The Winning Design for the Canadian Museum for Human Rights
It perplexes me that a potential symbol of Canadian culture and identity has been more-or-less ignored by the non-CanWest Canadian media, aside from a good slamming or two. Perhaps it stems from the media's problem with all things CanWest, since they are the driving force behind the project. CanWest's news, after all, has been criticized for exhibiting a pro-Jewish bias. In any case, rather of generating excitement about the project, many, such as the Globe and Mail's Lisa Rochon, have decided to criticize it long before the final product is really in sight.
The design was selected by a panel of archetects, who, one supposes, know more about archetecture than a columnist. Still, she's already calling the project structurally unsound, saying that it looks like "a tall swizzle stick ("the tower of hope") that emerges from a transparent lollipop" and that "the jury clearly wanted to privilege the voice of an American over the two short-listed Canadian firms." In fact, that seems to be her biggest complaint. She paints the winning archetect as a crazy biker dude from the desert of Arizona, while the Canadian archetects are brilliant, award-winning wonders. I'm fully in favour of supporting Canadian archetects, but I'm not about to give them a thumbs-up on that criterion alone.
New archetectural concepts and designs in Toronto (such as the new Dundas Square that nobody in the rest of Canada gives a hoot about), are big, positive news. On the other hand, the unveiling of what has been dubbed Canada's 'big ben' or 'eiffel tower' is, to them, not only trivial, but stupid. As far as the east is concerned, I suppose, "little Winnipeg done wrong," and we're going to pay the price when the roof of our museum caves in under heaps of snow.
The whole project may be overblown, and it may not live up to expectations - only time will tell. Since (regardless of what it looks like) it shall be a symbol for all Canadians, it is understandable that we all want to take pride in this project. Ideally, it will even be an aid to mutual understanding between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal Candians.
Alas, the big media have decided to introduce the project by slamming it, if it registers on the radar at all. It seems almost fitting that the design's unveiling goes largely ignored, not unlike our usual ignorance of human rights issues. Without knowing what the outcome will be, I can't say that the museum will do justice to the importance of human rights. But I trust that, when dealing with subject matter so deeply important, this Museum will somehow eventually become something we can take pride in. And that is what makes the media's cynical assessment potentially sad. Sad for Winnipeg, sad for Canada, sad for human rights.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home