Westin on Lower Broad

[NewTowner]

In an attempt to muster a little harmony and goodwill, I will post a humbler and more articulate explanation of why I believe the Westin should be expected to maintain high cultural standards, using the language and principles of traditional design as much as possible. Many people have made the argument that the proposed building's pure height and "contemporariness" should be good enough for Nashvillians. A few others have argued that calling for traditional design, even on Lower Broadway, was akin to "repeating the past" or "imitating the past." Here is my final attempt at a contrary argument:

The intelligent and exceptionally patient Mr. Lawson has argued "why not design something that isn't everywhere else or truly reflects Nashville?" I would like to take a second shot at this statement because my previous response was so inane, and apparently turned me into a "death retard" (not the words of Mr. Lawson, for the record).

Here goes: Nashville, despite the cars and toaster ovens, exists in a larger tradition of human civilization. We are a diverse city, to be sure, and a lot of us own video game consoles--but in general our moral principles, family structures, social standards, and other such things are part of the continuum of Indo-European peoples having been convinced of the merits of an Asian religion. We share tremendous and awesome things with our predecessors--our Greek, Jewish, Roman, Celtic, East African...even our Egyptian and Mesopotamian forbears. This means something--it lends great weight to the argument, made through the ages, that people are valuable and the Beauty is not just a bunch of bologne. There is order in chaos, there is music in laughter. The Modernists, those great pioneers of cutting-edge newness and Progress for the sake of Progress, intentionally wanted to dismantle this heritage because it stood in the way of their Social Technological Revolution--which was born of the same sort of pseudo-scientific communal kill-anything-in-the-way utopian thinking that produced both Stalin and Hitler. Stalin killed farmers--the Modernists killed cities. But this was a departure, an aberration, an intentional hiccup, in the great continuum of human experience that has given us our languages, our laws, our music, our legends, our bread and cheese, and a tremendous wealth of architectural tradition that is currently lying in the dustbin. So, having said all this, let me respond to Mr. Lawson's completely legitimate desire to see the Westin express Nashville's uniqueness, in a way respectful of the truth behind that desire:

I also want something that expresses Nashville "uniquely." But to me, Nashville uniquely exists in the same world as Aristotle, Moses, St. Augustine, Michelangelo, and Andrea Palladio. We have a wealth of tradition that we can built upon and add to, and I would like this very much. The alternative is to piss around in the dark, like Medieval Anglos, unaware that great men have had great things to say about Truth and Beauty--and about the Love hinted at by both.

There are wonderful opportunities that were squashed in the beginning of the 20th century by the Modernists. Americans were producing a new kind of classicism, unseen before, that contained great beauty and the promise of much more. African-Americans had adopted and transformed western classicism, fusing it with their desire to hold European oppressors accountable to their own standards of freedom and dignity--it did not escape the many scholars among them that the classical tradition had great roots in Egypt and Nubia. New technologies were being used to create new forms, expanding the classical vocabularly but staying true to the universal value of humankind as expressed in the timeless tradition. Blah blah blah, you get my point:

Nashville can be uniquely classical. In fact, it must be uniquely classical or it will be uniquely medieval. The Westin should express our unique place in a world much larger and older than Walter Gropius.

[titanhog]

Hey NT...you've probably already given an example in an earlier post...but would you mind refreshing our memories of a specific example of what building you would like the Westin to build in that location? I read your opinions and do not as of yet have a clear picture of they type of building you are talking about. Would you mind posting a link to a current building that you think would satisfy the requirements you've posted for a "human-scale" appropriate design?

Thank you.

[FromParkAveToTN]

Westin should look into becoming the Hotel component of Signature Tower.

[smeagolsfree]

Hey NT...you've probably already given an example in an earlier post...but would you mind refreshing our memories of a specific example of what building you would like the Westin to build in that location? I read your opinions and do not as of yet have a clear picture of they type of building you are talking about. Would you mind posting a link to a current building that you think would satisfy the requirements you've posted for a "human-scale" appropriate design?

Thank you.

Agreed, There was not much said as for the argument against the Weston. It seems as if Hitler and Stalin get brought up a lot. That has NOTHING to do with the Weston. The long post seem to be designed to show us how smart he is and talk above the vast majority of people on the thread. I like a few others simply skim or skip over the postings because we dont understand half of what is said.

[NewTowner]

I like a few others simply skim or skip over the postings because we dont understand half of what is said.

There might be a cause-and-effect relationship in there somewhere...

Anyway, I really don't intend to speak over people's heads, and I am not trying to "impress" nearly as much as I am trying to convince. If you don't like the taste of it, then argue against it or politely defer from its consumption. Please stop spitting half-chewed chunks of my arguments back into my face.

The Hitler and Stalin reference was due to the very real connection between the great Modernist pogrom against tradition and the Totalitarian purging of human beings in the first half of the 20th century--they are intimately linked due to shared assumptions about the violent perfectability of mankind through technology and ruthless Progress. The pleading for a Westin that is "contemporary" for contemporariness' sake is a descendent of this sort of thinking. Tradition articulates our links with the past--Modernism and its ideological descendants are committed to the abolition of that past, for what originally were some very scary reasons, but are now apparently no reasons at all.

Some of the unconscious social revolutionaries in Nashville target tradition and its defenders (here most visible in the wise Ann Roberts and her preservationist allies) with the ruthlessness of Brownshirt propagandists. They desire, above all else, A STEP FORWARD, no matter the ultimate destination (as yet undefined), and irrespective of who or what may go under the foot (expendable anti-revolutionaries in the undefined revolution). I argue that the Westin should be respectful--nay, celebratory--of Nashville's place in the continuum of human history, and that given its proposed site (classical Lower Broadway) it especially should make a more articulate and competent commitment to classical architecture. Got it? Okay...shoot! What's wrong with that?

I don't think Hitler or Stalin would particularly like the proposed Westin, and I certainly don't mean to imply that those Nashvillians in favor of it would commit a genocide in order to convince MDHA of its merits. But I just wanted to strip the layers of avant-garde rhetoric away from the apparently common contempt for traditional architecture and let the crows eat its logic. If someone wants to argue with me about it, please do. But don't get mad and stuff. Contemporary architecture cannot be defended by saying that "well, it's contemporary!" anymore than classical architecture can be condemned for being classical.

In regards to the perfectly reasonable request that I provide some examples of preferably American contemporary classical architecture, I will do so as best I can. We are in the beginning of a Renaissance, not its apex, and consequently we are probably several decades away from any real achievement. As of now, even the traditionalists disagree about a great deal. The New Urbanists, which is a large and diverse group, have racked up some amazing achievements (if a few doozies as well). Personally, I think we have a lot to be excited about in Nashville. The new public square hints deeply at the classical, and I bet it will feel very human-scaled.

I will try to dig up some gems, but for starters I would recommend checking out the following two websites to get your theory caps on nice and snug:

An Interview with L

[smeagolsfree]

I guess I like a few classical buildings, but things would be pretty boring without diversity. Read some of the articles and find the classicist group a little pretentious. I guess you would say they are purest and maybe a little extreme in their views. I think what you are saying is you want more classical buildings including the Weston to be classical in DT. I cant say that a 20 story Weston would fit in lower Broadway with classical architecture.

I feel they are in the group that want to be pleased by everything all the time with regards to architecture.

[NewTowner]

I feel they are in the group that want to be pleased by everything all the time with regards to architecture.

Why shoot for anything less? Expect the worst, labor for the best! That's patriotism, and civic pride!

[memphian]

Okay. I got to into the symphony center this past weekend. I LOVE it! Now I just want some sort of pretty front yard for it. As you come out of the main entrance of the Scherm the older buildings directly in front of you are just an eyesore. Which ones of these will be replaced if the Westin is built?

Oh and who let someone paint the old Harley-Holt building YELLOW? YUCK! I am not too convinced that our historical people are fighting the correct battle.

[chris holman]

Okay. I got to into the symphony center this past weekend. I LOVE it! Now I just want some sort of pretty front yard for it. As you come out of the main entrance of the Scherm the older buildings directly in front of you are just an eyesore. Which ones of these will be replaced if the Westin is built?

Oh and who let someone paint the old Harley-Holt building YELLOW? YUCK! I am not too convinced that our historical people are fighting the correct battle.

Sorry but, None of the building's in front of the Symphony are on the Westin proposed site.

[memphian]

Bummer. They're all ugly.

[barakat]

I think most would agree that the parking lot at the Schermerhorn's front door should be green space, maybe with a huge water feature. I rode my bike thru the parking lot the other day, and it looks pretty bad to have this nice building fronted by a concrete wall and asphalt.

[NewTowner]

I think most would agree that the parking lot at the Schermerhorn's front door should be green space, maybe with a huge water feature. I rode my bike thru the parking lot the other day, and it looks pretty bad to have this nice building fronted by a concrete wall and asphalt.

I appreciate the sentiments behind a desire for greenspace to replace the Schermerhorn's forward neighbor, but I think this would be a mistake--particularly given the large amoung of greenspace directly adjacent to the Schermerhorn. I think a good, two or three-story classical stone building with a large open portico and generous windows would make a fantastic northern counterpoint to the Schermerhorn, and would work with it to frame the approach to the Shelby Street Pedestrian bridge.

That open portico should have room for tables and chairs, and these should spill out in front of it, almost against the small fountain-filled plaza of the Schermerhorn, so that one could gather with friends and have a drink or a coffee while admiring the symphony center's northern fa

[it's just dave]

I think you're giving that shadow a bit too much credit. I wouldn't worry much. The earth moves, so shall the sunlight. I like the building idea. Something creative can be placed here to complement the openess of the SCC. I would love to see the craggy backsides of the Broadway buildings utilized. Nothing much cooler to me than ivy covered old brick. The contrast at that location would be sweet.

[MidTenn1]

There is also a vacant lot or alleyway which allows a peek at the SSC front entrance from Broadway. That vista should be preserved in some form if a new structure were built, although I'm not sure how you could accomplish that with one structure. Perhaps, if some one or two story retail were built with an open plaza where the alley is now, it would work. It sure would be inviting from Broadway and the teasing glimpse of the SSC could pull a lot of pedestrians in that direction and presumably to patronize whatever retail is available. Likely, something that is an alternative to the usual Broadway fare.

[barakat]

I appreciate the sentiments behind a desire for greenspace to replace the Schermerhorn's forward neighbor, but I think this would be a mistake--particularly given the large amoung of greenspace directly adjacent to the Schermerhorn. I think a good, two or three-story classical stone building with a large open portico and generous windows would make a fantastic northern counterpoint to the Schermerhorn, and would work with it to frame the approach to the Shelby Street Pedestrian bridge.

That open portico should have room for tables and chairs, and these should spill out in front of it, almost against the small fountain-filled plaza of the Schermerhorn, so that one could gather with friends and have a drink or a coffee while admiring the symphony center's northern fa

[smeagolsfree]

Is the lot owned by Central Parking or someone else? I would bet that Michael would know who owns the lot for sure.

[MidTenn1]

I realize we are drifting away from the Westin topic a little bit, but I think this discussion ties it into the area in general.

But anyway, here's a picture of the building from the Symphony web site, which you all ought to visit here for some nice photos of the nearly completed building. Buy some tickets, too. I am.

You can plainly see the alley referenced in my previous post.

As an aside, I recently noticed what looks to me like a small defacing of one of the figures in the frieze (like with a bullet). What a shame.

[NewTowner]

You can plainly see the alley referenced in my previous post.

I can totally see that alley being preserved--and towards its southern terminus actually covered and incorporated into the wrapped portico of a new building. it would make a wonderfully intimate stroll if flanked by tables and covered in lights, suddenly opening up to the Schermerhorn, framed by the new buildling on the parking lot...

That would be grand!

[memphian]

I like the idea of it becoming an alley covered in lights but by doing so I cannot see how that immediate area could be developed in a financially responsible way without adding a little bit of height to it. I am okay with midrise there but I believe it would have to be at least 6 floors above the ground with a sub-level parking garage. A music, ballet/dance school would be very awesome. I could also see retail there. This area, including the Westin, is becoming the nucleus of Downtown Nashville so whatever is done.... has to be done well the first time.

As for the Westin... I am hoping it will become a reality as it will add so much life to the area.

[Hankster]

Other cities in the South have not had too much trouble building high rise hotels along historic low to midrise streets. Check out this photo of Canal Street in New Orleans compliments of "NCB".

Looking down Canal Street in New Orleans from the 13th floor of One Canal Place:

[Richard Lawson]

PHofKS, that it is a great photo because not only does it show the Westin site it also shows the only other site that could be developed behind Lower Broad buildings -- that other empty parking lot. Nice photo of Canal Street as well. But it shows what NT certainly has been talking about. The Sheraton and Marriott are freaking ugly buildings.

Here is a link from NT's journal recommendation that shows the different classicism features he's been talking about. Yes NT I'm trying to help people understand what it is you are talking about.

http://www.grandtradition.net/component/op...oom/Itemid,100/

To further help him, here's an image of a classicist designed art gallery in Lincoln Nebraska by noted and award winning architect Demetri Porphyrios

http://architecture.nd.edu/news_and_events...n_galleries.jpg

Look at the building on the front of his firm's homepage. Now that is a cool building not for the color, which I'm not fond of, but the building structure.

http://www.porphyrios.co.uk/ That's actually a commercial building in Greece. Go to the projects section on the site and there's some cool stuff.

[barakat]

After studying the above arial image of the SSC and surrounding area, I'm a little less concerned about the appearance of the Westin, and more interested in the huge potential of developing these three adjacent blocks [Westin, BBS/SSC, Encore] almost simultaneously, if not consecutively. I hope the obvious potential to activate all these streets with pedestrian activity isn't lost. Aside from Westin needing a major tower redesign, I hope it and BBS get going relatively soon.

[ATLBrain]

If I have looked at those renderings correctly... and if I have a correct understanding of where the hotel will sit, then I can understand why the back elevation is so plain on the first 3-4 floors. Isn't that because those little buildings on 3rd Ave will remain between the hotel and the bridge?

[cheeriokid61]

Yeah, I think I remember hearing that.

[bnaflyer]

The Hitler and Stalin reference was due to the very real connection between the great Modernist pogrom against tradition and the Totalitarian purging of human beings in the first half of the 20th century--they are intimately linked due to shared assumptions about the violent perfectability of mankind through technology and ruthless Progress.

Although there is some grain of truth in this, the rhetoric is overblown. As every schoolboy knows, Hitler and Stalin were not fans of Modernism, so it's a bit disingenous to link them with the Modernists, many of whom were actively persecuted by the fascists. Hitler, in fact, favored pompous, grandiose and "historical" architecture, most of which was banal and completely derivative.

I am, generally, a classicist. But I am really tired of the two sides in this debate (Modernist v. classicist) trying to demonize one another to the point of claiming that Modernism (much less its contemporary descendants) is nothing more than an expression of fascism. That's just a silly, college sophomore sort of argument.