ArchiRaid

Browsing through the News section over at Archinect, I came across these links of interest:

Let It Be, Philip Nobel's critique of the four High Line finalists, from Metropolis Magazine. Nobel's stance that architects rely too much on buildings, even though they have created a situation where they have responsibility for everything from "the spoon to the skyscraper", is reinforced by three of the four finalists' entries, one being the winner. He argues that in this case the appropriate solution should have valued landscape over building, as in the TerraGRAM entry.



Built to thrill (classic) and Built to thrill (new), travel suggestions for the architourist. Capitalizing on a renewed interest in architecture, much like Time magazine's Great Buildings of the World, Budget Travel magazine picks twelve buildings in each category, all obvious to architects and students of architecture, but many new or unknown for the general public. Not surprisingly, all the names in the new section (outside perhaps Taniguchi) are big: Calatrava, Gehry, Libeskind, Hadid, Foster, Piano, Herzog & De Meuron; or at least they're getting big as their designs push public architecture in new and interesting directions. Of the 24 structures, I've yet to visit only eight of them (four in each section), though given the chance to catch up I would opt for visiting ones on the classic list over the new, particularly Park Guell, Fallingwater, and Mesa Verde.



and



Open access vs. donors' influence, an article in the Christian Science Monitor about the private money in the public Millennium Park. As public space in the US is becoming more and more privatized, the actual definition of "park" is changing, as is the role of public bodies in the creation and upkeep of parks. Witness not only the design of Millennium Park and its various features named after donors (Pritzker Pavilion, BP Bridge, SBC Plaza) but more importantly the closing of the Park to the public a week after its opening for a donor party. While no similar closing is anticipated in the future, it's clear that it could happen. Makes me wonder if a truly "public space" should ever be closed to the public, or is a new hybrid public/private space created?