Quote:
Originally Posted by arkhitektor
That's a pretty subjective view of what the Olympics should be, but I guess it's not for me to say that what London is trying to do is wrong. I'll just have to wait and see.
In London's defense, I've never seen a handover ceremony that wasn't a disappointment. What Sochi did in Vancouver was a complete mess.
|
Interestingly the approach London wanted to take the Olympics, was the same direction that the IOC wanted to go. Essentially the Olympics had become a bloated over-commercialised entity. The games became more about boosting the national ego than providing any long-term positives, especially for the host city that ended up with white elephant stadiums.
When I was in Beijing after the Olympics, the Birds Nest came across as an attractive piece of architecture and engineering - but then you realise that it (and the other permanent arenas) have little long-term benefit to the city and the surrounding community because they lack a long-term tenant. Quite simply no city on the planet outside of an Olympics has a requirement for a 80,000 capacity athletics stadium.