MFA Expansion
- Thread starter briv
- Start date
- Status
unterbau
Active Member
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2007
- Messages
- 546
- Reaction score
- 0
briv
Senior Member
- Joined
- May 25, 2006
- Messages
- 2,083
- Reaction score
- 3
The exterior is utterly pedestrian and just continues the "polyglotism" of MFA additions. Those who think it defers to Lowell's original building are lying to themselves. Where the original building is classical, utterly formal, to such a degree it feels plain, the addition is informal, carefully "playful", and incongruous. It pays more homage to Pei's addition (which, ironically, will be obliterated in the next phase) than the original building-- which, incidentally, seems to grow more beautiful by the day. The Fen-side is especially beautiful lit up at night.
But who knows, maybe the interior sings.
For $500 million, it better.
But who knows, maybe the interior sings.
For $500 million, it better.
Any addition to the MFA should be, by definition, polyglot, as mimicry of Lowell would have been a farce, no?
I haven't visited the new addition yet, but would hope that it excels in the sense of space and the details. I've been to Foster's British Museum many times, and that positively sings on the interior, one of the best public spaces in London. Here's to hoping that this reaches the same level when complete.
The Guggenheim Bilbao is pretty form-making and was very original, but it is not a good place to hang art. Foster's building will almost certainly be a better museum space.
The new MFA will function much better as a museum and will have a much better series of interior spaces and circulation routes. We've already seen the beginning of that with the reopening of the Fenway entrance. I would argue that how a building functions and the quality of its spaces is as important as its 'style'
Or is our only criteria of good architecture one that produces pretty pictures in travel magazines? (Frankly that would be a much sadder commentary on the state of design in Boston)
I haven't visited the new addition yet, but would hope that it excels in the sense of space and the details. I've been to Foster's British Museum many times, and that positively sings on the interior, one of the best public spaces in London. Here's to hoping that this reaches the same level when complete.
The Guggenheim Bilbao is pretty form-making and was very original, but it is not a good place to hang art. Foster's building will almost certainly be a better museum space.
The new MFA will function much better as a museum and will have a much better series of interior spaces and circulation routes. We've already seen the beginning of that with the reopening of the Fenway entrance. I would argue that how a building functions and the quality of its spaces is as important as its 'style'
Or is our only criteria of good architecture one that produces pretty pictures in travel magazines? (Frankly that would be a much sadder commentary on the state of design in Boston)
czsz
Senior Member
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2007
- Messages
- 6,043
- Reaction score
- 6
True, Foster buildings tend to be much better inside than out. Just look at the British Museum (though there's not much of an exterior to that addition, which filled a courtyard), London City Hall, Beijing Capital Airport or the HSBC building in Hong Kong.
I disagree. The symmetry and dimensions of Fosters addition echo the neoclassical facade on Huntington. Foster's addition is a central structure flanked by two wings, like the classical MFA building. The rhythm of the glass curtain wall is an ode to Lowell's colonnade.
Like you've stated, Foster's plan will obliterate Pei's. Will it be missed?
czsz
Senior Member
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2007
- Messages
- 6,043
- Reaction score
- 6
Was in the MFA today and peeked into the new addition...it looks quite nice inside; very spacious and very Foster in its detailing.
I don't quite understand the new entrance/exit system at all, though. The old entrances feel cramped, and the new visitor center between them feels totally superfluous and underused. Everyone just starts filtering into the narrow hallways leading to the galleries before they reach the couches and information desk.
I don't quite understand the new entrance/exit system at all, though. The old entrances feel cramped, and the new visitor center between them feels totally superfluous and underused. Everyone just starts filtering into the narrow hallways leading to the galleries before they reach the couches and information desk.
Yeah, its a little weird. The museum has a pretty good hallway system which lets you visit every room without repeating (as long as you plan it with the map), so I didnt catch the new welcome room until late in my visit.
JohnAKeith
Senior Member
- Joined
- Dec 24, 2008
- Messages
- 4,321
- Reaction score
- 69
Ain't I a tease ...
unterbau
Active Member
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2007
- Messages
- 546
- Reaction score
- 0
The Pei building entrance was pretty confusing as well: two completely different directions to enter the main exhibits/ had to enter the museum to get to the gift shop & theater.
unterbau
Active Member
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2007
- Messages
- 546
- Reaction score
- 0
I wouldn't call a museum with a japanese garden and a courtyard particularly shut off from the outdoors
I disagree -- I'm not suggesting there are not outdoor spaces within the MFA, I'm suggesting that the museum is shutoff from the outside world for a myriad of issues, starting with the lawn setback, parking lot, IM Pei's uninspiring blank wall, the car loop, etc.
Here's what I'm talking about.
This museum speaks, "come on in, I'm right here on the sidewalk, you and I are one and this belongs to everyone:"
This one says, "proceed with caution and make sure you don't step on the grass:"
Foster's MFA addition allows the passerby to peer right in at the galleries and breaks down that barrier.
- Status