4 ms·

The whole point was that this was a house that shouldn't have been demolished (or moved). The council didn't want the sculpture to stay because it stood as a re

by jmkd 6y ago

The whole point was that this was a house that shouldn't have been demolished (or moved). The council didn't want the sculpture to stay because it stood as a reminder of their policy, the public were in two minds because it was so brutalist in appearance, and they misunderstood it to exemplify gentrification. If it remained today it would be a universally loved and globally visited icon of modern art.

IshKebab 6y ago
I doubt it. It's cool but also really ugly. Imagine if you lived opposite it. Maybe if they made it out of something other than concrete it wouldn't be so bad, but history has proven again and again that bare concrete is just fundamentally an ugly material. Even if it starts ok it ages really really badly.
- leoedin 6y ago
  > bare concrete is just fundamentally an ugly material "Ugly" is an emotional response, and isn't universal. Maybe some people find bare concrete ugly some of the time, but that's a far cry from it being "fundamentally an ugly material". There's plenty of bare concrete buildings which are appreciated. This house in Chile comes to mind: https://www.stuff.co.nz/life-style/homed/houses/108353211/amazing-concrete-house-for-sale-in-chile-pushes-the-limits https://www.stuff.co.nz/life-style/homed/houses/108353211/am... . The Barbican Centre in London makes extensive use of bare concrete, and is widely appreciated.
  - IshKebab 6y ago
    This is "beauty is subjective therefore nothing is more beautiful than anything else" nonsense. We can talk about expected beauty - that is, how beautiful you would expect a random person to say something is. And on that metric bare concrete scores very low. > The Barbican Centre in London makes extensive use of bare concrete It does not. Its concrete has been worked to expose the granite aggregate. https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/255227503860482433/ https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/255227503860482433/ Bare concrete looks like this: https://www.friendlyshade.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/bare-concrete-01.jpg https://www.friendlyshade.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/bar... > and is widely appreciated. It was voted London's ugliest building in 2003. And I would say it is appreciated more for its cool layout than its materials.

by jmkd 6y ago

IshKebab 6y ago

I doubt it. It's cool but also really ugly. Imagine if you lived opposite it. Maybe if they made it out of something other than concrete it wouldn't be so bad, but history has proven again and again that bare concrete is just fundamentally an ugly material. Even if it starts ok it ages really really badly.

leoedin 6y ago
> bare concrete is just fundamentally an ugly material "Ugly" is an emotional response, and isn't universal. Maybe some people find bare concrete ugly some of the time, but that's a far cry from it being "fundamentally an ugly material". There's plenty of bare concrete buildings which are appreciated. This house in Chile comes to mind: https://www.stuff.co.nz/life-style/homed/houses/108353211/amazing-concrete-house-for-sale-in-chile-pushes-the-limits https://www.stuff.co.nz/life-style/homed/houses/108353211/am... . The Barbican Centre in London makes extensive use of bare concrete, and is widely appreciated.
- IshKebab 6y ago
  This is "beauty is subjective therefore nothing is more beautiful than anything else" nonsense. We can talk about expected beauty - that is, how beautiful you would expect a random person to say something is. And on that metric bare concrete scores very low. > The Barbican Centre in London makes extensive use of bare concrete It does not. Its concrete has been worked to expose the granite aggregate. https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/255227503860482433/ https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/255227503860482433/ Bare concrete looks like this: https://www.friendlyshade.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/bare-concrete-01.jpg https://www.friendlyshade.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/bar... > and is widely appreciated. It was voted London's ugliest building in 2003. And I would say it is appreciated more for its cool layout than its materials.