Hopefully, much of the oppressive and ugly modernist rubbish will wither away over time. Shaming bad architecture openly and mercilessly is a public service (af

Hopefully, much of the oppressive and ugly modernist rubbish will wither away over time. Shaming bad architecture openly and mercilessly is a public service (after all, we must live in the damned world built by these architects, and they seem not to care about the damage they inflict, so gloves are off). Also, architecture programs need some disruption. Maybe a ranking based on what they teach. University administration loves, and fears, the almighty ranking. They've got a noose around the neck of academia. Time to put a noose around their necks. Funding and its deprivation is another lever in this regard. In the interim, it's also possible to work with some of the stuff that's already here[0] in very simply ways if financial constraints and practical considerations prevent razing offending architecture and building greenfield. It doesn't take all that much to turn a mediocre building into something that's at least passable. The real difficulty is when the architect has painted you into a corner by producing some weird construction that forms a rigid and perverse totality of which nothing can be saved. Yes, looking at the poop building in the article. You cannot expand or extend or modify that building. Don't let the mood lighting reflecting off its surface fool you here either. You don't fix the problem of oppressive and ugly austerity by building things that look like shit. I also sympathize with taking on local architectural traditions, but only in a way that refines them and in a way that respects aesthetic principles. Gaudy buildings that look like something that belongs in Vegas or Atlantic City are not fun or "whimsical". They're gaudy. [0] https://www.stroik.com/portfolio/infant-of-prague-cloister https://www.stroik.com/portfolio/infant-of-prague-cloister