Typical architectural argument about how deep the design of an office building goes. This is one I like, because it has depth to the skin, shape to the form, and also brings the design inside.
These others are only slightly more than a coat of paint, or the selection of an exterior material. Both do perform a shading function, the way a simple mesh would, and this one has some depth, form, and variation of perforation. Still, it seems to me that to slap an exterior skin on a building that has no influence on, or roots in the actual design of the space is no better than "sprucing up" a design with marble or columns flanking the doorway. While I applaud the environmental layering, along with an attempt at post-modern materiality and digital modeling, I can't really get excited about the final product as architecture.
No comments:
Post a Comment