New Grand Rapids Art Museum

[GRDadof3]

I'm not sure I'd call designing a building with ornate features or what some would call historic features as "lifestyle center." The L&O Tower had some historic accents that were integrated into the design and that turned out pretty awesome. IMO, when someone (in this case Suydam) wants a building with ornate features, they aren't requesting a copy of history. They might be most interested in implementing basic principals of earlier architecture -- pillars, crowns, symmetry, etc...

I think the biggest problem with "lifestyle center" architecture is that it obtains itself as a modern relic. A part of the problem is using historical features purely for the look rather than serving a real structural function.

The GRAM is a real beauty, because you can see its function and that to me is the real form.

Just my observation

Even the last renderings of L&O left a lot to be desired, and were way "dressed down" from the original renderings and fly-through. I have yet to see a skyscraper built recently with a "classic or traditional" look that doesn't look artificial. That's why I used the term "lifestyle center". It all looks weird, and the proportions are way off. That's why personally I am leaning more toward a fan of modern architecture. It doesn't pretend to be something it's not.

[Rizzo]

Even the last renderings of L&O left a lot to be desired, and were way "dressed down" from the original renderings and fly-through. I have yet to see a skyscraper built recently with a "classic or traditional" look that doesn't look artificial. That's why I used the term "lifestyle center". It all looks weird, and the proportions are way off. That's why personally I am leaning more toward a fan of modern architecture. It doesn't pretend to be something it's not.

I didn't know there was ever a revision to that design. I go either way on this topic. You can dress up a building to look like its period architecture, but mostly its just awkward. I think its a combination of scale, materials and knowing there's no history behind the building. However, it's my opinion that you can incorporate some basic principals such as detail and symmetry that those period buildings designed around. To be more specific, I guess you would have to design a building not on early 19-20th century principals, but rather around Greek and Roman principals.

Maybe the architecture guys can further this conversation in an other thread I suppose?

[GRDadof3]

I didn't know there was ever a revision to that design. I go either way on this topic. You can dress up a building to look like its period architecture, but mostly its just awkward. I think its a combination of scale, materials and knowing there's no history behind the building. However, it's my opinion that you can incorporate some basic principals such as detail and symmetry that those period buildings designed around. To be more specific, I guess you would have to design a building not on early 19-20th century principals, but rather around Greek and Roman principals.

Maybe the architecture guys can further this conversation in an other thread I suppose?

Sure, you can, but nobody does. It's too expensive. The only place you see it done correctly are on very high end buildings (usually residential).

I do remember the L&O tower being very ornate when it was first unveiled, and then in the subsequent fly-through. It had a lot more cornice work and detail in the first go around. Then the last rendering we saw, which was an angle looking from the ground somewhere around Monroe and Lyon (someone even had it as their avatar) it was stripped of all ornamentation and even had a reddish colored brick and glass look like 99 Monroe. Yuck.

My only point is that I think people would rather have seen something else on this site other than an art museum, or the art museum redesigned. I'm glad that it DID end up being the art museum that was designed and is being built now.

[Veloise]

The fit and finish guys appear to be doing double shifts. They were out there this evening (7:45 pm). One of my vendors appeared at my office, out where the sidewalks end, and I made him bring me DT...Olive Express was packed with these new finishers, all in matching blue T-shirts.

The concrete seems to have been polished to a countertop-like shine.

[tamias6]

Maybe I'm misreading. But this is an observation that I'm picking up on. What I'm seeing in how folks are responding to the new GRAM or any project going on in DT is one big Catch 22. If the project is modern in nature as is the new GRAM, people gripe that the building is "too modern" and ruins the character of the surrounding urban landscape. If the project takes on a traditional design, such as the recent renovation on the Macatawa Building (name?) located on Ottawa Ave south of Perl St, than people gripe because the building is somehow a cheap knock off of real vintage buildings ala Life Style Centers. Is there a happy medium that allows traditional and modern buildings to be mixed together or is this observation simply a case of "You can't satisfy everybody?"

[numstead]

You can't satisfy everybody.

I was downtown last night and witnessed the illuminated lanterns for the first time. My jaw dropped. I think I drooled a little. Simply stunning. Very elegant. Perfectly fitting.

[Veloise]

Maybe I'm misreading. But this is an observation that I'm picking up on. What I'm seeing in how folks are responding to the new GRAM or any project going on in DT is one big Catch 22. If the project is modern in nature as is the new GRAM, people gripe that the building is "too modern" and ruins the character of the surrounding urban landscape. If the project takes on a traditional design, such as the recent renovation on the Macatawa Building (name?) located on Ottawa Ave south of Perl St, than people gripe because the building is somehow a cheap knock off of real vintage buildings ala Life Style Centers. Is there a happy medium that allows traditional and modern buildings to be mixed together or is this observation simply a case of "You can't satisfy everybody?"

But we all agree on one thing:

Super Mercado is UUUGGGGLY!!

[perhaps I'll shoot it at midnight; that'll improve things]

[snoogit]

Maybe I'm misreading. But this is an observation that I'm picking up on. What I'm seeing in how folks are responding to the new GRAM or any project going on in DT is one big Catch 22. If the project is modern in nature as is the new GRAM, people gripe that the building is "too modern" and ruins the character of the surrounding urban landscape. If the project takes on a traditional design, such as the recent renovation on the Macatawa Building (name?) located on Ottawa Ave south of Perl St, than people gripe because the building is somehow a cheap knock off of real vintage buildings ala Life Style Centers. Is there a happy medium that allows traditional and modern buildings to be mixed together or is this observation simply a case of "You can't satisfy everybody?"

short answer: no

Long answer: eventually people get "used" to the building, and after many years begin to see its charms and quirks and grow to love them. With the rare exception of really really bad architecture (See the area surrounded by Monroe, Ionia, Michigan, and Lyon, AKA the urban renewal core) most people grow to like the buildings if they have some lasting charm to them. I think GRAM's intimate setting and coexistance with elliptical, and all of the fun stuff that happens there will help people to appreciate GRAM.

[jbr12]

The concrete seems to have been polished to a countertop-like shine.

It may have seemed to be polished, but I can assure you they haven't touched the concrete in any way since they have pulled the forms back. That smooth, polished look is straight up concrete with no additional work. It is AMAZINGLY smooth. You'll see what I mean when the fences come down and you can touch it for yourself

[snoogit]

It may have seemed to be polished, but I can assure you they haven't touched the concrete in any way since they have pulled the forms back. That smooth, polished look is straight up concrete with no additional work. It is AMAZINGLY smooth. You'll see what I mean when the fences come down and you can touch it for yourself

So will that be part of the tour once GRAM opens?

[jbr12]

I would say touching the concrete is a requirement for anyone visiting the GRAM

[GRDadof3]

Wall sculpture gives new museum bold new start

Nice! This is the 26 foot tall, 1200 pound "Blue White" painting commissioned by artist Ellsworth Kelly talked about last year.

Here's a picture of it on the front page of today's paper

[torgo]

Wall sculpture gives new museum bold new start

Nice! This is the 26 foot tall, 1200 pound "Blue White" painting commissioned by artist Ellsworth Kelly talked about last year.

Here's a picture of it on the front page of today's paper

No comment

I am disliking the building less and less.

[Rizzo]

Does anyone have the link to the multi-media version? The front page article references the piece to the standard Mlive.com/grpress link, but I can't seem to find it.

[wingbert]

Wall sculpture gives new museum bold new start

Nice! This is the 26 foot tall, 1200 pound "Blue White" painting commissioned by artist Ellsworth Kelly talked about last year.

Here's a picture of it on the front page of today's paper

Here's a picture of it on UP!

A blue square on top of a white rectangle... wow, creative. Like all art, I guess it's subjective. I wonder if they'd like to install my son's sculpture created out of a square lego and a rectangle lego called "Red Yellow"?

[numstead]

I wonder if they'd like to install my son's sculpture created out of a square lego and a rectangle lego called "Red Yellow"?

never heard that joke before

[tamias6]

Construction Update:

The new GRAM's stretch of Louis St. appears to be open both ways.

[Rizzo]

Here's a picture of it on UP!

A blue square on top of a white rectangle... wow, creative. Like all art, I guess it's subjective. I wonder if they'd like to install my son's sculpture created out of a square lego and a rectangle lego called "Red Yellow"?

I used to think of it as that -- a blue square on top of a white rectangle, until I actually observe some basic principals. One principal I took notice of in this building and the artwork instilled inside is its ability to interact with the ambient light.

For example, look at this picture courtesy of Dad. I marked off a couple of details that I regard as a visual crown for the GRAM facility. Observe these two materials as they intersect. Notice as one material may reflect sunlight onto the diffusing material. I haven't seen this building up close yet, but I can imagine it must be beautiful to experience some of the features of this building, those being the color and light.

[therustymitten]

Le Corbusier once said that you will ruin an architecture student if you bring him to Rome. We are not building in the 13th century and should not design our buildings as such. New technology, programmatic needs, cultural boundaries, local vernacular, social significance, etc... should be the driving force of a design.

Traditional painting aroused the visual senses. Contemporary art evokes thought. Contemporary art is not about how well something was painted or the realism, but the experience it creates. Visually speaking, placing a blue block on top of a yellow block is not creative, but look beyond that at the texture of those blocks, the play of light, the spatial experience it creates is.

[suydam]

Le Corbusier once said that you will ruin an architecture student if you bring him to Rome. We are not building in the 13th century and should not design our buildings as such. New technology, programmatic needs, cultural boundaries, local vernacular, social significance, etc... should be the driving force of a design.

Traditional painting aroused the visual senses. Contemporary art evokes thought. Contemporary art is not about how well something was painted or the realism, but the experience it creates. Visually speaking, placing a blue block on top of a yellow block is not creative, but look beyond that at the texture of those blocks, the play of light, the spatial experience it creates is.

Disliking the design of the GRAM is not an attack on all modern architecture. Conversely, defending modern architecture and art as a whole doesn't speak to the beauty or quality of a single piece or building.

On the same token, I find the oft-repeated argument "you cannot please everyone" to be a cop-out. You can please most people. The benefits of that, and whether or not your goal should be to please most people is an entirely different debate. But it can be done, and it has right in GR (a majority of people find the JW Mariott to be an attractive building, using modern materials, etc, etc, etc). Of course, I'm not saying we should have an all glass art museum, just saying it's possible to satisfy a majority of people without building the Madrid Post Office from modern materials and saying "hey look! Faux historical architecture!"

At any rate, the good news is the museum's true value is what it has inside. It can be the ugliest building in the world and if the collections and exhibits are valuable, I'm sure I'll be there once a month either. way.

[Veloise]

I used to think of it as that -- a blue square on top of a white rectangle, until I actually observe some basic principals. One principal I took notice of in this building and the artwork instilled inside is its ability to interact with the ambient light.

For example, look at this picture courtesy of Dad. I marked off a couple of details that I regard as a visual crown for the GRAM facility. Observe these two materials as they intersect. Notice as one material may reflect sunlight onto the diffusing material. I haven't seen this building up close yet, but I can imagine it must be beautiful to experience some of the features of this building, those being the color and light. ...

Hey, Fountain Street's gallery hosted a piece last winter. It looked like a couple cans of Great Stuff ® sealant sprayed atop a 4' square base. Price was four figures.

Several of us were gaping at it. "Isn't that stuff about $3/can at the home stores??"

Perhaps that fine piece of art will wend its way to the new gallery DT.

[Rizzo]

Hey, Fountain Street's gallery hosted a piece last winter. It looked like a couple cans of Great Stuff

[wingbert]

It's all art to me, especially when its four figures and produced by a person whoes name I can hardly pronounce. Although, I won't defend everything, i.e. the local sausage exhibit.

Well, as I said in my original snarky comment, art is subjective... Just like architecture. After looking at the pic of the exterior I can now see how this piece of "artwork" is somewhat reflective of the light colored concrete towers with their colored glass on top.

Besides, I didn't really intend to begin a debate on what constitutes art. That would require a whole different topic and a could lead to some virtual fisticuffs.

Oh well, when all is said and done I'm sure it will be a fun place to visit.

[therustymitten]

Besides, I didn't really intend to begin a debate on what constitutes art. That would require a whole different topic and a could lead to some virtual fisticuffs.

It's just a testament to the way we feel about architecture. Besides there's nothing wrong with a healthy, heated debate.

[tamias6]

...Contemporary art is not about how well something was painted or the realism, but the experience it creates...

This is going a bit off topic perhaps. But I have to question the quoted statement above. What about so called works of art like "Pink", a 10 ft by 30 foot canvas hanging in the Detroit Art Institute. What about the time when I read up on an Artist that dumps buckets of paint into the thrust bloom of a jet engine which then splatters the paint all over a canvas placed behind the engine? Or how about the case people pay up to 30,000 dollars for artwork painted by an Elephant. Maybe its the fact I've spent 5 years of my life and a boat load of money in Art school, to learn about the golden means, color temperature, how to draw anatomically correct figures, how light interacts with an object, and so forth, basically how to turn thoughts an ideas into well executed works of art. But every time I hear "It's not about how well the piece is done. Its the statement behind the piece that counts." like what's quote above, I feel like I've wasted that time going to art school. If this statements like that were true, than I could have simply done something outlandish such as smeared Butterfinger candy bars all over a canvas throw in a thought provoking statment like "This is a reflection of how fat Americans are" and - Ta-Da!- I'd be hanging in the Guggenheim. My point is that yes Contemporary Art or any form of art is meant to be thought provoking. But there has to be at least some good level of technical merit to be thought provoking as most forms of art trace their roots what was developed in the Classical periods and Renaissance. Without some sort of technical merit the artwork fall flat on its face.