Gropius, Pan Am, and Naming Etiquette?
Because I have a background in urban design, I'm inclined to refer to buildings based on what they were called when the architect was commissioned to build them.
This is why I refer to the MetLife building in Manhattan as the "Pan Am Building" to this day, even though Pan Am took its name off in 1992 when it dissolved as an airline company.
For me, an architect like Gropius was far more inspired by an expansive vision of the future, and it just seems wrong to call one of his great works after an insurance company, an industry focused on compensating failures of the past.
I feel pretty strongly about this but I also haven't worked in design in 15 years, so I'm not fresh on naming etiquette like this. What do you think, Pan Am all the way? Or should I dirty Gropius's legacy to avoid sounding eccentric, and just call it the MetLife building?