This HTML5 document contains 9 embedded RDF statements represented using HTML+Microdata notation.

The embedded RDF content will be recognized by any processor of HTML5 Microdata.

Namespace Prefixes

PrefixIRI
n3http://www.openvoc.eu/poi#
schemahttp://schema.org/
rdfhttp://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#
n2http://data.yelp.com/Review/id/
n7http://data.yelp.com/Business/id/
revhttp://purl.org/stuff/rev#
xsdhhttp://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#
n5http://data.yelp.com/User/id/

Statements

Subject Item
n2:h_9bJuJa4BwzVsPqjn2nug
rdf:type
rev:Review
schema:dateCreated
2007-10-09T00:00:00
schema:itemReviewed
n7:_oEpmvm-4c7eq4Q9e1yqfA
n3:funnyReviews
2
rev:rating
3
n3:usefulReviews
5
rev:text
I can't say I agree with Carol's review, but since I don't live in Madison and since all I did was spend some time walking through the facility, I can certainly concede that living in Madison would probably alter my sentiments. That having been said, Peter and I made a special trip to Monona Terrace on our way to the airport because we love Frank Lloyd Wright, had traveled to Taliesin, and had not had a chance to see any other local buildings in our brief trip to Madison. As an example of Wright architecture, it is a disappointment. As a civic center and public building, it is lovely. While certain key Wright elements do exist within the space, as Carol mentions, it sadly bears the stamp of so many public buildings in that it possesses no point of view, Wright's or otherwise, and essentially has no real aesthetic. It is a lovely building, but you can sense the committee-ization of every aspect of the space. Bathrooms Wright designed to be at entry level are now flanking the main function areas downstairs to allow them to be larger and preserve more room for ballroom and meeting rooms upstairs. Practical, sure, but antithetical to Wright's philosophy who never met a bathroom he didn't want to make smaller in order to maximize living space. It echoes Wright's beliefs of being close to and in harmony with nature, and the curves and elegant lines of the exterior complement the landscape from all perspectives. However, much of Wright's trademark materials, color schemes and design elements are absent. What remains is a benign, elegant center, which certainly can offend nobody--which was never Wright's mission, and certainly wasn't his intention. While Wright's buildings are impractical and the materials he specified don't hold up well, to call this a Wright building, given the concessions and the changes, is really inaccurate. It is a tasteful and attractive space, but the interior especially has little or nothing to do with Wright, with the exception of the type styles the signage in the building utilize. Worth a visit, but not $3 for a tour, and don't go expecting to see a Frank Lloyd Wright building.
n3:coolReviews
3
rev:reviewer
n5:n3O5fFGjFS4zgbUiCNQkUg