Month: September 2019

This was a day filled with walking, which I really enjoyed because we learned about so many things along the way. It wasn’t just about getting from Point A to Point B, but about discussing other things in between.

On the way to the World Trade Center Site, we stopped in front of St. Paul’s Church. Although it was very close to the Twin Towers when they fell, it wasn’t touched. It has been open since about 1766, and was actually held the George Washington’s inauguration mass. We learned it was one of the oldest buildings in manhattan. You can tell by the style of the building and the materials used.

We then walked over to the World Trade Center Site, first passing under the seemingly eagle like structure of the Oculus.

When we arrived at the World Trade Center Site, the immensity was palpable. In the space where the towers use to be, now exists a deep gaping hole, invoking feelings of absence. I interpreted the waterfall as tears or blood being spilled. It is kind of like being swallowed by the ground. When I stood at the edge of the hole, the fountains drowned out the sounds of the city so that I was only thinking about what was in front of me. I had a lot of questions. How much water is used (especially if it runs 24 hours a day)? What are the environmental implications?

There’s a various obvious contrast of light and dark when moving from the World Trade Center Site into the Oculus.

The Oculus is stark white, and massive. It makes you feel small and large at the same time. From the outside (and above), it looks like an eagle taking flight, an embodiment of the American Spirit. On the inside, it is very skeleton like, maybe even ribs. In the center of the ceiling, there is this spine of glass. I also kind of looked like a leaf to me, like how leaves have all the veins coming out of the center spine. Either way, it conveyed life to me. I had a lot of questions. What was the material used? Was it built to last the test of time and the elements? I noticed signs of water damage, bubbling, and marks on the white walls. How is the space cared for, and what are those costs like? Also, why use the same name as the earlier created Fulton subway station?

Next we walked under and through to the Winter Garden Atrium in Brookfield Place. This garden of palm trees is inside a maybe 9 story high glass pavilion. This space seems to be very classically designed, with several floor to ceiling columns, and the floors are covered in various colored marble slabs all beautifully laid in repeating patterns. The massive windows flood the space with tons of natural light, and has such an airy and open feeling. The space had to be reconstructed after the 9/11 attacks, as all of its windows were completely blown out, in addition to other damages.

We then walked down the river path, and through some beautiful large and green trees to the Skyscraper Museum.

I didn’t get to spend a ton of time at the Skyscraper Museum, because class time was over. But I did a quick walkthrough, and learned the space mainly discussed the history of how New York started building towards the sky. This was initiated mainly to combat New York’s overcrowding problem. The museum explored the process of attempts at density reduction and slum clearance.

This was a really great day. In total (not just the class time), but my phone said I walked over 8 miles. It’s cool being able to see how much ground I covered. Also I learned and saw so much, not just at the official field-trip sites, but also along the way. I think that’s the best way to learn. I can’t wait for the others that are to come.

I have been raving to everyone about this hidden gem of a museum, especially to my dad. My dad and I both really love learning, and this is the type of place that him and I would go to together (he has actually been asking me if he can come along with me in class haha). I was in awe of the “Timescapes” exhibit. I think it can be hard to grasp the transformation of New York City, and this movie tells the 400 year story in 28 minutes. From start to finish I was captivated. I’m not sure if Erik Larson has made me think differently about the construction of New York City, but his description of the construction of Chicago’s trials and tribulations has definitely given me a new respect for the phrase “thinking outside the box”. I loved “Timescapes” because I am fascinated by the evolution of cities, and this had archival photos that could pinpoint locations still in existence today. This exhibit definitely altered my perception of architecture and New York City as a whole.

I also really enjoyed the “Voice of the Village” exhibit.

It got up close and personal with New York City, the LQBTQ community, musicians, poets, artists, politics, social justice, and resistance. I have been interested in photography and shooting/developing film since I was maybe 13, so I know the intricacy and the difficulty involved in film. This exhibit was mostly film pictures. I am in awe of all that was captured despite the “limitations” that comes with film (shutter speed, aperture, low light, limited shots, etc). These photos looked inside artists in their studios, poetry readings, famous musicians (maybe not famous at the time the photographs were taken), mayoral candidates, and so much more. A lot of these photos were just candid and genuine, something I really appreciate artistically, and especially in this selfie and posed picture driven society we are in now. Now we focus on pictures being “perfect”, but I don’t see that as a factor driving any of these photos. These photos tell a story, evokes feelings and thoughts. This is a quality of photography I wish we would return to.

I thought the “Stettheimer Dollhouse” exhibit was pretty wild. I don’t have much to say besides that I was blown away with the attention for detail and craftsman (and/or woman)-ship of this dollhouse. I just thought it was insane that something could be so small, intricate, and perfect. I was just so shocked, because most children have some type of dollhouse, but none of mine ever looked like this obviously. Someone put in an extreme amount of work to make it look this perfect, in terms of material, scale, accuracy to a time period, and just overall appearance.

This was a really cool excursion. Not only was it beautiful, I learned a lot, but I also walked probably more than 2 miles that day. Starting the day at the Whitney was cool because I got to see the city from a different angle, and to see a bigger picture. I never really knew much about the Meatpacking District. I had no idea there was a whole separate train, let alone that it actually stopped INSIDE buildings to drop off the meat. I also assumed that getting the High Line up and running as a tourist attraction was easy. I had no idea the type of revamp that had to happen. The High Line has a lot of detail if you pay attention to detail. The architects incorporated steel, original brick, wood, and concrete, all in a way paying homage to the railway that was once there.

I also learned about the Cult of Originality that occurred in the early 1900s, and how this movement focussed on creating something that had never been seen before.

The Vessel is free, technically? I know it is a public instillation that is privately funded, but what kind of tax break are they getting? Does it outweigh the money the people of New York City would have gotten in tax money? I can’t imagine what the construction of the High Line and the Vessel did to the immediate community. The Vessel doesn’t really have a purpose, besides being a tourist trap and a selfie spot. But it does allow for beautiful views and fresh(er) air.

There are different meanings of the word Vessel. One is like a ship or a large boat, and the second is like a host. I feel like this instillation incorporates both of those meanings.

Here are some things I was thinking about when we were at the Vessel: Is it open in the winter? Is that dangerous? Who shovels all of these steps? If they do shovel it, do they shovel it off the sides? What if someone falls off of this? Has anyone fallen off of this? What is the maintenance like? What is the future of the Vessel? Will people be charged an entrance fee?

Overall I really enjoyed this field trip.   

            Until reading “Edifice Complex: How the Rich and Powerful Shape the World”, I did not think deeply about the connection between power and architecture. How it can be used to impress or intimidate. How it can be used to distract and overcompensate. How it can be used as a type of propaganda. Architecture can be used to manipulate and skew our view on the world, community, or government. In many ways, Architecture shapes the way we live our lives, as well as death. It doesn’t have to necessarily have to have a specific purpose, it can be used as metaphors and as a symbol.  

          Since reading this, I have been wondering if the meanings of these buildings can evolve. Are they stuck with the name and the politics of the government that commissioned it? Architecture is often times based on exchanging money for notoriety. I did not previously view architecture as having its own language. I have always liked to explore all sides of every decision. When I am observing buildings, I often think about why the architect, or the benefactor, choose what they did. That includes style, and material for me. When it comes to architecture, we can assume time period by observing the material and style. Deyan Sudjic in a way validates my curiosity.

              I missed the class where we went to the New York Center for Architecture because I was sick, but I made sure I went when I felt better. The first exhibit I looked at was “Big Ideas, Small Lots”. My initial reaction was that proposals looked intriguing and very idyllic. I believe that it does contribute to the city as an architectural and cultural landscape. All the proposals had some type of greenscape to beautify the minimalist appearance. I’m not quite sure whose interests the proposals serve. I know they are intended for lower income and that is will be financed by the City of New York, but what does that actually mean? None of the proposals discussed the actual price bracket. I’m wondering, does this mean middle class or minimum wage earners. One of the negatives to me is that this doesn’t seem to be aimed at the homeless, which is obviously a big problem in New York City. Some of the positives for me involved how they are supposed to be environmentally friendly, including features such as micro-solar arrays, greywater filtration, stormwater capture, and low carbon footprint impact. Another positive is that the designs are created with replicable strategies in mind, as well as modular components for easy installation. The appearance is very modern, and I have to say, expensive looking. I had a lot of questions while looking at this exhibit. Are they built to last? What is the City’s budget? What corners are being cut to lower the construction cost? Who maintains this? How much would rent be? Affordability is in the eye of the beholder, so I’m wondering who the “affordable” housing is aimed at as it seems ambiguous for who the space is for. 

                 The second exhibit I looked out was “Topiary Tango”. This exhibit didn’t conjure up as many questions and thoughts for me as “Big Ideas, Small Lots.” Topiaries all began with the Romans and have a lot of history in Disney World, the Olympics, and usually found at Manors or Chateu’s. There’s a common theme in that list: wealth. This really only benefits the elite. If you take a drive through the Hamptons, topiaries can be found in front of, and around most of these homes and mansions. The exhibit stated that topiaries often helped satisfy the need for control. A question I had was, “who has time for this?” I’m not knocking topiaries, as much as it may sound like it. They are definitely an art form, and very beautiful. If there was a way they could be implemented in New York City, in possibly the form of rooftop gardens, I think that would be awesome and definitely contribute to the Cityscape. But then again, the upkeep would be very difficult. 

                   When I arrived at the NY Center for Architecture, I learned that the “Mapping Community” exhibit had been taken down, but I decided to do some research about it online. Part of the exhibit discussed what buildings are eligible for capital funding. That is something I haven’t thought about before. This exhibit also explained how public buildings are built in New York City, and also how many parks, bike paths, etc exist. In addition, there was an interactive component where people could drop a little block into a container, basically casting a vote, for what they would want to see in their neighborhood. Some of the options included a rooftop greenhouse at a middle school, a new elementary school library, a security lighting at subway plaza, to renovate a playground in a local park, or to install an accessible ramp at a local hospital. I’m not sure if those are being taken into account for an actual project, or if it is just to get people thinking and discussing. I believe that the “goal” of this exhibit is to make New Yorkers feel empowered and interested in contributing to community-building.