Start typing to search this publication.
Brandon Donnelly logo Brandon Donnelly
Open menu
Brandon Donnelly logo

Subscribe to Brandon Donnelly

Get new posts delivered straight to your inbox.

Brandon Donnelly — Daily insights for city builders. Published since 2013 by Toronto-based real estate developer Brandon Donnelly. — Page 1217

Urban pet peeve: copycatting

  • Cities
  • Copy
  • Copycat

One of my biggest pet peeves is when cities copy things from other cities. 

Let me give you an example. Whenever I see one of those red double decker tourist buses roaming around Toronto, I always look to see if it’s the type that has London signage and destinations plastered all over it. And when it is, I cringe. (I saw one earlier today.)

Why would anyone design a tourist bus that makes you feel like you’re half in another city? I don’t get it. The whole reason people are getting on that bus is because they’ve come to visit this city. It should make you feel like you’re here and nowhere else. It should feel locally authentic.

To be clear, I’m not saying that we shouldn’t be learning from other cities and building on top of other’s great ideas. That’s precisely what we should all be doing. I’m talking about kitschy copies with little additional thought put into them. And I can think of many examples beyond just tourist buses.

Am I just being pedantic?

What about you? Any urban pet peeves?

Cover image for If man had developed a third arm, where might this arm be best attached?

If man had developed a third arm, where might this arm be best attached?

  • 99-invisible
  • Architect
  • Architecture

Roman Mars of 99% Invisible recently published an excellent episode called The Mind of an Architect . It has to do with a set of research studies completed in the late 1950s by an organization at the University of California, Berkeley known as the Institute of Personality Assessment and Research (IPAR).

IPAR was founded by a personality psychologist named Donald MacKinnon. He initially worked for the precursor to the CIA and founded IPAR with the intent of studying “combat readiness and efficiency.” But over fears of how creative the Soviets were getting, the focus of IPAR shifted to instead studying creativity.

And architects were deemed to be an ideal test subject (from 99percentinvisible.org ):

“Researchers saw architects as people working at a crossroads of creative disciplines, a combination of analytic and artistic creativity. As professionals, architects had to be savvy as engineers and businessmen; as aesthetes, they also acted as designers and artists.”

So over a series of weekends in the late 1950s, some of the most celebrated minds in architecture – including people like Philip Johnson, Richard Neutra, and Louis Kahn – were studied and picked apart. 

image

They were asked to do quick sketches, create mosaics, and they were asked questions such as this one: “For the next 45 minutes we would like you to discuss this notion: if man had developed a third arm, where might this arm be best attached?”

In the end, here’s what they concluded:

The researchers began to notice certain patterns across creatives of all professions and genders, including a tendency to nonconformity and high personal aspirations. They also found many creatives shared a preference for complexity and ambiguity over simplicity and order. Creatives could make unexpected connections and see patterns in daily life, even those lacking high intelligence or good grades.

In short: IPAR found that creative people tend to be nonconforming, interesting, interested, independent, courageous and self-centered, at least in general. Many of these traits may seem obvious today, but they were not necessarily obvious prior to these studies. Back when their tests were being conducted and findings presented in the 1950s and ’60s, the very idea of a “creative personality” was a novelty in academic and public discourse.

The findings may not be groundbreaking to us today, but the documents and recordings produced during the study are certainly interesting. If you’re into this topic, there’s also this book you can pick up.

Oh, and if we are to have a third arm, I would like mine to run almost parallel to my existing dominant arm (right). That way I could double up on my most potent dexterity. It would also be far less intrusive than an arm on one’s head or in the middle of one’s back. Then again, it would ruin our symmetry as humans. And perhaps that third arms need to be celebrated instead of being masked.

What would you suggest?

Image: Institute of Personality and Social Research, University of California, Berkeley / The Monacelli Press (via 99% Invisible )

Cover image for How sexy is your city?

How sexy is your city?

  • Article
  • Battle-of-talent
  • Building

I recently penned an article for Building Magazine called  How Sexy Is Your City?  The subtitle is: The next generation of talent will require cities to take a next generation approach to city building.

I know that we’re all hitting our limit in terms of people talking about millennials, so I’d like to reassure you that – excluding the actual article tag – the word “millennial” only shows up twice in the piece. 

I also don’t write long-form articles very often. I’ve had people suggest that I do that periodically on this blog, but I find the time commitment to be exponentially greater than for the short, glib pieces I usually write here. ;)

So if you can bear two more instances of the word “millennial” and you’ve been looking for something longer, you are in luck . Also, if you’d like to subscribe to Building, you can do that here .

Image: Doublespace Photography via Building

Subscribe to Brandon Donnelly

Daily insights for city builders. Published since 2013 by Toronto-based real estate developer Brandon Donnelly.