3 ms·

I never bought into the "eye of the beholder" on aesthetics. I might not understand a particular aesthetic. It might be impossible to formulate logical rules t

I never bought into the "eye of the beholder" on aesthetics. I might not understand a particular aesthetic. It might be impossible to formulate logical rules to decide what is beautiful. But beauty is objective, nonetheless. Be it an exquisite Japanese drawing of a bird with ink and rice paper, or Caravaggio, anyone with a soul can see that talent, effort, and a sense of "wholeness" went into creating both. I, personally, cannot appreciate Chinese calligraphy art; but I don't doubt for a second it is beautiful and I could appreciate its beauty if I cared to learn Chinese calligraphy. On the other hand, 1950s brutalist buildings, by their own architect's admission, are ugly. An attempt by nihilist "artists" to force their rejection of aesthetics on others. A sea of grey cement m, jagged lines, and boxes resembling prison cells reflect the architects' sense that we are oppressed... and then shove that claustrophobic feeling on all of us too dumb or too happy to be suffer from ennui.

com2kid 4y ago
> On the other hand, 1950s brutalist buildings, by their own architect's admission, are ugly. Plenty of brutalist buildings are not ugly. https://preview.redd.it/1w5r7lmno0491.jpg?width=4032&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=520402461a0cfebdc8f3e359fe49299123571289 https://preview.redd.it/1w5r7lmno0491.jpg?width=4032&format=... Interesting uses of lines and perspective, a willingness to have large sweeping architectural shapes that were not possible before, huge stairwells, open air walkways, plenty of windows for natural light. Yes the concrete is ugly as sin, and it turns out it weathers and falls apart way sooner than anyone expected, but the shapes concrete was able to create are impressive.
- sbaiddn 4y ago
  Let me guess. A university or a museum. It's.. not pretty. A wannabe portico that is more reminiscent of a jail hallway. Its lined with buttock crushing benches to "rest". As you (necessarily briefly) sit on this bench, at no point are you allowed to fathom that you'll ever escape the concrete that envelops you on every side. Concrete floor. Concrete walls. Concrete ceiling. But! There's hope in the horizon! A few trees grow in the courtyard. these are the only things that shatters this prison cell. That introduces hope and, yes, beauty. None of it manmade. For the beauty in this picture, if there is any at all, is exclusive to nature. The trees' elegance jumps at the viewer precisely because otherwise everything in this picture is ugly.
  - com2kid 4y ago
    > But! There's hope in the horizon! A few trees grow in the courtyard. these are the only things that shatters this prison cell. That introduces hope and, yes, beauty. None of it manmade. It is a wonderful campus to be on. Open air walkways between classes, vines growing everywhere, lots of natural light. Concrete allowed for playing with new shapes and angles, the beauty is in the flow and dynamism of shapes. Go browse the top posts of https://www.reddit.com/r/brutalism/top/?t=all https://www.reddit.com/r/brutalism/top/?t=all plenty of amazing buildings there. Interiors like https://i.redd.it/e7yucwdqia461.jpg https://i.redd.it/e7yucwdqia461.jpg are wonderful to be in, and new technologies in construction materials and techniques made those interiors possible at a much lower price compared to what was possible before. https://www.reddit.com/r/brutalism/comments/hlqa2l/geisel_library/ https://www.reddit.com/r/brutalism/comments/hlqa2l/geisel_li... That is just cool. I'm not going to claim Brutalism has a good track record vs art deco or modern styles that incorporate natural material (loved me some mixed textures!) but claiming everything brutalist is ugly is just false. (another good entry, https://i.redd.it/5volkc9zx4561.jpg https://i.redd.it/5volkc9zx4561.jpg)
lo_zamoyski 4y ago
> I never bought into the "eye of the beholder" on aesthetics. Indeed, but I suspect this has a lot to do with the embrace of materialism, a metaphysical view that has far-reaching and destructive intellectual consequences. Once you accept materialism, you have a whole world of phenomena that cannot be explained purely in terms of res extensa which leads some people to a kind of crypto-Cartesian position in which this unexplainable excess is swept under the rug of the "subjective". (I say "crypto-Cartesian" because res extensa cannot accommodate this excess explanatorily, so clearly you've got to pass the buck and squirrel away things in this metaphysical time-out zone that you've conveniently constructed to hold all that things you cannot explain according to your officially stated dogmas.) Also, philosophical liberalism encourages a kind of indulgence of the subjective, a kind of alternate reality protected from error and insulated from threatening facts. Desire is one such thing kept in the safety of this interior world. It is not possible to have evil or disordered desires (with some ad hoc exceptions). It is not possible to have bad taste. These are "subjective" matters, and since only objective matters can be debated, then, as the saying goes, de gustibus non est disputandum. "That's just your opinion, man!"
- sbaiddn 4y ago
  "Thats just your opinion man!" Ugh. The triteness is the worse part.

com2kid 4y ago

> On the other hand, 1950s brutalist buildings, by their own architect's admission, are ugly. Plenty of brutalist buildings are not ugly. https://preview.redd.it/1w5r7lmno0491.jpg?width=4032&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=520402461a0cfebdc8f3e359fe49299123571289 https://preview.redd.it/1w5r7lmno0491.jpg?width=4032&format=... Interesting uses of lines and perspective, a willingness to have large sweeping architectural shapes that were not possible before, huge stairwells, open air walkways, plenty of windows for natural light. Yes the concrete is ugly as sin, and it turns out it weathers and falls apart way sooner than anyone expected, but the shapes concrete was able to create are impressive.

sbaiddn 4y ago
Let me guess. A university or a museum. It's.. not pretty. A wannabe portico that is more reminiscent of a jail hallway. Its lined with buttock crushing benches to "rest". As you (necessarily briefly) sit on this bench, at no point are you allowed to fathom that you'll ever escape the concrete that envelops you on every side. Concrete floor. Concrete walls. Concrete ceiling. But! There's hope in the horizon! A few trees grow in the courtyard. these are the only things that shatters this prison cell. That introduces hope and, yes, beauty. None of it manmade. For the beauty in this picture, if there is any at all, is exclusive to nature. The trees' elegance jumps at the viewer precisely because otherwise everything in this picture is ugly.
- com2kid 4y ago
  > But! There's hope in the horizon! A few trees grow in the courtyard. these are the only things that shatters this prison cell. That introduces hope and, yes, beauty. None of it manmade. It is a wonderful campus to be on. Open air walkways between classes, vines growing everywhere, lots of natural light. Concrete allowed for playing with new shapes and angles, the beauty is in the flow and dynamism of shapes. Go browse the top posts of https://www.reddit.com/r/brutalism/top/?t=all https://www.reddit.com/r/brutalism/top/?t=all plenty of amazing buildings there. Interiors like https://i.redd.it/e7yucwdqia461.jpg https://i.redd.it/e7yucwdqia461.jpg are wonderful to be in, and new technologies in construction materials and techniques made those interiors possible at a much lower price compared to what was possible before. https://www.reddit.com/r/brutalism/comments/hlqa2l/geisel_library/ https://www.reddit.com/r/brutalism/comments/hlqa2l/geisel_li... That is just cool. I'm not going to claim Brutalism has a good track record vs art deco or modern styles that incorporate natural material (loved me some mixed textures!) but claiming everything brutalist is ugly is just false. (another good entry, https://i.redd.it/5volkc9zx4561.jpg https://i.redd.it/5volkc9zx4561.jpg)

lo_zamoyski 4y ago

> I never bought into the "eye of the beholder" on aesthetics. Indeed, but I suspect this has a lot to do with the embrace of materialism, a metaphysical view that has far-reaching and destructive intellectual consequences. Once you accept materialism, you have a whole world of phenomena that cannot be explained purely in terms of res extensa which leads some people to a kind of crypto-Cartesian position in which this unexplainable excess is swept under the rug of the "subjective". (I say "crypto-Cartesian" because res extensa cannot accommodate this excess explanatorily, so clearly you've got to pass the buck and squirrel away things in this metaphysical time-out zone that you've conveniently constructed to hold all that things you cannot explain according to your officially stated dogmas.) Also, philosophical liberalism encourages a kind of indulgence of the subjective, a kind of alternate reality protected from error and insulated from threatening facts. Desire is one such thing kept in the safety of this interior world. It is not possible to have evil or disordered desires (with some ad hoc exceptions). It is not possible to have bad taste. These are "subjective" matters, and since only objective matters can be debated, then, as the saying goes, de gustibus non est disputandum. "That's just your opinion, man!"

sbaiddn 4y ago
"Thats just your opinion man!" Ugh. The triteness is the worse part.