Another example of thoughtful architecture from a bygone age.This time a high school. Central Technical High School.
The style is called "Collegiate Gothic" and I'm guessing this was built about 1910.
There are several Collegiate Gothic style schools throughout Toronto.
And although a bit severe, the style is head and shoulders above today's designs.
Which brings me to a correction (I don't like that word) from yesterday's post.
But certainly supports today's post.
I said this was a perfect example of current public building design from Toronto Hydro, circa 1970.Well wrong on both counts.
It was actually 1967.[Nice the way the area around the Date Stone it is kept so clean and tidy...]
And it isn't a Toronto Hydro building - but an addition to a Toronto High School - the very same Central Technical School.Uhhh....circa 1967.
I'll let you make your own decision on which style ("Collegiate Gothic" or "Concrete Slab") better embodies the ideals of higher learning...
Although I do remember seeing a lovely shot of the "entrance" to North Bay's Canadore College on another fellow's blog a few weeks back.
The disease is widespread indeed.
4 comments:
I am starting to see a pattern of conflicting principles in your blogs. On one hand you are clearly a back to basics, strip government to the bone in order to provide only the most basic of services. (A staunch Ford, Harper supporter). On the other hand you cry foul when the same principles are applied to the real world in the development of infrastructure. You hate the concrete behemoths that house people and institutions and long for the days of lavish, ornate, expensive buildings.
Perhaps we are getting it right now by providing functional buildings (however ugly they are) and spending money on people instead. The buildings of your last two posts were and are designs paid for by the taxpayers money. Something you keep a careful eye on and are quick to point out perceived waste.
Thanks for your thoughtful comment.
In a nutshell, I believe property taxes should go towards infrastructure and shared services (water, sewer, police; services citizens couldn't provide on their own - you're not going to pay for your own policeman).
I leave it to the feds for income redistribution, which is why I take issue when cities encroach in that area.
And I'm not sure how much more expensive yesterday's buildings were, although you may be right.
However, I doubt Toronto was any more affluent then to be able to afford any such perceived luxuries.
Prolly a quiet observer of this post should only say... They weren't more afluent that was the start of the waste. Government back in the day made building's to look a certain degree of "power" to show strength of state. The architectural details shown by the blog master are of no value to the services they provide to the citizens. Many old government buildings such Post offices have significant detail that don't help the mail get to its destination faster. I would say a better balance is the answer as government eye sores do not foster an image that we can be proud of.
In the end, doesn't it come back to the old thing about art vs function? At what point is function without beauty detracting from life as we know it? So what if it is most economical? Can man (or woman) live by bread alone? I'm not advocating circuses but maybe a few considerations for the fact that almost all of us do respond positively to beauty. And anything positive these days....
Post a Comment