From around the web

Metropolis Magazine conducts a short interview with Santiago Calatrava. He briefly talks about his work in Manhattan and waxes poetic about his favorite bridges.

    “Another one I like very much is the Brooklyn Bridge, because it’s so heroic. It has a quality–maybe it’s not as supreme in the landscape as the Golden Gate–but it started the whole idea of heroic bridges. It was a fight to build it, a tremendous effort. People died. It has this rich dimension of drama. Looking at it you understand a whole city, even a whole country. It belongs to the dreaming. And then up at the very top, a small American flag. It’s a sign of conquest, getting beyond limits. It’s so moving. It touches your heart. It’s a bit naïve, you understand?

We understand, Santago. We understand.

Slate writer, Witold Rybczynski, wonders if Olmstead would apprciate Christo’s Gates.

    From the beginning, Olmsted and Vaux strenuously opposed all attempts to introduce art into the park. In their Greensward Plan of 1858, they wrote that while it would be possible to build elegant buildings in the park, “we conceive that all such architectural structures should be confessedly subservient to the main idea, and that nothing artificial should be obtruded on the view.”…The aim was to limit the visual impact of the artworks on their natural surroundings… “The idea of the park itself should always be uppermost in the mind of the beholder,” [Olmstead and Vaux] reminded the park board.