LACMA Reflects L.A. - Good and Bad

After I posted yesterday's picture I looked at the rest of the photos I took that day. Looking at the first photo I realized the obivious - that there were several styles of archecture at LACMA. Even the railings in the first photo are of three styles. First is the concrete railing of the orginial Ahmanson building. Then there is the short section of concrete block(?) followed by a moden steel railing. Additionally there is four different outer skins of the two buildings. How L.A. is that?

The Pavilion for Japanese Art is classic L.A. archecture. It refuses to blend with the rest of the family but stands alone and proud. How L.A. is that?

Finally the pavilion that's suppose to unite the various pieces of LACMA. Now with the addition of the Broad Comtemperary Art Museum this pavilion will be regulated to has been. Uniting the orginial museum campus with the new buildings will be the BP Grand Entrance (Not shown.) Does this mean there will be two competing entrances? I think like most grand ideas from large egos the public will decide in the end. Now how L.A. is that?

In short LACMA is L.A. - constantly evolving, changing, and adapting to new needs and ideas. So L.A.

Note: I plan to get up to LACMA sometime this month and will post photos of the new entrance.