There is no challenge. It's a grotesque piece of molecular scat.![]()
Yes, what passes for wit among the unwashed always surprises.
There is no challenge. It's a grotesque piece of molecular scat.![]()
Yes, what passes for wit among the unwashed always surprises.
The fountain consists of 41 bronzed plaques, they could cut the fountain into pieces and
put it on the side of the wall..
Instead, melt down the bronze gilding and cast a large Apple logo for the empty wall.![]()
Giant. Well said.One thing this forum will never be short on is blind loyalists that are quick to dismiss any arguments or rational criticism of a decision made by or in support of Apple, usually by making a straw man out of the argument or by pretending the values motivating it are old or illogical.
"Who cares if the wall is boring and the fountain is gone, it's Union Square and it's a boring area". If that's how you feel, then you shouldn't care if Apple is forced to redesign it. They make a lot of money every year, I'm sure they can spend a little more time coming up with a new design. The idea that what goes on at Union Square doesn't matter, is a self-defeating argument because it LITERALLY means that you as a person, who don't care what Union Square looks like, shouldn't even take part in the discussion. You yourself have dismissed your own view.
"The fountain looks [x], [y] and [z] and I don't think it matters anymore anyway." The fountain could look like a generic circular disk with a garden hose sticking out of it and it would look more unique than the Apple store. That store literally looks like a large, two-story version of any regular Apple store.
Here's how I feel about it: If you don't live in San Francisco, you shouldn't be concerned with whether or not the ramifications are a valid argument against it. This is of course, unless you SUPPORT the arguments. The reason why? It's not YOUR fountain and you're not one of the people directly involved in its removal.
Society in general is tending toward dismissing classical forms of art and art history. It's really sad.
And for what? A generic glass front two-story cube? Did they borrow their design idea from Forever 21? We need to be moving forward with our flagship designs and inspiring young businesses and the future of architecture. Decisions like this are what makes things so boring when it comes to progress these days. No one is taking chances, no one is trying new ideas. People just fall into line, minimize their artistic risk and gun for the maximized profit.
I do think, however, that we should all refer to this design as the "toaster oven Apple store", and hope that out of embarrassment Apple starts over with a different design that respects the immediate neighborhood.
As someone from San Francisco and happily familiar with the Bay Area, there are a few things I feel need to be addressed:
You can't say that about anyone because the letters to editor referenced in the post right above yours contradict about everything you just wrote.I am the first to say that this building design is, by no means, artistically important. However, anyone that has spent time looking at that fountain, has probably come away with a similar feeling. It is Kitchy, very 70's, highly detailed, but not inspiring in the least, or at least only as inspiring as a Bugs Bunny cartoon might be. This not a critique of the artist, who has many interesting pieces of art. But this piece in particular looks more like a junior high school art project then any thing produced by a famous artist.
I tend to agree that the building could use more windows and design on the sidewalk side,
I also think that if the architect had been told to incorporate the fountain into the design of the building they could have. But IMHO I can't imagine why.
...anyone that has spent time looking at that fountain, has probably come away with a similar feeling. It is Kitchy, very 70's, highly detailed, but not inspiring in the least...
Fairly brand by Apple's standard. Of all the cities, SF is Apple's home town, it got to be more iconic than New York's.
I am the first to say that this building design is, by no means, artistically important. However, anyone that has spent time looking at that fountain, has probably come away with a similar feeling. It is Kitchy, very 70's, highly detailed, but not inspiring in the least, or at least only as inspiring as a Bugs Bunny cartoon might be. This not a critique of the artist, who has many interesting pieces of art. But this piece in particular looks more like a junior high school art project then any thing produced by a famous artist.
I tend to agree that the building could use more windows and design on the sidewalk side,
I also think that if the architect had been told to incorporate the fountain into the design of the building they could have. But IMHO I can't imagine why.
Today's (May 31) SF Chronicle has a dozen letters arguing to keep the Ruth Asawa fountain.
http://www.sfchronicle.com/opinion/letters-editor/
And it got covered in the local network news:
http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=news/local/san_francisco&id=9121366
I thought you all might want to know what the people who actually live in SF think about it.