Listen to Blair Kamin, in a review of Helmut Jahn’s 600 North Fairbanks, bray his contempt for and sneer at what some people value in their residence.
Yes, the minimalist aesthetic comes with certain rules and quirks: You must have an off-white window shade. Some of your concrete walls may have plug holes from the building’s form-work. The absence of operable windows on the north and south sides means that apartment dwellers there will have to nudge their balcony doors open to get fresh air. And, in a small number of units, residents will have to draw the shades to obtain privacy while in the bathroom.
None of these restrictions seem particularly annoying, however, and, besides, there are plenty of mansard-roofed condo towers out there for those who wish to be cosseted in traditional luxury
For those who doubt that Walter Benjamin knew where “l’art pour l’art” might lead, Kamin provides clarification.
Kamin’s article and writing is a wee bit overwrought this time, yet I do like the building. More than a wee bit overwrought, the article is downright pretentious. I feel like I am at an art film at “The Music Box Theatre” and dozens of berets are walking up and down ze aisles.
It does provide a nice contrast to many of the other buildings out there. Which is what architecture should be. Difference. I don’t want to see one style out there. I want to see dozens. I don’t want to see Moscow 1950. I want to see Chicago 2030.
Given the 95% sold I guess a few other people like it too.
Was over there a few weeks back. Outside is decent, but inside is a disaster with the cheap finishes, small rooms, finishes. Just has a feeling of not oozing with quality, but tries to be pretentious and hip.
Its a wonderful addition to the skyline, infact I hope to see more buildings built like this in Chicago. I am sick of the cookie cutter, painted concrete boxes that are filling the skyline, that nobody would miss is they fell down tomorrow. This building is fresh and bold and in my opinion where architecture is going.
irishpirate,
Reading Kamin is all too often like reading a Jonathan Rosenbaum movie review – you’re left with no idea whether the subject of the review is worth watching. You’re impressed with the author’s learning, but more than a bit sorry that you slogged all the way through the piece.
you’ve got to be kidding me. ‘bray his contempt’?
give me a f***ing break.
foo.
I like Blair Kamin. I don’t always agree with him, but generally I like his “take” on things.
My guess is he is so excited to see a relatively different style of residential highrise that he went a bit over the top. More than a bit. That’s ok.
I’m still glad we have him writing in Chicago.
Kamin is pathetic.
He’ll only review a building if there’s a personality involved. He embellishes the personality angle with invented nonsense like ‘he was on his cell phone at the Berlin airport on his way too…’
A routine cantilever mandated by the need to get adequate sized floor plates on a small site is ‘svelte verve’.
And further embarrasses himself trying to use technical words that he doesn’t understand like fan coil unit and post tension cables.
His columns are consistently unintelligent.
Gee, sounds like all this criticism directed at Kamin stems from the fact that he’s doing a good job as an architecture critic. If nothing else, his role is to foster discourse and discussion within the industry. He’s done that in spades.
Kamin writes fictional short stories. He works to construct a lame derivative of an Ayn Rand fantasy. In a dumbed down newspaper, I suppose there’s space for that, but I don’t think that his attempts to mystify architecture, rather thzn explain it, are beneficial. Yo Chicago, a real estate forum, has done more to foster discourse and discussion.
pk, don’t confuse this site with an architecture/design forum. I have been making that misteak fer munths.
Architecture/design forums are populated by too many Blair Kamin wannabees. I think interviews with the heads of Mesa Development and Thrush Development are far more interesting.