OG&E Tower

[zookeeper]

I sure hate to see it go and I think many others, who don't think they will, might also once its been gone for a while. I know betts has a hard time even reading this thread. I just can't believe this unique structure will be demolished. It will be seen in pictures decades from now and people will be asking why we ever wanted to tear it down. Maybe not, but I wouldn't bet against it.

I know I've posted many things about the Stage Center, but I don't recall ever reading or posting this:
http://offcite.org/wp-content/upload...ble_Cite25.pdf
(worth the read - for future reference, obviously)

[Urbanized]

I sure hate to see it go and I think many others, who don't think they will, might also once its been gone for a while. I know betts has a hard time even reading this thread. I just can't believe this unique structure will be demolished. It will be seen in pictures decades from now and people will be asking why we ever wanted to tear it down. Maybe not, but I wouldn't bet against it.

I know I've posted many things about the Stage Center, but I don't recall ever reading or posting this:
http://offcite.org/wp-content/upload...ble_Cite25.pdf
(worth the read - for future reference, obviously)

Wow. Fascinating read. I've never seen that before. Interesting to see some detail in the role John Kirkpatrick played in the downfall of the theater company. Also interesting to read about the renovation helmed by Rand. A few years after that I had drinks with Rand in that lounge during a production and talked a bit about the renovation, but it was mostly social chit-chat. This provides quite a bit of backstory and context that I wasn't really familiar with.

[Just the facts]

While the building was showered
with international acclaim at the time of its
completion in 1971, no one bothered to
explain its unusual design to the hometown
audience.

We understand it, we just don't like it. I personally don't like the architecture or the politics the architecture was born out of. And I use 'we' in the sense of the majority as I know some people like both the style and political movement.

[catcherinthewry]

^Agree

[FritterGirl]

Posts are up around the building now. Looks like whatever fencing they'll be using as a barricade is on the way. Hard to tell from my vantage point, but the posts look to be about 6' tall, I'd imagine. Reality is sinking in. I may have to close my office blinds for awhile when demo really starts to kick in.

[LakeEffect]

Posts are up around the building now. Looks like whatever fencing they'll be using as a barricade is on the way. Hard to tell from my vantage point, but the posts look to be about 6' tall, I'd imagine. Reality is sinking in. I may have to close my office blinds for awhile when demo really starts to kick in.

[SoonerDave]

We understand it, we just don't like it. I personally don't like the architecture or the politics the architecture was born out of. And I use 'we' in the sense of the majority as I know some people like both the style and political movement.

I think that's one of the "elephant in the room" things. The folks who like it, who hold nearly a religious fervor for it, are simply unable to comprehend the notion that anyone couldn't like it, merely because it should be obvious (in their view) they "ought" to..just because. There's this belief that, "well, if you'd just let me explain it to you, you'd like it" - almost the way opera fans insist everyone should like it "if you gave it a chance." Where I think the line is crossed is where the assumption is made that if you are among those that don't like the place, you're of some lower form of intellect. Liking or not liking a building doesn't make anyone stupid nor brilliant. It just means you have an opinion.

[ABryant]

Wow...Someone should write up an article here about all of Rand's projects that have influenced OKC's architecture.

[Jim Kyle]

Might be interesting to compare his track record to that of Layton...

[HangryHippo]

I think that's one of the "elephant in the room" things. The folks who like it, who hold nearly a religious fervor for it, are simply unable to comprehend the notion that anyone couldn't like it, merely because it should be obvious (in their view) they "ought" to..just because. There's this belief that, "well, if you'd just let me explain it to you, you'd like it" - almost the way opera fans insist everyone should like it "if you gave it a chance." Where I think the line is crossed is where the assumption is made that if you are among those that don't like the place, you're of some lower form of intellect. Liking or not liking a building doesn't make anyone stupid nor brilliant. It just means you have an opinion.

Excellent post, SD.

[Just the facts]

I think that's one of the "elephant in the room" things. The folks who like it, who hold nearly a religious fervor for it, are simply unable to comprehend the notion that anyone couldn't like it, merely because it should be obvious (in their view) they "ought" to..just because. There's this belief that, "well, if you'd just let me explain it to you, you'd like it" - almost the way opera fans insist everyone should like it "if you gave it a chance." Where I think the line is crossed is where the assumption is made that if you are among those that don't like the place, you're of some lower form of intellect. Liking or not liking a building doesn't make anyone stupid nor brilliant. It just means you have an opinion.

I 100% agree but I have a feeling there is fair number of the "I like it" crowd who themselves don't under the political motivation behind the architectural style and if it was explained to them - THEY might stop liking it. Just like the Baroque movement was designed to spread the Catholic Church in the 1600's the Modernist movement from 1930 to 1970 also had an agenda (and it turned out to be a freaking disaster for anyone who had it forced on them). It is part of the reason I would kick Le Corbusier in the crotch if he was around today.

[Pete]

^

You also have to respect the sentimental attachments people form with buildings and places.

One of the reasons I have not been particularly upset about losing Stage Center is I have absolutely no history with it whatsoever. I've never even been inside the place (which is telling in itself, but that's well-covered territory).

But others did have plenty of experiences there, especially since it's been around for quite a while. Or they just liked seeing it for other emotional reasons.


Feelings don't have to be rational.

[DoctorTaco]

^

Feelings don't have to be rational.

False. I optimize all my feelings using advanced numerical techniques. When negative emotions are indicated I outsource them to third parties.

[hoya]

I like Stage Center precisely because it's so weird. Every time I walk past it, I look at it a different way. It's like abstract art, to me.

It's not really functional and the design is very limited -- it would be hard to convert to something else. But it is such an odd design, I think we could have made much better use of it than we have. I totally understand why a lot of people don't like it, but I do not understand this driving need to tear it down, even if it just gets replaced with a parking lot.

[Pete]

[Just the facts]

False. I optimize all my feelings using advanced numerical techniques. When negative emotions are indicated I outsource them to third parties.

[OKCisOK4me]

I was being serious

a serious haha it was.

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S5

[G.Walker]

I love this site, this is my preferred news source.

[cagoklahoma]

I love this site, this is my preferred news source.

Agreed! Between OKC Talk and Twitter, I have no need to watch local news. Except to see how poorly they "report" stories they get from OKC Talk.

With the exception of Steve, I do apperciate his work.

[Pete]

Steve made a couple of good points in his blog post about the demolition...

He reminded everyone that the elementary school directly west will be opening in August and that the demolition will likely be complete before then.

Not only to not have the mess and danger with kiddies so close, but also because the site is presently a refuge for a good number of homeless and the school would rather have it completely cleared.


On that same point, you've got to think the the school opening will create some extra heat on Preftakes because there are lots of homeless in and around his block since it is now almost completely deserted.

[mkjeeves]

Remember when the crazy guy took a hammer to the Pietà? That incident comes to my mind recently. Funny how it works sometimes.

[Urbanized]

I think that's one of the "elephant in the room" things. The folks who like it, who hold nearly a religious fervor for it, are simply unable to comprehend the notion that anyone couldn't like it, merely because it should be obvious (in their view) they "ought" to..just because. There's this belief that, "well, if you'd just let me explain it to you, you'd like it" - almost the way opera fans insist everyone should like it "if you gave it a chance." Where I think the line is crossed is where the assumption is made that if you are among those that don't like the place, you're of some lower form of intellect. Liking or not liking a building doesn't make anyone stupid nor brilliant. It just means you have an opinion.

I think this is a fundamental misunderstanding of the preservation bias that some people have. Personally, I see many buildings that I don't particularly like, yet still agree are worth preserving, and I will defend their existence. Stage Center is far from my favorite building in OKC; I just believe that it is pretty easily the most architecturally important, and we have an extreme shortage of architectural significance here. For better or worse, no other building in OKC inspires articles like one linked above, and probably none of our existing building stock ever will.

It is possible to admit that a building is important architecturally without personally being in love with it. The idea that EVERYONE has to agree that a building is worth keeping before it is safe just means our built environment eventually sinks to the lowest common denominator. We are doing a GREAT job in OKC of sinking to the lowest common denominator.

I think you have it exactly backwards. The pro-demo group takes the approach that "I personally don't like this building, so it should cease to exist." THAT is the arrogant position, if you ask me.

Go back and read this thread and the other Stage Center thread with an open mind - if you can force yourself to do so - and you will see that the venom on this topic is directed at those who would have like to have seen preservation, not the other way around.

[Bullbear]

I will be sad to see it go. not because I am in love with it but because it is somewhat iconic. people always ask about it when visiting and it is interesting. when I see pictures of amazing buildings that were demolished in years past in OKC I wonder if we have learned much from it. just my 2 cents

[Just the facts]

I think you have it exactly backwards. The pro-demo group takes the approach that "I personally don't like this building, so it should cease to exist." THAT is the arrogant position, if you ask me.

I can't speak for everyone, but I can do a pretty good job of speaking for myself, so I am going to borrow your phrase to express my thoughts.

"I personally don't like this building, so I don't care if it ceases to exist."

As for like/don't like, I don't like it for many more reasons than just because I don't like the Modernist movement. I think it was a 40 year deterrent to development of the land south and west of it.

[Pete]

Ugh.