A Modern City Hall in an Old City

^ No guardrails back then.

The safety Nazis have probably had their way by now, but when I went up, my companion was Terror; an infinity of steps wound vertiginously past yawning prospects of doom. I bet now and then careless folks plunged to death in the abyss.
 
Pretty neat looking. I like London's City Hall also.
 
It isn't just Boston, ablarc. Consider: it's never been easier for artists to distribute their music, yet too many people would rather sit in front of their flat panel TVs and watch a bunch of talentless assholes humiliate themselves on American Idol than make the effort to catch a set at Wally's, or Jordan Hall, or the Middle East. Or they're playing Rock Band (full disclosure: the co-creator is a friend of mine; he plays clarinet in the chamber ensemble I'm a trustee with).

None of these things seems to have killed the enthusiasm for live music in New York (although it has arguably killed some of the enthusiasm for mainstream live music, but, then again, all of that is getting pumped out of the Idol factory anyway).
 
The continued vibrancy of NYC's music scene is a result of scale and cultural diversity. I will say the Philharmonic's schedule looked pretty pedestrian this season.

The fact that Boston produced such a stellar mix of smart rock and smarter pop in the 80's and 90's (The Pixies, Galaxie 500, Buffalo Tom) was a function of our university communities. I was at the Paradise a few weeks ago for Mercury Rev -- it was mobbed. The scene changed, because the means of delivery changed (and the entire record industry capsized as a result). Considering live music, good Jazz still oozes out of NEC and Berkley. An array of new classical ensembles rose in the 90's (Metamorphosen [RIP], BMOP, Chameleon, and Radius). Boston and Cambridge are also centers for Early Music.

I miss the Channel and the Rat. I'll miss Avalon and Axis as well. I'm reserving final judgment on the new venues on Lansdowne, though the design is repulsive.
 
But again, you're talking about structural factors. Many of the small bands in New York are formed by groups of postcollegiate kids in a limited set of neighborhoods and subcultures. Arguably the same is true of Boston, where there is a similar student population. Means of delivery would have hit both cities in the same way - and online sampling should be favoring low budget up and coming college bands anyway.

Boston's early music and classical scene is indisputably formidable, but like most of the city's timidly traditional architecture, it only adds to the image of Boston as steadfastly retrogressive. Plus you can't build a cultural capital on such a small foundation - Boston needs strength in more contemporary music in order to draw more diverse (and hence, larger) crowds.
 
Risking the total hijacking of this thread, I beg to differ on our cultural organizations' commitment to new music. Harvard and MIT host two of our finest composers, John Harbison and Bernard Rands. I'm close with several of their students, including Ken Ueno, Curtis Hughes, and Jonathan Bailey Holland. Their music is performed frequently in and around Boston by the groups referenced above, and others.

I do agree that the rock scene has slid a bit in the past few years, though groups like the Dresden Dolls and Dear Leader continue to do interesting work.
 
Unlike Boston City Hall plaza, the plaza in which the Ulm City Hall sits was established in the 14th C. So the problem is our impatience... We should just wait five hundred years for City Hall plaza to be ingrained in the daily life of the city. I'm sure Menino will still be Mayor.


Also I think the second photo posted is an inverse of the Trinity Church/John Hancock building relationship in that the older chuch dwarfs the modern glass box. The Ulm Cathedral was the tallest building in its day, J Hancock was [is?] the tallest building in New England....I think each City should trade modern boxes to make it a fair fight.

url]
 
Scootie, that's an awesome comparision. By the way, welcome to archBoston!
 

Back
Top