The Very Best

Comments

Thumbs down to that ugly piece of shit. Rem Koolhaas left a giant spooge dollop in the middle of downtown; nothing more.

Greg on August 13, 2009 at 10:52 AM

How are they doing at keeping bird shit off the glass roof?

minderbender on August 13, 2009 at 10:52 AM

It looks like it's about to transform into a giant robot to fight Megatron.

Baconcat on August 13, 2009 at 10:54 AM

It's a hostile ugly piece of shit. It has no interaction with the street. Nobody has a picture of it above their mantelpiece. Nobody ever will. And nobody will build a village or town of buildings like this and paint pictures of them the way we do of villages in France or Greece, or go to visit them to stroll around.

It's a load of pretense and it has nothing, nothing to do with Seattle culture, values, history or essence.

PC on August 13, 2009 at 10:56 AM

LOL, Charles.

No, it's not.

Seriously, that's like claiming that the box the space needle came in is the best.

Seriously ...

Will in Seattle on August 13, 2009 at 10:57 AM

No, it's actually the second greatest work of architectural masturbation in our city. I think we all know what the first one is.

Hernandez on August 13, 2009 at 10:58 AM

Hernandez,

The Viaduct right?

Akbar Fazil on August 13, 2009 at 11:06 AM

It's fun inside, but the outside...um, yeah. Not exactly inviting. Hell, the doors are practically hidden.

g on August 13, 2009 at 11:08 AM

I might like it more if it didn't look so much like a glorified parking garage. And PC you are right, it is absolutely a disaster at street level.

crazycatguy on August 13, 2009 at 11:09 AM

It might look cool, it is not functional or friendly to humans.

danhowes on August 13, 2009 at 11:10 AM

That building sucks in my opinion, and the photo composition is terrible. Maybe they should invest in a tilt shift.

NumberOne on August 13, 2009 at 11:21 AM

@ 4 "It's a load of pretense"

That about sums it up perfectly.

NumberOne on August 13, 2009 at 11:23 AM

#6 space needle?

w7ngman on August 13, 2009 at 11:25 AM

@7 and 13 - I was going for EMP, but those are also solid answers.

Hernandez on August 13, 2009 at 11:28 AM

Haha, look at all these agry hater types. And what would all of you super-informed, public-space architectual geniuses proposed instead? Maybe something that resembles Lindas? Maybe the Crocodile? Ot maybe #4's advice, a Grecian downtown masterpiece to stroll around and hang art in? Thats a swell idea...D-bags.

__-00_- on August 13, 2009 at 11:30 AM

To me it's the most beautiful new building in the entire country (not counting Tom Kundig's houses). Design Observer recently ran an article on it, "Seattle Central Library: Civic Architecture in the Age of Media," which is worth a look:
http://places.designobserver.com/entry.h…

Strath on August 13, 2009 at 11:41 AM

Fuck this wannabe deconstructivist hunk of android feces. Both the interior and the exterior scream hostility to the library patrons. The whole design goes to great effort to conceal and demean its function, i.e. a storehouse for books and documents.

Reg on August 13, 2009 at 11:44 AM

if by greatest you mean another example of how Seattle rates 2nd to Vancouver in every respect. Do a Google image search for "Vancouver Public Library".

see also...rapid transit, waterfront development, highway not piercing heart of city, cosmopolitaness, etc

runswithnailclippers on August 13, 2009 at 11:46 AM

I know the budgets are separate, but I would have preferred that they spent the money on books.

Central library reminds me a lot of the library at my alma mater. It's also an overwhelming building, and, thanks to the huge ass atrium in the middle, there's no room for actual books. They were already starting to run out of space by the time I graduated. It sure is a nice monument to the rich d-bag who funded it though.

keshmeshi on August 13, 2009 at 11:49 AM

I love the library. Not Seattle enough? BS. It's not hostile. It is slightly disheveled, geeky and full of nerdy information. The way the glass walls make use of available light, it embraces rainy, grey October days with purpose. It took a sterile part of downtown and made it fantastic.

odonata on August 13, 2009 at 11:50 AM

@ 16 I respect your opinion, however, I prefer my libraries to look like this:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/travelguy/2…

NumberOne on August 13, 2009 at 11:50 AM

One other thought: what do the people who dislike progress want? Old buildings and Craftsmen houses are absolutely beautiful, but you can't replicate them now. So many crummy new condos in Seattle have attempted to do it and it just doesn't work, it never looks as good – it's the middle mind represented in buildings. Along with extremely strict preservation rules I honestly would prefer to have everyone build with cinder blocks or shipping containers unless they have a new idea.

Strath on August 13, 2009 at 11:51 AM

whoever called that architectural masturbation is right on - that and the EMP are a blight on the city. Ugh.

on August 13, 2009 at 11:54 AM

@14 - no, you meant the Space Needle.

Stop with the hating.

Will in Seattle on August 13, 2009 at 11:54 AM

@21 – so do I, I love those old buildings, probably even more than interesting new buildings. My point is that if anyone tried to build one now, it would cost an insane amount of money and would look like crap – so new ideas have to be put forward. And there's nothing wrong with having a great new building next to a great old one – or even within the same building, as with the Morgan Library in NYC.

Strath on August 13, 2009 at 11:56 AM

I used to live with a librarian who worked at the VPL - the reason it's functional has more to do with the surrounding space and the law courts than the building itself, which is a harsh setback from the streetscape - so don't call that building a functional street presence - it works due to the inner space and the nearby buildings, in spite of its own street presence. Fwiw.

Will in Seattle on August 13, 2009 at 11:57 AM

I kind of like it as a sculpture. As a library, it feels more like a airport terminal than a public space for learning and access to information.

Westside forever on August 13, 2009 at 11:59 AM

#14 oh man, I don't know if I'd even go so far as to call EMP "architecture".

w7ngman on August 13, 2009 at 12:03 PM

@22: Ignoring some unfortunate mid-century distasters like Sieg Hall, the UW campus has managed progress without resorting to International Style blandness OR ridiculous crap like the downtown library/EMP.

gfish on August 13, 2009 at 12:10 PM

Aw, heck, that's not so bad. Here's Denver's insanely hideous central library:
http://www.city-data.com/forum/members/d…

Fifty-Two-Eighty on August 13, 2009 at 12:19 PM

It ought to be for what it fucking cost. I like the fact that I always see Asian tourists marveling at it and snapping photos like crazy. But the inside is still whacky and has too much wasted space. And my eyes tell me it won't fair well in an earthquake.

Vince on August 13, 2009 at 12:23 PM

It's a beautiful building. I love it, inside and out.

mitten on August 13, 2009 at 12:27 PM

@ 22 I think that is a great question. Personally, I just don't care for the "modern" looking architecture. I think there are plenty of other more aesthetically pleasing options that would work well for a library. One of my favourite libraries is in Columbia City- what a beautiful building. I think that the upgrades to a lot of the smaller libraries look great. The question you pose really is quite difficult because one really can't begin to replicate Gothic or Classic architecture these day with the modern building techniques. Unless its built really slow, like St John the Divine Cathedral in NY.

NumberOne on August 13, 2009 at 12:28 PM

I don't like it inside or out. The outside looks like a cardboard box full of clothes that someone sat on. The inside is mostly hostile to humans.

The kid's area is pretty nice, except the bathrooms.

dwight moody on August 13, 2009 at 12:36 PM

Smith Tower.

That is all.

Original Monique on August 13, 2009 at 12:55 PM

@29 - that's because we have all those architecture post-docs yearning to break free (and working real cheap).

Will in Seattle on August 13, 2009 at 1:31 PM

What could they have done instead? They could have added floors to the existing library for a fraction of the cost. They could literally have built a frame around the old library and put 20 stories on top of it for less money; that thing was INSANELY expensive to build. And it's already dated; it was dated the day after it opened.

On the other hand, it is the biggest architectural tourist attraction in the city -- or anywhere north of LA. Seriously -- all day every day little groups of Japanese tourists make a beeline towards it and only it. The EMP is a joke in comparison; NO ONE is interested in seeing the EMP, inside or out.

But architectural tourism isn't much of a justification for a library, which is supposed to be about the books. This library definitely isn't about the books. Koolhaas is a great enemy of The Book (and the human body).

The Space Needle is an international icon. Don't talk shit about the Space Needle. Even ruined with the lower level it is unparalleled.

The best building in Seattle is probably the Dexter Horton Building. Or the Alaska Building. Or the Exchange Building. Or the Frederick and Nelson store.

Fnarf on August 13, 2009 at 1:34 PM

It is very creative, but I'm with those who prefer older libraries. So I prefer Portland's central, especially since it's right on the MAX line.
www.portlandground.com/Downtown/2005-01-…...

The Alvar Aalto Library at Mount Angel Abbey is a personal favorite for modern architecture. www.pbase.com/greenfrog5/image/81571680

I bet Seattle's new library will excel at night much like Phoenix Central Library does. At day, www.pixelmap.com/images/Arch/dma_bruder_…, and at night www.planetarchitecture.com/.../bruderw1_…

kim in portland on August 13, 2009 at 1:45 PM

Long live our Robocop library!

/it sucks.

charity on August 13, 2009 at 1:52 PM

I seem to suck at links today. Sorry.

www.planetarchitecture.com/.../bruder_w1… Phoenix central at night.

Porland's www.flickr.com/photos/maisonbisson/15389…

kim in portland on August 13, 2009 at 1:52 PM

Charles,
I do like the Central Library but I think the Seattle Tower on 3rd at University is excellent:

File:Seattle_Northern_Life_06A.jpg">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Seattl…

It has art-deco features and is air-cooled (no central A/C). I believe it is on the National Register of Historic Buildings.

lark on August 13, 2009 at 1:53 PM

@37, or the Seattle Tower (formerly the Northern Life Tower).

What's a shame is the downtown library two incarnations prior to this version (the one before the modernist one that was torn down for the glass dunghill) was a real beaut.

on August 13, 2009 at 1:58 PM

#18 - nice try, but you forgot nightlife. Vancouver definately has Seattle beat on some metropolitan fronts, but nightlife in Vancouver comes in just barely above Spokane.

Dougsf on August 13, 2009 at 2:05 PM

I don't get it.: I don't hate it, but it holds no attraction for me. I would like to have seen what Liz Dunn would have commissioned.

Zioncheck on August 13, 2009 at 2:21 PM

Charles,
I also like the Arctic Building with the walrus motifs.

lark on August 13, 2009 at 2:29 PM

only a boy would design a cold, inorganic piece of crap like this. kill the aspiring starchitect with his heart in the wrong place. buildings are supposed to honour the citizen, not impress and alienate.

Madonna on August 13, 2009 at 2:42 PM

@37, I don't see it as dated – it's basically a bunch of lines in different formations, there is no decoration to it. I feel like decoration is the only thing that can date something. I also loved the old library – I was sad to see it go. But that being out of my control, I'm glad to have this new one.

I would add the Norton Building to your list, and definitely the Smith Tower. Agreed on Frederick & Nelson but I miss Paul Bunyan and Babe.

Oh, the Greek Church in Montlake is also overlooked.

Strath on August 13, 2009 at 2:43 PM

You people are either retarded, or just hate everything Charles likes on principle. That library is fucking amazing. It's beautiful from the street, and from all points within.

on August 13, 2009 at 2:47 PM

I agree with all the haters. The Central Library is an abomination, inside and out. Cold, hostile, misanthropic. If only we had gotten someone like Santiago Calatrava -- now there's an amazing modern architect. Or, hell, Tom Kundig.

As for the best building in Seattle: Smith Tower, definitely. Maybe that little chapel on the Seattle U campus.

pdp on August 13, 2009 at 2:53 PM

King County, at least, knows how to build some good library buildings. Ones that look attractive on the outside, relate to the street, are easy to navigate, and - lest we forget - hold lots of books.

Greg on August 13, 2009 at 3:03 PM

Denver's library is SWEET. I'm in the minority here but I'm sticking to my guns.

I like looking at Seattle's library, but the inside sucks (or it did; have they gotten rid of the concrete prison feel?).

Matt from Denver on August 13, 2009 at 3:39 PM

Those who feel it's cold and hostile should really explore inside -- brilliant and creative and warmly functional. I hate it when a building has pretensions of whimsy or nostalgia. It's insulting. This building is all about function, and it succeeds on every level. But then, I might be the only one who likes the outside of the EMP (it's appropriately ugly).

The library on cap. hill is also great, and the Chapel of St. Ignatius.

Michael of the Green on August 13, 2009 at 3:43 PM

Charles is right. The Central Library is provocative, original and quite functional. For my money, that's what great architecture should do. Also, I think it's stunningly beautiful — a jewel in a city of mostly bland structures.

Lincolnish on August 13, 2009 at 4:23 PM

I hate it. I've always hated it. It's a shitty place to read, it's horrible to navigate as a patron, and I happen to think in ten years, it'll be such an embarrassing artifact of the past that we'll end up bulldozing it.

Geni on August 13, 2009 at 4:28 PM

You know, now that I look at it again, that really is a horrible picture of the library. And it's kind of difficult to take a horrible picture of the library.

Strath on August 13, 2009 at 4:45 PM

The downtown library is on my way to work, and I go through it pretty much every day, often pausing to sit and read briefly. I'm baffled by the people who think it's cold and unfriendly; the third floor feels like a cathedral, bathed in natural light. I love the jolting vivid colors -- the startling yellow-green on the escalators, the vibrant red of the 4th floor -- and the bamboo floor covered in words of greeting. The exterior sparkles, the diamond grid dazzling the eye; it's pretty in the sun, it's pretty in the rain. I get books, music, and movies from the library all the time. It's one of the few reasons I still like living in Seattle after twenty years.

bottsford on August 13, 2009 at 5:21 PM

nice proclamation, charles, but would you care to share some of the reasons why *you* find it so great?

keith on August 13, 2009 at 5:34 PM

@50, you're right. Bellevue Regional is a great building. Nothing flashy, no superstar architect with a $100 million fee, but it does what it's supposed to extremely well.

Fnarf on August 13, 2009 at 5:43 PM

I would be pretty interested to hear what the architecture critics here consider to be good contemporary architecture. Kind of sound like a bunch of contrarian luddites. There is no shortage of extremely shitty and boring architecture in Seattle. Given this fact it seems a little petty, and well stupid, to be griping about the library which if anything is certainly not boring.

Rhizome on August 13, 2009 at 6:42 PM

I still think that Columbia Center is the greatest work of architecture in our city. It is proudly, unapologetically tall; visually interesting; and clean/uncluttered. Plus, its design does not impede its function. The library, on the other hand, uses space poorly and always reminds me of a muffin top.

brendan on August 13, 2009 at 6:46 PM

My #1 favorite place in the whole city. Rock on, Rem Koolhaas!

jcolman on August 13, 2009 at 8:10 PM

If we had cleaned up and reinforced the old Central Library (which was also considered "world class" in its day) we could have used the extra money to actually keep the libraries open year-round. But that wouldn't have been nearly so fun.

Just like if we had cleaned up and reinforced the old City Light Building (as the expediters international folks did, but in a really ugly way) and added a few floors to it (as the expediters international folks did, in a really uninspired way) we could have kept a great old mid-century building, and saved the taxpayers the millions it cost to buy and renovate that butt ugly Seattle Municipal Tower - and the millions they lost in the firesale price they sold the old CL building for).

But Norm Rice's pals might have actually had to deal with their bad real estate debt, and that would have been very sad for them.

Catalina Vel-DuRay on August 13, 2009 at 10:10 PM

@59: Check out the Shoreline library. Or the Kirkland library before the 2009 expansion. (I can't vouch for post-expansion, since it won't be done until November, but it's looking good so far.)

Greg on August 14, 2009 at 12:02 PM

Oh guys. It's a weird looking piece of architectural masturbation (and yes a waste of money), but it's easy to spot from outside as a reference point if you're navigating through Downtown on foot, it's got a ton of space inside and if anything's wrong with their interior, it's the inefficient use of the floor space aside from the stacks. Too much empty space for a library, and go figure there's usually not enough places to sit. The 10th floor itself is an interesting space to sit, read, look up and... whoa.

Gomez on August 15, 2009 at 12:25 AM

@62 and @64, and Fnarf, Please. It's too late to be bitching about how much it cost. Maybe it cost too much, and maybe (likely) someone could've done better with the same money, but we have the building we have. The truth is, it sucks, but it at least stores books okay. Y'all are pretentious assholes.

MikeC in YF on August 15, 2009 at 1:32 AM

Wait, what indicates I was bitching? I think the Central Library's fine, honestly.

Gomez on August 16, 2009 at 4:14 PM

I like the library. It makes me happy. If it doesn't make anyone else here happy, you are missing out because it is a delightful, beautiful building. I don't understand how there are so many complaints about the architecture of this library, when meanwhile we have dozens of new condo buildings that will remain MUCH WORSE eyesores until god knows how long. I am happy with library, I wish all the buildings downtown looked this fucking crazy. The whole planet would love Seattle!! Better yet, if more buildings looked like the EMP.
I am infuriated with the jerks who are poorly designing these boring-ass condo buildings, botching our urban landscape. I wish they could all be rounded up and shipped off to a small island in the middle of the Pacific with geography that is impossible to construct anything upon.

i'm pro-science and i vote on August 16, 2009 at 6:48 PM

The Very Best

Comments

Please wait...

Add a comment

Preview

Editors' Picks

Mayor Harrell Promises a ‘War on Health,’ Not a ‘War on Drugs’

How Will Conservatives Smear City Council Candidates This Election?

Are You Ready for Summer?

Here's What Happened in Olympia

Seattle Reboots Its Drug War with No Plan and No Money to Scale Up Diversion

How Can We Fix the King County Jail Crisis?

Support The Stranger

Comments

Please wait...

Add a comment

Preview

Editors' Picks

Just Can't Get Enough?

Sign up for our newsletter for news recaps, updates, and more!