Individualism, the ROM and Happy New Year

This was going to be an essay about individualism but then I thought the subject was too self-glorifying and hedonistic. And people soon tire of the subject. Nevertheless, individualism is what makes the world go round and it is a philosophy we can't deny or avoid.

Then I thought I would write about a LA Times columnist who was going to wish the world Happy New Year in his column but then changed his mind. Instead he wrote, "Why bother" because " for a huge and growing number of people around the world, today isn't the start of a New Year". I will probably write on that later.

I then decided to go for a walk. I walked through Toronto's trendy Yorkville district, eying its many construction sites. I am fascinated by construction sites, especially the big wholes that are dug for the foundations of new buildings, of which there are a few in the works at the moment. Then I came upon the new extension to the Royal Ontario Museum, hence the ROM in my title.

I was overcome by what I saw when I stood across Bloor St. and looked at the ROM's new extension. It's overwhelming and fantastic. It is very impressive. It reminded my of a huge cruise liner moored in port, a liner that looked like no other because of its dramatic angles . As I was standing there taking it all in I moved a few steps and then looked at it again. I seemed to repeat this a few times; moving down the block a bit and then stopping to look again, like a camera. I mean, it's fantastic. It's great to have this in Toronto, a building designed by one of the leading architects in the world, Daniel Libeskind.

Some people don't like the postmodern design of the ROM's new extension because they think it is out of place and does not conform to the old building, which is of a 19th century design. Well, in many cases modern extensions to old buildings have been failures. That's because those extensions have been too timid and weak in design, so naturally they look awful. This extension is not weak but at the same time it does not overwhelm the old Victorian building. Instead, it juxtaposes the older building. I think it would have been silly and impossible to replicate the old building in this day an age as some have suggested. As I have said before, if you are going to build an extension to an older building there are no half measures and you can't be wimpy about it. You have to be radical to successfully blend with an older building since whatever is done will never match. And this building is radical and goes to the limit. Such a design also attracts significant attention and tourists.

As I was walking and looking at this fabulous extension I was thinking how lucky the merchants across the street from it are, to have this great view. And as I was walking I spotted someone taking pictures of it. I stopped to talk to him and ask his opinion of it. I though I could get from him some material for this essay I was planning. I asked him what he thought and he said he loved it. I told him how lucky I though the people across from it were and he told me that the architect, Libeskind, used to sit across from the site, perhaps in a cafe, to sketch his design for it. We both thought Toronto was very fortunate to have such a great building.

Now I will touch on the subject of individualism. Without the individual or individualism this great building would not be possible. The design was picked from a competition of several individual architects. And I think, like most people think, the best design was picked. Imagine such a building being designed by committee instead of an individual. Most likely it would have turned out to be lackluster like so many past extensions to old buildings have been, because most have been influenced by committee. Communist countries are noted for their ugly modern architecture because committees instead of individuals designed them. Communism is a system that didn't believe in individualism and that is one big reason why it collapsed. Communism didn't understand that the strength of any society first starts with the individual, it prime element.

On that note I am reminded of a quote: "For best results, cultivate individuals, not groups". Not only will we get the best governance and organization possible by cultivate individuals but also the best buildings.

Now on the topic of Happy New Year. Niall Ferguson is the author of the article I mentioned who decided not to wish everybody a Happy New Year. He thought it was too Anglo-centric a tradition to bother, that most of the world was not Anglo and thus did not participate in New Year's eve celebrations. What nonsense. By what one saw on TV New Year's eve most of the world has been Anglo-ized because most every major city in the world from Tokyo to Mexico City, plus most every culture, were ringing in the New Year as though it was also their custom. More on this topic later.