
With all the controversy surrounding Diller Scofidio +Renfro (DSR) and MoMA's decision to demolish the American Folk Art Museum to make way for expansion, DS+R has increasingly come under fire (indeed, even DS+R's democratizing move to make the MoMA's sculpture garden accessible to the public has provoked considerable ire). In the following article, which originally appeared on Metropolis as "Damage Control," critic and author Martin Pedersen questions: why didn't DS+R just walk away?
A few weeks ago, in the wake of MoMA’s decision to raze the Folk Art Museum, the estimable Christopher Hawthorne of the Los Angeles Times asked ; why Diller Scofidio + Renfro (DSR) didn’t simply resign the commission, rather than recommend the demolition of a building designed by their (former?) friends. At the time, I was skeptical of the suggestion. But with the onslaught of negative publicity—which will continue up until the demolition of the building and perhaps well beyond—I’m beginning to think Hawthorne was right. And right not just from a moral, ethical and historic perspective.


.jpg?1391806773&format=webp&width=640&height=580)
_Tuomo_Tammenpa%C3%8C%CB%86a%C3%8C%CB%86.jpg?1391784293&format=webp&width=640&height=580)
_Tuomo_Tammenpa%C3%8C%CB%86a%C3%8C%CB%86.jpg?1391784293)

.jpg?1391602667&format=webp&width=640&height=580)











.jpg?1391095745&format=webp&width=640&height=580)
