many boxes (in fact probably more) in Manhattan as there are in Chicago. Have you ever strolled down 6th, 3rd or 2nd Avenues? Or even Park, in the 40s and 50s?
Oh there is probably more as New York has larger skyline, however boxy buildings are not the top New York buildings. In Chicago the most mentioned buildings are boxy Sears and Hancock. In new york ESB and Chrysler.
See the difference?
NYC has more international style box buildings than Chicago just look it up in Emporis.com.
Yes but nobody ever quoted the post-modernist boxes as the highest achievement of New York architecture, it is quite the opposite, usually the most mention goes to Chrysler and ESB, both design in art-deco.
I think both Hancock and Sears are simply ugly and I ma not alone in that opinion. In 2006 American Institute of Architect (AIA) conducted a survey on America's favorite buildings. According to that poll America's favorite building was Empire State Building while Chrysler building was number nine on that list.
The first Chicago building on the list was at postion 39. It was Wrigley Field. As you can see the general public does not recognize Chicago's building's as truly remarkable and even places Wrigley Field ahead of Hancock and Sears (42). New York City has a total of 32 structures on that list, more than any other city including Chicago.
So I am entitled to an opinion but it is worthless if it is different than yours. Funny.
Oh there is probably more as New York has larger skyline, however boxy buildings are not the top New York buildings. In Chicago the most mentioned buildings are boxy Sears and Hancock. In new york ESB and Chrysler.
See the difference?
I see the difference but I fail to see your point. The ESB and Chrysler are no more representative of NY's skyscraper architecture than Sears and Hancock are of Chicago's. The reason they are among the most mentioned is because they are among the 2 or 3 tallest in each city. Before the Twin Towers came down (you may be too young to remember those days) they were among the most mentioned in NYC and they were as boxy as they come.
Besides, not all boxy buildings are bad. The Twin Towers, Sears and Hancock all have/had elegant and distinctive features that have made them instantly-recognizable classics. The stuff that you see along 6th and 3rd Avenues, on the other hand, is mostly generic crap that's indistinguishable from one another. See the difference?
Location: Pittsburgh (via Chicago, via Pittsburgh)
3,887 posts, read 5,562,795 times
Reputation: 3107
Quote:
Originally Posted by rebel12
In 2006 American Institute of Architect (AIA) conducted a survey on America's favorite buildings. According to that poll America's favorite building was Empire State Building while Chrysler building was number nine on that list.
The first Chicago building on the list was at postion 39. It was Wrigley Field. As you can see the general public does not recognize Chicago's building's as truly remarkable and even places Wrigley Field ahead of Hancock and Sears (42). New York City has a total of 32 structures on that list, more than any other city including Chicago.
lolol what a troll post...wrigley field.... ya..it sure is prettier than the Tribune Tower or wrigley building..what a great 'scientific poll'
lolol what a troll post...wrigley field.... ya..it sure is prettier than the Tribune Tower or wrigley building..what a great 'scientific poll'
Not any more or less than discussion on C-D. The survey by the way was sponsored and conducted by AIA.
I don't think there is a higher professional authority on architecture in the US then those guys.
Interestingly ESB and Chrysler were in the top ten and Sears and Hancock were not.
Take it up with AIA
Last edited by JMT; 07-14-2012 at 01:01 PM..
Reason: don't call people "losers"
I see the difference but I fail to see your point. The ESB and Chrysler are no more representative of NY's skyscraper architecture than Sears and Hancock are of Chicago's.
They are NYC's crown jewels as much as Sears and Hancock are Chicago's.
ESB and Chrysler, immortalized in popular culture will always be NYC's most popular no matter how many taller buildings will be built in the city. There is a race to building taller building but there is also timeless classic beauty that most of the post-modernist boxes cannot provide. Empire State Building to many New Yorkers simply symbolizes New York City.
Location: Pittsburgh (via Chicago, via Pittsburgh)
3,887 posts, read 5,562,795 times
Reputation: 3107
Quote:
Originally Posted by rebel12
Not any more or less than discussion on C-D. The survey by the way was sponsored and conducted by AIA.
I don't think there is a higher professional authority on architecture in the US then those guys.
Interestingly ESB and Chrysler were in the top ten and Sears and Hancock were not.
Take it up with AIA...
I'd go find some more great 'surveys' for you to coo over but I actually have things to do. The blatant ignorance on this site awes me sometimes. I'm starting to think you actually have no clue what Chicago even looks like.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
