3 ms·

I think it's two of the five columns on the right in this image: https://images.adsttc.com/media/images/6352/6dc1/66b7/442f/b9ed/3d05/slideshow/renovation-plans

I think it's two of the five columns on the right in this image: https://images.adsttc.com/media/images/6352/6dc1/66b7/442f/b9ed/3d05/slideshow/renovation-plans-for-venturi-scott-browns-national-gallery-wing-are-revised-after-widespread-criticism_8.jpg https://images.adsttc.com/media/images/6352/6dc1/66b7/442f/b... Note that they are absent from this render: https://images.adsttc.com/media/images/6352/6d02/da69/b45e/2863/ce99/slideshow/renovation-plans-for-venturi-scott-browns-national-gallery-wing-are-revised-after-widespread-criticism_1.jpg https://images.adsttc.com/media/images/6352/6d02/da69/b45e/2... > located on the ground floor near the former cloakroom, halfway between the street entrance and the stairs and lift leading down to the basement. Three adjacent structural columns have needed to be retained.

adastra22 2y ago
Why would the architect want those columns to be there? It makes absolutely no sense.
- corndoge 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - carabiner 2y ago
    Strange idea but it might work.
  - krisoft 2y ago
    I did read the article and still have the same question. To show that I read it I can even quote the line where they talk about the architect’s motivations: “Venturi wanted the foyer to have the feel of a mighty crypt, leading upstairs to the galleries, so it was a subsidiary space—the beginning of a journey, not a destination.” And still I have the same question? Why would those two false collumn make the space a “subsidiary” space? (Or to put it differentl why would the addition of those two collumns make it more of a subsidiary space than the fact that it is just the foyer of a gallery?) And then the further question is why did they place the false collumns unevenly? If i see it right they form a pair with the real collumns, instead of being evenly distributed in between them. Which is… a choice.
    - SenHeng 2y ago
      I also wonder why they didn't simply build a hollow column out of wood then cover it in mortar instead of actually building a concrete column.
- amelius 2y ago
  In architecture, there is this phenomenon where people may have an irrational fear of collapse. Adding (the suggestion of) redundant structural support may take away that fear.
  - radicaldreamer 2y ago
    Same reason why the WTC windows were smaller than they needed to be, to give people a sense of security.
    - buildsjets 2y ago
      You triggered memories of being in the south tower observation deck with my feet a foot and a half from the window and my forehead braced against the glass, staring 1200 feet straight down.
  - akira2501 2y ago
    > there is this phenomenon where people may have an irrational fear of collapse. That's most appropriately a "phobia." > may take away that fear. I'm also not aware of any materials that suggest a way to deal with generalized megalophobia is by adding by false lobby columns everywhere you go.
    - em-bee 2y ago
      for some reason this makes me think of gauls who purportedly believed that the sky was about to fall on their heads. now i imagine them lining all their roads with tree trunks and large stones, and wait, now i got the purpose of stonehenge. ;-)
  - cam_l 2y ago
    On the other hand, this comment reminds me of a project I started working on midway through, in London many years ago, demolishing and rebuilding an operational train station under a 20 storey building. My first site meeting with the contractors we were standing across the street and looking at the massive new columns they installed on the side street holding the transfer beams for the building above. And I am not saying anything looking, just looking at the structurals and back at the building and counting the columns. Not wanting to make a fool of myself, but there was no way of avoiding it, but there was one more column on the structural drawings than on the building. So I mentioned it, and the head contractor goes pale and cancels the meeting. The next time I went to site there was an extra column. Redundancy is not just there for phobias and earthquakes.
- FearNotDaniel 2y ago
  Architects' whimsy doesn't always "make sense" from a practical standpoint but often has some kind of reasoning behind it. In this case it's right there in the article - for purely aesthetic reasons, to invoke the sense of entering an underground "crypt" sort of space when the real treasures (the artworks themselves) lie on a floor above. Makes a little more sense when you know what the article doesn't obviously state, that the whole extension uses a lot of pastiche of ancient Egyptian style, Tutankhamen's tomb and all that, and that the street level entrance is lower than the original main entrance of the National Gallery itself.
- GJim 2y ago
  It's disappointing to see you being downvoted for asking a genuine question. Such silly downvoting is pointless, counterproductive to conversation, and needs to stop.
RIMR 2y ago
That first link is spot on. Looking at the third image in the article, they are standing next to the destroyed column, and it is clearly one of the columns you indicated. https://cdn.sanity.io/images/cxgd3urn/production/0a733d1463e90e5134c5bfa604bb0d91ffbfdf6c-1468x1101.jpg https://cdn.sanity.io/images/cxgd3urn/production/0a733d1463e...
dwighttk 2y ago
Oh wow (having never been to the museum) I was picturing much classier looking columns. Those are terrible and Lord Sainsbury was absolutely correct.

adastra22 2y ago

Why would the architect want those columns to be there? It makes absolutely no sense.

corndoge 2y ago
[flagged]
- carabiner 2y ago
  Strange idea but it might work.
- krisoft 2y ago
  I did read the article and still have the same question. To show that I read it I can even quote the line where they talk about the architect’s motivations: “Venturi wanted the foyer to have the feel of a mighty crypt, leading upstairs to the galleries, so it was a subsidiary space—the beginning of a journey, not a destination.” And still I have the same question? Why would those two false collumn make the space a “subsidiary” space? (Or to put it differentl why would the addition of those two collumns make it more of a subsidiary space than the fact that it is just the foyer of a gallery?) And then the further question is why did they place the false collumns unevenly? If i see it right they form a pair with the real collumns, instead of being evenly distributed in between them. Which is… a choice.
  - SenHeng 2y ago
    I also wonder why they didn't simply build a hollow column out of wood then cover it in mortar instead of actually building a concrete column.
amelius 2y ago
In architecture, there is this phenomenon where people may have an irrational fear of collapse. Adding (the suggestion of) redundant structural support may take away that fear.
- radicaldreamer 2y ago
  Same reason why the WTC windows were smaller than they needed to be, to give people a sense of security.
  - buildsjets 2y ago
    You triggered memories of being in the south tower observation deck with my feet a foot and a half from the window and my forehead braced against the glass, staring 1200 feet straight down.
- akira2501 2y ago
  > there is this phenomenon where people may have an irrational fear of collapse. That's most appropriately a "phobia." > may take away that fear. I'm also not aware of any materials that suggest a way to deal with generalized megalophobia is by adding by false lobby columns everywhere you go.
  - em-bee 2y ago
    for some reason this makes me think of gauls who purportedly believed that the sky was about to fall on their heads. now i imagine them lining all their roads with tree trunks and large stones, and wait, now i got the purpose of stonehenge. ;-)
- cam_l 2y ago
  On the other hand, this comment reminds me of a project I started working on midway through, in London many years ago, demolishing and rebuilding an operational train station under a 20 storey building. My first site meeting with the contractors we were standing across the street and looking at the massive new columns they installed on the side street holding the transfer beams for the building above. And I am not saying anything looking, just looking at the structurals and back at the building and counting the columns. Not wanting to make a fool of myself, but there was no way of avoiding it, but there was one more column on the structural drawings than on the building. So I mentioned it, and the head contractor goes pale and cancels the meeting. The next time I went to site there was an extra column. Redundancy is not just there for phobias and earthquakes.
FearNotDaniel 2y ago
Architects' whimsy doesn't always "make sense" from a practical standpoint but often has some kind of reasoning behind it. In this case it's right there in the article - for purely aesthetic reasons, to invoke the sense of entering an underground "crypt" sort of space when the real treasures (the artworks themselves) lie on a floor above. Makes a little more sense when you know what the article doesn't obviously state, that the whole extension uses a lot of pastiche of ancient Egyptian style, Tutankhamen's tomb and all that, and that the street level entrance is lower than the original main entrance of the National Gallery itself.
GJim 2y ago
It's disappointing to see you being downvoted for asking a genuine question. Such silly downvoting is pointless, counterproductive to conversation, and needs to stop.

RIMR 2y ago

That first link is spot on. Looking at the third image in the article, they are standing next to the destroyed column, and it is clearly one of the columns you indicated. https://cdn.sanity.io/images/cxgd3urn/production/0a733d1463e90e5134c5bfa604bb0d91ffbfdf6c-1468x1101.jpg https://cdn.sanity.io/images/cxgd3urn/production/0a733d1463e...

dwighttk 2y ago

Oh wow (having never been to the museum) I was picturing much classier looking columns. Those are terrible and Lord Sainsbury was absolutely correct.