Talk:Albany City Hall/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Grsz¹¹ 21:11, 4 October 2010 (UTC) I will be reviewing this article shortly.

This is a good article that thoroughly details the topic, and the history. I'm a fan of NRHP as well!

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Congratulations on GA status. Grsz¹¹ 21:24, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Review

I was disappoited to see that the discussion on this article had been archived before my comments were dealt with. So I'm posting them here Amandajm (talk) 07:34, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Comment

I haven't read everything that is written here. I'm just going to crash in and disagree with the following:

Save for the bold asymmetrical placement of the tower (which is a prime example of Richardson's disregard for architectural correctness and known for being one of his best tower designs), the building is noted for its general simplicity in design. The entranceway is a simple triple-arch loggia; other design elements on the front façade are limited to its windows and a quadruple-arch balcony off the Common Council chamber. The building is simultaneously noted for its general simplicity and care for small details, especially its intricate carvings.[18] The entranceway is flanked by multiple tiers of relief sculpture and gargoyles.[23]

• The tower is stated elsewhere to be Venetian in inspiration. Under those circumstances one would expect it to be asymmetrically placed. Hence it does not show Richardson's disregard for architectural correctness. It demonstrates Richardson's use of his architectural vocabulary to place the tower at the point at which it is going to have the greatest impact on the streetscape. The profile Of Albany City Hall juts forward a little from the other buildings on Eagle St. This adds to its effectiveness. The tower forms a counterpoint to the corner pavilions of the New York State Capitol. This is not accidental. Richardson is creating a tension between the buildings. Its a pity he didn't grab the corner building on the other diagonal axis and come up with something equally dramatic.
• General simplicity in design. No. As far as Romanesque goes, and as far as Richardson goes, this building is not simple. In form maybe, since it is almost a cube, with a tower ang gables, but certainly not in its achitectonic devices.

1. The whole surface is heavily and elaborately rusticated. The rustications on the tower form a regular and pre-planned pattern which gives a great overall richness of surface.

2. All the architectural features are in contrasting stone of a rich colour.

3. There is an additional parquetry of stone in the gables and over lintels.

4. Every window in the building is of a complex form, and these forms vary, not only from floor to floor but from face to face of the building and across the same level. A comparison with the NY State Capitol shows that in this latter building the same main window shape is repeated over several floors.

5. The architect has utilised all the significant decorative features available within the Romanesque vocabulary. The deep portals have strongly projecting shafts around the supporting piers, which create rippling light and shadow. The upper loggia has clusters of shafts, rather than simple smooth pillars.

6. Each colonnette has a richly carved capital. The columns of the lower loggia rise into richly sculptured moldings.

7. Above all the larger arches Richardson has invested the building with decorative drip mouldings, finished with carved bosses at every terminal or joint. Even the little roof over the stair turret at the corner of the tower is equipped with a circlet of bosses.

The caption to an illustration reads City hall has intricate stonework, but because of its small size, it is a secondary design feature compared to the generally simple overall building design.

• When one refers to "stonework" this ususlly means "masonry". I think you mean stone carving.
• It isn't a "secondary design feature". The carvings are integrated with the forms that they decorate. ie. Wherever there is a boss (at every corner of a moulding) it demands to be carved. Likewise, wherever there is a capital (on the top of every on of those colonettes) it demands to be carved.
• This sentence again states that the overall building design is "generally simple".

Let me emphasise again that while the form of the building is a basic box, nothing else about it is "simple", not even its roof structure, which is far more complex than it probably needs to be. This building has an abundance, one might almost say an over-abundance, of architectonic elaboration in the Romanesque manner. All the design choices that the architect has made, such as the shafts, the mouldings, the parquetry, the varied windows, have led to elaboration. As ones eye moves across the building, there is no point of repose.

A telling comparison is with Cincinnati City Hall, a much larger building, also rusticated and polychrome, but with very much simpler treatment of its many windows.[1] Royce Hall at the university of California is a good example of simple Romanesque REvival on a large scale.[2]

If the building is heritage listed, then someone at some time has probably written about this.

Amandajm (talk) 10:56, 2 November 2010 (UTC)