Boom! We've come a long way baby

[Allison Slater]

I really don't see how rehabbing an otherwise ugly facade on a street with a mostly historic feel into something more fitting for the street is anti-progressive. I should also point out that using classical art/architecture is not in itself anti-progressive either.

In fact, I would argue that the changing of a "Skidmore" facade into something more contextually appropriate is rather progressive in itself in the fact that it rejects the notion of the artistic quality of something being linked predominantly to the name of the artist/architect rather than the quality of the art itself.

[GRDadof3]

I really don't see how rehabbing an otherwise ugly facade on a street with a mostly historic feel into something more fitting for the street is anti-progressive. I should also point out that using classical art/architecture is not in itself anti-progressive either.

In fact, I would argue that the changing of a "Skidmore" facade into something more contextually appropriate is rather progressive in itself in the fact that it rejects the notion of the artistic quality of something being linked predominantly to the name of the artist/architect rather than the quality of the art itself.

Agreed. I like contrasts too, but I always thought that building looked too contrasting.

[LA Dave]

I agree with your grouse. Generally I dislike the international style as much if not more than most urbanplaneteers. But I always thought this one worked (before the re-skinning) since the glass facade was a nice contrast to all the dark colors and textures of the surrounding buildings on both sides of the street.

Regarding Merrill Lynch et al, all the stock brokers used to have a couple of rows of seats in their lobby where the old retired men (presumably with money) would gather to watch the big stock ticker on the wall. It was the old geezer version of hanging out downtown in pre-internet/cable TV days.

Simple isn't the same as bad. It, in my opinion, is all in the context. As a stand alone building I wouldn't have liked it either.

If there is an earlier 1890's picture, it is an earlier building. I can remember when the glass building was dedicated. It was a big deal then since it had been the first new building in Downtown Grand Rapids since the nineteen-twenties. There was even a local TV special for the dedication with all the local WOOD TV celebrities of the day (I'd guess Eddie Chase, Carol Devoe, Frank Slaymaker - the weatherman, Alex Dillingham. I'm guessing the spellings)

That was my recollection, that this was a new 1958 building, not a re-skinning of a late 19th century building. Hence, its significance. Believe me, before 1966 and the opening of the Old Kent (now 5th Third bank), none of the architecture except for this building and the Herpolsheimer store were post-war development. Hence, to keep downtown relevant, folks would put awful aluminum siding skins on wonderful mid-19th century facades along Monroe.

I think that this is a matter of taste -- I love the contrast. If you look at a picture of Lever House from 1952, it looks like a building from the future has landed on Park Avenue. Today, Lever House is lost in a sea of ugly glass boxes.