Talk:Architecture of Ottawa

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ottawa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ottawa articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
B	This article has been rated as B-class on the quality scale.
Top	This article has been rated as top-importance on the importance scale.

An entry from Architecture of Ottawa appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know? column on 3 May 2007.

[edit] Rewrite entire article

I feel this entire article needs to be rewriten as it establishes a negative point of view on the built environment in Ottawa. Also, I feel it should be based chronologically, like the Architecture of Canada page, as it perhaps presents a more focused look on the details of actual architecture. I will work towards this but it will take some time.--Ducio1234 (talk) 01:58, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

There is definite room for expansion of this article, but we should also be careful to not present an overly touristic impression of Ottawa. The Parliament Buildings and other federal monuments are prominent structures, but they are also very unreflective of the city as a whole. Much more of the city looks like Barrhaven and Tunney's Pasture than it does like Parliament Hill. Too much focus on the attractive highlights will give an inaccurate impression of the city. - SimonP (talk) 18:44, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

While I wouldn't advocate touristic editing, I think the Parliament buildings (which could be more fully discussed) have come to define architecture in Ottawa, as they have influenced a host of other buildings in the city, like the Supreme Court of Canada, National Gallery of Canada, and the Bank of Canada. While suburban sprawl characterizes much of the city, I don't really consider this type of building notable architecture that needs to be included in depth.--Ducio1234 (talk) 01:34, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

I worry the article has already gone too far in the touristic direction. I would be very surprised if you could find an architecture critic who would use the words romantic and picturesque to describe Ottawa's architecture as a whole. The same goes for saying that the Parliament Buildings "heavily influenced the architectural development of Ottawa." They really didn't. Ottawa's dominant style, both downtown and in the suburbs, is a deeply conservative modernism. Ignoring that fact by focusing on the prominent exceptions gives a false impression of the city. - SimonP (talk) 13:14, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

I also don't think we should move to a more chronological approach. The evolution of government buildings from the Connaught Building to the R. H. Coats Building is a distinct story from the evolution of residential houses from Victorian to neo-eclectic and its better not to try and combine them. - SimonP (talk) 19:38, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

I believe that architecture is best understood when the buildings are placed in their context and that a chronological approach best explains the larger developments in architecture that cross these thematic cateogizations, for example, why should a Neo-Gothic church be separated from the Neo-Gothic Parliament buildings when the design of the building was largely meant to do achieve the same goals and when they originate from the same period? Why should discussion of the rise of the suburbs be separated from R.H. Coats building when they are both essentially products of modernism's influence and interaction in Ottawa?--Ducio1234 (talk) 01:34, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

The problem with that approach is it tells us very little about Ottawa. The story of Neo-Gothic being used for nineteenth century institutions or of modernism leading to unadorned towers and suburban sprawl is exactly the same for any city in North America. Duplicating that same narrative here isn't useful, when such things are already well covered at articles like Gothic Revival architecture in Canada. The history of Ottawa's urban planning and the evolution of federal buildings are stories that are unique to the city and will be covered no where else in the encyclopedia, and should be the focus of this page. - SimonP (talk) 13:14, 10 June 2008 (UTC)