The Architectural Record reviews new museums, and those wounded by the criticism respond

(((I knew there was a War on Science going on, but the "War on Architecture" had escaped my notice till I saw the orchestrated campaign here.)))

http://archrecord.construction.com/features/critique/0806critique-1.asp

Link: New museums: The good, the bad, and the horribly misguided | Critique | Architectural Record.

(...)

"Creation Museum, Petersburg, Kentucky, by A.M. Kinney Associates. At a time when museums are accused of turning themselves into theme parks, along comes a bizarre new institution that makes Walt Disney World seem like the Albertina. This is not surprising, since the displays of cartoonish dinosaurs and humanoids at the Creation Museum—devised to supplant Darwin’s theory of evolution with a Bible-based fantasia of the world’s origins—were dreamed up by a former Universal Studios designer, Patrick Marsh. I use the term “institution” in both the museological and the psychiatric sense, because this only-in-America loony bin is no more a museum than I am Napoleon. Even more unsettling than its mission to enlist impressionable children in the Christian fundamentalist crusade against scientific reason is the fact that there are already two dozen such creationist museums around the country, though none equals this in impressive presentation values that make it all the more pernicious. In flat-out rejection of the Enlightenment rationalism that brought the United States into being, the Creation Museum is more frightening than Disney’s Haunted Mansion. Let us pray."

Anonymous wrote:

Being a Christian, the fact that I wasted time reading the writer's drivel declares my low intelligence, unlike my religion.. I'll save my precious time for worthy pursuits such as teaching my children what is correct to prevent their indoctrination into the fundamentalist "evolution" religion that he is a fan of. You can easily change my mind though: Just show me one (yes only one) piece of concrete evidence that macro-evolution has occurred anywhere. Surely after "millions" of years and "millions" of specie changes, millions of evidenciary items should be easy to produce, and one item should be that much easier. Good Day
6/11/2008 8:18 AM CDT

Anonymous wrote:

It's sad to see a supposed Architectural critic totally ignore the architecture he is supposedly criticizing and attack the mission of a museum. It is also sad to see his obviously ignorant comments regarding both the museum's mission and the false illusion that the Enlightenment had anything to do with the founding of this great country. I think the real illusion is Mr. Filler's pretension to have any sort of credentials to criticize anything. This is just one more example of a total lack of regard for reality, instead choosing to live in a fantasy world. I would have to agree with the first post in the total lack of conclusive evidence for evolution. As is typical, someone like you who apparently supports evolution have no facts for your opinion, but rather blindly accept failed scientific dogma without any serious understanding or study of the subject. I suggest you stick with your architectural critiques, even though they are for the most part poorly written and clearly represent a lack of insight into the art of architecture.

Anonymous wrote:

Hmmm. But what does he think of the Creation Museum as ARCHITECTURE? I really doubt he has even been there. There is an impressive fossil and mineral collection inside (praised by a NY Times critic), a state-of-the-art planetarium, science lectures, etc., with many on staff holding doctorate degrees in biology, geology, astrophysics, medicine, etc.
6/12/2008 3:13 PM CD

Anonymous wrote:

I found his review nothing more than someone who likes to hear himself speak in big words and catchy sentences. He used the "review" as a means to express his opinions, but not about architecture. There was little information concerning any architectural details. And his obvious hate of Christians was clear, completely tasteless commentary. I wonder if he knows what "tolerance" is nowadays. Seems to me everyone but Christians are entitled to tolerance and free speech. What a completely unprofessional review. Yuck!
6/13/2008 11:32 AM CDT

Anonymous wrote:

How can a magazine that is supposably focusing on architecture even consider Mr. Filler's article worthy to be printed. His observations of the Creation Museum had absolutly nothing to do with the building itself (which has won awards for its design, by the way). He also showed his lack of intellegence about our founding fathers and American History. Ironically, he may be the best evidence against "Intelligent Design". Thankfully, the world of science does prove ID and we don't need to rely on the idiots such as Mr Filler for our proof.

I suggest the Architectual Record choose its writers more carefully.
6/13/2008 12:06 PM CDT

Anonymous wrote:

Astonishing. Mr. Filler has truly revealed his lack of knowledge on origins science like a good little evolutionary mind-drone who has swallowed everything he has been spoon fed in his public education courses. Filler, if you are reading this...it's time to wake up and do some research. Our universe has been created by a Master Architect. I wonder what His critique of you would read.
6/13/2008 1:28 PM CDT

Anonymous wrote:

You can tell that AiG's Creation Museums is making an impact in the world and is clearly convicting Mr. Filler. You may be interested to read Ken Ham's amusing response to this poorly written and patently false article at http://blogs.answersingenesis.org/aroundtheworld/2008/06/13/leading-architecture-magazine-blasts-creation-museum/
6/13/2008 5:19 PM CDT

Anonymous wrote:

Filler is obviously biased and unobservant. it is amazing how an architectural critic can be oblivious to the obvious architecture of this universe in which we live.
This "Bible-based fantasia" of our world's origins has more empirical evidence than Darwin's theory. Wake up!
6/14/2008 10:48 AM CDT

Anonymous wrote:

Mr. Filler, you totally overlooked architecture in your gleeful diatribe directed at the Creation Museum. Sadly, you have exposed your own ignorance and fear. There is no move afoot to "enlist impressionable children" to what you term fundamentalism (an obvious evil in your vernacular), but instead a group of scientists who are righting the wrongs of our lopsided acceptance of Darwinist evolution. They are shedding light in a dark place and thankfully took the risks to bring science back to what it SHOULD be - a search for truth wherever it may lead. And the greatest truth today and always is found in the book of the One who was there from the beginning. NOW let us pray.
6/16/2008 2:16 AM CDT

Anonymous wrote:

I can understand (though not agree with) diatribes against the creation museum from evolutionary scientists. But isn't this writer supposed to be reviewing the architecture? What does he think about the architecture? What the building is used for is irrelevant to its architecture.
6/16/2008 8:38 AM CDT

Anonymous wrote:

I'm an architecture student and a Christian and I am sad to see that the review of the Creation Museum was nothing but a biased view on the concept of Intelligent Design. There were no references to what the architect, A.M. Kinney Associates, actually did with the structure in playing with light and space. If I were A.M. Kinney Associates I would probably ask for a rebuttal from the critic and and have him actually talk about the architecture. After all, this is "Architectural Record" and not "Science" or "The NY Times."
6/20/2008 1:48 AM CDT

Anonymous wrote:

Obviously this writer is just another arrogant bigot full of himself. But hey, he doesn't have to answer to us. Just to God. Good luck, bud, you'll need it.
6/26/2008 2:57 PM CDT