My building's better than yours!

The Ottawa Citizen ran an editorial today that claims that because the Portrait Gallery proposal from Claridge Homes does not meet up with their standards of architecture. It is an afterthought, they claim. "...the gallery entrance could easily pass for the entrance into a food court...", they mock.

This from the company whose Ottawa offices resemble a fortress with gun slits. It's about as inviting as gum sores.

I have news for you, good old CanWest employees at the Citizen, the gallery was not an afterthought, it was an also thought. For a commercial builder, such as Claridge, the Gallery is a non-revenue space much like a foyer or an elevator; or some Citizen paper boxes. Claridge designed the space to fit their image of the building not some architects fancy idea of a work of art. The works of art are supposed to be on the inside.

Architects, most but not all, are egotists who love to spend other peoples money. How can you explain taking a fifties era building like the old city hall in Ottawa and turning it into Superman's long lost planet. Who's idea is it to suspend a glass tower at the Museum of Nature in Ottawa. The 19th century castle is going to look a bit like it's wearing a condom.

Remember when they first built the National Art Gallery. It looked great with all those glass panels along the roof - but it leaked like a sieve. I can't remember what the Citizen said about the building, but I bet they liked it.

Public spaces are built by taxpayers. They can afford to be extravagant. Private space are built by developers. They have to be a bit more practical than extravagant. If you want more than a food court entrance, then blame the government that foisted this "competition" on the country.