Gary
I love Federation Square. I do so enjoy hanging out there watching people when I'm in Melbourne. It makes a good break from shopping. From memory the critics said that people would not go there other than the skateboarders. Melbourne was not big enough apparently. Nonsense. It works as a pizza.

Pam,
I kept on thinking of the history whilst I wandered around taking photos like a tourist. Federation Square is a kind of public monument built to commemorate the centenary of Australia’s Federation in 1901, an event which is at once a coming together--- a joining of the states, the birth of the Australian nation--and a rupture --the beginning of Australian independence from Britain.

I couldn't connect that history with the architectural design. The metaphor for pulling together disparate elements — Does that refer to the states — being one nation whilst allowing them to retain their individuality? Another interpretation could be that the square celebrates not the states but the federation of differences of culture and beliefs,for which Melbourne is known.

Gary
I've been googling Federation Square and postmodernism--you might find this article of interest--- Towards home and away from home: the networked cosmopolitanism of Federation Square in Crossings Do you know Crossings?

The article is too academic for me to read. I'm not all that familiar with the discipline of cultural studies.

I'm always disapointed that they didn't go ahead with the infamous Glass Shard on the corner next to Flinders St Station and I can never get used to the uneven surface which seems to invite sprained ankles and prevent anyone but the youngest and fittest walking around Fed Square. When I'm there I spend time watching how young women in very high heels walk around on the surface.

Interesting to compare Fed Square with the "official" City Square just up Swanston on Collins. It has never ever worked despite many expensive makeovers.

Compare again to Flinders St Station. People still "meet under the clocks at Flinders Street" (that tradition must have survived a century) and the variety of people and their public presentations sitting on the steps is always worth a pause and gawk. A variant of the good old goth look has always survived any other mode of presentation throughout the years.

Mick Thomas (Weddings Parties anything) has an evocative set of lyrics here: http://lyrics.rare-lyrics.com/W/Weddings-Parties-Anything/Under-The-Clocks.html

Banging "meet me under the clocks" into google throws up enough hits to show that there are clocks to meet under in Uk, Ireland and many states in USA.

FXH,
yes I wondered what happened to the Glass Shard.It looked good in the models. The north west corner of the square--the one opposite Flinders Station---Flinders Gate--- is very tacky indeed. It doesn't work.

I came across this comment from here

the 20 metre high shards at the corner of flinders and swanston streets may be scrapped. the national trust has pressed their concerns about these glass shards with the new labour government. there will subsequently be an inquiry about the future of these structures and the overall contractual issues dogging this project right from the start. c'mon national trust people, there is a time and a place! i hope the government has fair representation from melbourne's architectural community when discussing the design validity of these structures and not rely on politically correct or obviously biased bodies.

I agree with you: Federation Square--it's not really square --- effectively takes the place of the dysfunctional current city square.

It is difficult to link Fed Square with Russell Street and Hosier Lane--its basically disconnected from this part of Melbourne.

FXH,
I've been thinking more about your comments about meeting people.

Federation Square has actually changed the Hoddle grid, as it's effectively extended the city one block to the south, thereby making Melbourne a riverside city. It's making the city move to the river. The City had been effectively been blocked by the railway line and the appalling Gas and Fuel towers at Princes Gate, which had shut the city off completely from one of its greatest assets, the Yarra River.

Gary,
I understand that the western shard, in the architects’ original plan, stood more than 20 metres tall on the north-west corner, and with the eastern shard would have framed St Paul's Cathedral, integrating it into the overall design.

But following a State Government decision in October, 2000 to preserve views of the cathedral from St Kilda Road,a smaller green-tinted glass building that looks like a fish tank occupies the site.

The fish tank is nothing like the rest of the square. Apparently it leads to an underground visitors’ information centre, operated by the City of Melbourne.

So it was all about the politics of the Brack's Government, which was concerned with cost overruns and functionality; a politics that had a conservative understanding of design. I get the impression that they were anti-Federation Square then.

Pam,
I do not think that the design of St Paul's Court, St Paul's Cathedral is integrated with Federation Square.

I understand that in the original design, rejected by the Brack's Government when it came to power, formed the Cathedral's spatial connection to the site, by the north west arms of the Square and the two "shards" framing the cathedral's south facade. This thereby allowed the cathedral to become a central focus, encouraging previously unseen cathedral vistas.

It was not to be.

Gary,
I've been reading Russell Degnan on Federation Square as a public space at his Civil Pandemonium blog.The entry is from February 2004. He talks in terms of what works and says:

There is no traffic, good views of the city and the people coming and going through the square - though not the river - and the buildings are designed for people, not cars. One point should be made however. Fed. Square isn't a streetscape, nor is it integrated into the urban fabric. Because of the gallery, the cafes and restaurants, it will always be busy, and therefore relatively safe, but its isolation from the streets - while a benefit from a traffic viewpoint - means that few people travel through it each day, and few return often. It is therefore, an unowned space, with a diverse, but fluid and variable collection of users. Sometimes, a public space can become derelict from that situation, as it gets older, dirtier and less popular; unlikely, but if the gallery was to wane in popularity, and the businesses to close, then it would be a problem, and the relevant authorities would need to see the signs beforehand.

It is still popular.

Pam
I see that Russell Degnan makes an interesting point about Federation Square on his excellent Civil Pandemonium blog. On the 2004 post you link to he says:

On the other side, there is an almost criminal neglect of the river. Just two half-hearted back-entrances, and a few seats on a balcony or two allow you to experience the water. It is a self-centred structure that way. It could have been placed anywhere in Melbourne and not been markedly changed.

I was suprised how the flow of people to the river was constrained, rather than opened up. The river is a key feature of Melbourne.

More desert than island I think. I appreciate that it provides a badly needed public space, and the location is perfect for that, but the embarrassing design was dated 10 minutes before it left the design computer.