On 19 Nov, 09:10, Bruce wrote:
On Thu, 19 Nov 2009 12:42:45 +0900, Miles Bader wrote:
Bruce writes:
grotesque and entirely pointless 19th century propylaeum.

What's wrong with propylaea (no idea how one is supposed to form the
plural...) anyway? *

What is wrong with anything that is completely pointless?

The original served no useful purpose. *It was purely a marketing
tool. *It made a statement about the railway company that commissioned
it. *And that's it.

Admittedly, it was a massive statement. *The "Arch" became a familiar,
but ultimately pointless landmark. *

I've always felt the same about Canary Wharf Jubilee station, which
everyone but me seems to rave over, but which I would consider to be
an ostentatious sculpture rather than architecture.

It's a rectangular concrete hole, probably created by pumping water
out of a dock, and fails to protect its occupants from the cold in
winter. Putting a sculpture on top of it doesn't make it more fit for
purpose.