![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Is this by any chance named after the architecture of the Guggenheim museum? — Rlquall 19:36, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Pardon me, but what do Lava Lamps have to do with the Googie Movement in Architecture? Michael 23:03, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
Would Dulles Airport be considered of this style? Jkatzen 08:50, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
It should probably be noted that the word "Populuxe", which redirects to the "Googie" page originates from the title of the book by Thomas Hine on the rise of post-WWII consumerism.
http://thomashine.com/work5.htm
http://www.wordspy.com/words/populuxe.asp
It's really quite a dull book, but it's thesis and conclusions were influential at the time and from there the word entered the popular lexicon. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.26.235.204 ( talk) 19:21, 1 February 2007 (UTC).
I have placed citation needed and attribution needed tags to the term populuxe, because I don't think it has the same implication as "Googie" and the book by Hine isn't cited or discussed here. WE could improve this by having someone who has the book introduce a quote about the term populuxe. maybe it needs its own section. but also, if Googie is different from mainstream modern architecture, but populuxe is a category that overlaps with it, we should try to explain that. Fixifex ( talk) 19:57, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
Is the atomium in brussells, an example of googie architecture?-- Richy 22:36, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi, am I correct in thinking that the James S. McDonnell Planetarium falls under this design specification? Here's a photo, if there is some consensus that it does indeed qualify, I'd like to add this photo to the gallery. -- Agent-88 06:07, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
The roof of the McDonnell Planetarium sure looks like the roof of the Seattle Space Needle —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.76.32.217 ( talk) 22:00, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
Why bother having the typo — GoogIe — redirect here? Nobody accidentally puts a capital letter near the end of a word. It's a leet sort of styling which is intended to look like "Google". Why not have that page redirect to Google? Binksternet ( talk) 08:39, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
In July, the article was tagged as relying too heavily on a single source, Hess, who also coined the term Googie. In my admittedly meagre research to date, Doo Wop seems to be a widely used term, perhaps more than Hess' neologism Googie? If so, we might wish to consider renaming. Also, the importance of East Coast doo-wop, especially in Wildwood's historic district remains overlooked, IMO, perhaps because Hess was focused on the West Coast. Shawn in Montreal ( talk)
The modern casino image has been repeatedly deleted. I believe its design has nothing whatsoever to do with Googie--it looks to me like Steampunk or Scientific Romance or Neo-Victorian in its Jules Verne stylistic features. Definitely not jet age or space age. Binksternet ( talk) 22:40, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
here's some "modern googie" but does that count or is it already too old to have a modern branch?
on another level, we might use this image regardless, because it is some cheeky frickin architecture...
... 72.0.187.239 ( talk) 03:33, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
is populuxe due
to the lines of the main mast and smokestack, with a noticeable aerodynamic curve that is the same for all three.
the "side-roof" of the bridge which also has a highly-stylized curvature
the decks immediately under the bridge, and especially the perfect semicircle of the front deck with the tall narrow windows- is very futuristic
not that colors can be populuxe or googie really, but certainly the colors were non-traditional upon launch. and the time period is perfect.
I guess not everyone appreciates this but so many curves on an ocean liner was somewhat cutting edge at the time. The smokestacks alone I feel are justification for it being googie... there are few if any stacks with such a look to them before the launch of the Canberra. etc etc
72.0.187.239 ( talk) 22:29, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
<== You ask "if Canberra doesn't go in populuxe where does it go lol?" but that's not the question we are here to answer. The question is: what is good for this article? What isn't good are images that don't have an expert or popular critical connection to googie. Show me the reference and we can discuss how best to put the ship into the article. Otherwise, the image is unsatisfying and not reminiscent of googie. Binksternet ( talk) 06:49, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
I dont know the right way to edit the article. In the first section there is a mention of the earliest or first McDonalds. There could be a link from those words to this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_McDonald's#United_States
Thanks all. I keep forgetting my login. penguinv maybe
Granted the Opera House already has a designated architectural designation, I cant help but see a bit of Googie influence in this very important UN heritage landmark. I will leave it to the experts to decide if needs to be mentioned in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gizziiusa ( talk • contribs) 03:02, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
Just copying note from above:
Now a more general question - how do we decide what is googie and what isn't? The general Wikipedia way would be to have a reference for each, where a reliable source specifically states that this building is Googie architecture (or Populuxe or Doo-Wop). That might be a bit too tough for this article, since it is about a very popular (or should I say populist?) style that informally came up from non-academic, vernacular traditions. I might even say "low class" except that folks might take that as a put down. In any case, it may be hard to identify each specific example in a reliable source, but ... We SHOULD NOT be including formal (more academic) styled architecture, from big name architects, unless it or they have been specifically identified as Googie. A little informality can go a long way to improving the article and even reflects the popular style, but completely WP:Original Research about more formal buildings should be off-limits, and actually misrepresents the style. I may start removing specific examples soon, after asking for cites in the text. Smallbones ( talk) 16:06, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
maybe add this photo to the image section of this article.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/vintageroadside/2128311024/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gizziiusa ( talk • contribs) 16:11, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
The first photo in this article is the Space Needle in Seattle. This doesn't look Googie to me, and there's no reference supporting its inclusion. As the article states, Googie is "low architecture": gas stations and motels. The Space Needle, on the other hand, is monumental. It's a poor example to have at the top of the article. I intend to remove it unless someone objects and provides evidence to support its inclusion. Pburka ( talk) 20:39, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
I think most if not all of the architecture on the Oral Roberts University campus qualifies as Googie...I'm not an architectural expert though. It is another example to include. Take a look at the picture of the Prayer Tower...Googie, or not-so-Googie? Chris van Hasselt ( talk) 02:20, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
Before ever seeing a "googie" example in the real world, I had long noticed the illustraton (cartoon) style in old magazine ads and appliance manuals. For lack of a better term, I called it "jetsonesque", usually adding "you know...those lopsided starbursts and rhombus-shaped signboards?"
Does "googie" apply to an art/design movement as well? Aside from the "Influences" section, this article focuses ENTIRELY on architecture. Moreover, it gives the impression the art/design term would be "Retro-futuristic", but the linked article focuses mainly on steampunk and doesn't even MENTION googie!
Seems to me googie is more a whole school of art than just an architecture style. Unless there's a distinct term for it. 66.105.218.27 ( talk) 11:47, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm looking at some of the pictures in the gallery at the bottom of the Googie page.
The piano store in La Jolla, California doesn't cry out 'Googie' to me.
Any comments? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Richard apple ( talk • contribs) 31 March 2013
There's another picture in the gallery, of the 360 at Founders Plaza, Oklahoma City. It doesn't really say "googie" to me. Thoughts? Magnolia677 ( talk) 12:27, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
I'm just curious if this was ever a term used outside of a specific region. I don't know much about the subject, but I'm not familiar with it being used on the west coast. Junkyardsparkle ( talk) 23:58, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
Should the roadside sign be in the gallery? — ATinySliver | talk to me 22:22, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
Furthermore, I suggest we move the "borderline" googie pics to commons:Category:Googie architecture, and move the truly googie pictures (in my opinion) from the Commons into the gallery in googie architecture.
Borderline - move to Commons:
Very googie, move from Commons to gallery on googie architecture:
Magnolia677 ( talk) 17:35, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
Verifyable sources are indeed a cornerstone of Wikipedia. Interestingly, I did a Google search for " Theme Building" (at LAX) and "googie" and couldn't find one good source (ie. an architectural text) which referred to this iconic building as "googie". And not one source listed on the Theme Building's wiki article calls it googie. Yet, I did the same google search for the "Elm Road Drive-In" (one of the pics on our wiki article) and found a few sources (not all reputable), but ALL calling it googie. Eg. [4] As for the Town Motel in Birmingham, I didn't even bother looking for a reference, but for goodness sake, just look at it?? We may need to use editorial consensus--another cornerstone of Wikipedia--to determine what pics should stay on article. I've made a chart to help us...
Googie architectural characteristic | Points (1-5) |
---|---|
motel, coffee house or gas station | |
upswept roof | |
curvaceous, geometric shape | |
bold use of glass, steel and neon | |
space-age design elements symbolic of motion (boomerangs, flying saucers, atoms and parabolas) | |
free-form designs such as "soft" parallelograms and an artist's palette motif | |
TOTAL |
Magnolia677 ( talk) 02:39, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
I support removing the Theme Building. I don't think it's appropriate to include based on the lack of sourcing or authoritative determination that it is Googie. Are there sources classifying the Anaheim Convention Center as Googie Architecture? THis also seems a stretch. And finally, there are also some dubious assertions in the influences section. What source suggests Googie influenced the Jetsons or other cultural developments?
Candleabracadabra (
talk)
04:03, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
It's a bit wordy, but I've added clarification text to the Kona Lanes image. There was a remodel in the 1970s; for the full Googie (no free images), go here. xD — ATinySliver| ATalkPage 20:19, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
As this page seems to be fairly active.. would anyone be willing to do some photo work? It would be great to have photos of the Chips (coffee shop), Ships Coffee Shop, Wich Stand, Corky's (in Sherman Oaks, recently renovated and reopened), the Ritts Furniture building on Santa Monica Boulevard east of La Cienega Boulevard (recently renovated and now the Hollywood Stock Exchange headquarters) and the Pann's building and interior. Thanks to any volunteers. Candleabracadabra ( talk) 16:47, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Is this by any chance named after the architecture of the Guggenheim museum? — Rlquall 19:36, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Pardon me, but what do Lava Lamps have to do with the Googie Movement in Architecture? Michael 23:03, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
Would Dulles Airport be considered of this style? Jkatzen 08:50, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
It should probably be noted that the word "Populuxe", which redirects to the "Googie" page originates from the title of the book by Thomas Hine on the rise of post-WWII consumerism.
http://thomashine.com/work5.htm
http://www.wordspy.com/words/populuxe.asp
It's really quite a dull book, but it's thesis and conclusions were influential at the time and from there the word entered the popular lexicon. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.26.235.204 ( talk) 19:21, 1 February 2007 (UTC).
I have placed citation needed and attribution needed tags to the term populuxe, because I don't think it has the same implication as "Googie" and the book by Hine isn't cited or discussed here. WE could improve this by having someone who has the book introduce a quote about the term populuxe. maybe it needs its own section. but also, if Googie is different from mainstream modern architecture, but populuxe is a category that overlaps with it, we should try to explain that. Fixifex ( talk) 19:57, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
Is the atomium in brussells, an example of googie architecture?-- Richy 22:36, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi, am I correct in thinking that the James S. McDonnell Planetarium falls under this design specification? Here's a photo, if there is some consensus that it does indeed qualify, I'd like to add this photo to the gallery. -- Agent-88 06:07, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
The roof of the McDonnell Planetarium sure looks like the roof of the Seattle Space Needle —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.76.32.217 ( talk) 22:00, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
Why bother having the typo — GoogIe — redirect here? Nobody accidentally puts a capital letter near the end of a word. It's a leet sort of styling which is intended to look like "Google". Why not have that page redirect to Google? Binksternet ( talk) 08:39, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
In July, the article was tagged as relying too heavily on a single source, Hess, who also coined the term Googie. In my admittedly meagre research to date, Doo Wop seems to be a widely used term, perhaps more than Hess' neologism Googie? If so, we might wish to consider renaming. Also, the importance of East Coast doo-wop, especially in Wildwood's historic district remains overlooked, IMO, perhaps because Hess was focused on the West Coast. Shawn in Montreal ( talk)
The modern casino image has been repeatedly deleted. I believe its design has nothing whatsoever to do with Googie--it looks to me like Steampunk or Scientific Romance or Neo-Victorian in its Jules Verne stylistic features. Definitely not jet age or space age. Binksternet ( talk) 22:40, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
here's some "modern googie" but does that count or is it already too old to have a modern branch?
on another level, we might use this image regardless, because it is some cheeky frickin architecture...
... 72.0.187.239 ( talk) 03:33, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
is populuxe due
to the lines of the main mast and smokestack, with a noticeable aerodynamic curve that is the same for all three.
the "side-roof" of the bridge which also has a highly-stylized curvature
the decks immediately under the bridge, and especially the perfect semicircle of the front deck with the tall narrow windows- is very futuristic
not that colors can be populuxe or googie really, but certainly the colors were non-traditional upon launch. and the time period is perfect.
I guess not everyone appreciates this but so many curves on an ocean liner was somewhat cutting edge at the time. The smokestacks alone I feel are justification for it being googie... there are few if any stacks with such a look to them before the launch of the Canberra. etc etc
72.0.187.239 ( talk) 22:29, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
<== You ask "if Canberra doesn't go in populuxe where does it go lol?" but that's not the question we are here to answer. The question is: what is good for this article? What isn't good are images that don't have an expert or popular critical connection to googie. Show me the reference and we can discuss how best to put the ship into the article. Otherwise, the image is unsatisfying and not reminiscent of googie. Binksternet ( talk) 06:49, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
I dont know the right way to edit the article. In the first section there is a mention of the earliest or first McDonalds. There could be a link from those words to this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_McDonald's#United_States
Thanks all. I keep forgetting my login. penguinv maybe
Granted the Opera House already has a designated architectural designation, I cant help but see a bit of Googie influence in this very important UN heritage landmark. I will leave it to the experts to decide if needs to be mentioned in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gizziiusa ( talk • contribs) 03:02, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
Just copying note from above:
Now a more general question - how do we decide what is googie and what isn't? The general Wikipedia way would be to have a reference for each, where a reliable source specifically states that this building is Googie architecture (or Populuxe or Doo-Wop). That might be a bit too tough for this article, since it is about a very popular (or should I say populist?) style that informally came up from non-academic, vernacular traditions. I might even say "low class" except that folks might take that as a put down. In any case, it may be hard to identify each specific example in a reliable source, but ... We SHOULD NOT be including formal (more academic) styled architecture, from big name architects, unless it or they have been specifically identified as Googie. A little informality can go a long way to improving the article and even reflects the popular style, but completely WP:Original Research about more formal buildings should be off-limits, and actually misrepresents the style. I may start removing specific examples soon, after asking for cites in the text. Smallbones ( talk) 16:06, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
maybe add this photo to the image section of this article.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/vintageroadside/2128311024/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gizziiusa ( talk • contribs) 16:11, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
The first photo in this article is the Space Needle in Seattle. This doesn't look Googie to me, and there's no reference supporting its inclusion. As the article states, Googie is "low architecture": gas stations and motels. The Space Needle, on the other hand, is monumental. It's a poor example to have at the top of the article. I intend to remove it unless someone objects and provides evidence to support its inclusion. Pburka ( talk) 20:39, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
I think most if not all of the architecture on the Oral Roberts University campus qualifies as Googie...I'm not an architectural expert though. It is another example to include. Take a look at the picture of the Prayer Tower...Googie, or not-so-Googie? Chris van Hasselt ( talk) 02:20, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
Before ever seeing a "googie" example in the real world, I had long noticed the illustraton (cartoon) style in old magazine ads and appliance manuals. For lack of a better term, I called it "jetsonesque", usually adding "you know...those lopsided starbursts and rhombus-shaped signboards?"
Does "googie" apply to an art/design movement as well? Aside from the "Influences" section, this article focuses ENTIRELY on architecture. Moreover, it gives the impression the art/design term would be "Retro-futuristic", but the linked article focuses mainly on steampunk and doesn't even MENTION googie!
Seems to me googie is more a whole school of art than just an architecture style. Unless there's a distinct term for it. 66.105.218.27 ( talk) 11:47, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm looking at some of the pictures in the gallery at the bottom of the Googie page.
The piano store in La Jolla, California doesn't cry out 'Googie' to me.
Any comments? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Richard apple ( talk • contribs) 31 March 2013
There's another picture in the gallery, of the 360 at Founders Plaza, Oklahoma City. It doesn't really say "googie" to me. Thoughts? Magnolia677 ( talk) 12:27, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
I'm just curious if this was ever a term used outside of a specific region. I don't know much about the subject, but I'm not familiar with it being used on the west coast. Junkyardsparkle ( talk) 23:58, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
Should the roadside sign be in the gallery? — ATinySliver | talk to me 22:22, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
Furthermore, I suggest we move the "borderline" googie pics to commons:Category:Googie architecture, and move the truly googie pictures (in my opinion) from the Commons into the gallery in googie architecture.
Borderline - move to Commons:
Very googie, move from Commons to gallery on googie architecture:
Magnolia677 ( talk) 17:35, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
Verifyable sources are indeed a cornerstone of Wikipedia. Interestingly, I did a Google search for " Theme Building" (at LAX) and "googie" and couldn't find one good source (ie. an architectural text) which referred to this iconic building as "googie". And not one source listed on the Theme Building's wiki article calls it googie. Yet, I did the same google search for the "Elm Road Drive-In" (one of the pics on our wiki article) and found a few sources (not all reputable), but ALL calling it googie. Eg. [4] As for the Town Motel in Birmingham, I didn't even bother looking for a reference, but for goodness sake, just look at it?? We may need to use editorial consensus--another cornerstone of Wikipedia--to determine what pics should stay on article. I've made a chart to help us...
Googie architectural characteristic | Points (1-5) |
---|---|
motel, coffee house or gas station | |
upswept roof | |
curvaceous, geometric shape | |
bold use of glass, steel and neon | |
space-age design elements symbolic of motion (boomerangs, flying saucers, atoms and parabolas) | |
free-form designs such as "soft" parallelograms and an artist's palette motif | |
TOTAL |
Magnolia677 ( talk) 02:39, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
I support removing the Theme Building. I don't think it's appropriate to include based on the lack of sourcing or authoritative determination that it is Googie. Are there sources classifying the Anaheim Convention Center as Googie Architecture? THis also seems a stretch. And finally, there are also some dubious assertions in the influences section. What source suggests Googie influenced the Jetsons or other cultural developments?
Candleabracadabra (
talk)
04:03, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
It's a bit wordy, but I've added clarification text to the Kona Lanes image. There was a remodel in the 1970s; for the full Googie (no free images), go here. xD — ATinySliver| ATalkPage 20:19, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
As this page seems to be fairly active.. would anyone be willing to do some photo work? It would be great to have photos of the Chips (coffee shop), Ships Coffee Shop, Wich Stand, Corky's (in Sherman Oaks, recently renovated and reopened), the Ritts Furniture building on Santa Monica Boulevard east of La Cienega Boulevard (recently renovated and now the Hollywood Stock Exchange headquarters) and the Pann's building and interior. Thanks to any volunteers. Candleabracadabra ( talk) 16:47, 13 January 2014 (UTC)