<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.3.2" -->
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Polishing the Library to a Big City Shine</title>
	<link>http://www.bloglanta.com/archives/196</link>
	<description>For fans of everything ITP</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 12:31:27 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Joeventures</title>
		<link>http://www.bloglanta.com/archives/196#comment-2291</link>
		<dc:creator>Joeventures</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Jul 2008 13:50:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.bloglanta.com/archives/196#comment-2291</guid>
		<description>That I am a human being, I think, qualifies me to know for myself how something makes me feel. To me, the library is a depressing sight that does little more than exacerbate people's worst stereotypes about cities -- gray, drab, concrete. The streets on the sides and rear of the building more resemble dark, dirty, dangerous alleyways than they resemble vibrant downtown streets. And that, of course, leads me to raise the question -- why are there sides and a rear to the building? Did Breuer think people would only think about and care about the front? It's on a city block, and yet it bears no relation whatsoever to the surrounding urban context.

So, yeah. To me, it feels depressing to be within sight of that building. If, however, a giant concrete block makes you feel exuberant, more power to you. I can't disagree with the way you feel.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That I am a human being, I think, qualifies me to know for myself how something makes me feel. To me, the library is a depressing sight that does little more than exacerbate people&#8217;s worst stereotypes about cities &#8212; gray, drab, concrete. The streets on the sides and rear of the building more resemble dark, dirty, dangerous alleyways than they resemble vibrant downtown streets. And that, of course, leads me to raise the question &#8212; why are there sides and a rear to the building? Did Breuer think people would only think about and care about the front? It&#8217;s on a city block, and yet it bears no relation whatsoever to the surrounding urban context.</p>
<p>So, yeah. To me, it feels depressing to be within sight of that building. If, however, a giant concrete block makes you feel exuberant, more power to you. I can&#8217;t disagree with the way you feel.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Max Eternity</title>
		<link>http://www.bloglanta.com/archives/196#comment-2283</link>
		<dc:creator>Max Eternity</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Jul 2008 21:00:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.bloglanta.com/archives/196#comment-2283</guid>
		<description>The Marcel Breuer designed Central Branch is an extraordinary piece of architecture which is easily to be considered one of the finest public (or private) structures that has ever graced the skyline of Atlanta.  However, because the rather monotheistic cultural paradigm that is pervasive here, exclusive of the recognition that we rightfully bestow upon the fabulously historic civil rights events that occurred here, it is easily understood why such a gem of a site is treated like a troublesome, non-entity.   Since because, in any other major city (throughout the world) this sublime creation would be considered an absolute treasure, just think of Breuer's Whitney in NYC.  Thus whereas the above commenter "trainiac" laments that the building is of a "soul-crushing" nature...I would instead affirm that it is the collective individual, like "trianiac", which are soul-crushing.  Yes, it is the weed infested psyche of the ingracious yet sophomoric few, who with their loud-mouthed propaganda, have littered the civic scene with a message of bigger, better, faster.  Which ultimately results in...dumb, dumber and dumbest.  But I for one, am not buying it.  No, instead, I say we should preserve (and improve) the Marcel Breuer designed Central Branch library.  For it is the only wise and prudent thing to do.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Marcel Breuer designed Central Branch is an extraordinary piece of architecture which is easily to be considered one of the finest public (or private) structures that has ever graced the skyline of Atlanta.  However, because the rather monotheistic cultural paradigm that is pervasive here, exclusive of the recognition that we rightfully bestow upon the fabulously historic civil rights events that occurred here, it is easily understood why such a gem of a site is treated like a troublesome, non-entity.   Since because, in any other major city (throughout the world) this sublime creation would be considered an absolute treasure, just think of Breuer&#8217;s Whitney in NYC.  Thus whereas the above commenter &#8220;trainiac&#8221; laments that the building is of a &#8220;soul-crushing&#8221; nature&#8230;I would instead affirm that it is the collective individual, like &#8220;trianiac&#8221;, which are soul-crushing.  Yes, it is the weed infested psyche of the ingracious yet sophomoric few, who with their loud-mouthed propaganda, have littered the civic scene with a message of bigger, better, faster.  Which ultimately results in&#8230;dumb, dumber and dumbest.  But I for one, am not buying it.  No, instead, I say we should preserve (and improve) the Marcel Breuer designed Central Branch library.  For it is the only wise and prudent thing to do.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: trainiac</title>
		<link>http://www.bloglanta.com/archives/196#comment-673</link>
		<dc:creator>trainiac</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Mar 2006 22:36:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.bloglanta.com/archives/196#comment-673</guid>
		<description>Not a fan of the Central library building, but the re-organization they went through from 2003-2005 has paid off big time. Especially the Atlanta historical archives move to take over the entire fifth floor (with geneology) has been very successful -- an outstanding resource. I just think, the soul-crushing nature of the building will always be a problem.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Not a fan of the Central library building, but the re-organization they went through from 2003-2005 has paid off big time. Especially the Atlanta historical archives move to take over the entire fifth floor (with geneology) has been very successful &#8212; an outstanding resource. I just think, the soul-crushing nature of the building will always be a problem.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Laura</title>
		<link>http://www.bloglanta.com/archives/196#comment-672</link>
		<dc:creator>Laura</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Mar 2006 23:54:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.bloglanta.com/archives/196#comment-672</guid>
		<description>How could there be no comments to this post? I think everything you said is a wonderful idea. As a librarian in Atlanta, it's difficult to watch the energy within AFPL focused on issues not at all related to public service.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>How could there be no comments to this post? I think everything you said is a wonderful idea. As a librarian in Atlanta, it&#8217;s difficult to watch the energy within AFPL focused on issues not at all related to public service.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
