MIT sues architect for crap computing-dept campus

WFT

When the committee, that agreed to buy that building complex, actually signed the contract - well I want some of what they were smoking.

That has gotta be goooood sh1t.

?Wha?

Who in there right minds would spend 15 mil for a building...only to not like it after the fact and sue them for 30 mil.

This sounds like a scam.

Oh...and the building looks like crap....so I don't blame them.. other than they where dumb enough to agree to it in the first place.

Barcelona/Bilbao there all in Portugal aren't they?

I think The Guggenheim Museum you're referring to is in Bilbao, northern Spain rather than Barcelona.

Lewis, Lewis, Lewis... didn't 007 teach you ANYTHING?

The Guggenheim is in BILBÃO, NOT Barcelona. Barcelona is the home of Gaudi, the famous creator of a very unique and organic style.

And ANYONE who watched Pierce Brosnan swing himself down that Swiss banker's building by his belt and the Venetian blind straps in The World Is Not Enough would know that.

:-)

BWIWAF

Back in my day we were happy with the old "Building 20". It housed hobbiests and niche study groups. And while it looked like it was about to fall down any day, its "temporary" structure lasted decades. Perhaps the RADAR helped seal the site.

Vis Gehry, The Onion had it right back in 2002:

http://www.theonion.com/content/node/34331

Architects

Gehry is a classic example of an architect who's work has only one function: impressing other architects. This is not difficult since most architects are impressed with shiny things like OS X (look: the IT angle!).

The rest of us just have to live with cityscapes that become dated as quickly as any Paris catwalk of similarly fashion-led self-indulgent twaddle (look: the Paris angle too; I'm smoking today!).

Knock the thing down and give the Scottish Parliament farce the same treatment.

Hey, don't go lumping all of California with Lala land!

Given the location on the state, it's appropriate for LA to be the anus of California, because that's where all the crap comes from (See: Hollywood).

Heck, even insane old Sarah Winchester, with her 38 years nonstop building, with her fears of ghosts, lack of architectural training, and an unlimited budget, made something that's stood the test of time and earthquakes. And it looks like she had a working straightedge and square.

Silicon Valley might have its fair share of loonies and a dog-turd sculpture or two, but even the Adobe HQ building and Transamerica Pyramid are stylish, useful, and don't waste materials with windows hanging out like cheap air conditioning units!

What did they expect?

Did anyone at MIT even look at any of Frank Gehry's previous creations? They all look like that. They all look like shite.

Re: California Architects

Mr. Gehry is perfectly capable of creating buildings that don't work in California as well. He's also responsible for the Walt Disney Concert Hall, whose curvy, shiny aluminum roof had to undergo an emergency lowering of albedo after it was discovered to be creating hotspots in the buildings next door.

Eh so what

What a waste of donor and tax payer monies.

MIT is not what it used to be.

It used to be about hands-on, way-out research.

Now it is just another financial aid sponge pumping degrees out for China and India's elite on the US tax payers dollar.

@Chris G

If we lived in a world designed by civil engineers we would all live in concrete cubes or shipping containers.

That, or just all huddle under bridges.

And while I'm at it...

"maybe if architects actually had to live with some of the abominations that have been foisted on the general public of late there'd be a chance of them removing their collective craniums from their rectums."

Well, someone needs some anger management, don't they? People don't call for ALL programmers to be beheaded because one or other OS has some bugs; in fact most sane people would regard such as statement as a jest.

Architecture, though brings out real bile; you see, EVERYONE is an expert on it - you all live in buildings. It's exactly the same as the way you are all expert doctors because you are alive, expert pilots because you breathe air, expert It consultants because you know how to sync your iPods, and expert vintners because you drink White Storm.

Being an Architect is tough career; you spend 6 years slogging through a tough course, inevitably in a cold, damp, draughty & leaky building (like the Arch faculty at MIT probably is - I know UNSW was like that in the late 80's.) You work hours that would make even the most hardened sysadmin quail, for a salary is only generous when viewed in terms of the 1950s. You then get exposed at every turn to continual abuse in the media, at parties, BBQs, family functions, airports, wherever, because as an architect YOu are personally to blame for the shitty building you happen to be in. Furthermore it is simply assumed that you think Frank Gehry | Zaha Hadid | Daniel Libeskind is a god, and you think the Gherkin is the Best. Building. Ever. (It's not - probably the Sydney Opera House / Colloseum / Washington DC Vietnam Memorial is though...).

Here's a Clue!: A building is a team effort. Pretty bloody simple really, isn't it? MIT as clients also had a responsibility - due dilligence in finding an Architect; rather than just flick through a few magazines and getting a hard-on for SHINY! About 10 mins research (or pop down to the Arch faculty!) would have found that Gehry's buildings, while very impressive, are also very, VERY expensive to procure, and difficult to construct sucessfully (as most on-site subbies aren't exactly the sharpest crayons in the box). If aircraft manufacturers had to put up with shop-floor monkeys like this, NOTHING would get off the ground, let alone get moving quick enough to hit it again.

MIT likely wanted a 'Mercedes'-class building but had a budget that was somewhere between 'Lada' and 'Hyundai'. The very first thing to get cut from any building procurement process when it's almost christmas | the wife's due back soon | the board will find out | the money will run out is the 'details' - the little crucial things like designing & selecting good roof drainage systems and making sure the on-site monkeys actually install those little flimsy bits that stop the windows leaking.

When things go pear-shaped the Architect is the first one against the wall because they practice under their own names, are liable under legislation for the buildings they make, and have paid-up professional indemnity insurance. Unlike most builders, who change comapny names every 3 years to so to avoid this exact situation. It's hard to sue a company that doesn't exist.

I'm not commenting on Gehry's design, but there are NO physical reasons why such a design should or shouldn't work. The faults are with the procurement process, NOT with the exterior physical form. See, oddly enough, buildings are incredibly complex entities; in which seemingly small and harmless omissions can cause tremendous problems. If MIT's problem is that the new board thinks the building looks goofy, well, tough! Any building can have issues with leaks & cracks; in general the more expensive the building the bigger such problems will be. This wouldn't be a story if it wasn't a visually distinctive building by a Big Name. If it was MIT's Vet Science Faculty's Pig Shed that leaked do you think the Reg would be writing about it?

Hat, coat, brass knuckles, kosh, loitering with intent at pub door. I'll 'ave ya!

Registered ARCHITECT, NSW, Australia AND sysadmin for Windows Server, OSX, *nix, C64 & DS Wizzard

@Adrian Esdaile

Hey, I like my concrete cube, thank you very much! ;)

It's soundproof (so I can pump my stereo at 3 in the morning), it stays cool in summer and warm in winter, and it looks just like any other concrete cube in the area. Now given that freedom is dead and we are now living in an Orwellian oligarchy where you can be arrested and indefinitely detained merely for LOOKING out of place, a nondescript concrete cube surrounded by other nondescript concrete cubes keeps you out of the deadly spotlight of being different. And you can customise the inside to reflect your politically-incorrect and eclectic tastes, without broadcasting to the world that you're a Gitmo candidate! ;)

So:

Concrete cube to hide from B-B in... check.

Anonymising proxy for web surfing... check.

Browser set to strip HTTP headers... check.

Encryption for email... check.

Tinfoil hat on... check.

Coat retrieved... check.