Plans for the Museum of the American Revolution have met almost unanimously with disappointment and derision. Though the museum was designed by Robert M. Stern, one of the country's most acclaimed architects, the plans show a building which is perhaps a little bland. Yesterday, the Art Commission (which turned down the first set of plans for the museum) approved revised plans. However, a quick glance at the plans side by side shows that they're minimally different.
Hidden City called the plans for the new building a "missed opportunity" and "colonial imitation on grand display". Inga Saffron (the Inquirer's archicritic) called it "more cartoon than homage". Here's the question: is this building the horrible tragedy that both Inga Saffron at the Inquirer and Hidden City have made it out to be?