a couple of spare minutes for blogging.
Today, I would like to draw your attention to the recently completed Millau Bridge in France.
Designed by Norman Foster Partners of London.
This is an awe inspiring example of what is possible through the marriage of art and engineering. The human spirit is nurtured when such attention and beauty is suffused into prosaic structures. This bridge is an unapologetically modern structure; as such, it does not so much impose itself onto the landscape but insert itself into the vista, becoming a framing element and providing sublime counterpoint to the natural elements. As the designer says, the piers seem to grow organically out of the landscape, then flowering into a delicate, technical resolution of the structural forces inherent. It sings; it is triumphant without being overbearing.
I am sure that penny pinching accountants could have saved some euros by having a more ordinary bridge built. But this kind of playing to the lowest common denominator is coarsening; our built environment impoverished when the public realm is ignored and our human nature is dulled.
Public structures used to be considered an opportunity for enrichment of the public space; through decoration, human scaled design, pedestrian friendly detailing and sensitive landscaping.
Now, most public projects are squeezed down to the last penny, because someone somewhere is whining about wasting a tax dollar. Our cities, towns and villages are bleaker because of it.
Now, just go admire some more of these photos. Look at how the bridge looks to float on the clouds; at how it helps frame the vistas.
A thing of beauty is a joy forever.
Monday, November 28, 2005
Beautiful Thing
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
It is a lovely bridge. Truly. Is it inspired by Calatrava, or the other way around? Because the resemblance to the Milwaukee Art Museum foot bridge is too distinct to be an accident.
ReplyDeleteAs to penny-pinching vs. aesthetics. There's a tradeoff that needs to be found, a balance point between big, ugly, stark monoliths and trendy, artistics, and, yes, more expensive constructions. The balance points shifts to and fro-- in large measure based upon what sort of economic resources are available at any given time. If taxes are at historic highes, is public art where we need to be spending our dollars? If taxes are low, the local economy strong, then why not go beyond "no frills" for the betterment of the community as a whole. I do find it odd that France, currently mired in a god awful economy and rife with high unemployment, should be spending large quantities of money on a bridge, beautiful or no. Because every dollor spent on that bridge is one less that can be spent on something else-- healthcare, fire fighters, libraries, museums, road conditions, old age homes, and on and on. No public construction-- no consruction period, for that matter, comes without a tradeoff.
Where that line is must be determined by both the public and their representatives. And what's right for one community/state/country may not be right for another. What's my point? I don't know. Probably don't have one, really, except that to expect all public constructions to be beautiful, mind-expanding, and aesthetically pleasing isn't very realistic, nor is it necessarily horrible that some of them aren't.
Food for thought, I suppose.
Hey, stop in to my blog if you get a chance and let me know if any of my C) None of the Above candidates for President appeal to you at all.
If I can find somebody that both you and John would at least consider voting for, I think I got my candidate.