this tower is very two-faced.
There are some works of Architectural Design that are far above average; this is very cool looking, or eye candy, or beautiful - but those terms do not do this particular work justice.
I would describe this design as ‘transcendent’ in the sense that the look of this building goes beyond the “applied arts” of Architecture and transcends into the realm of the “fine arts”.
This is an inspiring building to look at - a work of ART.
I agree, although you would not know that from some of the comments on YIMBY.
If all you read were the comments on YIMBY you’d think it was a NIMBY newspaper.
OK, here is a definite A. I think the “Architecture with a capital A” distinction is a very useful term to separate the ‘best’ from that which is merely ‘good’ or ‘better’. I have long struggled with various superlatives when trying to describing the aesthetic merit of a new building featured here on YIMBY; my highest praise was usually “iconic”.
Architectural Snob trigger warning here. I do not believe members of the general public possess the powers of discernment necessary to identify the difference between architecture, and “Architecture with a capital A”.
If I were a practicing architect, that inconvenient truth would be the bane of my existence…
the parapet looks great. I was afraid they would cheap out on it.