Monday, February 13, 2012Partly Cloudy 2°C
Arts, Video

Libeskind in Toronto to Promote, Defend ROM

Posted by Tim / December 15, 2007

With the dinos now on display, it was media day at the ROM today. The Post, The Globe, Citytv and a host of other media outlets were each alloted 10 minutes to interview Daniel Libeskind, the celebrated (or maligned depending on who you ask) architect of the ROM's Michael Lee-Chin Crystal.

I had hoped to talk to the globetrotting architect about the fake bomb but he hadn't heard the news. Said Libeskind "There are a lot of bombs around the world. You can't follow all of them." So instead we settled on the media's reaction to his work, what he would change about the design, and the state of architecture in Toronto. All of this and more in my brief (2 minute) video interview with him below:

Subscribe to this and future blogTO videos: RSS | blipTV Channel | iTunes

Discussion

3 Comments

Adam / December 15, 2007 at 07:19 pm
user-pic
Gotta agree with the guy about the state of architecture in Toronto. He seems to have sparked a bit of change, and regardless of what I think of the ROM (I'm still a little iffy), I'm certainly thankful for that.
Greg J. Smith / December 16, 2007 at 12:42 pm
user-pic
He fielded that "If you could change one thing about the building what would it be" question quite well.
A|Layton / December 16, 2007 at 06:33 pm
user-pic
While I do admire the concept of the building, frankly I think this guy is full of it. He refers to the building as "a work of art", but works of art are supposed to be unique and creative. Take a look at any of his other buildings and you'll find that they look exactly the same, better even, cause they were done first. But frankly, what do you expect from the new breed of "star-chitects". Libeskind and Gehry both have been successful in branding their work to the point where they're all identical and any form of inventiveness and/or innovation is practically non-existent. Look at one of the premiere architects of the 20th century, Frank Lloyd Wright, he kept experimenting and improving on every one of his buildings till the day he died, so for him to say that architecture is not something to improve upon is both egotistical and closed-minded.

Oh, and if he was so considerate of the civic space that he was using, why was the original concept of a glass crystal (which would have looked amazing) changed so much until we are left with the amazingly ugly aluminum sided structure we see today?

The answer is simple, he was taking the easy way out by plopping the same building he's used elsewhere into this space without taking into consideration the climate it was being built in and, perhaps most importantly, the purpose of the space.

He is right about one thing though, Toronto is, and still remains a remarkably boring city in terms of architecture.

Add a Comment

Other Cities: VancouverMontreal