CBBarnett
Senior Member
It's difficult to separate my political ideas from my valuation of these projects. In so many way NMC represents community, philanthropy, risk-taking, creativity, and I can't think of Rogers Place without thinking of Katz's threat to move the team, corporate welfare, stadium politics, etc. Plus, it's in Edmonton. Funny they are both sponsored by telecom, bridge a road, and are in revitalizing neighbourhoods. Architecturally, they are so different that it's hard to appraise them with the same rubric.
I agree with you in principle - stadium economics and billionaire bonusing are laughably appalling - but I think you are being a bit too generous on the NMC. Recall that the "philanthropy" you are mentioning is really only a minority of the NMC's cost, ~100 million / 160 million cost came directly from the various layers of government. It actually has a similar ratio of public vs. private funding as the Edmonton arena deal, albeit on a smaller scale.
The other issue that shouldn't be obscured is with the programming of the NMC itself is not designed for everyone - despite the brochure and tag lines. This isn't a facility designed with grass-roots music in mind or to help struggling artists groups. This is about the elite end of the music industry - the type that the elites donating all this money would support. This is the CPO, not an open-mic night at the Unicorn or Blues Can.
Both buildings are examples of elites leveraging public funding to achieve their own development and programming goals. I still think the NMC turned out great and is visually an stunning building - I would build it over a stadium any day - but we shouldn't think from a development point of view they are worlds apart. They have more in common than people think.
Last edited: