I think the point is that using one medium to critique another is an excercise in non-sequiturs. Which is not to say that there aren’t some people who can write eloquently and informatively about music, just as I am sure there are plenty who know what they are talking about when they write about architecture. But whoever it was who described Nashville’s new Convention Center as “the Christmas sweater of buildings” either does not have a particularly deep grasp of the subject matter – or has just never been inside the place.
While the style of the Music City Center does not suit my personal taste (which is a diplomatic way of saying it strikes me as hackneyed and unattractive in a big-boxed way), I'm much more concerned about its lack of long-range vision (in not including mixed-use development on such a large plot) and its inaccessibility for most Nashvillians who cannot or will not pay the price of admission (hence, its dedication to tourists and out-of-towners and the wealthy money changers who collect their tributes).
Attractive or not, we are stuck with this monument to a convention center industry on the wane, a structure that only marginally connects to life in Nashville. And we are stuck with it for decades. How will it look to Nashville in 20 years?
Post a Comment