The Scottish Parliament

[Kryters 0]

THE SCOTTISH PARLIAMENT


Amongst everyday Scots, one building has caused the most fuss this year. Taxpayers were outraged at it's spiralling costs; traditionalists were outraged by it's modern look. However, it is still acclaimed by hundreds of leading architects. Please feel free to voice your opinion on this building. Additional pictures can easily be found on any image search...










These show the complexity of its modern design. Scots want this kind of thing (below) but is it feasable to build in this Victorian/Edwardian style these days. Certainly it is probably possible to build just about anything for

[louisville327 0]

I'm with the Scots, because I hate the new building, too.

If I didn't know it was designed by the late Enric Miralles, I could have easily assumed it was done by Frank Gehry, with all the curves, crooked lines and over-the-top blockiness. Either way, it's garish and disjointed.

I'm not sure why modern architects are so afraid to build with stone these days (like the second, much-older building you posted), but they can hardly cite concerns for cost when their engineering gimmicks almost always result in budget overruns and costly renovations.

[ILL Tonkso 1,236]

It looks drunk

[aestiva 0]

Whoa!

  That thing is so muddled.  I think buildings should externally impress one with the activities carried out inside.  That thing looks like a mental hospital.

 

-Aestiva

[Valiko87 0]

That building is an abomination -.o There are some modern-style buildings I can stand, but that is certainly not one of them...and yes, I think it is entirely possible to still build in the architectural styles of yesterday. Something like the second building you've shown would have looked far better. Nothing on that building contributes any sort of rythm or flow to the design  . It's there in parts, but there's always some feature ready to step in and screw up whatever flow it had going.

I think Louisville is entirely right about modern architects being scared to build with stone...with the cost of a lot of these new (and usually ugly) buildings, it would be entirely possible to build a stone structure, and it would likely end up looking far better.

[aestiva 0]

I wonder if anyone has the skills to build with stone anymore?  And if they do I wonder what the cost of their services might be.

It is a shame that our structures are so impermanent in the west.  I work in the USAF's Flagship hospital and it is made out of modular blocks of reinfroced concrete, It's a disgrace.  Look: members.tripod.com/ loder_jm/Base.html

 

(The first two pics)

 

Things used to have much better value.

 

-Aestiva

[Motina 77]

Despite the exterior, the interior is incredibly interesting and playful with the light and roof structure. Now the thing is, what does it respresent of Scottish heritage?

[Motina 77]

Date: 12/18/2005 10:08:54 PM Author: aestiva

I wonder if anyone has the skills to build with stone anymore? And if they do I wonder what the cost of their services might be.

quote>

The number of skilled stone masons and people who specialize in terrazo flooring are shrinking. People just do not think that they are worth it, despite these trades are highly skilled and dignified with good pay.

[The boy formerly known as Evil Muzz 27]

The previous parliament was fine, I don't see why they built this one. It is rather ugly on the outside, but it's much more modern than Westminster aside from looks.

1. They have electronic anonymous voting, where as Westminster is an old-fashioned stand in a hall kind of thing.
2. The actual debating room is a curved horseshoe shape, making it feel less like a battle and encouraging females to become MSPs, this helps to stop the gender inequalities that Westminster has.
3. There is a creche for those MSPs who have to look after their kids on their own. Instead of arranging for expensive child care, they can use the complimentary creche.

This discussion is about the architecture though, so I'll say again that I don't like it.

[christhebull 1]

It would look better if it was less of a jumble. It's OK, but

[cammo2003 20]

Egadz, that exterior's AWFUL. The main chamber looks ok, but the lobby looks like some Orwellian nightmare (though it may look better in real life).

Yes, I'll side with the Scots, quite frankly. I like some modern architecture, but in every type of architecture there's an example of what to avoid.

This is that example.

[Compromise 1]

I don't like it either. I think it been modern is fine but it should look more organised than like a art museum.

[Mulefisk 15]

Wow.. Don't tell me they're actually gonna build that thing?
Simply afwul. An eyesore. That's all I have to say.
It has absolutely nothing to do with scotland or its cultural heritage, it's simply an arrogant statement by an arrogant architect.

[choco1 4]

I think that building looks amazing! The design is stunning, in the interior and exterior. I really love that building and The interiors looks amazing, and I think I really want to visit this building someday!

I really like this building, its so unique.

[sloppet 3]

It looks drunk

 

hell yeah it looks like that

[kaji 0]

mulefisk: lol, emphasis on the word built. they have actually built that thing.

from the outside it looks nothing lke what one would think of when a government or the leaders of a country are concerned. look at westminster or the USA's equivalent buildings eg the senate. there is something more imposing and an overwhleming sense grandure about them. i feel also there is a sense of heritage that old stone buildings have of this / these period(s). however westminster if i remember correctly is a fake anyway - not built from that period of time its trying to look like but thats another matter

 

i feel that the scottish building is more like an entertianment complex of some sort or as compromise put it an art museum and so for that reason alone i dont like it as the scottish parlimentary bulding. also the cost of the thing is shocking. over

[aestiva 0]

@TBFKAEM,  I think that the interior design sounds fine, but the exterior should convey the majesty of Scotland as a nation. This does not.

BTW, did the old debate floor operate anything like Parliment in London.  We watch that in the USA for fun.  Even SaturdayNightLive(famous US show) spoofed them.

 

-Aestiva  

[sparkythepenguin 90]

How strange... It looks more like a condo development from the outside more than a seat of government. It is quite out of context, and it's overall form is too muddled and busy. Quite overwhealming. It's too modern. Had they made some fusion with an earlier or traditional style, maybe they could have pulled it off...

[SYM Productions 7]

I do find that this is interesting... I sorta like the modern look, but it's WAY outta style for PARLIAMENT???

Date: 12/27/2005 11:32:01 PM Author: sparkythepenguin How strange... It looks more like a condo development from the outside more than a seat of government. It is quite out of context, and it's overall form is too muddled and busy. Quite overwhealming. It's too modern. Had they made some fusion with an earlier or traditional style, maybe they could have pulled it off...

quote>

 

I was thinking the exact same thing!  Holy cow the second picture with the wacky windows looks so, wacky!  What is this thing???

 

- CDI_spy

[umnoscottishhootsmon 0]

they spent

[Glaswegian 0]

It looks drunk

quote>

 

Excuse me, but anyone who cracks jokes about the Scots being drunkards are just plain hypocrits. You of all people should know your country is also full of ugly drunken people with no shame.

[Emozo 0]

i usually support modern architecture in almost every case but this really is a disaster. it looks terrible, messy and plain ugly, i doubt it will age well at all.

and half a billion? is that right? if you just stop to think about that for a minute and ask yourself what half a billion could buy then think why on earth did they waste their time, new schools, hospitals anyone? think what an art work

[aestiva 0]

Dear Glaswegian, You're right, we're are all ugly and have no shame; but I don't think anyone meant the Scots were drunkards, anymore than say the Aussies, Franks, Brazilians, Netherlanders, Spaniards, Canadians, Japanese, etc.,  or the Germans.  Don't get yer dander up over such trivial comment. It's all about the architecture.

 

-A 

[vidioman 21]

Australias parliament is underground. Oh, but it has a big stick on top so you know where it is!

I prefer my government buildings to be neat and orderly looking, this thing looks like someone took a hammar to a jig saw puzzle because they couldnt get the pieces to fit.

[Emozo 0]

exactly videoman i agree:goverment buildings should be neat and consise which will hopefully reflect the polotics inside

but perhaps they built the scottish parliament to reflect the troubled and confused design process the twisting and abstract facades are a metaphor for the poor management and the confused way in which the building came to be. in that respect its quite fitting!pull it down.