Already a subscriber? Log in
Continuing this dialogue with nature, the Pavilion’s umbrella-like roof has a concave polygonal shape intended to respectfully avoid the park’s trees, with delicate concertina folds inspired by palm fronds. Yet this is somewhat illegible from the ground, apart from the exquisitely razor-sharp eaves. ‘It seems designed for a top-down view that you’ll never see,’ another architect visitor tells me, who regards it as a rookie error typical of architecture students more preoccupied with the building as an object, rather than a space. Inside the brochure, they helpfully show a computer-generated aerial image of the Pavilion, in case you forget to bring your drone.
But perhaps the biggest blow is the screens that enclose the pavilion, featuring kitsch cut-out patterns of stylised leaves that take this echoing of nature into full-blown caricature, looking like something from a garden centre’s own-brand fencing range. It was made known that this was a cost-cutting substitute for what was intended to be glass-panelling, but paired with an insipid café menu that is inspired by a watered-down version of the architect’s Lebanese heritage, it is perhaps the final straw that tips the Pavilion into feeling like a beach shack in a Mediterranean tourist resort.
The brochure helpfully shows a computer-generated aerial image, in case you forgot to bring your drone
Fred and his friends had already gone by now, possibly in search of a convivial space that is less policed. As I left, I happened to catch the Serpentine Gallery’s concurrent exhibition by Tomás Saraceno, which features a poignant film on the hidden costs of the global push for decarbonisation, namely the environmental and social consequences from lithium extraction for batteries in Argentina. Clearly, the Serpentine’s curators have made environmental ethics central to what they preach, yet I can’t help but dwell on the forest that supplied the timber for this seasonal folly. As to whether or not it was cut down for a good enough reason, they seem not to have seen the wood for the trees.
Because you read about architecture
Also by Calvin Po
Latest
Comments
Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just $5 for 3 monthsAlready a subscriber? Log in