You all might want to duck come the morning. This whole Art Museum and Solar Reflector thing just went from asinine to downright wrong.
Move an existing phasod, which is roughly a century old, around the corner. What about the rest of the building, which is also the same age?
That parking lot alone is worth $1,046,500.00
So we get an attractive wall.
And an ugly, unused art museum.
What a trade.
And I wish these "starbucks elite" would stop saying its going to bring in money to the local economy. Its not, ok? People dont travel somewhere for one thing, then spend money at others. They travel somewhere for multiple things, and spend money only at those places. This is not something where we can say "Oh well, we tried" if it fails. This is a huge gamble with the very life of this city.
And since Mr. Randall Stout is in town apparently, I ask him to walk the site - and really give it a good hard look, imagining what his building will look like in the place they want it to be.
No offence to the fine people at Billy's Ritz, but if they havent put money into fixing up the "shabby chic" building they have now, whats the promise they will? Those 2nd and 3rd floor boarded up windows will look great next to a world-class art museum. Allegedly world class.
I've been to the Museum of Transportation, Ive been to Explore Park, Ive been to the Zoo atop Mill Mountain many a time. These are worthwhile causes and should be supported by Roanoke. Im not big on art, but I do keep meaning to get to the Art Museum and O Winston Link museum. However, a building of that scale and design - and I would probably stay home. I didnt support the garish designs in NYC, and Im not supporting them here. Build to the area, not build of the area. Not that this is going to do either.
You want to create an artistic triangle, where it can be easily reached yet still stand out? I give you the Yellow Cab site, 200 Shenendoah Ave. Right down the block from both the O Winston Link Museum, and the Hotel Roanoke. Right on 581, easy to get to. Highly visible.
And doesnt wreck the area.
More to come in the morning, lots more. Including the history of the site, and why the Roanoke City Council should rethink its actions.
14 comments:
Dear Mr. Clinton:
Why is there ALWAYS someone who feels they have to make a name for themself by criticizing visionary plans in the Arts?
The new Art Museum design is exquisite. As you know, the design is similar to the art museum in Bilbao, Spain. This museum has been acclaimed throughout the world, and has put Bilbao on the map as an international travel destination.
This museum will likewise give worldwide recognition to Roanoke. I can easily see travelers planning to take a weekend trip to Roanoke for the Fine Arts much as they do in Sante Fe, New Mexico today.
You may know that a similar situation occurred in Paris when designs for the Pompidou Museum were made. It was highly controversial for its wild design that did not "fit" into the surrounding architecture. As you probably know, it is now one of the most popular public spaces in Paris.
Architecture throughout history has inspired people like no other art form. Please, do not recommend some bland design for our museum.
Roanoke is no longer the "biggest small town in the US." There are many other small towns around to take your small thinking.
- C. Beach
C. Beach -
Exquisite, I cannot agree with. But that is a minor matter. Bilbao, Spain has historically a destination, so comparing Roanoke to it is highly unfair. Aside from the fact that Bilbao is one of the greatest stops on a culinary tour of Spain.
What passes as a popular public space in Paris is a fleeting thing. Paris is trend, novelty, and vanity. If its better to be seen by the new museum, than the old one - guess where people are going to hang out. But if you choose to emulate the French, thats your choice.
Yes, architecture has inspired people - for both good and bad. Need I remind that just a few short years ago, the Taliban destroyed some very ancient architecture in Afghanistan?
The only reccomendation I have made for the museum is move it. I dont like the design, I think its cheap and derivative. If not a blatant rip-off, then certainly a bad copy by an architect who has not graduated from designing Community Recreation Centers in Europe. Design is meant to be inspiring, provoking, or futuristic. This design is none of the above. But all I want is that the city sticks to the principals it set out.
Roanoke is a city now, not the biggest little small town. If it intends to stay a city, it will think before jumping at flashy projects. I can personally attest how many homeless camp out in front of MoMa, konowing the patrons have money.
There is a whole other continent available for you to continue your glorification of all things Moderne'. Europe is a lovely, visually stunning place. But I dont want it here.
This is Roanoke, and Im sorry to say that some people were taken by a world class con man, who is now going to build his resume on the back of Roanoke, and leave us with a building that in 2 years no one will want.
Mr. Clinton -
I can assure you that there are many Americans that knew nothing about Bilbao until the museum was built. Furthermore, what would be wrong for Roanoke to become a city known for Fine Arts in a tour of the South (maybe culinary as well)? With the beautiful Link museum and the proposed art museum it will all come together.
I just feel it very backward for certain people to get in the way of great visions simply because it does not fit into their personal taste. What you have to understand is there WILL be many people who "want" the museum in two years, so I think we need to keep our "personal vanity" regarding styles to ourselves.
There are probably people in Roanoke that "poo-pooed" the restaurant Metro when it opened on the market. I can hear people saying "I don't get it." "Doesn't belong on the Market." "No one in Roanoke will go there." Well, surprise! Metro is one of the most successful ventures on the Market. It brings real sophistocation to Roanoke and I would would like to see more it. I want my friends from San Francisco to come here and say "Wow, what a beautiful and progressive city." Again, finding a design that will "fit in" is bland and mediocre.
For great diversity of design go to Cambridge, MA and see the very modern, such as the Polaroid building, against the traditional buildings of Harvard. Modern architecture makes traditional buildings stand out, not blend in.
Also, what is one of the main things that stands out in people's minds when they think of Sydney? Ah, the Opera House - very modern and was very controversial. Great architecture makes great cities. "Fitting in" does not.
In regards to Paris, your comments are very provincial and I think most people would not agree with your assessment. Regardless, of what you think of the French, Paris has been one of the most beautiful cities for centuries and will be that 1000 years from now. I have to laugh to think how many Parisians were opposed to the building of the Eiffel Tower.
Your comment regarding why people go to certain public spaces is strange. People go to public spaces for fresh air, to socialize, to people watch, and take in a great city. Some people may sit outside the Louvre - others at the Pompidou. The point is that such a controversial building as the Pompidou has become a favorite building of people the world over.
I also really do not understand why the homeless in front of the MOMA is germane to the discussion. The homeless will always go where they think there are people with money. I think it has more to do with their hunger than their artistic tastes.
In regards to saying the architect is a world class con man, that is very strong language. I would like to know what you base that disparaging comment on.
In summary, I would like to say that I appreciate your personal taste. But, please, do not impede the progress of this project when so many people have worked so hard to make it come to fruition. And realize that there is much more at stake than your personal taste.
- C. Beach
C. Beach-
I have 2 questions for you. 1) why is it that you keep referring to the one entry that is almost solely based on my feelings, and not the 2 postings which are based on fact?
My feelings, your feelings - in all mean nothing to the grand scheme of Roanoke.
And 2)Why not respond to the idea that the museum should be built, just not in its current location?
I appreciate the hard work it takes to get a project like this off the ground, but that does not cloud the fact that it is the wrong location.
There is much more at stake than my personal taste - I will live, built or not, Im not going to keel over from the sight of it. Whats really at stake here is the future of Roanoke, and where it goes in the next 10-20-80 years.
As for saying he is a con man, he is selling a product that is a direct "rehashing" of his former bosses projects. There is no unique style to it, it looks like a bad clone. When finished, it will be crammed into that parking lot, looking nothing at all like the models we have seen. Stainless steel stains , polycarbonate sheeting clouds and cracks, and stone is prone to structural problems in climates like this.
This building as he has designed it is a novelty, not meant to last. It has no classic stylings, it bears no resembelance to the mountains to which he claims inspiration.
I seem to recall reading thatwhen he came to pitch the idea to the board, they were taken by this "Southern Gentleman who came with sweet words." A man who even sent gifts afterwards.
There is no "public space" at the museum, unless you intend people to stand in the road on Salem or Norfolk, so the issue of public space is null.
The reason most people think of the Sydney Opera House when they think of Sydney is because for years since its opening, the image of it has been hammered into our subconcious. It is impossible to think of anything else in Sydney, because so little else is shown. And I do seem to recall that a few years back, they had to close the opera house because it was crumbling. A worthy building to stand the test of time, nyet.
Metro is a whole other issue which I have neither the time nor the want to get into. It is another case of Roanoke being hoodwinked by novelty.
And if you feel it so backward for "certain people to get in the way of great visions simply because it does not fit their personal taste," then perhaps you should seek out a place where individuals don't have the power to change things.
The AMWV crowd is a minority among Roanokers. If it wasn't there wouldnt be funding issues. You cant force an idea down people's throats and then ask them to fund it, which in a few years time - there will be a need for funding. $46 million is a tremendous debt to open with, not to mention the day to day operations of the place. The IMAX was the only repeat source of revenue the museum had, and now it too is lost, leaving an empty space. There is much empty space in the floorplan of the museum, no matter which floor.
This plan is well concieved - just ill defined. And still I say in the wrong location. Unless there are museums surrounding, a museum should always be a stand alone building, thereby allowing it to stand out as it rightfully should.
Mr. Clinton -
We will have to agree to disagree regarding the design of the museum. Clearly, our definitions of novelty and sophistication are very different.
I would like to comment on the location. It is critical that the Museum be in close proximity of the other art galleries, restaurants and bars of downtown. Otherwise, there will be no mutual benefits.
I assume you remember when the Roanoke Civic Center was built that everyone was excited about it bringing a "revitalization" to Orange Avenue and Williamson Road. It never happened because of three words: "location, location, location."
On the issue of parking, I assume that the municipal garage on Williamson Road is not overflowing on weekends.
Yes, there will be upsides and downsides to every new project as monumental as the Museum. I just think that at the end of the day this is the right project at the right time.
I am already telling my friends across the US about what is happening in Roanoke. Their comment is "wow, can't wait to come and visit you." Isn't that much better PR than your complaining?
- C. Beach
This will be my final comment on this posting to the blog. This conversation grows weary, and is getting no where.
I was not here for the RCC being built. And really, as far as thats concerned - your talking about 2 different issues. I can point to many Civic Centers and show you that the area surrounding is exactly like Williamson Rd. And thats in many areas. I can point to art museums in areas like Williamson and show them thriving.
However I can attest to the fact that parking lots downtown are infact PACKED on Saturdays at least. And I can tell you, without a doubt the city will wind up charging for parking on weekends should the demand grow enough. And there goes the downtown revitalization. Even if the revenue from parking went to the Art Museum, it would still hurt downtown more than most realize.
I moved here from NYC, mainly because I was tired of a transient lifestyle - NYC is ever changing, ever "growing" and living in a total delusion of grandeur. There is nothing truly new in New York, its all rehashed and bootlegged.
I moved here because I found a town with roots, a town that finally valued its history. And for every "forward thinking" individual I meet, I meet 10 who understand the value of whats here.
I fear that you may have been here so long that you dont see the value any longer. You dont see that what we have is more important to what roanoke is than what we "could" become. Possibilities are endless, but revenue is not. Where will the new Rail Station go? Best place would be right where you want the museum. Where should a new park go? The museum land is perfect for it. We allready know it can handle a small festival sized crowd.
That is the good PR for this area. That it is not NYC. It is Roanoke, individual and independant. I am not sure what blog you are reading, but you seem to have me confused with other people. I do not wish to see it go to the civic center. Thats not really useful. I want to see it go someplace where it can benifit all of Roanoke.
However, that place is not next to Billy's Ritz. Plain and simple. I too tell my friends about what a lovely area, community, city Roanoke is, and they all live in envy that I was able to escape NY and find a place that I can call home.
Instead of trying to change Roanoke to fit your ideals, maybe you should actively search out a place that fills those dreams. I did - and Roanoke is what I found.
I tolerated far too much of this mentality while in NY. Demolition of critical community icons led to the communityless, transient and ever soulless lifestyle that is NY. If you wish to live in such a cultural mecca, then be prepared to pay the price for it. There is a reason no house sells for less than $468k, no decent apartment rents for less than one thousand a month, not including utilities.
If thats what you want, Smith Mountain Lake is nearly halfway there allready. They have art galleries.
And the fact alone that you dont know how parking is at the Muni garage on Williamson (not even the closest garage by a long shot) shows that you truly aren't acquainted with downtown.
You would know there are more art galleries off Franklin Road by Walnut than there are downtown. You might know that Elm Ave. is becoming a hotbed of artistic people.
You might want to take a trip down there one day, and see for yourself. Instead of assuming that downtown is still the same dirt-ridden hole it was back before the flood of 85.
And with that, I wish you the best in your quest to find happiness in this life. I found mine.
Its called Roanoke.
Mr. Clinton -
I am sorry you have tired of this "weary" discussion. I do not understand what is the point of your blog site if you do not want to enjoy stimulating conversation. I believe that is the way people learn. Perhaps, the purpose of your blog site is to state your opinions uncontested.
If you desire to end the conversation that is fine. But do not do it by making incorrect assumptions about me that I must then address.
- I grew up in the same home in Salem until I left to go to the University of Virginia.
- I lived in New York City in the 80's AND loved it.
- I now live in SW Roanoke and I am an artist.
- I am very aware of where art is "happening" in Roanoke. I do not know what Market you are referring to because the Market I know is full of galleries, and First Fridays is very successful.
- I also never have a problem finding parking on the Market on Fridays or Saturdays. It is interesting that on the one hand you say the new Museum will not be successful, but then you say we should be worried about parking.
- I think one thing you do not understand about communities is, as with anything else, that a community dies if it does not grow. Roanoke is a thriving city -it is not some small country town from yesteryear. Places like Metro, Dulce, and Expresso are opening (whether you like it or not) because that is what people desire.
- It is too bad that your view of the world is colored by being burned out by large cities and culture. I just do not think a perspective of being tired and burned out is healthy in any discussion.
- C. Beach
One of mans greatest fallacys is the notion of "learning by discussion." There is far more to be learned by actually doing than talking. I have been considered an "artist" myself.
Writer, painter, poet, musician.
I have much experience in the arts, maybe not as much as some - but enough to make me happy. More important than anything to me is the fruits of a hard days labor. If I sat and painted all day, wrote all day, composed all day - I would forget what life is like for my audience.
I come from blue-collar, middle-class roots. My friends and family are, well a good number are, firefighters - police - trade workers - soldiers. That is my audience.
NYC was a great place to grow up, of that I will make no bones. Especially in the 1980's. However, return to NYC now. Its a different city. It has lost its edge. There is nothing new there, just novelty.
First fridays are successful, I never made any remarks otherwise. As for the galleries part, I have seen maybe 2. And I spend a good part of my free days wandering all of downtown roanoke. So unless your including the gallery on Campbell, where the former Hotel Raliegh existed - then I can only think of the one gallery on the market itself.
I have found a few places on a Saturday that parking is easiest at. But most of them are pay places. What we should be worried about is money going to something that is unsupported by the community as a majority. If 10% of the population wants to support it, thats their choice. But don't ask the other 90% to fork over funds.
And this free parking concept it ripe for the picking when it comes to funds.
A sidenote: if anything dies it does not grow, except for your fingernails and hair - which continue on for a while after death.
Metro exists because of the Lake crowd, like it or not. Had it not been for the Lake crowd telling the chef at Metro that they wished he would open a place downtown, he wouldn't be here.
Dolce is a thrill, I dont know that people desired it prior, but once they discovered it - it became just another part of Roanoke. The key to being a good restauranteur is taking a risk. And thats what Dolce was, and still is in some ways. I can tell you from experience - 3 years is a long time to go before you reach stability. And Dolce still has a good deal of time. But I do love that place.
Now Expresso is really just a Starbucks in disguise. They serve Seattles Best Coffee, which is owned and operated by Starbucks. Otherwise, its a coffeehouse. If they serve food, its only to their benifit. But its still a coffeehouse.
I am not "burned out by large cities and culture." I am burned out by the culture of large cities. Perhaps you remember reading about the furor that arose in NY during the showing of the painting of the Virgin Mary with strategically placed elephant dung? Irony has its hold over New York City, and that concept has now become a tool for use by grafitti artists, protesters, and those with a gripe.
That overwhelming sense that everything in life is "ironic" is the biggest detriment to life in a big city. I could elaborate, but I have other things to do. Examples are all around. And if you think that having this "world class museum" would elevate Roanoke in the eyes of the NY art crowd, think again. The "look and laugh" crowd would come once, tear this place apart, and never return.
This blog is for the people, to remember and learn. If you look at my website, you will see that clearly. The Art Museum thing is just a sidenote. I do not believe I ever made assumptions on your life here, all I assumed was that you might be happier elsewhere. Someplace thats more supportive of the arts than Roanoke. I doubt very highly that once the novelty of the New museum as worn off, Roanoke will be a city transformed. But that usually is the biggest conceit of the art world I have noticed.
No artist will ever be more valuable to life in general than the plumber who comes to fix your leaky pipes. You cant repair flood damage with a painting.
And while I will admit that cooking is an art, Im willing to bet the average daily customer count is 3 times higher at the Texas Tavern than it is at Metro. Metro deals with a higher profit margin, being what they are - which might make them come out ahead of the Texas Tavern in earnings for the year, but not by much.
And still, your arguement in support of the museum is not dealing with the facts. Facts are, had the city not donated the $1.046 million dollar parking lot, there would be no new museum. Facts are, once the museum moves out of Center in the Square, total revenues will decline. Facts are, Roanoke allready IS a stop on the tour of the New South, it is just badly marketed.
For more facts see my postings Part 1 & 2, and while I realize through years of dealing with the art community in general that feelings are more important than facts, when it comes to the vitality of an area, feelings have very little place in the conversation.
Please look at the Roanoke Vision 2020 plan. It, adopted by the City Council, lays out the plan for making Roanoke more attractive to outlanders. Creating communities, public works, heck it even has a plan for Victory Stadium and Mill Mountain. The AMWV plan was underhanded, back-room dealings that should have been held out in the open. Not just open to those few who actually subscribe to the museum. This is something that affects Roanoke as a whole, and the whole of Roanoke is being asked to swallow an idea they never agreed to.
And you wonder why complacency for the future of Roanoke exists? Its because of things like this. When the public is left out of the process, the public has no vested interest, and when it happens more than once - the public gives up on trying to affect any change. Then comes the backlash, allowing nothing because they arent given the option on something.
Its Roanoke's way of fighting back against something they had no choice in. The whole notion of ramming a new museum down the throats of Roanokers, regardless of what they felt about it is crass, tacky, and ignorant. Look at the World Trade Center, they allowed a vote over the design. The design was chosen, but the voting was not open to all. The backlash started immediately. And now, through copious nitpicking, the chosen design has been forced back to the drawing board.
Roanoke does not have that option. And if the Museum does not turn out stunning, attractive, and alluring - you can bet that we will be paying higher taxes because of it in short order.
Well, those of us who live in the City anyway.
I still say if they insist on building it where they want it, the design needs to change. If they want to keep the design, then it must move. Roanoke, in fact, will not support an eyesore.
If you wish to continue the conversation, then feel free. Get it off your chest, about how "proletariat" my views are, how "provincial." How I wish for nothing more than the Status Quo to carry forth through this century. Then ask me what I would do with the abandoned storefronts downtown, the parking lots, the entire buildings fallen to disrepair. Im sure you would find things are not as they seem to be. Theres forward thinking, and then there is foolish thinking. As it stands now, the museum is foolish thinking. It wouldn't take much for it to be forward thinking.
ps - The choice of architects is astounding, considering Michael Graves was on that list. But I guess why would you want a well-known name to design a building which will become a landmark, locally and nationwise. But then again, I guess he did not send gifts.
Mr. Clinton -
I think you continue to ignore the intangible quality that makes a good city a great city. Often that intangible is much about feelings and little about practicality. I really do believe that outstanding architecture defines a city more than anything else. For example:
- in Miami, the Architectonica apartment buildings on Brickell
- the John Hancock building in Boston
- the Empire State Building in NYC
- the Eiffel Tower in Paris
- the Syndney Opera House
All of these were very controversial constructions and were on the cutting edge of design. But every one of them is now an icon for tourism advertisement.
I am curious as to what you believe is "acceptable" architecture for Roanoke.
- C. Beach
PS It seems you have a prejudice against those of us who are not "blue collar". Would that be a correct assessment?
I believe you will find that the intangeable quality that makes a good city a great city does not lie in what it has, it lies in what it is. That intangible quality is the people and community that make up that city. It has little to do with individuals feelings or any praticality. It is about the people themselves, and I find - in abundance in Roanoke especially, the people here are outstanding, caring, compassionate, hard working, fun loving, and very proud of the place in which they live.
If you think architecture is the key to making a city a great city, then perhaps you need a good dose of Los Angeles. Much like what they propose to do with The Lonesome Dove/Frank's Place - it is nothing more than a hollow, thin shell. Empty behind all the glitz.
Boston and Miami are not great cities - they are wonderful, interesting cities. But far from great. The Empire State Building was not controversial, it was a challenge. It was not the cutting edge of design considering the building of the Chrysler tower was started a few weeks prior. What was cutting edge was the amount of time it took to build both these behemoths of the sky. THAT is the legacy of these buildings. Architectually the Chrysler Tower is far superior in design, but in terms of the story - the winner is the Empire State. A building, which I might add; now has rats to the 70th floor, constant leaking of plumbing, and a lease ratio of 10 to 1. For every 10 sq. ft. existing, 1 sq. ft. is actually leased.
The Empire State building is nearly vacant. Sad, but true. Mainly due to the skyrocketing "per sq. ft." price.
Not everything is as rosy as it seems, behind the veneer of these "great buildings."
Paris would still be Paris without the tower, just as Sydney (with which I have had some contact having family over there) has much more to offer than the Opera House.
Those lone buildings make an Icon, not a city. Thats like saying Thomas Edison was a genius, when its more truthful that those who worked for him were genius'.
What you believe to be controversial and cutting edge is not always so. How about the Roanoke Academy of Music. Certainly a controversial decision to raze a cutting edge grand dame of the theatre era? Locally and Nationall historic, it was razed in 1952, and to what end? "They paved paradise, and put up a parking lot."
Acceptable architecture for downtown Roanoke has allready been decided in the Vision 2020 Plan and numerous Architecture Board decisions. Which is precisely why some of the most magnificent architecture downtown has never been repaired.
I suppose the re-painting of the vintage advertising has nothing to add to the local architecture?
The key for downtown architecture has been laid out long before I moved down here. Roanoke made the decision to salvage its history, to cease production of 1960's aluminum and concrete and glass boxes that added nothing to the city. The Wachovia/Old Dominion tower is a perfect example. Sure, its modern, but look closer - the details are vintage. Even the Roanoke Times new printing plant is not without its merits. The brickwork matches the surrounding brick buildings. The lettering of the "Roanoke Times" on the bricks evokes a sense of importance and place. Even the red columns on the main buildings street corner have a visual interest, seperating what would otherwise be another block of building in the Municipal District as a seperate entity.
As for my having a prejudice agains those who are not blue collar. My only prejudice is for those who have no interest in what Mr. and Mrs. Blue Collar want. Those who believe that its their god given right, and civic duty to lead the way to a better tomorrow, regardless of what the majority wants.
In short, I am prejudiced against ignorance, corruption, and "holier than thou" attitudes. If you have not been elected, do not have the backing of the people, and do not ask the people what they want, then you are useless to me. Just another empty-head polluting the air and trying to force your will upon the masses.
I say put it to a vote, 2 questions on a referendum. First, Do we build the art museum as is, where it is? And second, do we ask them to change the design or move the building?
I dont think thats much to allow the people you purport to want to "enlighten through art" to have a voice in the matter. As of yet, I have seen no public meetings on the situation, with the sole exception being the Architectural board meeting, which I did not even recieve notice of until the day after.
So, since we are going question for question, what do you believe the actual value to the existing community of Roanoke (not the artists, not the art crowd, the common people) is going to be in moving the museum from where it is, to where you wish it?
-kmc
Mr. Clinton -
We do have very different philosophies about architectural design and the impact on cities. And there is no question that our opposing views are very common in regards to new projects anywhere.
It really is a question of whether a city wants to be daring and "push the envelope" or if it wants architecture that "blends in" and is a "decision by committee." These are two opposing views and cannot be reconciled.
It would probably be better if both of us focused on what are the real blights on the city e.g. the horrendous development that is occurring on S220 near the Rt 419 intersection. Every day greedy developers lop off more and more of our beautiful hills and mountains. I think both of us can agree that that is the true atrocity.
- C. Beach
Yes, we do have differing viewpoints on design and impact. Although I do question your statement about the views being common to projects everywhere. Somewhere in this vast world of ours there must be a place where an accord can be reached. If not then we are really in trouble. That is one of my major hangups about this whole deal.
The people were never consulted. Sure the Times ran a poll, but that had no impact on the outcome of the building. Well, none yet anyway.
In the 21st century, daring and pushing the envelope can be a dangerous prospect. That Hancock tower you talked about in Boston, it bears a striking resembelance to a few buildings I grew up near. Specifically the WTC, and EAB Plaza in Uniondale, NY.
These designs are nothing new to me. And for Roanoke to really be unique, it should gamble on technology rather than Disneyland ideals. And yes, I do mean Disney - as in the Disney Music Hall. Another vapid entry into artistic life.
Blending in is not the crime you make it sound like. Because what blends in, might very well set the trend for the next wave of technological advances. Look at the Carilion Bio-medical park. Those buildings are all classically styled, yet inside is the workings to change the course of mankind.
Even Carilion Memorial Hospital, which I might add works well with the mountain as a backdrop, is shiny and pretty on the outside, but at the core of it is a high tech, advanced system.
The real beauty is in conserving and preserving what we have, but making sure they can last far into the future.
That $46 million dollars, and all it entails, could be much better spent actually supporting the arts instead of trying to dominate them. The AMWV, in its current design will not only require funding far beyond a rainy Wensdays entries, but will most likely suck funding from the other art projects in the area.
This year alone their funding jumped to levels that, split up properly - could level out the lack of funding to ALL the Roanoke area public betterment organizations. And still leave them with a mighty tidy sum.
Might I point out another struggling art community. The Mill Mountain Zoo.
Now if the daily care of exotic animals, the lush and diverse grounds, and the wonderful ZooChoo arent worth funding - then no art is.
The Zoo also has a plan, a plan to expand and enlarge its capacity. Rework the entire site, and make itself into a world class zoo, quite unlike anything seen. They have a model on display near the Hot Dog Stand. Its worth a look. That is a project that can pay off exponential dividends far into the future. We cannot expect to attract the best and brightest if we only have one light.
The Zoo struggles, and struggles on a daily basis. But first and foremost is the care of the animals and education of the public. Not to be rude, but the Art Museum is nothing more than storage. Static displays. It has yet to be shown that a Monet can give birth to baby Monets. I am in no way saying that art is not to be valued. But value needs to be adjusted in each community, based on its values.
And as for the Slate Hill project, Im actually quite shocked by your stance. Considering your stance on the museum, I would think you would be all for the new, high-end retail shops, high class hotel, and most likely high end art galleries. You cant have it both ways. Either you want Roanoke to better itself, or you want it to remain a place of beauty. There is no comprimise on that, what goes for one spot must go for all. Its called continuity. And for any region to excel, its a must. Its all about the packaging.
I do not support the Slate Hill project, but mainly for the reasons that it doesnt belong on such a crowded corner. Were it going further down, more off the 2 roads - I wouldnt have a problem with it. Its free enterprise, capitolism. The American Way, as it were.
Its what leads to funding for all these art groups and civic groups. You have to have capitol to raise capitol.
-kmc
Mr. Clinton -
The point in my last response was that developers are building all over our beautiful mountains and hills, it was not project specific.
I proposed to you that we work together to attack the real culprits when it comes to destroying the qualities of Roanoke that both you and I enjoy. I think that it is much more productive and positive than attacking people who are attempting to bring more art and culture to Roanoke. The art museum is not being built on top of our mountains. Instead it is preserving Roanoke's natural beauty by being built in our downtown.
- C. Beach
Well, so far I have not seen evidence of developers building all over our beautiful mountains and hills. And the City of Roanoke is quite different from the County of Roanoke in that respect. Those are 2 different battles.
The real culprits are infact, those people who want to bring more "glass & steel" buildings to Roanoke. Regardless of how novel the design. See todays entry for the view and "natural beauty" that you and your AMWV friends are seeking to destroy.
You cannot have it both ways. You cannot condem one for doing the same thing you are doing. They are building according to "demand." You are building according to "demand." There is little difference, considering you are both building for the same crowd.
There are no trailer parks being built ontop of mountains, no affordable housing. Its all high-end housing and retail, the people you are directly trying to market the museum to.
No, I dont think our working together would accomplish much. I prefer consistency from my co-workers.
Post a Comment