PDA

View Full Version : What I hate about Boston


Pages : [1] 2

statler
02-14-2008, 08:10 PM
Ok, we have a booster thread (http://www.archboston.org/community/showthread.php?t=2043), so let's counter that with a gripe thread.
Same rule applies: be creative, no "The NIMBY's!" or "Menino!" posts.

I'll post mine soon.

Suffolk 83
02-14-2008, 10:46 PM
(this isn't so much Boston but you get it) The annoying, obnoxious, loud, retarded acting kids who go away to college tell everyone they're from Boston when they're really from Springfield and they annoy the crap out of everyone and give the rest of us a bad name. I believe thats where the phrase -- Massholes came about.

KentXie
02-14-2008, 11:16 PM
The T sometimes

vanshnookenraggen
02-15-2008, 12:43 AM
The T not running 24 hours. This is probably the biggest sticking point now that I've experienced NYC.

statler
02-15-2008, 08:13 AM
My biggest complaint about Boston is that I hate that Boston isn't the cultural capital of the US. While it's true we have and amazing amount of arts and culture for a city our size (see below) we still play a weak second (third?) fiddle to places like New York and Chicago. I'm fine with Boston not being the financial capital of the US. The book Invented Cities (http://www.amazon.com/Invented-Cities-Creation-Landscape-Nineteenth-Century/dp/0300074913/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1203082499&sr=8-1) does an excellent job of explain why New York got that title. But the arts and culture title is Boston's birthright. I understand that New York got the money and the population followed the money and the arts followed the population, but Boston should be putting up a bigger fight. We have such a rich cultural history but in the last century or so we just stopped trying. I hate that The Atlantic Monthly left Boston.
I hate that very few (if any) 'big name' authors and artists choose the live in Boston.
I hate that Boston live theater scene is so weak.
I hate that the MFA (as good as it is) isn't considered the premier fine arts museum in the US.
I hate the fact that the ICA isn't even in the discussion.
I hate the fact that Boston isn't known for our restaurants (we're getting better, but we not really on the map yet, as far as I can tell)
I could not care less that Boston isn't a fashion capital, but I hate the fact people consider fashion to be part of arts & culture.

I hate that the natives of Boston are seen as unfriendly and hostile to outsiders.

I hate the fact that Bostonians don't want to see their city as a CITY but rather as a large town. I hate the fact that fewer then a million people live within the city limits. And city has no really desire to grow past that. We need more people living in the city so that our cultural institutions can grow.
I hate the blind desire for 'open space' and 'green space'. Yes, places like the Esplanade and the Public Garden are wonderful spaces, but they were perfectly planned to interact with the city around them. Open space for the sake of open space rarely works.
Thus, I hate 90% of the Greenway. (the North End and Chinatown parks are OK)

I hate people bitching about snow and cold weather. It's New England. Strap a set on and go to work.
I hate that T doesn't run late at night. And even more so, that there are people who don't want the T to run late at night.
I hate that bars close so early. And even more so, that there are people who don't want bars to close later.
I hate that the Pat's lost the Super Bowl.

underground
02-15-2008, 10:22 AM
The lack of supermarkets. I know that specialty shops are cute/unique/add charecter/support local economy/whatever, but some times you just want some Coco Krispies, know what I mean? In some areas, it's like the city planners just thought everyone would eat out every meal.

Ron Newman
02-15-2008, 10:50 AM
Which part of town lacks supermarkets? The only one I can think of is the North End and downtown, but they're going to get one soon as part of Bulfinch Triangle development.

lexicon506
02-15-2008, 03:46 PM
I hate that The Boston Globe is owned by The New York Times

czsz
02-15-2008, 05:16 PM
Actually, NYTCo is one of the better media companies in terms of maintaining newspaper quality and treatment of employees. Anything owned by the Tribune Co. right now (including LA and Chicago's flagship papers) is getting reamed.

I don't like the fact that NYTCo ownership has resulted in lots of stories being piped in through the backdoor via International Herald Tribune or even LA Times (paying a competing company!) wires. Better than AP, worse than loyal correspondents.

A better model is the Christian Science Monitor, which gets tons of great filler from freelancers. It's Boston's forgotten quality paper (beyond the independents like the Phoenix and the incomparable Weekly Dig).

statler
02-15-2008, 05:34 PM
and the incomparable Weekly Dig.

Have you read the Dig lately?

It hasn't been very good since Joe Keohane left and has really sucked since Michael Brodeur and Lissa Harris left.

About the only decent writer they have left there is David Thorpe and he is pretty much a one-trick pony.

But Keohane was the Dig. His Month in Review pieces were some of the best writing in Boston. And the Media Farm was never the same after he left.

czsz
02-15-2008, 05:43 PM
I hate that very few (if any) 'big name' authors and artists choose the live in Boston.

Increasingly there's a nice home-grown crop, supplanted by the many who are affiliated with growing university MFA programs. Claire Messud lives with her husband, literary critic James Wood, in Somerville. Rishi Reddi lives in Brookline. Junot Diaz is at MIT and edits the Boston Review, Jamaica Kincaid teaches at Harvard on and off, Chinua Achebe is at UMass-Boston, and Jhumpa Lahiri is at BU.

The days of Ticknor & Fields it is not, but isn't that true of most of the country? Does Philip Roth really equal Longfellow and Thoreau? You could make a case for John Updike, maybe...who, by the way, lives in Beverly.

aquaman
02-26-2008, 08:47 AM
My biggest complaint about Boston is that I hate that Boston isn't the cultural capital of the US. While it's true we have and amazing amount of arts and culture for a city our size (see below) we still play a weak second (third?) fiddle to places like New York and Chicago. I'm fine with Boston not being the financial capital of the US. The book Invented Cities (http://www.amazon.com/Invented-Cities-Creation-Landscape-Nineteenth-Century/dp/0300074913/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1203082499&sr=8-1) does an excellent job of explain why New York got that title. But the arts and culture title is Boston's birthright. I understand that New York got the money and the population followed the money and the arts followed the population, but Boston should be putting up a bigger fight. We have such a rich cultural history but in the last century or so we just stopped trying. I hate that The Atlantic Monthly left Boston.
I hate that very few (if any) 'big name' authors and artists choose the live in Boston.
I hate that Boston live theater scene is so weak.
I hate that the MFA (as good as it is) isn't considered the premier fine arts museum in the US.
I hate the fact that the ICA isn't even in the discussion.
I hate the fact that Boston isn't known for our restaurants (we're getting better, but we not really on the map yet, as far as I can tell)
I could not care less that Boston isn't a fashion capital, but I hate the fact people consider fashion to be part of arts & culture.

I hate that the natives of Boston are seen as unfriendly and hostile to outsiders.

I hate the fact that Bostonians don't want to see their city as a CITY but rather as a large town. I hate the fact that fewer then a million people live within the city limits. And city has no really desire to grow past that. We need more people living in the city so that our cultural institutions can grow.
I hate the blind desire for 'open space' and 'green space'. Yes, places like the Esplanade and the Public Garden are wonderful spaces, but they were perfectly planned to interact with the city around them. Open space for the sake of open space rarely works.
Thus, I hate 90% of the Greenway. (the North End and Chinatown parks are OK)

I hate people bitching about snow and cold weather. It's New England. Strap a set on and go to work.
I hate that T doesn't run late at night. And even more so, that there are people who don't want the T to run late at night.
I hate that bars close so early. And even more so, that there are people who don't want bars to close later.
I hate that the Pat's lost the Super Bowl.

Nailed it.

I would add a couple of things that REALLY bugs me about Bostonians: 1) selfishness (bad drivers who refuse to obey traffic laws and use turn signals, and self-centered pedestrians who feel it's their birthright to walk in front of a car, trapping it in an intersection); and, 2) a seemingly perverse sense that rudeness and hostility ought to be the dominant traits of city dwellers. I have encountered many more people with that "you don't like it? F- off" attitude here than when I was in NY. NYers, IMO, are generally more outgoing and friendlier people than Bostonians.

About Boston in general, there seems to be a lack of vision for big things or major improvements. We'll never be NYC (thankfully) and I wouldn't want to be like Atlanta, but we could do more to have boosters for this place. We could be more like Chicago or San Francisco, at least in attitude and in a willingness to reinvigorate city life.

cden4
02-26-2008, 09:04 AM
About Boston in general, there seems to be a lack of vision for big things or major improvements.

I totally agree. There is little will to take risks, by either politicians or citizens. It's surprising especially surprising when things are opposed that could easily be undone.

For example, there was a proposal to make Hanover St pedestrian-only during certain times. This could easily be done as a trial through simple road closures to see if any negative side effects can't be worked out. Major cities around the world have pedestrian-only streets, and they are hugely successful! It seems like such a no brainer. Just try it, darnit. If it works, consider making some changes to the street to make it permanent. If it doesn't work, just don't close the street to traffic anymore!

palindrome
02-26-2008, 09:44 AM
My biggest complaint about Boston is that I hate that Boston isn't the cultural capital of the US. While it's true we have and amazing amount of arts and culture for a city our size (see below) we still play a weak second (third?) fiddle to places like New York and Chicago. I'm fine with Boston not being the financial capital of the US. The book Invented Cities (http://www.amazon.com/Invented-Cities-Creation-Landscape-Nineteenth-Century/dp/0300074913/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1203082499&sr=8-1) does an excellent job of explain why New York got that title. But the arts and culture title is Boston's birthright. I understand that New York got the money and the population followed the money and the arts followed the population, but Boston should be putting up a bigger fight. We have such a rich cultural history but in the last century or so we just stopped trying. I hate that The Atlantic Monthly left Boston.
I hate that very few (if any) 'big name' authors and artists choose the live in Boston.
I hate that Boston live theater scene is so weak.
I hate that the MFA (as good as it is) isn't considered the premier fine arts museum in the US.
I hate the fact that the ICA isn't even in the discussion.
I hate the fact that Boston isn't known for our restaurants (we're getting better, but we not really on the map yet, as far as I can tell)
I could not care less that Boston isn't a fashion capital, but I hate the fact people consider fashion to be part of arts & culture.

I hate that the natives of Boston are seen as unfriendly and hostile to outsiders.

I hate the fact that Bostonians don't want to see their city as a CITY but rather as a large town. I hate the fact that fewer then a million people live within the city limits. And city has no really desire to grow past that. We need more people living in the city so that our cultural institutions can grow.
I hate the blind desire for 'open space' and 'green space'. Yes, places like the Esplanade and the Public Garden are wonderful spaces, but they were perfectly planned to interact with the city around them. Open space for the sake of open space rarely works.
Thus, I hate 90% of the Greenway. (the North End and Chinatown parks are OK)

I hate people bitching about snow and cold weather. It's New England. Strap a set on and go to work.
I hate that T doesn't run late at night. And even more so, that there are people who don't want the T to run late at night.
I hate that bars close so early. And even more so, that there are people who don't want bars to close later.
I hate that the Pat's lost the Super Bowl.

This post made me depressed. :(



I hate the fact that Gillette left for Cincinnati, and fleet was bought by BOA.

Ron Newman
02-26-2008, 09:56 AM
Gillette was bought but they didn't "leave". I don't see them moving out of Fort Point Channel any time soon.

Suffolk 83
02-26-2008, 10:20 AM
I would add a couple of things that REALLY bugs me about Bostonians: 1) selfishness (bad drivers who refuse to obey traffic laws and use turn signals, and self-centered pedestrians who feel it's their birthright to walk in front of a car, trapping it in an intersection); and, 2) a seemingly perverse sense that rudeness and hostility ought to be the dominant traits of city dwellers. I have encountered many more people with that "you don't like it? F- off" attitude here than when I was in NY. NYers, IMO, are generally more outgoing and friendlier people than Bostonians.

I like the way people drive here. Try living in Florida and they way they drive there. Its HORRIBLE. and its just not the old people.

And I also like the pedestrian style. People in other parts of the country don't know how to cross a road. It is your birthright to walk in front of a car because the person in the car gets in trouble if they hit you, and they're sitting all comfortable in the their car, listening to their music and sipping their coffee, you as the pedestrian is out braving the elements, watching out for people, cars, bikes and whatever else. It is your birthright. (there are some extremes when people really make a car stop short, but thats the minority)

I went to school out of state in another city, and my friends from all over the country joked around and said just follow (me) whenever we were crossing the street. They knew because they saw the skill, its an artform perfected in very few places.People don't know how to cross roads. seriously. I hate morons that sit at crosswalks with no cars coming like they need that little white walk sign to light up.

statler
02-26-2008, 10:49 AM
I hate morons that sit at crosswalks with no cars coming like they need that little white walk sign to light up.

Abso-fuckin'-lutly!

I was in San Diego a while ago with some friends. We were walking down the street and come to a crosswalk. There were three or four people standing there so we stopped. A few seconds went by so I looked up the road and you can see for miles and there wasn't a car in sight.

"What the hell are we standing here for?"
"Beats me."

So we cross.

From the looks we got, you would have thought we were kicking a baby across the street.
Strange.

Lrfox
02-26-2008, 10:53 AM
I'm going to agree and disagree with that one. I LOVE the way people drive around here... In fact, whenever I'm anywhere else, I miss it. Florida is bad, but try Maine nearby; I've been going to school up here for 4 years and two of the most frustrating things are how slow people drive and how oblivious to other drivers they are. I feel like in order to drive in Boston (or Massachusetts in general) you have to be on your toes and alert and I love that. I love that at a green light, if you hesitate going straight, the guy who wants to bang a left is going to go before you. Driving outside this area (except in New York) is annoying, but driving in it is fantastic.

I have to say the pedestrians here drive me nuts. I noticed this last month while driving in New York: I was on Canal Street and I needed to take a left on West Broadway (I was making my way over to the Holland Tunnel) and I took the left, but there were probably 30 pedestrians in the crosswalk... but instead of blocking me in the middle of oncoming traffic on canal street, It was like Moses parting the Red Sea and they let me go. I was shocked. Not in Boston... oh no... I would have been the main cog in a mess of gridlock because pedestrians would continue to walk across and I'd have to do that crawl slowly through the sea of people move you have to do here (although it's tough with a standard). Pedestrians here generally suck, the drivers do not.

As far as an "art form" goes, there is an art to crossing streets in Boston; it involves judging distances between the nearest moving car and the time it takes to cross the street, as a pedestrian, you have to judge correctly or you're going to piss someone off royally (at the very least). This is great, as Statler and Suffolk have mentioned, it's stupid to stand at a crosswalk while no one is coming; however, the pedestrians that just file across the street with no concern for waiting cars in Boston are obnoxious to no end.

Ron Newman
02-26-2008, 11:01 AM
Pedestrians were here first (1630); it makes sense for cars to have lower priority than people.

belmont square
02-26-2008, 11:52 AM
I hate the way people arbitrarily use municipal boundaries to make points that don't have anything to do with municipal governance. It bothers me that people consider Boston a small city because its municipal population is only 600,000. If the city's area was increased to the size of New York City's, Boston would rank 5th in the nation in population. If New York's city limits were coterminus with Manhattan, New York would only be the 5th largest. Neither change would affect anything other than city governance--the two "cities" would still be the same size they are today.

I hate the term "most densely populated city in New England" being used to describe Somerville. Not because it's not technically accurate (which it is) but because it creates a false impression. There are inherent challenges for the local city government in being such a dense municipality (such as lack of commercial development), but city boundaries don't keep residents from accessing jobs, parks and subway stations just over the border. Dozens of similarly and more dense 4 square mile areas exist in the urban area, just without imaginary lines drawn around them in such a way as to exclude large tracts of parkland and industrial areas.

czsz
02-26-2008, 11:53 AM
About Boston in general, there seems to be a lack of vision for big things or major improvements. We'll never be NYC (thankfully) and I wouldn't want to be like Atlanta, but we could do more to have boosters for this place. We could be more like Chicago or San Francisco, at least in attitude and in a willingness to reinvigorate city life.

The problem is that the boosters love this place so much that any change is seen as an apostacy. There is no culture urging civic improvement, only pride in what's been long entrenched.

The only time there has ever been a groundswell for the new was when people enthusiastically embraced the idea of a new Fenway - just so that their asses would be more comfortable while enjoying another century-long tradition.

aquaman
02-26-2008, 12:27 PM
I'm going to agree and disagree with that one. I LOVE the way people drive around here... In fact, whenever I'm anywhere else, I miss it. Florida is bad, but try Maine nearby; I've been going to school up here for 4 years and two of the most frustrating things are how slow people drive and how oblivious to other drivers they are. I feel like in order to drive in Boston (or Massachusetts in general) you have to be on your toes and alert and I love that...

I have to say the pedestrians here drive me nuts. I noticed this last month while driving in New York: I was on Canal Street and I needed to take a left on West Broadway (I was making my way over to the Holland Tunnel) and I took the left, but there were probably 30 pedestrians in the crosswalk... but instead of blocking me in the middle of oncoming traffic on canal street, It was like Moses parting the Red Sea and they let me go. I was shocked. Not in Boston... oh no... I would have been the main cog in a mess of gridlock because pedestrians would continue to walk across and I'd have to do that crawl slowly through the sea of people move you have to do here (although it's tough with a standard). Pedestrians here generally suck, the drivers do not.


I find the opposite is true about drivers here. I think they are either utterly clueless and dismissive of other drivers' presence or ruthlessly mean-spirited about road courtesy. Case in point: people here DO NOT know how to take left hand turns. Rather than shimmying slightly to the left of their own traffic lane so that straight-traveling traffic can get around them as they wait for an opening in oncoming traffic, drivers here either sit square in the middle of their traffic lane or -- worse -- actually move a little to the right to do a big swing left turn. People here seem to not give a flying f_ck about anyone else's wish to get around them. I have never encountered this in the NYC area. People there understand car and pedestrian traffic efficiency (and escalator etiquette) so much more.

Which brings me to point #2 -- you are right about the Canal St. story. Pedestrians in NYC understand that you can pause for two seconds to let a car out of an intersection and it makes life better for everyone. Here it seems pedestrians take personal glee at cutting off cars. Believe me, I am a lifelong jaywalker and would never stand at a crosswalk when there's no traffic to stop me from crossing, but there's also such a thing as courtesy. There's no reason I can't pause at a crosswalk so that the car can clear the intersection on a yellow. Deliberately blocking the path of a car is self centered and rude.

It's almost like the attitude here is that no one gets ahead without first sticking it to someone else.

Ron Newman
02-26-2008, 12:43 PM
Describing Somerville as "most densely populated" has a point -- that the place has very little parkland and green space compared to its neighbors, Cambridge, Arlington, and Medford. It's a result of residential real estate developers having too much political influence during the city's period of greatest growth (circa 1870-1930).

It's something that people who live here constantly notice, and would like to change. Not only do we have very little parkland, but most of the parks are quite small and almost none of them are 'passive' parks (i.e. just green space to enjoy, not occupied by baseball or soccer or basketball or the like).

belmont square
02-26-2008, 01:12 PM
I understand the motivation for Somerville residents, or the city government to make the claim. And I also understand why the same people emphasize that the city only has one subway station when looking for improved transit access. But both statistics are misleading and have very little meaning at the community level. There are sections of Dorchester, Chelsea, Everett, Southie, Charlestown, etc that face similar challenges, but I sometimes think Somerville residents feel like they have been particularly or uniquely slighted due to how the boundaries were drawn.

If Somerville included present-day Arlington, it wouldn't make the recreational or transportation needs of current Somerville residents any less important (although municipal density would decrease). Nor would those needs change if the city lost its "most dense" title due to the North End seceding from Boston and becoming its own municipality.

Ron Newman
02-26-2008, 01:19 PM
My impression is that most other similarly populated areas have many more pocket- or block-sized parks intermixed through them. If you walk from Somerville into adjoining North Cambridge the difference is easily noticeable.

Lrfox
02-26-2008, 01:21 PM
aquaman,
I agree with you. Actually, I didn't mention this in my post, but i think New York drivers are the best in the country. The pedestrians there are equally as smart.

My observation about people being aware of other drivers here was not elaborated on properly i don't think. I meant that people here are aware of other drivers in the sense that they know where someone coming the other way is before they cut them off to make their left, or that they know there is someone behind them before they brake check them. Mass. drivers may not be courteous, they may be self serving and rude, but they certainly are aware (generally speaking) of the people around them that they are going cut off rudely.

The thing I love about driving here, is that it's fast paced. Which is in contrast to places like Florida, and my example of Maine. After living here for 4 years, I have had more people pull out right in front of me without even looking, then act surprised when I honk; or people who sit in the left lane of the 65mph highway going 55 without so much as glancing in the rearview mirror. I guess it's the pace of driving in MA that I like, not so much the method in which the drivers aggressively move. New York has the best drivers and Pedestrians, no question. But for New England (and anywhere outside NYC and maybe L.A.), the speed and pace of Massachusetts drivers is great in my opinion.

belmont square
02-26-2008, 01:33 PM
My impression is that most other similarly populated areas have many more pocket- or block-sized parks intermixed through them. If you walk from Somerville into adjoining North Cambridge the difference is easily noticeable.

You may be right about this, but you also prove my point with your comment. Why should we think any differently about a neighborhood in Dorchester that doesn't have good parks but is adjacent to another Dorchester neighborhood that does, than we do about a neighborhood in Somerville that doesn't have good parks but is adjacent to a Cambridge neighborhood that does? It sounds to me like both neighborhoods have the same access to good parks.

Ron Newman
02-26-2008, 01:46 PM
The point is that the parts of Somerville that aren't next to Cambridge have very little parkland, so these people have to take buses or drive to see any significant amount of green space. My impression of most Boston neighborhoods is that (like North Cambridge) they are well speckled with small parks.

kz1000ps
02-26-2008, 06:06 PM
I hate morons that sit at crosswalks with no cars coming like they need that little white walk sign to light up.

Amen!

I want to ask each and every person that does that, "do you not know how to think and look for yourself??" I mean sheesh!

Scott
02-26-2008, 09:32 PM
I dislike that people come here for a few years, get an education or make their fortune and never have a nice thing to say about anyone or anything.
I ask you, how many of these students or business people ever get outside the Boston Magazine ghettos and actually meet people unlike their privileged selves? Common people... good people, hard working people who have rebuilt this city from ashes time and time again. These would include my Father, my Grandfather, my Great Grandfather...etc.
Not the warmest and fuzziest people but among the kindest most authentic.

bosdevelopment
02-27-2008, 11:23 AM
I dislike that people come here for a few years, get an education or make their fortune and never have a nice thing to say about anyone or anything.
I ask you, how many of these students or business people ever get outside the Boston Magazine ghettos and actually meet people unlike their privileged selves? Common people... good people, hard working people who have rebuilt this city from ashes time and time again. These would include my Father, my Grandfather, my Great Grandfather...etc.
Not the warmest and fuzziest people but among the kindest most authentic.

Bud Fox: That's because you never had the GUTS to go out into the world and stake your own claim! ...

underground
02-27-2008, 12:22 PM
One of my pet peeves came up on the Fox 25 Morning News show today. They were discusing tolls on I-93, and someone said that it would just be another thing to drive people out of Massachusetts. Why do people always use this as a point of argument, and even more so, why do people let people use this as a point of argument? It's absolutley untrue, but people say it all the time, and it drives me crazy! Under any measurement (city growth, metropolitan growth, statewide growth, and regional growth) our population has risen in the last 10 years, not dropped. All you need to do to figure this out is spend 5 minutes of Wikipedia. Sure, our population hasn't risen as rapidly as many other places, but if you mean that, then say that!

Ron Newman
02-27-2008, 12:37 PM
The expanding number of worthless free publications: Improper Bostonian, Stuff@Night, Barstool Sports, Metro, and BostonNOW.

kz1000ps
02-27-2008, 07:34 PM
^ Yep. I find it cute how BostonNOW loads its paper full of random blog postings. Soooo with the times.

Lrfox
02-27-2008, 08:19 PM
One of my pet peeves came up on the Fox 25 Morning News show today. They were discusing tolls on I-93, and someone said that it would just be another thing to drive people out of Massachusetts. Why do people always use this as a point of argument, and even more so, why do people let people use this as a point of argument? It's absolutley untrue, but people say it all the time, and it drives me crazy! Under any measurement (city growth, metropolitan growth, statewide growth, and regional growth) our population has risen in the last 10 years, not dropped. All you need to do to figure this out is spend 5 minutes of Wikipedia. Sure, our population hasn't risen as rapidly as many other places, but if you mean that, then say that!

And many of those places that are "growing faster" are growing in all the wrong ways... I'll take a slow rate of growth over Las Vegas suburban sprawl any day. Why people assume that this area should grow like Phoenix, I will never understand.

Ron Newman
02-27-2008, 09:54 PM
The Boston Globe Sunday magazine recently suggested Shanghai as a model for growth.

kz1000ps
02-27-2008, 10:23 PM
Bud Fox: That's because you never had the GUTS to go out into the world and stake your own claim! ...

LOL!

"I don't go to sleep with no whore, and I don't wake up with no whore -- that's how I live with myself. I don't know how you do it."

czsz
02-27-2008, 11:16 PM
The Boston Globe Sunday magazine recently suggested Shanghai as a model for growth.

The NIMBYs must have loved that.

Yeah, I'm sure they'll be bulldozing the obsolescent Beacon Hill hutongs any day now.

Oh wait, isn't Shanghai employing Boston's model of growth, circa 1950?

ChunkyMonkey
02-28-2008, 09:06 AM
About Boston in general, there seems to be a lack of vision for big things or major improvements.

I'm not sure I agree. Boston has a history of big visionary projects, good and bad. Think how Back Bay was created. Think about the massive cleanup of Boston Harbor. Think about the Big Dig. Good or bad, it is a visionary project. I'm not sure if any city will be able to do a "Big Dig" anymore both politically and financially.

What is frustrating is the bureaucracy and the slow move of developments.

GW2500
02-28-2008, 11:21 AM
I hate how college kids come here, stick to their campus, Back Bay, Fanuel hall, Allston/Brighton, and Harvard Sq. and act like they have seen all of
Boston. Especially assuming that Boston dosn't have real neighborhoods, and real streets. That Boston is fully of pussies. Try walking through Roxbury, or parts of Dorchester, Southie, East Boston, East Cambridge, Charlsetown, shit go to Malden. It's got it's real side too. Boston, demographically and sociol economiclly, is pretty close to NY, just on a minuture scale. Boston actaully has a far higher murder rate than NY (and homicides are terrible). But my point is NY is allways viewed as that tough crazy place where only the strong survive (and I do admit after going through all the burroughs that NY is crazier) and Boston is this preppy town with only colleges. NY is hip hop and were just white boys listening to Irish folk music or Dave Mathews Band (I do like DMB) and its more like were (demographically) pretty much the same just on a smaller scale.

bosdevelopment
02-28-2008, 12:53 PM
I hate how college kids come here, stick to their campus, Back Bay, Fanuel hall, Allston/Brighton, and Harvard Sq. and act like they have seen all of
Boston. Especially assuming that Boston dosn't have real neighborhoods, and real streets. That Boston is fully of pussies. Try walking through Roxbury, or parts of Dorchester, Southie, East Boston, East Cambridge, Charlsetown, shit go to Malden. It's got it's real side too. Boston, demographically and sociol economiclly, is pretty close to NY, just on a minuture scale. Boston actaully has a far higher murder rate than NY (and homicides are terrible). But my point is NY is allways viewed as that tough crazy place where only the strong survive (and I do admit after going through all the burroughs that NY is crazier) and Boston is this preppy town with only colleges. NY is hip hop and were just white boys listening to Irish folk music or Dave Mathews Band (I do like DMB) and its more like were (demographically) pretty much the same just on a smaller scale.

That's just terrible.

pharmerdave
02-28-2008, 01:13 PM
That this was never built:

http://img297.imageshack.us/img297/8465/boylstonsquarexu7.gif (http://imageshack.us)

Ron Newman
02-28-2008, 02:51 PM
What's that, and where would it have gone?

Beton Brut
02-28-2008, 03:09 PM
This is from the late 90's. This would have been "Boylston Square," corner of Mass Ave and Boylston Street, on the air rights over the Pike. CBT was the architect (likely the best thing they've ever done). Initially 59 stories, trimmed to 49, and then killed. Condos, retail and 12 movie theatres.

A shame.

czsz
02-28-2008, 03:31 PM
^ Worst NIMBY martyrdom in Boston history? A close second might be the Renzo Piano Charles River museum.

Beton Brut
02-28-2008, 04:43 PM
Indeed.

Boylston Square always reminded me of this unbuilt Frank Lloyd Wright project (http://books.google.com/books?id=L2BMt1fCo5kC&pg=RA1-PA35&lpg=RA1-PA35&dq=Lacy+hotel+dallas&source=web&ots=99zh31Gosf&sig=GyDYgpp3hYgoAqeVsoY1_9R5O1M&hl=en).

Suffolk 83
02-28-2008, 04:53 PM
That's just terrible.

what's terrible, GW's rant, or the college kids he speaks of?

bosdevelopment
02-28-2008, 05:11 PM
what's terrible, GW's rant, or the college kids he speaks of?

the rant.

rayray07
02-29-2008, 02:58 AM
Originally Posted by GW2500
I hate how college kids come here, stick to their campus, Back Bay, Fanuel hall, Allston/Brighton, and Harvard Sq. and act like they have seen all of
Boston. Especially assuming that Boston dosn't have real neighborhoods, and real streets. That Boston is fully of pussies. Try walking through Roxbury, or parts of Dorchester, Southie, East Boston, East Cambridge, Charlsetown, shit go to Malden. It's got it's real side too. Boston, demographically and sociol economiclly, is pretty close to NY, just on a minuture scale. Boston actaully has a far higher murder rate than NY (and homicides are terrible). But my point is NY is allways viewed as that tough crazy place where only the strong survive (and I do admit after going through all the burroughs that NY is crazier) and Boston is this preppy town with only colleges. NY is hip hop and were just white boys listening to Irish folk music or Dave Mathews Band (I do like DMB) and its more like were (demographically) pretty much the same just on a smaller scale.


I strongly agree with GW2500. The people I talk to down south thinks that boston doesn't have a ghetto and that its white people only here. They don't know the REAL Boston. All they know is what they see on tv and what people tell them. And Im sick and tired of the maps of the city stopping its boundries at the south end and back bay like parts south aren't part of the city. That makes me mad as HELL

czsz
02-29-2008, 03:29 AM
What maps do you mean? The ones tourists use? If so, then yeah, I agree, it's terrible the Freedom Trail doesn't lead straight to Bowdoin-Geneva.

lexicon506
02-29-2008, 07:03 AM
All they know is what they see on tv and what people tell them.

I'm not sure about that. The vast majority of good movies set in Boston showcase the city's rougher parts. Think The Departed, Boondock Saints, Mystic River, Gone Baby Gone, etc.

GW2500
02-29-2008, 10:55 AM
I will admit it was a bit ranting and not put together. Let me further my point. And I guess it's not soo much that I hate Boston for this, but just how its viewed. Most people view Boston as a rich white bread town with no diversity. Now that scene does exist, on par with New York really. But Boston does have diversity, and real neighborhoods. I suppose those movies mentioned above show Boston's working class neighborhoods, but I think Gone Baby Gone is the only one that has Black people in it. And I think this city's diversity is something to be proud of. And maybe this is just me but I'm also proud to live in a city where if your a punk, you will get your ass kicked. The homicides are trajic and I hope they will stop, but sadly in all reality they can only be minimized not eliminated.

PerfectHandle
02-29-2008, 12:57 PM
And maybe this is just me but I'm also proud to live in a city where if your a punk, you will get your ass kicked.

Just wondering what this means exactly.

Ron Newman
02-29-2008, 01:44 PM
Me too. What exactly does GW2500 have against fans of the Ramones and Sex Pistols?

Beton Brut
02-29-2008, 01:51 PM
I think he means in the non-musical sense.

Like the goons on my street used to say, "If you don't want none, there won't be none."

blade_bltz
02-29-2008, 03:04 PM
I will admit it was a bit ranting and not put together. Let me further my point. And I guess it's not soo much that I hate Boston for this, but just how its viewed. Most people view Boston as a rich white bread town with no diversity. Now that scene does exist, on par with New York really. But Boston does have diversity, and real neighborhoods. I suppose those movies mentioned above show Boston's working class neighborhoods, but I think Gone Baby Gone is the only one that has Black people in it. And I think this city's diversity is something to be proud of. And maybe this is just me but I'm also proud to live in a city where if your a punk, you will get your ass kicked. The homicides are trajic and I hope they will stop, but sadly in all reality they can only be minimized not eliminated.

Inexcusably, Affleck almost entirely neglected to represent the significant Vietnamese population in Dorchester. GBG wasn't set in Mattapan, after all.

Still, the Cape Verdean reference was cool...and I'm sure no one outside of Boston managed to catch it at all.

Lrfox
02-29-2008, 04:46 PM
Blade, Cape Verdeans are well represented on the South Coast and in Rhode Island as well. In fact, Waterplace in Providence has Cape Verdean night every Saturday night. Unfortunately people outside southern New England (specifically Eastern Mass and Northern RI) don't know anything about the Cape Verdean culture. My girlfriend (from Maine) and I accidentally stumbled upon the Cape Verdean night at Waterplace once in Providence and when the bouncer said, "Just so you know, It's Cape Verdean night," my girlfriend responded with a humiliating, "Cape Verdeeeen? What the heck is that?" We were in front of a large group of them smoking cigarettes outside and promptly left. I was mortified.

So, no question that the reference was neat, but they do extend outside of Boston. I personally felt that Affleck depicted DOT as predominantly white trash. I know there's a fair share, but there's more to it than that. Gone, Baby, Gone was enjoyable no less, but there was certainly more room for improvement.

rayray07
02-29-2008, 09:30 PM
Yea them movies show the white people ghettos, no offense. They barely show the black population. I want to see a big budget movie shot in Roxbury or Mattapan where there is a large black population. And where I used to live down south they have no culture at all!!! They dont know what Cape Verdians are neither Dominicans. They never even heard of these things. They barely even know what reggae music is and thats sickening

commuter guy
03-01-2008, 07:30 AM
Yea them movies show the white people ghettos, no offense. They barely show the black population. I want to see a big budget movie shot in Roxbury or Mattapan where there is a large black population.

Could part of the reason why movies seem to focus on working class white ethic neighborhood in Boston is because they are relatively unique in the country? The white ethnic neighborhood of Boston may have some parallels in Chicago and NYC, but its relatively unique IMO.

Just a thought, but I'm not sure that Boston's black neighborhoods are perceived as offering anything unique compared to other US cities. If a movie is going to be set in a black neighborhood, they would likely gravitate to NYC, Detroit, Baltimore, Chicago or LA etc. Further, although we have a significant amount of foreign born blacks, including but not limited to Hatians, there are larger communities in NYC and Miami. Boston and New England may have the largest concentration of Cape Verdians in the US, but their impact is so minor on nationwide scale. Every major city in the U.S. seems to have some large minority or ethnic population that is relatively unique to that particular area - whether the community is from the middle east, Africa or S.E. Asia. Also, its my understanding that many Cape Verdians (and Brazilians and Carribean populations for that matter) do not self identify themselves as black or even hispanic.

tobyjug
03-01-2008, 11:37 AM
I hate what has happened to the Boston Globe. Nothing to do with the paper's politics, which are unchanged. It is the quality that has cheapened.
As late as the 70's, the Globe was a nationally regarded publication of record. The top tier was (and always been) the N.Y. Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal. The Globe used to slot into the A minus tier with the L.A. Times. Since that time, the Globe slowly bled to death from a thousand cost cuts.
Bureau eliminations, layoffs, over reliance on wire services, an editorial panel that writes with the sophistication of a college newspaper staff... today's Globe is very much the Double A team to the Times major league franchise. It appears that the Times bought the Globe only for its considerable production facilities, not as a patron of newscraft. But it isn't all the Times fault; the damsel was in distress long before the "Fit to Print" gang abjured the role of white knight.
They ought to finish the job. Prune the Globe of all national and international news, and insert it into the New England edition of the Times as the local supplement. As things now stand, the Globe is on a par with the Newark Star-Ledger, a very nice local paper that one reads only when there is enough time left after reading the grown up papers.

Lrfox
03-01-2008, 12:17 PM
^^Agreed. And on a related note, I hate Boston.com... It's amazing what is the primary headline at any given moment. Sensationalist, and like the Globe itself, lacking in quality.

kz1000ps
03-01-2008, 01:00 PM
Agreed again. The only thing I use the paper for is local news. And even at that, I'm not using the paper, just the website, where I go straight to what I want and skip over that lame-brained front page.

12345
03-01-2008, 08:14 PM
Every major city in the U.S. seems to have some large minority or ethnic population that is relatively unique to that particular area

Not really, nearly all unique immigrant population's are located on the coast's and very rarely will you find a population in the middle of the country that is unique to the country as a whole.

(and Brazilians and Carribean populations for that matter) do not self identify themselves as black or even hispanic.

Brazilians are not hispanic, because they speak portuguese. Also many immigrants from latin america are mixed white, black, ameridian and some are of asian ancestry.

Further, although we have a significant amount of foreign born blacks, including but not limited to Hatians, there are larger communities in NYC and Miami

true but Boston has many more african immigrants.

commuter guy
03-01-2008, 10:14 PM
nearly all unique immigrant population's are located on the coast's and very rarely will you find a population in the middle of the country that is unique to the country as a whole.

A few examples come to my mind immediately and I am sure there are many more quirky immigration settlement patterns. The following cities are thought to have the largest immigrant communities in the USA:

Minneapolis - Hmong and Somolian (on a % basis - I have heard Lewiston, ME has the highest share of Somolian immigrants in the U.S.)
Chicago - Bosnian
Detroit - Arab
Nashville - Kurd
Omaha - Sudanese

Granted these immigrants may be found elsewhere, but many cities, including those away from the coasts, have unique immigration patterns. Relatively speaking, I just don't think it is that novel that Boston has a relatively large, if not the largest, Cape Verdian immigration community in the country.

Brazilians are not hispanic, because they speak portuguese. Also many immigrants from latin america are mixed white, black, ameridian and some are of asian ancestry.

This is my point, many immigrants from Latin America don't self identify themselves in the racial/ethnic catagories that have been widely adopted within the USA.

12345
03-02-2008, 02:03 PM
commuter guy,

Boston has the majority of Cape Verdians in the America and the largest outside of Cape Verde.

Suffolk 83
03-02-2008, 02:20 PM
^ interesting factoid. From what I've heard the cape verde gangs in Dorchester and Roxbury are brutually violent.

Beton Brut
03-02-2008, 02:36 PM
^ interesting factoid. From what I've heard the cape verde gangs in Dorchester and Roxbury are brutually violent.

Isn't it interesting how we consistently identify groups by their worst tendencies and behaviors?

Why have a conversation, for instance, about why my great grandparents came to East Cambridge from Avellino (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avellino) when we have thoughtful posts like this one (http://www.archboston.org/community/showpost.php?p=46179&postcount=34) to keep us going.

Thanks for posting in the right forum this time...

Suffolk 83
03-02-2008, 03:09 PM
come on lighten up. my best friend was Italian and we gave him crap about it everyday. I've dated girls that are italian and speak it. its called a joke.... as the great rosie colvin once said... "calm down"

KentXie
03-02-2008, 03:40 PM
Oh I forgot to say, I hate Scott Van Hooris

Lrfox
03-02-2008, 04:07 PM
Oh I forgot to say, I hate Scott Van Hooris

How did we make it to the 7th page without this one coming up?

czsz
03-03-2008, 02:37 AM
...and Steve Bailey.

Look, Boston.com is atrocious, but don't underrate the Globe. It comes up in national discussions far more than you'd expect for a regional paper. I hear about it nearly as much as the LA Times, and certainly more than the Chicago Tribune. I think only three newspapers (the WSJ/Washington Post/NY Times) can clearly be said to stand head and shoulders above it.

Ron Newman
03-03-2008, 08:00 AM
For how long will that continue to be true, as the Globe lays off more and more editorial staff?

kmp1284
03-03-2008, 10:09 AM
Luckily Ron every major paper is going down this same path. The Globe is never going to be the source of international news it was when it had the overseas bureaus in Berlin, Jerusalem, etc. but as far as local, regional and even some national political news, it can't be beat. I've never done the math but I'm guessing on a per-capita basis, the Globe has among the highest circulation rates of any major city's paper. For the sake of proof and out of sheer boredom on my travel day(London for the rest of the week, yay!) I'm going to pull up wikipedia and do a little math. I'll do the top twenty-two exclusive of WSJ and USA Today.

tobyjug
03-03-2008, 03:30 PM
An ebbing tide lowers all boats! (With apologies to Rev. Jackson.)

caravaggiste
03-03-2008, 03:40 PM
mostly just the NABB

Ron Newman
03-03-2008, 03:41 PM
Hey, I like Steve Bailey. A lot. If he goes away, I'll find the business pages a lot less interesting.

Beton Brut
03-03-2008, 07:53 PM
Why do people insist on standing like a bunch of scarecrows on escalators? I see this on the T, in department stores, and at Logan. In every other city I've visited, people stand to the right and leave the left open for people to pass.

Move with a purpose, or stand aside. Please.

Suffolk 83
03-04-2008, 01:07 PM
its funny I noticed the complete opposite today... getting off downtown crossing hawley st exit, its just a long escalator, and everybody who didnt want to walk were all over on the right. usually you have to weave in and out in other places.

but what I hate about Boston... no $1 menus at McD's, Wendy's Burger King. they're all like a 1.59. not cool.

Lrfox
03-04-2008, 01:23 PM
I've always noticed that people stay to the right on escalators in Boston. Even the people who break the mold and stand in the middle or on the left tend to move to the right when someone comes up behind them. It's sort of like driving where many people will sit in the left lanes of the higway (except for some reason on the SE expressway) until someone comes up behind them and then they move (again, usually).

Ron Newman
03-04-2008, 01:25 PM
What I like about Boston: most neighborhoods are not infested with McD's and Burger King.

czsz
03-04-2008, 01:31 PM
No; where there would be both of those, there are 2-3 Dunkin Donuts instead. And a CVS.

aquaman
03-04-2008, 03:13 PM
I've always noticed that people stay to the right on escalators in Boston. Even the people who break the mold and stand in the middle or on the left tend to move to the right when someone comes up behind them. It's sort of like driving where many people will sit in the left lanes of the higway (except for some reason on the SE expressway) until someone comes up behind them and then they move (again, usually).

We must commute in entirely different circles, because I so rarely encounter uniform adherence to this unspoken rule here in Boston. To be fair, though, I have seen it more frequently when I've exited from the commuter rail platform at Back Bay during the morning rush, but I still encounter the occasional escalator slug whose passive-aggression and/or cluelessness causes everyone else to yield to her (or him).

In London there are signs everywhere telling people to stand to the right and in NYC, people will literally yell at you if you disregard the rule.

kz1000ps
03-04-2008, 05:14 PM
What I like about Boston: most neighborhoods are not infested with McD's and Burger King.

And yet there's never a Wendy's when you need one.

Lrfox
03-04-2008, 06:47 PM
We must commute in entirely different circles, because I so rarely encounter uniform adherence to this unspoken rule here in Boston. To be fair, though, I have seen it more frequently when I've exited from the commuter rail platform at Back Bay during the morning rush, but I still encounter the occasional escalator slug whose passive-aggression and/or cluelessness causes everyone else to yield to her (or him).

In London there are signs everywhere telling people to stand to the right and in NYC, people will literally yell at you if you disregard the rule.

Your experiences are probably more of the norm considering that I go to college in Maine and grew up on the Southcoast (Assonet). I'm in town about once every two weeks, so I only experience a small fraction of what most of the members here experience.

I would expect that you notice it more at places where suburbanites and tourists frequent more often (like Back Bay Station)? I have had to pull my girlfriend over to the right side by her jacket (she's from Scarborough, Maine) plenty of times when we're in the city; most recently when getting off of the orange line at Back Bay actually, but she's starting to get it.

I have seen people yell in New York, Baltimore (I was surprised too) and Madrid (I assumed that's what they were yelling about) about escalator courtesy. I haven't yet seen someone yell in Boston, but I saw someone push someone at the Harvard Sq. stop a few weeks ago and just walk on by while the shocked tourist (they were obviously a tourist) just stared with a blank look on her face. I guess I just haven't experienced enough commutes in the city to see enough of this.

statler
03-06-2008, 06:40 AM
http://multimedia.heraldinteractive.com/images/aeb443bac4_render_03062008.jpg

palindrome
03-06-2008, 10:46 AM
i cracked up laughing at that post ^.

I hate the lack of sonic.

Scott
03-06-2008, 03:08 PM
I particularly dislike hooliganism in the name of the Red Sox or St Patrick.

tobyjug
03-07-2008, 12:09 AM
The architecture at the intersection of Summer St. and Chauncy/Arch St. It should be named "The Four Corners of Hell".

Ron Newman
03-07-2008, 07:51 AM
The old Jordan Marsh annex (now Macy's) doesn't seem that bad to me.

tobyjug
03-07-2008, 08:15 AM
I have to look at the Summer St. side of it every day. It is like a beached oil tanker.

palindrome
03-07-2008, 08:59 AM
I also hate Brighton Nimbys. They have a world class institution looking to expand to their suburban industrial wasteland, and they oppose every bit of it. They have BC looking to house more students on campus, and they oppose every bit of it.

czsz
03-07-2008, 04:45 PM
Brighton is Southie culture's westernmost outpost (somewhat mitigated by students and various immigrant pops). You have to drive through it to get between Cambridge and Newton, painfully reminding everyone in those two cities that they're in Boston and not some kind of urban Vermont.

blade_bltz
03-07-2008, 05:17 PM
It's strange, before I came to this board I was totally unaware of Brighton's "true colors." I'd always felt the students and immigrants entirely mitigated the influence of "Southie culture" in Brighton. I mean...there's always Mary Ann's in Cleveland Circle, but...

Scott
03-07-2008, 05:24 PM
Pardon me do you have any Grey Poupon?

No sir, not in Brighton.

Ron Newman
03-07-2008, 05:28 PM
Historically, Brighton was a meat-packing district. More recently, it's been the only neighborhood within Boston city limits with a substantial Jewish population. Many of these are recent Russian immigrants.

Corey
03-10-2008, 11:55 AM
I hate that I'll never be able to afford to live there.

statler
03-10-2008, 12:01 PM
^^ Sure you can. You just need to lower your standard of living. A lot.

Lrfox
03-10-2008, 03:18 PM
That the "What I hate" thread has nearly double the responses of the "What I love" thread.

Corey
03-10-2008, 05:50 PM
^^ Sure you can. You just need to lower your standard of living. A lot.

I guess I'll stay put then. :P

AdamBC
03-15-2008, 10:28 PM
This building:


http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3289/2335820247_ab69b5624c_o.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/24786860@N08/2335820247/sizes/o/)

tobyjug
03-15-2008, 11:02 PM
Funny building, that one. I always thought the size was right for the spot, and that it was kind of a contemporary version of Boston Granite/Gridley Bryant, only rendered in concrete. Gentle Brutalism, if you will.

Beton Brut
03-15-2008, 11:27 PM
^Exactly -- austere but right-sized. New windows (high-performance plate glass) and a "refreshing" would do wonders. Walked by there on Thursday. The coolest detail about this building is that the columns are octagonal. It fits together like an Ikea shelving unit.

aquaman
03-18-2008, 08:13 AM
Sorry, but I agree with the others. I like that Fidelity Investor Center building. I dislike the automatic doors which open anytime you round the corner, but it's a decent building for that parcel.

statler
03-18-2008, 08:20 AM
It fits together like an Ikea shelving unit.

Always a feature I look for in buildings in prominent locations.

The Fidelity building would be a fine background building tucked along some side street or even at some lesser corner, but the corner of Franklin & Congress call for some a little less, uh, Ikea-esque.
Not that the other three corners are great shakes but that's no excuse.

I once heard that that is actually Fidelity's headquarters. That can't be true, can it?

Oh, this building did get a 'refresh' a few years ago, hence the slabs of brown plastic on the facade and the funky glass etching on the windows.

Suffolk 83
03-18-2008, 10:56 AM
that building sucks ass. I hate that building. somebody should burn that fucker down.

Beton Brut
03-18-2008, 01:40 PM
Just shit on everything and your cool. Thats some people's motto around here. It makes you look smart you should probably do it more often.

Face it - Boston's brutalism collection is as good as its group of South End/Back Bay Victorian rowhouses. We should quit fighting that aesthetic legacy, embrace it as an integral part of Boston's heritage, and market it. Brutally.

.

aquaman
03-18-2008, 02:39 PM
I once heard that that is actually Fidelity's headquarters. That can't be true, can it?


No, Fidelity's HQ is in the very non-descript 82 Devonshire/35 Congress collection of interconnected buildings.

aquaman
03-19-2008, 08:20 AM
Stuff like this drives me nuts: "The report also said that the state could add an optional toll lane on I-93 that would let solo drivers use the carpool lane if they pay a fee."

http://www.boston.com/news/traffic/bigdig/articles/2008/03/19/turnpike_managers_scramble_for_plan_b/

NOOOOOO -- we should encourage carpooling and we should raise more revenue by charging everyone EXCEPT those who can use the HOV lane. Make the HOV lane free and charge to toll to the 95% of I-93 users who refuse to rideshare.

Lrfox
03-19-2008, 09:04 AM
Stuff like this drives me nuts: "The report also said that the state could add an optional toll lane on I-93 that would let solo drivers use the carpool lane if they pay a fee."

http://www.boston.com/news/traffic/bigdig/articles/2008/03/19/turnpike_managers_scramble_for_plan_b/

NOOOOOO -- we should encourage carpooling and we should raise more revenue by charging everyone EXCEPT those who can use the HOV lane. Make the HOV lane free and charge to toll to the 95% of I-93 users who refuse to rideshare.

They do that in LA. It costs about $2-$8 depending on the location to commute in by yourself in the carpool lane.

What's the matter? you don't want our highway system to model itself after Metropolitan Los Angeles?

Lrfox
03-24-2008, 09:13 PM
Motorcycle Staties riding down the paths on the Greenway. I just saw this today. Does it happen a lot? It seemed he had no apparent reason to be doing it; Surface Rd. wasn't particularly congested, and there weren't hordes of teenagers plotting evil.

I don't see how motorcycles roaring down pedestrian thoroughfares really helps attract more pedestrians.... even if it's a cop on the bike (for some pedestrians, that's even more of a deterrant).

Suffolk 83
03-25-2008, 05:50 PM
I hate Joe Constigs REPEATEDLY saying "can you believe it?" that drives me absolutely nuts and its getting worse everytime he says it. Come up with another line! It wasn't that good the first time around!

Scott
03-25-2008, 05:53 PM
WAAAAY BACK!!

um sorry...

cool36
03-28-2008, 08:19 PM
What do I hate about Boston

Everything is away from the city like I-95 and the pats stadium. It sucks that didn't built a stadium in Boston. The Boylston Square
was never built. If that tower was built it would have make the skyline of the Back Bay and Boston even better than now. There is not allot of huge venues and concert halls in the city. Street grid planning is not good like other cities like Philadelphia, Los Angeles, New York, and Washington D.C. Boston city boundaries should expand from west as Waltham, north as Lynn, and south as Quincy and all these cities would have been boroughs and Boston would become a populated city a long time ago. But its too late. We need more people to move to Boston. Cut down the prices of houses in the Boston area. Stop foreclosures and built stadium with transportation center next to it so everyone would be happy for the sake of Boston.

Ron Newman
03-29-2008, 12:23 AM
A football stadium is used 8 times a year, maybe 10 if you're lucky and make the playoffs.

Compare to Fenway Park (81 regular-season games, plus a few playoff games) or the New Garden (41 Celtics games, 41 Bruins games, some playoffs for each, plus the Beanpot, the circus, and various concerts).

caravaggiste
03-29-2008, 07:36 AM
the view looking towards government center from the North End parks:

http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f24/rmacneely/IMG_0117.jpg

Suffolk 83
04-04-2008, 06:50 PM
No 24 hour T..... I'm living proof of the problems with the T not running long enough. Right now its friday night and I'm sitting in, why? Because I got a DUI on St Paddies day that I am now paying for it dearly. Did I deserve it? most likely. Might it not have happened if the T ran 24 hours or after 230 am? most likely. To me, before and after this incident, 24 public transportation is a MUST. public safety is at risk... although I swear I was no danger to myself or anyone else.

bosdevelopment
04-05-2008, 09:25 AM
^Do you have an apt attorney to handle your problem?

AdamBC
04-20-2008, 10:27 PM
Buildings like this that have no relationship to the street and are just plain hideous...


http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2371/2428548857_ca88e13870.jpg?v=0 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/24786860@N08/2428548857/)

czsz
04-20-2008, 11:27 PM
^ Can one of our old timers please explain how the fuck something like that happened?

palindrome
04-20-2008, 11:48 PM
The advertisement on that building is pretty ironic.

Ron Newman
04-21-2008, 12:32 AM
Is this building's facade the fault of CVS, or some previous tenant? (CVS has moved across the street.)

If there's an original old facade under that mess, uncovering it would make the building much more rentable. If there isn't, it should just be demolished.

tobyjug
04-21-2008, 02:53 AM
Ah, yes. What we have here is a failure to appreciate.
The building is one of the "Four Corners of Hell". 7-11 (and upstairs architectural firm), CVS, and Macy's account for the other three. A "Gold's Gym" operated on the premises for a number of years. I believe that the remnants of a circa 1880 building facade survive beneath the "pisoir moderne" update.
I doubt that the property owner will do much to revive the old boy, as the vulgarian probably hopes to cash in on the oft mooted but never commenced highrise on the site of the Arch Street church property next door...

Ron Newman
04-21-2008, 08:09 AM
One of the very few buildings anywhere in Boston that is not better than a parking lot.

Beton Brut
04-21-2008, 02:38 PM
I hate this building for what it does (and doesn't) on the street. That said, I don't mind the building's design elements and grammar -- it's a rarity in Boston. If the owner fixed it's obvious flaws, could it work? Might be an interesting place for a Shibuya-style electronic billboard.

Ron Newman
04-21-2008, 02:49 PM
I don't understand for what purposes a windowless box is ever appropriate. What was, or is, this building used for above the ground floor?

czsz
04-22-2008, 01:30 PM
Might be an interesting place for a Shibuya-style electronic billboard.

Good luck with that one. Maybe if it displayed a perverse image of Curt Schilling.

Beton Brut
04-22-2008, 02:30 PM
Ron --

As our resident Boston-area theatre expert, could this weird little building have been used as some sort of auditorium attached to the Arch Street church? The lack of windows on the lower floors, and the clerestory band of windows suggest "theatre" to me. Just a guess...

Ron Newman
04-22-2008, 02:39 PM
If so, it's not one I've ever heard of or read about.

It's true that theatres have (and need) blank exterior walls, but usually they try to make up for that with signage and ornamentation and even fake windows.

Beton Brut
04-22-2008, 03:45 PM
Exactly. Hence, my electronic billboard suggestion.

AdamBC
04-22-2008, 07:55 PM
The thing is being on Summer st in the Financial District, there's not the kind of foot traffic as seen in the Theater district 90% of the week. I doubt electronic signs would get the kind of ROI they would on the 'Times Sq Building'. Though it should be noted that there is a WindowGain in the windows facing onto Summer St.

Patriots_1228
04-23-2008, 01:15 PM
-I hate all the ugly brutalist buildings near MIT
-I hate the apartment towers between Alewife and Havard that have gas stations built into the side.
-I also, like most people said, don't understand why the T stops after 11:35. What happens if the Sox and Yankees get into a long pitching duel? Does that mean that 1000's of people who take the T to the game can't go home?
-lastly, I hate being teased with all these beautiful skyscrapers, only to realize they will never get built.

tobyjug
04-23-2008, 02:55 PM
I don't understand for what purposes a windowless box is ever appropriate. What was, or is, this building used for above the ground floor?

Toby wishes to answer your questions!

http://i298.photobucket.com/albums/mm278/tobydog_photos/L1060966.jpg

What's this I see? A door ajar around the corner? Toby believes in an open door policy!

Oh crap. No adventure. A gym has opened up and they are INVITING me inside.
Yup, its a gym on all floors. Windows only on the first and fifth floors, and some on the right hand side on all floors of the front. (See top photo.) These mark the original spacing. All architectural detail stripped. Post and beam construction inside. Nothing worth photographing.

http://i298.photobucket.com/albums/mm278/tobydog_photos/L1060968.jpg

Anyway, from this angle you can see that it is (or was) a typical late 19th century commercial row building. After watching "Tokyo Drift" the other night, I like B.B.'s idea about the Japanese lighting!

BarbaricManchurian
04-23-2008, 03:59 PM
Ned Flaherty.

blade_bltz
04-23-2008, 05:47 PM
Damnit, you beat me to it. I came to this thread with the express purpose of writing two words:

Ned Flaherty

Lrfox
04-23-2008, 06:06 PM
-I hate all the ugly brutalist buildings near MIT
-I hate the apartment towers between Alewife and Havard that have gas stations built into the side.
-I also, like most people said, don't understand why the T stops after 11:35. What happens if the Sox and Yankees get into a long pitching duel? Does that mean that 1000's of people who take the T to the game can't go home?
-lastly, I hate being teased with all these beautiful skyscrapers, only to realize they will never get built.

Do you mean the commuter rail, Patriots? Because all of the light rail runs until right around 1:30am. It's a big mistake if any of the suburbanites take the CR into town for a night game because there's a good chance they'll have to find some other way back to their car.

In any case, I don't think there's a person on here that would argue against having the subway run later... at least until a while after last call at 1 or 2 depending where in town you are (a last call that many would argue should be later as well). I don't however, know how I feel about the CR running later. It's easy to commute to one of the outer subway stations (like riverside, oak grove, wellington, quincy adams, etc) and get a spot if you're heading in in for a late night. I just have a hard time seeing the justification for having heavy rail (the CR) run late at night most likely with VERY low ridership (not to mention the waste of fuel). the subway is all electric and serves a higher population density which makes it easier to justify the extended hours.

I agree with the skyscrapers thing, but I have to say, not all of the renderings have been that impressive to me. In anycase, in a better market, some of these may come back to life. Tough times right now.

Ron Newman
04-23-2008, 07:39 PM
Toby, I thought the Gold's Gym had opened and closed already, after CVS moved out. Did they reopen or did another gym move in?

Was the windowless box created specifically for the gym? Most gyms I see these days revel in their windows (e.g Planet Fitness near City Hall, Healthworks in Porter Square, Boston Sports Club in Davis Square)

statler
04-23-2008, 07:50 PM
Another gym has moved in.

That building has has been that way for at least 12 years.

The windows on the Summer St side are still there, just covered with ads.

Ron Newman
04-23-2008, 08:22 PM
I see no windows above the first floor on the Summer Street side, ads or no ads.

tobyjug
04-24-2008, 01:22 AM
Toby, I thought the Gold's Gym had opened and closed already, after CVS moved out. Did they reopen or did another gym move in?

Was the windowless box created specifically for the gym? Most gyms I see these days revel in their windows (e.g Planet Fitness near City Hall, Healthworks in Porter Square, Boston Sports Club in Davis Square)

Ron,

I think it looked that way in the CVS days. It certainly has the look of 80's and 90's CVS stylings. The upper floors reminded me of a warehouse, indeed, it was a bit like the New England Architectural Salvage warehouse in New Bedford (minus, of course, the salvage!)

The only windows in the gym were the first floor horizontal band, and a band (which looked like Pittsburgh-Corning block, but I won't swear to it) on the fifth floor Arch St. side. The interior had close to zero natural light on 2 floors, none on the rest.

Gold's took over from CVS. Gold's failed, and some other gym picked up the membership. That gym failed, and the space was vacant for a while. This new outfit is taking another shot at a gym.

This (Leopold Morse) is what I think lies inside the tiled coffin. I assume the decomposition is advanced.

Toby

http://i298.photobucket.com/albums/mm278/tobydog_photos/003289.jpg

Ron Newman
04-24-2008, 09:33 AM
Thanks. I guess I'm still trying to figure out who first bricked over those windows, and why, and what those floors were first used for after they were bricked over. I don't think CVS ever occupied more than the ground floor.

tobyjug
04-24-2008, 11:03 AM
If I can ask you to cross the street with me to the opposite corner of Arch and Summer, I'd like to show you this loathsome little toadstool:

http://i298.photobucket.com/albums/mm278/tobydog_photos/L1060980.jpg

This is what used to be there:

http://i298.photobucket.com/albums/mm278/tobydog_photos/003315.jpg

Ron Newman
04-24-2008, 01:01 PM
The 7-11 was once a bank -- I think Union Warren Savings Bank. I'm curious if this was the result of a fire? There's no way a landlord could make as much money from the new building as from the one that was there before.

tobyjug
04-24-2008, 04:34 PM
I feel for the architecture firm that rents the second floor. It is a nice central location, and I'll bet the rent is a good deal, but what unfortunate product placement!


http://i298.photobucket.com/albums/mm278/tobydog_photos/001858.jpg


As you can see from this shot looking up Summer toward Washington, the original turned the corner more gracefully. On the other side of the street, you can see what preceded that brick barge they call Macy's. That too had more grace.

tobyjug
04-24-2008, 06:00 PM
I must be in a hateful mood today. Look at this before and after on another edge of the "Four Corners of Hell":

http://i298.photobucket.com/albums/mm278/tobydog_photos/001214.jpg

http://i298.photobucket.com/albums/mm278/tobydog_photos/L1060981.jpg

Ron Newman
04-24-2008, 06:03 PM
I can't quite make out the name of the savings bank. Can you?

Scott
04-24-2008, 06:17 PM
^My sister used to work there in the '80's when it was something like The Bank of New England or New England Bank. My father and I would pick her up and we would eat steamed hamburgers at Joe and Nemo's. Not hotdogs but little burgers steamed with mustard onions and relish for 50 cents.

czsz
04-24-2008, 06:18 PM
It's "Charlestown Savings Bank"...and it looks like its new-for-1962 facade is eating that poor Richardsonian Romanesque structure.

Ron Newman
04-24-2008, 08:16 PM
Oh! Charlestown Savings is the bank where I had my first-ever checking account, as a student. They got eaten up in a series of mergers culminating in Citizens Bank. Their original headquarters building is a landmark in Thompson Square.

I still have and use one of their totebags, with a "that's my bank!" logo on it.

Bank of New England was a different bank, originally called New England Merchants National Bank. BoNE went spectacularly bust in 1991, and the FDIC brought Fleet Bank (then from Providence, RI) in to rescue them. Fleet then proceeded to eat up most of the rest of our local banks.

Surprisingly, another unrelated bank in New Hampshire has now renamed itself "Bank of New England" (http://www.snhb.com/).

tobyjug
04-24-2008, 08:56 PM
It's "Charlestown Savings Bank"...and it looks like its new-for-1962 facade is eating that poor Richardsonian Romanesque structure.

That's brilliant! I thought it looked like the magician dropped his wand half way through the metamorphasis, but yours is better!

Scott, where was Joe and Nemo's? I remember dining at the one on Bowdoin St., (and at the White Castle on Stuart in the ante-Harold and Kumar epoch.)

Merper
04-25-2008, 06:26 PM
these last couple of pictures are extremely depressing.

i've read about 'general sentiment' of the era and all that stuff, and yet am still unable to understand how the replacements ever seemed like a good idea, even back then.

Sure, some of these buildings were destroyed by accidents, but some obviously weren't...

mind boggling, absolutely mind boggling.

Scott
04-25-2008, 06:44 PM
Toby,

I believe it was Summer and Kingston, where the original moved after the destruction of Scollay Square

tobyjug
05-05-2008, 11:38 PM
"Progress".

http://i298.photobucket.com/albums/mm278/tobydog_photos/002205.jpg

http://i298.photobucket.com/albums/mm278/tobydog_photos/003289.jpg

http://i298.photobucket.com/albums/mm278/tobydog_photos/L1070379.jpg

briv
05-06-2008, 07:03 AM
Toby, you must be a sadist.

tobyjug
05-06-2008, 11:20 AM
Yup, pretty much. My assistant claims to be a dominatrix, too.

tobyjug
05-08-2008, 10:45 AM
Chauncey Street improvements.

http://i298.photobucket.com/albums/mm278/tobydog_photos/Chaunceyst.jpg

http://i298.photobucket.com/albums/mm278/tobydog_photos/L1070411.jpg

http://i298.photobucket.com/albums/mm278/tobydog_photos/chauncey.jpg

http://i298.photobucket.com/albums/mm278/tobydog_photos/chauncey1.jpg

http://i298.photobucket.com/albums/mm278/tobydog_photos/4cornersofhell.jpg

http://i298.photobucket.com/albums/mm278/tobydog_photos/L1070420.jpg

underground
05-08-2008, 12:10 PM
To be fair, a lot of that was due to fire, not progress.

tobyjug
05-08-2008, 01:03 PM
^^^^^^
The first two pairs, perhaps.

tobyjug
05-18-2008, 03:58 PM
The "Lincoln Memorial Shoeshine"... please send it to the scrapyard where it belongs.

http://i254.photobucket.com/albums/hh109/tobyjug_2008/L1070825.jpg

palindrome
05-19-2008, 09:00 AM
Thats actually pretty funny that still exits! :D


Anyways, I hate college move in/move out season when tristate area people flood the streets.

Ron Newman
05-19-2008, 09:12 AM
Mass., RI, and NH?

kmp1284
05-19-2008, 09:25 AM
NJ, CT, NY

Beton Brut
05-19-2008, 11:11 AM
More likely: CT, NY, NJ...

(sorry for the double post)

tobyjug
05-19-2008, 11:55 AM
You got your damned insurance blood money; please fix this now!

http://i254.photobucket.com/albums/hh109/tobyjug_2008/L10708622.jpg

kz1000ps
05-19-2008, 06:52 PM
^ Two years and counting...

Ron Newman
05-19-2008, 09:37 PM
where's this?

kz1000ps
05-19-2008, 09:55 PM
Boylston Street, across from the Common. That's the only telltale sign left of the April 3rd, 2006 scaffolding collapse on the then-u/c Emerson dorm.

tobyjug
05-19-2008, 11:09 PM
Boylston Street, across from the Common. That's the only telltale sign left of the April 3rd, 2006 scaffolding collapse on the then-u/c Emerson dorm.

...if you don't count the tombstones.

castevens
05-21-2008, 11:07 AM
What I hate about Boston: In a seemingly random act of violence/theft, a friend of mine (and a very, very good friend of my roommate's) was shot to death on Mission Hill yesterday morning.

Suffolk 83
05-21-2008, 12:18 PM
^ I read about that. Horrible. Poor girl. Shot and both legs and in the chest? That's not right

Ron Newman
05-21-2008, 12:27 PM
OMG - you knew her? how awful

castevens
05-21-2008, 12:39 PM
she was an Athletic Training major in the Bouve College of Health Sciences. I am a Pharmacy major in that same college, but 2 of my 3 other roommates are Athletic Training majors. I used to go out to eat with the AT gang all the time.

It's terrible. Sad.

castevens
05-21-2008, 12:43 PM
Funny how our "What I hate about Boston" thread is twice as long as its counterpart

vanshnookenraggen
05-21-2008, 02:08 PM
It's so much easier to rant.

tobyjug
07-10-2008, 02:03 PM
http://i254.photobucket.com/albums/hh109/tobyjug_2008/washingtonandessex.jpg

http://i254.photobucket.com/albums/hh109/tobyjug_2008/L1090232.jpg

kennedy
07-10-2008, 08:24 PM
You hate wonderful buildings?

Suffolk 83
07-10-2008, 08:33 PM
he hates what happened to the building... is that winter st? I'm ignorant

commuter guy
07-10-2008, 09:05 PM
Its the intersection of Washington and Boylston Streets (or is Boylston called Essex Street in the Chinatown?) You can see the RMV building on the right side of the bottom picture.

Suffolk 83
07-10-2008, 09:50 PM
oh yea the T station gives it away

Suffolk 83
07-10-2008, 09:54 PM
Toby you've produced many of these pics to date, mostly of the DTX area, which makes sense to somebody who works near there, ( I did at one point) I'm curious if you could provide your POV of what might have been done. I know you might not be an architect, but how much more could have been done with these buildings?

I dare you to compile a photoalbum of your examples much like Albarc and site your expert or non expert opinion to these.

tobyjug
07-11-2008, 12:26 AM
I have a whole bunch of these old shots of the city that I've pulled off the Bostonian Society website, mostly photos of old buildings I like. When I get restless, I pick one or two of the ones I saved and shoot their replacements.

This is the corner of Washington and Essex. Boylston is renamed Essex when it moves east of Washington.

I don't hate wonderful buildings. I hate it when interesting buildings are superceded by less interesting ones, as is the case in my previous post. Would you call the old one on the corner of Washington and Essex an example of Ruskinesque Gothic? It certainly went well with its surviving near neighbor on Essex (now threatened) pictured below.

http://i254.photobucket.com/albums/hh109/tobyjug_2008/L1070495.jpg

In any event, the later building at 600 Washington is pleasant enough, but it isn't as nice as the buildings it replaced. It is an object lesson about what we can expect at Shreve Crump and Low...something that will probably be pleasant enough in the end, but not as varied and interesting as that which went before.

Rather than being overtly didactic about my opinion, I have posted before and after photos. Since you draw me out, my theory is this: Boston reached its architectural peak before WW1, and almost everything that has followed has been devolutionary. There are exceptions (e.g. 45 Province, although I don't vouch for what preceded the ugly old garage there), but as a rule it seems that most teardowns or fire casualties have been followed by inferior replacements. Reactionary stuff, eh?

I am not going all Prince Charles on you. I love skyscrapers and modern architecture. I actually like City Hall and Hurley too, just not at the price that was paid make room for them. I like the waterfront stuff (except the Harbor Towers extermination of India Wharf), especially as its antecedents were falling into the harbor.

I also wonder if a modern liberal democracy is capable of great architecture. I am not saying it is incapable of it, so I am not going Albert Speer on you either. I throw it out there for your views: have illiberal democracies and monarchies done a better job of it?

Anyway, I think that development ought to be focused on filling the gaps, and removing the crap, fixing the old teardown mistakes. Hello Turnpike air rights (hello Ned!), Sawyer parking lots, Congress St. garage, empty N. Station lots, Gateway Center, City Hall Plaza.

So what I hate about Boston is we tear down the wrong stuff, and don't put up worthy replacements. Don't believe me yet? See below for the first half of the before and after I'll be posting in 3 years.

http://i254.photobucket.com/albums/hh109/tobyjug_2008/L1070485.jpg

statler
07-11-2008, 04:03 AM
So what I hate about Boston is we tear down the wrong stuff, and don't put up worthy replacements.


Quoted for truth.

Edit- See also: This thread (http://www.archboston.org/community/showthread.php?t=1835) & this thread (http://www.archboston.org/community/showthread.php?t=2330)

Suffolk 83
07-11-2008, 07:55 AM
Monarchies obviously build better. and they do so because money is usually not a question. Modern times its about the economics, its just the facts and something people just have to deal with. I wonder what its going to be like in 30 years...

Pierce
07-11-2008, 08:17 AM
Monarchies obviously build better. and they do so because money is usually not a question. Modern times its about the economics, its just the facts and something people just have to deal with. I wonder what its going to be like in 30 years...

true enough, but also many current EU cities the size of boston are building much better as well

underground
07-11-2008, 08:27 AM
The question about what type of government builds the best is an interesting question. Berlin would be a great case study as it went from small trading post to seat of an empire to republic to fascist state to Communist State to modern democracy. Hell, you could probably center in just on Potdzdamer (sp?) Platz itself and get a good idea.

disturbanist
07-11-2008, 02:30 PM
Monarchies obviously build better. and they do so because money is usually not a question. Modern times its about the economics, its just the facts and something people just have to deal with. I wonder what its going to be like in 30 years...

Monarchies probably have produced better architecture, but I don't think it's entirely based on economics. Money doesn't seem to be a problem for congress when they're writing blank checks for the Iraq War or for Deval Patrick handing out $1Billion for biotech. Architecture used to be what "great leaders" spent money on so that they would be remembered. Now all that money gets funnelled off to corporate interests.

tobyjug
12-19-2008, 08:46 AM
Thank you Mr. Drucker! That's MUCH better!

http://i254.photobucket.com/albums/hh109/tobyjug_2008/L1110228.jpg

http://i254.photobucket.com/albums/hh109/tobyjug_2008/L1110230.jpg

Ron Newman
12-19-2008, 09:41 AM
I can't quite read the COMING SOON banner near the top of the building. What does it say?

The banner at the bottom, it announces a new coffee shop? Windows would be a good idea for such a use.

Beton Brut
12-19-2008, 09:47 AM
"Ground floor retail space available"

statler
12-19-2008, 10:11 AM
Ron, I'm pretty sure that is just an ad.

This is going to sound callous but when Ifirst saw that 'billboard' my first thought was that it could make for a great photograph with one on the local homeless people sitting under the "a lot to be thankful for..." holding a Green Mountain Coffee cup. Sort of a modern take on this classic shot (http://ravingsfromtheblogdweller.files.wordpress.com/2008/08/great-depression-soup-line.jpg).

Lurker
12-19-2008, 12:33 PM
Statler, you realize today that most people all too recently would have found that depression era ad appalling. "How could such a large family comfortably fit into such a small car? Oh wait, those people are waiting in line for gruel...what do you mean they didn't have McDonald's value menu back then?"

tobyjug
12-19-2008, 02:16 PM
Ron, I'm pretty sure that is just an ad.

This is going to sound callous but when Ifirst saw that 'billboard' my first thought was that it could make for a great photograph with one on the local homeless people sitting under the "a lot to be thankful for..." holding a Green Mountain Coffee cup. Sort of a modern take on this classic shot (http://ravingsfromtheblogdweller.files.wordpress.com/2008/08/great-depression-soup-line.jpg).

It is an ad. Let's see. Don't fix the building, can't rent the building, yeah. Use it as a bill board. I wonder what the state Outdoor Advertising Board thinks? Can't believe it isn't a zoning violation too. Better than a hole in the ground, I guess. Now we know how many holes it takes to fill the DTX.

Stat, I had the same thought on the slogan, but none of the Arch Street irregulars (who use coffee cups for begging bowls) were available. They converge on the 7-11 across the street.

palindrome
12-19-2008, 05:53 PM
What I hate about Boston:


Boston as a nanny-state, where unelected officials ban a legal substance. (http://www.wickedlocal.com/roslindale/town_info/government/x1720697433/No-more-tobacco-sold-at-pharmacies)


It's a slippery slope...

statler
12-19-2008, 07:47 PM
Yeah, next thing you know they'll make marijuana possession illegal.

BTW, everyone knows that the term 'slippery slope' was coined to describe a type of logical fallacy (http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/slippery-slope.html), right?

disturbanist
12-19-2008, 08:30 PM
Yeah, next thing you know they'll make marijuana possession illegal.

BTW, everyone knows that the term 'slippery slope' was coined to describe a type of logical fallacy (http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/slippery-slope.html), right?

As far as I know, possession of marijuana is still illegal in the same way that driving 100mph while not wearing your seatbelt is illegal.

Besides, "they" would re-criminalize marijuana in a blink if they knew there wouldn't be considerable public backlash as a result.

palindrome
12-20-2008, 11:35 AM
BTW, everyone knows that the term 'slippery slope' was coined to describe a type of logical fallacy (http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/slippery-slope.html), right?

hmm...you learn something new everyday! After reading up on it, all i could do is laugh at the fact that so many of my peers use that mechanism in the same manner i did.

Chessplayer
12-20-2008, 12:28 PM
hmm...you learn something new everyday! After reading up on it, all i could do is laugh at the fact that so many of my peers use that mechanism in the same manner i did.

Look out for "begs the question" as well.

castevens
01-11-2009, 01:04 PM
What I hate about Boston: In a seemingly random act of violence/theft, a friend of mine (and a very, very good friend of my roommate's) was shot to death on Mission Hill yesterday morning.

8 months later, no resolution. Willing to bet a large majority of the law enforcement would not know what you were talking about if you said "Becca Payne" to them.

Oh well. Awful mess. Obviously they'll never find who did it (or slap the people who heard the gunshots and didn't call anyone despite there being a hospital literally next door).

/rant.

statler
01-29-2009, 07:08 AM
I hate how bitchy people get this time of year.

tobyjug
01-30-2009, 11:09 AM
Thanks for this, Roz:

http://i254.photobucket.com/albums/hh109/tobyjug_2008/L1110606.jpg

http://i254.photobucket.com/albums/hh109/tobyjug_2008/L1110607.jpg

vanshnookenraggen
01-30-2009, 11:10 AM
/\ What/Where is that? /\

tobyjug
01-30-2009, 11:39 AM
Ah. That is Kingston Street. The photo depicts the Gorin family parking lot and service entrance to the cheap and foul edifice on the corner of Chauncey and Summer which presently houses a CVS.

statler
01-31-2009, 08:25 AM
What they did to the lobby of 75 Federal street. :mad:

A sin.

Pro tip: Art Deco doesn't need to be 'modernized'.

Does anyone have any pictures of the old lobby?

kennedy
01-31-2009, 09:36 AM
Do you have pictures? I mean, art deco can certainly look good as 'contemporary art deco'-just look at the luxury hotels in South Beach.

statler
01-31-2009, 09:55 AM
Security guards often get their panties in a twist about indoor photography. I will bring my camera in Monday and see what I can do. Some of it is viewable from the street.

Here a poor description:

In the Franklin St foyer the walls were covered with very ornate brass panels with large raised intricate brass reliefs attached. The brass panels were removed and replaced with dark wood paneling (very now) and the reliefs were put back in place sans context.
Honestly it not a terrible look, unless you know what was there before.

Thankfully, they left the outside of the building alone, except for some signage (which matches 101 but not 75) and replacing the odd-looking terracotta colored window frames with ugly brown ones.

kz1000ps
01-31-2009, 11:13 AM
....the cheap and foul edifice on the corner of Chauncey and Summer which presently houses a CVS.

I don't mind that building, partly because its plaza is actually useful, and also because it's small enough that it's easy to overlook. No doubt what was there before was infinitely more honorable, but all things considered, it's OK.

ablarc
01-31-2009, 01:40 PM
...the cheap and foul edifice on the corner of Chauncey and Summer which presently houses a CVS.

No doubt what was there before was infinitely more honorable, but all things considered, it's OK.
When built, that building was thought a minor masterpiece. It was so fresh and new looking! And it had trick detailing taht made it dernier cri. It got old and its style went out of fashion.

That often happens when you're so up-to-date: you stay perpetually up-to-date --with the date when you designed your building.

Striving to be timeless keeps you in fashion longer --maybe even forever if you really know how to be timeless. Consult Palladio and Wright for lessons. Oh ... that's commonly done already.

czsz
01-31-2009, 01:42 PM
Didn't they think of Adam-style country houses the same way? Palladio? I think you need to reach for explanations other than "being too up to date".

Style is cyclical. People used to right-mindedly criticize Penn Station for being overbearingly garish. These beliefs change.

ablarc
01-31-2009, 01:47 PM
Style is cyclical. People used to right-mindedly criticize Penn Station for being overbearingly garish. These beliefs change.
That's right; that's why we need to drop our obsession with style and modernity, its alter ego. All it does is make most architects ineffective.

Beton Brut
01-31-2009, 01:56 PM
Consult Palladio and Wright for lessons...

Add to your list:
Alvar Aalto
Louis Kahn
Jorn Utzon
Tadeo Ando

ablarc
01-31-2009, 02:18 PM
Most architects should be content to be good followers, since they lack the genius to truly innovate. What kind of an army would you have if everyone were a general?

If you study and master a style, you're at least assured visual competence. If the style you master yields art only to a genius' efforts, you've picked the wrong style to study --unless you're a genius.

Gehry, Meier, Rudolph, Foster, Calatrava, Nouvel: they're all OK with modernism. But if your IQ's below 140, you're better off with a manner that has had a few centuries' development to keep the egg off your face.

statler
01-31-2009, 02:30 PM
How is architectural IQ determined?

Who gets to separate the generals from the followers?

Was there anything that Kallmann McKinnell & Knowles had done prior that would have led us to believe they were capable of something like City Hall?

(I'm not challenging you, I'm genuinely curious)

czsz
01-31-2009, 03:09 PM
That's right; that's why we need to drop our obsession with style and modernity, its alter ego. All it does is make most architects ineffective.

Drop modernity, yes, style, not so much. If you have a world of "generals and followers", how does one choose whom to follow without some sense of the style one wants to work in - and some theory of why it is superior/one's own?

(The "generals and followers" argument reminds me of David Brooks' recent column in praise of individuals subordinating themselves to institutions (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/27/opinion/27brooks.html). The idea is not new; it's derived from Burke - but the weakness is that fully "subordinate" individuals are prevented from shifting allegiances - and, more importantly, as Thomas Paine pointed out, prevented from forging new institutions when the times legitimately call out for them.)

kennedy
01-31-2009, 06:22 PM
Most architects should be content to be good followers, since they lack the genius to truly innovate. What kind of an army would you have if everyone were a general?

If you study and master a style, you're at least assured visual competence. If the style you master yields art only to a genius' efforts, you've picked the wrong style to study --unless you're a genius.

Gehry, Meier, Rudolph, Foster, Calatrava, Nouvel: they're all OK with modernism. But if your IQ's below 140, you're better off with a manner that has had a few centuries' development to keep the egg off your face.

Alright, way to absolutely crush my dream, suffocate my creativity, and assassinate any hope I have. I don't have an IQ of 140. So now I can't be a great architect? I can't create innovative architecture, ever, because I'm not smart enough? Since my left-brain isn't MIT material, my right-brain is F-ing useless?

Back to style. Ablarc, it seems to me you propose eradicating all innovation and progress in architecture, because it's too trendy. You sound like my mother decorating her kitchen, for chrissakes. Alright, so if all architects (except a minor few geniuses) decide to only follow in the footsteps of our forefathers, we end up with a solid design, but what are the architects there for? Why should they exist? Who's to say that Home Depot won't just come up with software that allows you to build your own house (in the conservative style), and it gets built? Architects (unless you're a genius) replaced by computers. Great. Now we'll really some interesting work in Boston.

My plan, for now, is to go to school for architecture and get my masters. When I work for a firm (or have my own firm, fingers crossed) I want to design super stylish, functional, and flashy architecture (design in general). However, I want it to last. I want a building to last, and not be a piece in a museum after 20 years. That's the challenge with modern architecture/design-styles that break barriers, and remain stylish for generations.

tobyjug
01-31-2009, 08:50 PM
I don't mind that building, partly because its plaza is actually useful, and also because it's small enough that it's easy to overlook. No doubt what was there before was infinitely more honorable, but all things considered, it's OK.

The plaza, while usually dark, is not awful. The facade between the elevator/utility shafts that bracket it is dated, but in and of itself, not awful.

For me, at least, the wheels come off because of two features. 1) The wholesale destruction of Kingston Street street wall that the creation of the service entrance brought, as depicted in the photos posted above. Thus at least two superior buildings were lost, and it is unlikely that the Kingston Street hole will ever be filled. 2) The exceedingly poor relationship that the elevator shaft/blank walls bear to the adjoining buildings on Summer and Chauncey Streets. In one respect, these awful spaces are the precursors of the great black void on the back of the Province Street tower. Yet in another, they are far worse: while the void is redolent of cutting corners and sloppy thinking, the blank bookends are vanity made granitic. "Hey look at me! I'm new and special, not like those crappy old buildings that surround me."

ablarc
01-31-2009, 09:25 PM
How is architectural IQ determined?
No such thing as "architectural IQ". General intelligence is scientifically determined by testing, and informally by observation. Some folks are smarter than others. The smartest are actually able to conceive something wholly new. Did you ever wonder how Einstein was able to make the conceptual leap that brought him to E=mc2? Or how Brunelleschi discovered the mathematics of perspective?

Who gets to separate the generals from the followers?
Formally, no one of course. In fact, each architect chooses his course. If he makes the wrong choice, reality corrects him. If you don't have the talent to win at Wimbledon, you become a tennis coach.

Was there anything that Kallmann McKinnell & Knowles had done prior that would have led us to believe they were capable of something like City Hall?
Kallmann is a deep thinker whose ruminations reminded me of Kahn. McKinnell is an obsessed zealot (hope he doesn't read this). A nice combination: in this case, the partners formed a whole that would have eluded either individually.

statler
01-31-2009, 09:36 PM
Formally, no one of course. In fact, each architect chooses his course. If he makes the wrong choice, reality corrects him. If you don't have the talent to win at Wimbledon, you become a tennis coach

So you are saying the problem eventually corrects itself, but we are still left with a bunch of bad architecture.
Though I'm not not sure the tennis analogy quite follows through. In sprts you win or lose. You lose enough you don't get to play anymore (professionally).

In architecture, you can be a bad architect is still have a full career designing bad buildings.

Most architects should be content to be good followers, since they lack the genius to truly innovate.
You put the onus on architects to be honest with themselves about their skill level. Probably your most wide-eyed pipe dream yet. ;) But yeah, it would solve a lot of our problems.

ablarc
01-31-2009, 10:11 PM
Back to style. Ablarc, it seems to me you propose eradicating all innovation and progress in architecture, because it's too trendy.
No way.

Copying is what's trendy; genuine innovation creates trends among the copyists.

Problem is, today's innovators unleash trends so difficult that the copyists can't acquit themselves honorably.

When Richardson unleashed the Romanesque Revival, by contrast, his emulators were able to produce decent products, because the style was inherently rich and interesting even when applied by the modestly-talented. The same is true of Gothic Revival, which is always satisfying, and classical architecture, which produces unsatisfactory results only if it's applied without a knowledge of its rules.

Notice I didn't say "adherence" to its rules; you don't have to adhere to the rules, just know them well enough so you're clearly aware when you're taking them to a level of genuine innovation --or can appreciate that you can't because of your creative limitations.

Anyone who knows classical architecture can tell when an architect doesn't --just as you can tell when a musician plays a sour note. That doesn't mean you're forbidden to use dissonance creatively; in fact, you can use all twelve-tones to make music that an unsophisticate might regard as all wrong notes. But here too it helps to be a genius. It's much harder to make music that most folks like with a tone row than with conventional harmony.

Modernism is like that tone row; you can afflict the public with it if it's anything less than superb, whereas classical or gothic architecture is OK or better, even when it's not of the first rank.

Alright, so if all architects (except a minor few geniuses) decide to only follow ... we end up with a solid design, but what are the architects there for?
To assure we end up with that solid design. That's really all we want or need 99 times out of 100. Who would want the North End to consist entirely of innovative works of genius? It would be monstrous.

Who's to say that Home Depot won't just come up with software that allows you to build your own house (in the conservative style), and it gets built? Architects (unless you're a genius) replaced by computers.
A version of this already exists, but the architects aren't replaced by the computers; they operate the computers. There's still plenty of professional know-how privy to architects about such matters as spatial organization, structure and function.

My plan, for now, is to go to school for architecture and get my masters. When I work for a firm (or have my own firm, fingers crossed) I want to design super stylish, functional, and flashy architecture (design in general). However, I want it to last. I want a building to last, and not be a piece in a museum after 20 years. That's the challenge with modern architecture/design-styles that break barriers, and remain stylish for generations.
Consider mastering the Deco Style. It's still modern, it's due for a revival, and its vocabulary is rich enough to satisfy both journeyman and genius.

It also makes great cities.

ablarc
01-31-2009, 10:27 PM
So you are saying the problem eventually corrects itself, but we are still left with a bunch of bad architecture.
The problem is unique to practitioners of Modernism. If you do Beaux-Arts or Gothic or Deco, folks will like what you do even if you're not top rank.

Though I'm not not sure the tennis analogy quite follows through. In sprts you win or lose. You lose enough you don't get to play anymore (professionally).
That's what I'm saying; when you stop playing professionally, you become a coach. Except at Ivy League schools, architecture faculties consist almost exclusively of folks who have discovered they're not talented enough to play professionally.

In architecture, you can be a bad architect is still have a full career designing bad buildings.
Again, the problem is Modernism. You have to be super, super smart to make it yield paydirt. If you know how to do a classical building, you don't have to be a genius to come up with something satisfying. Ornament goes a long way towards pleasing people, and Modernism is the only style that forbids it. I bet Pete Sampras could beat you even if he were playing in handcuffs --but your local tennis pro couldn't.

You put the onus on architects to be honest with themselves about their skill level. Probably your most wide-eyed pipe dream yet. ;) But yeah, it would solve a lot of our problems.
Even more effective would be to have each one of them major in a second style to supplement the universally-taught Modernism --just in case you turn out not to be a genius. ;)

ablarc
01-31-2009, 10:39 PM
David Brooks' recent column in praise of individuals subordinating themselves to institutions (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/27/opinion/27brooks.html).
Good article.

statler
01-31-2009, 10:40 PM
I seem to remember you doing a rather lengthy post about Classicism. In in you showed a few examples of thoroughly Modern buildings that still (secretly?) followed Classic form.
Would it be fair to say all the Modernists you admire are probably well versed in the Classics and those who are responsible for the junk forgo the Classics entirely?
Kind of a "you need to know the rules before you can break them" sort of thing?

(If the above makes no sense, it's because it is late and I should be asleep -in fact I may be)

czsz
02-01-2009, 02:11 AM
Would it be fair to say all the Modernists you admire are probably well versed in the Classics and those who are responsible for the junk forgo the Classics entirely?

I wouldn't.

http://www.pps.org/graphics/gpp/albany_empire_plaza_02_large

ablarc
02-01-2009, 06:53 AM
I seem to remember you doing a rather lengthy post about Classicism. In in you showed a few examples of thoroughly Modern buildings that still (secretly?) followed Classic form.
Yeah, that didn't get much response. Don't even know where to find it anymore.

The point there was that classicism continues as a living tradition. We're still rooted in it because it's the basis of our culture, and folks who think it's only in the past are deluded. That's why I get so bored with all this "be true to present times" blather.

Would it be fair to say all the Modernists you admire are probably well versed in the Classics...
Sure.

It's a small group, and I've been able to enjoy conversing with many of them. But you wouldn't really expect someone who's a force to be ignorant of the history of his field, would you?

...and those who are responsible for the junk forgo the Classics entirely?
No, the converse doesn't hold, as the Albany Mall illustrates.

Kind of a "you need to know the rules before you can break them" sort of thing?
That ... yes.

Otherwise you're just a bull in a china shop.

tobyjug
02-01-2009, 09:34 AM
Akin to Miles Davis (have "Live-Evil" on in background) The guys in the band know the rules of classical music, and that lets Miles or John riff off them now and then. If if was all honks and squawks, you couldn't make a record out of that (or I guess you could and would call it "Two Virgins".)

It is harder to be a brilliant soloist than one of the boys in the band because it can go so wrong so fast! The wrongness only seems more obvious if you are doing something different and fail. For a quick A and B, compare the mawkish and superficially classical 125 Summer Street (which unjustifiably flies under the critical radar) with the Fiduciary Trust Building across the street.

kennedy
02-01-2009, 10:10 AM
Again, the problem is Modernism. You have to be super, super smart to make it yield paydirt. If you know how to do a classical building, you don't have to be a genius to come up with something satisfying. Ornament goes a long way towards pleasing people, and Modernism is the only style that forbids it. I bet Pete Sampras could beat you even if he were playing in handcuffs --but your local tennis pro couldn't.

This will sound really erm...uneducated; but what happens when the architecture (the shapes, and lines, and forms) actually turn into the ornament? It's not modernism, because modernism isn't ornamental. It's not po-mo because it doesn't have ornaments. The structure itself is an ornament. Is it still modernism? Forgive my lack of understanding of the different styles, I'm still trying to fully understand all of the rules.

statler
02-01-2009, 10:59 AM
From ablarc's defense of City Hall (http://www.archboston.org/community/showpost.php?p=27807&postcount=42) (I think this is related to your question):

Their building?s tectonic components are the structural and mechanical systems, and there?s precious little else to this building (except glass infill where the structure isn?t). The structural materials are brick and two kinds of concrete: poured-in-place and precast, which has a different nature.

And here?s a surprise: in their reductionist zeal, they made the upper levels? structure double as the mechanical system. Concrete ducts !! You can see them clamber up the building?s outside; that?s what those massive cement fins are that function ?decoratively? at the upper levels, like colossal dentil molding. Simultaneously they serve as the building?s structure and enclosure. To synthesize, to hang together, to do more with less.

ablarc
02-01-2009, 01:03 PM
...but what happens when the architecture (the shapes, and lines, and forms) actually turn into the ornament?
Then you end up with what Venturi called a Duck:

By contrast, the duck is a building that has morphed into an ornament, where the decoration is the building. The "architectural systems of space, structure and program are submerged and distorted by an overall symbolic form...building-becoming-sculpture we call the duck in honor of the duck-shaped drive-in, 'The Long Island Duckling'". The duck no longer feels or looks like it is a building, because the key structural elements are concealed within its overall, ornamental form. The shape of the external appearance of the building has "submerged" and "distorted" its internal structures and function - the form has superseded the function.

http://www.usp.nus.edu.sg/writing/folio/vol2/duck1.html

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/08/The_Big_Duck.JPG/800px-The_Big_Duck.JPG

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Duck

It's not modernism, because modernism isn't ornamental.
Well, actually it is. Being a Duck is Modernism's only access to ornament. The whole building becomes ornament. Boston has excellent examples in City Hall, the Carpenter Center and the ICA.

statler
02-01-2009, 03:07 PM
So... City Hall's ducts are a ducks!

(so very sorry)

ablarc
02-01-2009, 03:16 PM
^ Redux, actually.

Beton Brut
02-01-2009, 03:40 PM
Moderism's greatest duck is a swan (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/98/SydneyOperaHouse.jpg).

kz1000ps
02-01-2009, 04:20 PM
...the Deco Style. It's still modern, it's due for a revival, and its vocabulary is rich enough to satisfy both journeyman and genius.

It also makes great cities.

Amen.

I always wished that the art deco-inspired stuff of the late '80s (see the Americas Tower (http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/bu/?id=115448) in NYC) would've led to a full blown revival. Alas, that strain fizzled out with the real estate crash of the early '90s, and now we're firmly entrenched in a '50s/'60s/'70s revival. I guess we can try again in a decade or two.

In the meantime, let's hear it for asymmetrically spaced windows!

kennedy
02-01-2009, 05:15 PM
Then you end up with what Venturi called a Duck:

By contrast, the duck is a building that has morphed into an ornament, where the decoration is the building. The "architectural systems of space, structure and program are submerged and distorted by an overall symbolic form...building-becoming-sculpture we call the duck in honor of the duck-shaped drive-in, 'The Long Island Duckling'". The duck no longer feels or looks like it is a building, because the key structural elements are concealed within its overall, ornamental form. The shape of the external appearance of the building has "submerged" and "distorted" its internal structures and function - the form has superseded the function.

http://www.usp.nus.edu.sg/writing/folio/vol2/duck1.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Duck

Well, actually it is. Being a Duck is Modernism's only access to ornament. The whole building becomes ornament. Boston has excellent examples in City Hall, the Carpenter Center and the ICA.

So, the Oscar-Meyer Weiner-mobile is modern? So technically, if I drew a building that didn't have ornament, but the structure itself drew the eye certain ways (like art), it would be modernism? Even if it weren't City Hall-esque? Say, something like this:

http://i41.tinypic.com/2krm77.jpg

or the pictures of Amsterdam (I think) that czsz posted in the "They Got The Seaport Right"...thread, are both modern? I'm not challenging you, I'm really curious.

ablarc
02-01-2009, 06:50 PM
^ Yup.

(But scratch the Oscar Mayer wienermobile.)

A book for you to read: "The International Style" by Philip Johnson.

Seminal, earth-shaking definitive exposition of the ground rules of Modernism. One of the most important books written on architecture in the 20th Century.

kennedy
02-01-2009, 08:09 PM
I'll add it to my list, my next question was going to be: "What reading would you suggest on urbanism and architecture?" The Death and Life of Great American Cities should come in a brown box sometime this week :). I'll check out The International Style next.

ablarc
02-01-2009, 09:08 PM
What reading would you suggest on urbanism and architecture?
?The City in History? by Lewis Mumford (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_City_in_History): a splendidly-written and erudite history of urbanism and urbanity. The chapters on Rome (Chapter 8), the Middle Ages (Chapter 10), and the New Stone Age (Chapter 1) are particularly good.

?Architecture: Choice or Fate? by Leon Krier (http://www.kunstler.com/mags_choice_fate.html): the definitive hatchet-job on modern planning by the No. 1 urban theorist of our times.

ablarc
02-01-2009, 09:43 PM
Moderism's greatest duck is a swan (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/98/SydneyOperaHouse.jpg).
Sho'nuff. A beauty that caused its architect a lifetime of pain and conflict. But definitely a work of genius.

czsz
02-02-2009, 12:35 AM
A shame about the Sydney Opera House: the closer one gets, the worse it looks. The brown underwear in that shot reminds me of City Hall's unseemly bricks.

tobyjug
02-02-2009, 10:11 AM
(But scratch the Oscar Mayer wienermobile.)


Kinky!


(p.s. the Moxie Mobile was cooler!)

ablarc
02-02-2009, 11:17 AM
What reading would you suggest on urbanism and architecture?
Another one: "Suburban Nation" by Andres Duany (http://architecture.about.com/od/productreviews/fr/sprawl.htm): true, entertaining and full of facts. Essential reading if you want to know what's going on in urban planning.

Beton Brut
02-02-2009, 11:43 AM
A beauty that caused its architect a lifetime of pain and conflict.

Much of this as a result of a political pissing contest (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utzon#cite_note-4). On the upside, the building really launched the career of Ove Arup (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ove_Arup). The firm he founded (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arup) is an astonishing hive of creative problem solving.

That said, Utzon's done okay (http://www.pritzkerprize.com/laureates/2003/index.html) for himself. His kids are (from what I can tell) good architects, his son Jan is working to better realize his father's vision for the interiors of the Opera House.

...the closer one gets, the worse it looks. The brown underwear in that shot reminds me of City Hall's unseemly bricks.

Some plinths are better than others. This was a well-published project -- maybe Kallmann, McKinnell and Knowles lifted the idea.

Utzon was trying to evoke many things with his design, among them clouds over a rock outcropping.

What he wanted for Sydney was the effect he had noticed when tacking round the promontory at Elsinore, of the castle?s piled-up turrets against the piled-up clouds and his own billowing white sails; the liberation he had felt on the great platforms of the Mayan temples in Mexico, of being lifted above the dark jungle into another world of light; the height and presence of Gothic cathedrals, whose ogival shape was to show in the cross-sections of the Sydney roof-shells; and the curved, three-dimensional rib-work of boat-building, as he had watched his own father doing it at Aalborg. The load-bearing beams of the Opera House shells he called spidsgattere, in homage to the sharp-sterned boats his father made.

Like many of his peers, Utzon was a better artist than urbanist. But he did have a strong hand in creating Critical Regionalism. Where would Gehry and Calatrava be without him?

Lurker
02-02-2009, 06:52 PM
Gehry would have stayed in Boston and done relatively pedestrian work. Calatrava would have remained an engineer and produced more unique cable stayed bridges than any other individual in history before dieing of old age or something falling on him.

kennedy
02-02-2009, 09:24 PM
Calatrava would have remained an engineer and produced more unique cable stayed bridges than any other individual in history before dieing of old age or something falling on him.

Perhaps, a unique cabled stayed bridge would fall on him.

tobyjug
05-27-2009, 09:01 PM
The gigantic property owners like Druker, Gorin, even the old Sawyer parking lot empire. They manage their latifundia on the basis of maximum exploitation, minimum civic pride. Their monopolies discourage the reinvestment and improvement that would have been occasioned by periodic ownership turnover. With a low cost basis, there is no incentive for them to improve the properties, which they will milk until the day each can be ripped up for a big score.

Look around. If you see a piece of crap, there is a fair chance one of these folks owns it.

vanshnookenraggen
05-27-2009, 10:01 PM
Dude, you are accusing developers of being developers. That happens everywhere, not just in Boston (and not just in cities). It doesn't matter what the flavor is, it's how it is everywhere.

statler
05-27-2009, 10:09 PM
Technically he is accusing bad developers of being bad developers.

I'm not sure you could levy the same charges against, say, Norman Leventhal.

Ron Newman
05-27-2009, 10:12 PM
No, I think he's accusing them of being non-developers.

kennedy
05-27-2009, 10:40 PM
Gehry would have stayed in Boston...

Gehry is from Boston?

KentXie
05-27-2009, 10:45 PM
I hate Gehry's projects. Yes I said it. Crumple looking building inspired by crumple napkins is just not my thing. Glad he didn't build anything monolithic in Boston. His designs are definitely of an acquired taste.

Beton Brut
05-28-2009, 07:11 AM
Gehry (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Gehry#Personal_life) is from Toronto. He studied at (but did not graduate from) the GSD (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harvard_Graduate_School_of_Design#Distinguished_gr aduates_and_faculty).

tobyjug
05-28-2009, 09:19 AM
Technically he is accusing bad developers of being bad developers.

I'm not sure you could levy the same charges against, say, Norman Leventhal.

Not just bad developers, but bad property owners. In contrast, Mr. Leventhal epitomized civic pride. Still time for the others (here is a shout out to you, Mr. Fitzgerald) to follow his example.

statler
06-26-2009, 07:38 AM
Advertisements for national products that try to play up the local angle.

I saw an ad in the Improper for olive oil (sold in a green jar) with the tag "The Other Green Monster".

That about 300th 'other' green monster I've seen. :mad:

That and all the oh so clever plays on the Boston accent.

"Get yer ice-cold beah"

Oh Budweiser, you know us soooo well.