David Brownlee, vice chair, of the Design Advocacy Group, had some scathing words for the design of the new Museum of the American Revolution, which was presented to the nonprofit group this month. In yesterday's Inquirer, Brownlee writes of Robert A.M. Stern Architects' plans: "We believe [the design is] not worthy of the museum's prominent location, ambitious leaders, or talented architect."
Brownlee's specific objections include:
· the building would look smaller than it is
· it has no strong gestures
· there aren't windows, turning it into "a rather bleak mass"
· it's unoriginal and any architectural borrowings have no context
· it's not nearly as inspired as the Barnes
This comes a little more than a month after the Inquirer's Inga Saffron's lukewarm column about the design, which she wrote "suffers from all the weaknesses of Stern's neo-traditionalist design philosophy" and his "remedial architectural language."
· Let's make it revolutionary [Inquirer]
· Revolution lite: Robert A.M. Stern's design for the Museum of the American Revolution [Inquirer]