Save LACMA

“The building [ CEO Michael] Govan has opted for, while impressive, is materially rigid and conceptually inflexible, with even more stubbornness baked into its DNA than even the most severe of encyclopedic museums.“

If anything, this piece reminds us of that devastating exposé about how this is in no way a Peter Zumthor design as the architect himself walked away from it due to Govan’s slapdash, value engineered version. And ’s CEO has the hubris to say that his version is better, “I would argue that there are many, several, “I would argue that there are many, several,
Zumthoresque details. I do have that matter-of-fact aesthetic, and interest, which is one of the reasons I like Peter... but mine is more pared back.”

Not one of ‘s shining moments, and this only can be judged as a feat of value
engineering; especially when no one thought to take soil samples, which would’ve, maybe, persuaded everyone to realize that the bridge idea would be cost prohibitive. But ’s CEO wanted to keep the bridge and cut everything else...no matter how bad it’d turn out.

‘s CEO Michael Govan is quoted here as saying that the subpar, unrefined concrete used is
“American concrete”, but no noted architect we’ve spoken to, and we’ve spoken to quite a few, don’t know what the hell he’s talking about; unless he’s using his standard insincere doublespeak to deflect from this building’s obviously cheap and shoddy workmanship.