5 ms·
> Criticizing these photos is a bit like criticizing a landfill or sewage treatment plant as reflecting on the beauty of an entire area. It's essentially utilit
by shkkmo 7y ago
> Criticizing these photos is a bit like criticizing a landfill or sewage treatment plant as reflecting on the beauty of an entire area. It's essentially utilitarian infrastructure. It's ugly, sure, but you can't have everything be ivy-covered brick and artisanal bakeries.
Does it really have to be so ugly to be functional? This isn't some out of the way piece of infrastructure, these are areas of high traffic density and it is not unreasonable to ask why aesthetic considerations are so universally ignored in these types of areas in this country.
- HeWhoLurksLate 7y agoI asked the same thing about the engineering offices where I worked, and found that the reason why was because the offices didn't matter much for the people in them- we move around a lot, and the only time you're in an office is when you're figuring something out in CAD or the like. The people who work all day long in offices understandably have better furniture- we just don't need all that much. People- interactions- matter more than places do- the happiest family I've ever met lived in a poorer neighborhood and their house was obviously not doing well.
- shkkmo 7y agoWhat point are you trying to make? That there is no point to aesthetics because the only thing that matters is interactions with people?