4 ms·

There is nothing objectively beautiful about modern architecture. Brutalism, for example, is talentless nonsense. Before the advent of "everyone gets sued", th

There is nothing objectively beautiful about modern architecture. Brutalism, for example, is talentless nonsense. Before the advent of "everyone gets sued", the ADA, nuclear war, etc there was actual creative freedom. Now, everything is just one size fits all. Just in case you happen to attract the wrong attention. Architecture really is a reflection on how mind numbingly dull modern life actually is.

sph 4y ago
> Brutalism, for example, is talentless nonsense. Brutalism is a perfectly serviceable form of art. The problem is that architecture has more practical purposes than pure art, as its goal is to create inviting living spaces. It needs to exist within this constraint, with the ultimate judges being the people that dwell in it, and the architect as their servant. Imposing architecture on people is just plain rude, and brutalism can be quite imposing and oppressive. So in general I agree, brutalist architecture is terrible.
PartiallyTyped 4y ago
> Brutalism, for example, is talentless nonsense. I find eco-brutalism to be interesting and eerily captivating, but I think it relates to your last sentence: > Architecture really is a reflection on how mind numbingly dull modern life actually is. Eco-brutalism reminds me of depictions of the remnants of long lost civilisations adopted by privitive species*. * This is likely a consequence of growing up playing Halo CE.
kelseyfrog 4y ago
At least brutalistic buildings have some character. I'd take living in the hollowed out bones of a concrete monstrosity over the tepid soulless constructions we are building in the post-modern age. Some of the most fetishous ideas about building design come from AI-art. Unconstrained by economics, practicality, or code, I've been offered glimpses of architectures that could have been and in doing so have a profound impact but also a sense of loss of the could-have-been.
com2kid 4y ago
> There is nothing objectively beautiful about modern architecture. I drive by multiple, lovely, modern houses every day. Some are incredibly well restored mid century pieces, others are tastefully done new buildings. I'd argue that examples such as https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/36/Einsteinturm_7443.jpg https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/36/Einstein... http://inspirationist.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/223.jpg http://inspirationist.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/223.jpg https://mediacloud.theweek.com/image/upload/f_auto,t_content-image-desktop@1/v1662076379/TWS1095.Props.PhinneyExt.jpg https://mediacloud.theweek.com/image/upload/f_auto,t_content... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Stillman_Photo_2.jpeg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Stillman_Photo_2.jpeg are great examples of modern exteriors. It is also worth noting that modern buildings are largely about interior spaces. Tons of natural light all day long, and beautiful interiors that work as canvases to hang the art that one gathers throughout life. You want to know what is ugly? Almost everything built in America in the 40s. Cape cod houses. Saltbox houses Modern architecture encompasses a wide set of styles. Yes the crap "modern" houses being thrown up now days with bad vinyl siding are ugly. They also didn't have a single architect involved in their creation. The good modern houses, the ones that play with textures and colors, that use natural materials mixes with the modern, those are far from ugly.
smsm42 4y ago
With brutalism, as it is obvious from its name, it is a deliberate move. The bigger question is why this direction has been embraced so much. I.e. why brutalist architects get commissions to build the next ugly building after they built the previous ugly (and often poorly functioning) building? Why taxpayers, who pay for many of these buildings, tolerate it? I think the latter may be because of the "you have no taste, peasant" thing - they have been convinced that "the experts" know what is really beautiful and really ugly, and only their opinion matters. I think there might be time to push back on that and admit the possibility that if something looks ugly, there may be a chance it is ugly.

sph 4y ago

> Brutalism, for example, is talentless nonsense. Brutalism is a perfectly serviceable form of art. The problem is that architecture has more practical purposes than pure art, as its goal is to create inviting living spaces. It needs to exist within this constraint, with the ultimate judges being the people that dwell in it, and the architect as their servant. Imposing architecture on people is just plain rude, and brutalism can be quite imposing and oppressive. So in general I agree, brutalist architecture is terrible.

PartiallyTyped 4y ago

> Brutalism, for example, is talentless nonsense. I find eco-brutalism to be interesting and eerily captivating, but I think it relates to your last sentence: > Architecture really is a reflection on how mind numbingly dull modern life actually is. Eco-brutalism reminds me of depictions of the remnants of long lost civilisations adopted by privitive species*. * This is likely a consequence of growing up playing Halo CE.

kelseyfrog 4y ago

At least brutalistic buildings have some character. I'd take living in the hollowed out bones of a concrete monstrosity over the tepid soulless constructions we are building in the post-modern age. Some of the most fetishous ideas about building design come from AI-art. Unconstrained by economics, practicality, or code, I've been offered glimpses of architectures that could have been and in doing so have a profound impact but also a sense of loss of the could-have-been.

com2kid 4y ago

> There is nothing objectively beautiful about modern architecture. I drive by multiple, lovely, modern houses every day. Some are incredibly well restored mid century pieces, others are tastefully done new buildings. I'd argue that examples such as https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/36/Einsteinturm_7443.jpg https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/36/Einstein... http://inspirationist.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/223.jpg http://inspirationist.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/223.jpg https://mediacloud.theweek.com/image/upload/f_auto,t_content-image-desktop@1/v1662076379/TWS1095.Props.PhinneyExt.jpg https://mediacloud.theweek.com/image/upload/f_auto,t_content... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Stillman_Photo_2.jpeg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Stillman_Photo_2.jpeg are great examples of modern exteriors. It is also worth noting that modern buildings are largely about interior spaces. Tons of natural light all day long, and beautiful interiors that work as canvases to hang the art that one gathers throughout life. You want to know what is ugly? Almost everything built in America in the 40s. Cape cod houses. Saltbox houses Modern architecture encompasses a wide set of styles. Yes the crap "modern" houses being thrown up now days with bad vinyl siding are ugly. They also didn't have a single architect involved in their creation. The good modern houses, the ones that play with textures and colors, that use natural materials mixes with the modern, those are far from ugly.

smsm42 4y ago

With brutalism, as it is obvious from its name, it is a deliberate move. The bigger question is why this direction has been embraced so much. I.e. why brutalist architects get commissions to build the next ugly building after they built the previous ugly (and often poorly functioning) building? Why taxpayers, who pay for many of these buildings, tolerate it? I think the latter may be because of the "you have no taste, peasant" thing - they have been convinced that "the experts" know what is really beautiful and really ugly, and only their opinion matters. I think there might be time to push back on that and admit the possibility that if something looks ugly, there may be a chance it is ugly.