It’s a sore thumb on campus. We have a love/hate relationship with the grumpy, unhelpful staff. The stacks are always messy and when you look at the library catalogue and see that the only copy of a book left on campus is at Robarts, you get a sinking feeling that the book is missing. Robarts library is just one of the things at U of T that we all love to hate. In fact, you probably aren’t a real U of T student until you get frustrated at it for some reason or another. It’s just one of those experiences that every U of T student goes through.
Unhelpful staff and messy shelves aside, we love to complain about the fact that the turkey “peacock-shaped” building is hideous. And it is, when you compare it with some of the lovely structures we have on campus, like Trinity College, UC or the fascinating Pharmacy building (if we want to have a more modern building on the list).
In any case, U of T is trying to transform the building and according to an article in the Toronto Star, this is what Robarts could look like after all the construction that is currently going on:
Personally, I find this proposed renovation horrendously disgusting. The article was talking about the open spaces that’s unfriendly and whatnot but in all honesty, this looks as if someone took a child’s doll house and tacked it on to the now decapitated turkey. At least with the turkey/peacock head, the building was caricature-ized. This new proposed plan seems to lack cohesion. At least with Daniel Libeskind’s crystal (which itself is deemed to be an architectural monstrosity), the idea was crazy enough to be interesting and in a sense, avant garde. This, on the other hand is just… weird. And kind of ugly. (Opinions?) The two portions don’t seem to match each other and therefore, the triangular concrete structure as a result of this contrasting “warm” add-on looks even more imposing and jail-like. I never thought that Robarts could be made even worse than it already is. Then again, I’m used to seeing the weird turkey/peacock on the corner of St. George and Harbord, so maybe it’s just me.
I know that Robarts has done a lot of renovations on the interior but I don’t think it’s enough. Rather than spending money on the outside of the building (which we’ll have to use anyways, so it’s not like we can demolish it completely or anything), it may be better to just completely redecorate the interior to make study space, not the exterior, more warm and welcoming. This way, students can get a nice surprise. Wouldn’t it be nice to hear: “Robarts is ugly on the outside but it’s wonderful when you walk in!”
So, what do you think of this proposed rejuvenation for Robarts?
I’m not a fan of Robarts. I always choose to go to Kelly or EJ Pratt to get any of my studying done. But I don’t know if that’s because of how it looks on the outside. I don’t care if it’s peacock shaped. I just don’t like the inside of it. The study areas are bleak and old and stuffy and looking at this article, I completely agree with you. I would much rather they change the interior than the exterior. Especially if THAT’S their plan for it. That’s truly horrible-looking.
This new building does look lame. However, be thankful that you did NOT get some piece of crap from Daniel Libeskind. His work is ugly, non functional AND it leaks. I can think of no greater imposter masquerading is an architect than the jackass who destroyed Bloor Street. So be grateful for buildings less ugly than the ‘Crystal’.
I’m no architecture student but I don’t think it looks half bad. Im sort of a fan of the old and new architecture mix similar to the economics building and even Bahen.
@Eddie Carroll The crystal may be considered to be ugly but it did do something good for the ROM: since the crystal’s opening, for about a year, the ROM has been booked almost full for expensive corporate events that added greatly to its revenue.
Interior needs a major face lift! I want to cry every time I go in there.
It’s worth noting that the picture above is taken from the south-west (basically from on top of the AC). The addition is going to be over the shipping & receiving bay on Huron St.
So for all you turkey lovers, fret not.
And by “picture” and “taken” I mean “rendering” and “drawn”
@ Jess
So the ROM benefits financially, if at the visual expense of the city we all share, and that’s OK? What happened to the day when cultural institutions set the aesthetic, architectural and principled standards for a city? I guess it’s more important that ROM does whatever it feels like, and Libeskind satiates his ego.
I particularly enjoy the name of the photo… “Neo-Robarts”.
As a staff member at Robarts myself, let me just say that not all of us are “grumpy and unhelpful” but I agree, too many of us are unfortunately. Not sure why. Some of my colleagues have worked there so long they don’t realize how good they have it and take their job for granted. I’m sorry if you’ve had bad experiences with staff (seriously!), but if anyone is giving you a hard time just ask to speak to someone else. Believe me, it’s no picnic working alongside people like that either.
Re: the ROM Crystal comment
I, for one, find the ROM Crystal to be beautiful. It takes my breath away every time that I drive by and it juts out at me from the ground. I never even used to notice the ROM before, but with the old-meets-new architexture of the Lee-Chin Crystal, it’s truly a sight.
I was just in the Crystal tonight for perhaps the third time. It’s an architectural disaster, sloppy looking from the outside (the compromised tiny window slits are placed haphazardly), and inside it still looks unfinished. The front doors are already falling apart. For all the space it take up outside, the museum gains very little in actual floorspace. And the way it was merged with the existing building creates lots of “dead spaces” that are too small or poorly shaped to be of any use.
From what I understand the remake has brought in way less revenue then was hoped for. They have lots of great exhibits at the ROM, but the Crystal is a disaster.