apartment therapy changing the world, one room at a time

I always have loved 333 and also the Modadnock Building.

An absolute crime that the John Hancock didn't make it on this list...just goes to show you that this list is strictly a popularity contest. Wrigley Field? Lake Point Tower?? C'mon. And the fact that the Sears Tower gets on these lists is all about once being the world's tallest not about it aesthetic qualities. ST is architecturally mediocre (on its best day) and pales in comparison to the Hancock.

Well, none of the 'comment' links for the individual buildings seems to work over at the AIA site, but that's OK, since some of my favorites aren't on there anyway.
My own personal favorites?

1: The Auditorium Building. Thousands of people zoom past this place every, but its amazing how few people realize how great it is. Then again, most people would'nt notice the glittering topaz crystals hidden under the dull exterior of a geode, especially if they were zooming past at 4O miles an hour, trying to beat the red light at Wabash. Anyway, if you haven't seen the Auditorium Theatre in person, you've missed one hell of a show, and I'm not talking about what's onstage. And the closer you look, the greater it becomes.

2. The Inland Steel Building: this one is just the opposite of the Aauditorium: light & slick & cool instead of heavy & rough & warm. It's like a gigantic crystal ice bucket on stilts--sensuous Modernism designed for the masses instead of for the elite, the way Mies did things. Why this beauty didn't make the list, I don't know.

3. The Chicago Board of Trade: another shocking no-show on the AIA A-list. This is what big-city sophistication is all about, even 3/4 of a century after it opened. OK, it's still not Diana Court, but it's close. The drop-dead glamour of the black-&-tan lobby has just been restored by Gunny Harboe, & it's a knockout.

4: The Pedway. OK, technically, it's not really architecture, but it has a wonderful sense of place, the underground equivalent of the twisty, narrow courts & passages of old London. Of course, it was a richer experience before the city let Sears close off a vital passage with ugly concrete block & a set of rusty steel doors, but then, the days when traversing that section gave you a peek at the parakeets & goldfish in Woolworth's basement& the South Side ladies trying on a new pair of boots at Payless Shoes were long gone anyway. Still, where else in Chicago can you get a marriage license, an antique clock, a shoeshine & a DQ Blizzard without going outside. Sometimes the pedway is sleek & up-to-the-minute, like the glitzy section extending east & west from the Cultural Center, & sometimes it's a glimpse into the Chicago of another era--8Os Postmodernism outside the-store-formerly-known-as-Marshall-Field's or the streamlined optimism of the early 4Os when you spy a scarred remmnant of Mayor Kelly's original State Street subway stations--but it's always an adventure. The street level entrances are cool, too, tucked away inside unmarked doors & down secret stairways. In fact, I already have an escape plan ready to go if I'm ever abducted by spies, like Cary Grant in North by Northwest: I'll act nonchalant & suggest a martini before we head off to wherever, then take them to Trattoria No. 1O, and--under the pretext of looking for the restroom--slip out the secret door to the subway. By the time the bad guys realize what's up, I'll be taking the Blue Line to Milwaukee. Street, that is.

5: The South Shore Cultural Center. Not many of us can live down the hall from Oprah, but we can still experience the graciousness that Benjamin Marshall designed into all his projects--even those on a massive scale--because it belongs to all of us: it's now owned by the city. The ornament is lovely, but it's the grandeur of the big spaces & the intinmacy of the little ones, and the way they lead seamlessy into one another that make this such a magical place. The scale & logic & clarity of the place, just as much as its beautiful detailing, make this a standout among Chicago buildings. And its site doesn't hurt either.

AddisonBelmont

This was strictly a feel good survey, and not really representative of good architecture. (The Bellagio in Vegas?)

Chicago Tonight did a story on this with Blair Kamin (Tribune's Architecture Critic) on Tuesday of last week Kamin also did a story in the Trib on this.

The huge problem with this survey is that they took photos of about 300 buildings, then surveyed about 1,800 individuals from the general public, and published the results. I am sure that the 1,800 people picked the buildings they recognized and/or the ones they felt were the prettiest, completely ignoring whether or not the architecture was any good.