The rotting-decaying piers of yesteryear along the West Side of Manhattan are becoming unwitting pieces of art, according to the Times. Artists and city officials love them, like the pier that landscape architect Thomas Balsley affectionately calls, "spaghetti pier," at West 62nd. Reporter Fred A. Bernstein also notes that the "random" deformation of the piers brings to mind modern architecture that tries to achieve that spontaneity of form via computers; Frank Gehry's new Walt Disney Concert Hall in L.A. is one example. The piers will most likely be demolished, so on this lovely weekend, go take a look at them while you can.





They claim in the article that it would be impossible to stabilize/preserve the piers. But I find it hard to believe that they couldn't just build a structure over and and around the spaghetti pier in the picture, something that allows people to walk out over the old pier and view it through windows in the floor of the structure.
The thought that came to mind when reading the article was that if the twisted heap of metal was away from the water we'd be calling it an eyesore and demanding that at the very least it is dragged and delivered to the front lawn of junk shop. Jersey City also has some nice rotting piers as well but no one is calling them art. Perhaps that is the caliber of folks who live there? (Myself included)
i wish they could have gotten some else of some repute other than Toshiko Mori, who seems to be the only one in the article that has any understanding of the architecture that the others are comparing the piers too.
`accidental,' `random,' `arbitrary'? those aren't words one should use in any sort of association with FOA's Yokohama International Port Terminal in Japan.
This is waterfront decay, and I have a hard time seeing the merit of art THERE.
When I worked in Jersey City, if this had been out front of Newport, I guarantee the project would have never taken off.
How come the urban-blight "art" is always some drive's distance away from where the artists hang out?