4 ms·

> There's some pushback Quite understandable as well. The thing is big enough as it is. Bought at a discount or not, bulldozing that many homes in an overpopul

> There's some pushback Quite understandable as well. The thing is big enough as it is. Bought at a discount or not, bulldozing that many homes in an overpopulated city that already struggles for space due to its geography is a little ludicrous.

wouldbecouldbe 3y ago
Modern Architecture is ludicrous. We build and build depressing neighborhoods in cities for us to all flee to historical centres to experience beauty for a minute. I mean if you are in the US you are lost anyway, but the Europe has some beautiful cities (Amsterdam, Venice, Palma, Rome, Vienna the list continues), but none of them are modern. The citizens should be helped to find replacement, but please let's put some beauty back in our cities and give prominence to Gaudi's architecture (although maybe it's not the prettiest it's at least fun)
- helpmefindpurp 3y ago
  > I mean if you are in the US you are lost anyway, but the Europe has some beautiful cities, but none of them are modern. stop treating us like some kind of zoo animals. The reason why the old tenaments were demolished is because their living conditions brought fire, disease, and discomfort with them.
- rsynnott 3y ago
  > and give prominence to Gaudi's architecture I mean... It's right there, you can't miss it. It's not like it's currently particularly well-hidden.
- EdiX 3y ago
  Ironically the Sagrada Familia is an example of modern architecture.
  - martibravo 3y ago
    Yes, Catalan modernism is relatively modern. For me it's one of the most beautiful 20th century architecture styles.
  - rob74 3y ago
    It was modern at the time, same as Art Nouveau and Art Deco, but then those were (unfortunately) pushed aside by Bauhaus, Le Corbusier and post-WW2 concrete brutalist architecture.
  - javier123454321 3y ago
    I mean, it lacks most of the defining characteristics of modern architecture. It is highly ornate, for one. I would not put it in the category of modern, aside from describing the time period which it came to be. Art noveau seems more appropriate a description.
  - wouldbecouldbe 3y ago
    Yeah modern in the historic classification of the term, not in the way of speaking. Most people normally consider modern housing last decades. Lots of building up untill the second world ware are gorgous, but not considered modern by most people. For instance Berlage in Amsterdam is modern in your classifcation. And his buildings grace Amsterdam, but most people would consider them "older", he was living around the same time of Gaudi. https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hendrik_Petrus_Berlage https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hendrik_Petrus_Berlage
    - pixl97 3y ago
      >Lots of building up untill the second world ware are gorgous I think you may have severely underestimated the population growth and need for housing after WWII. The world had not seen population growth like that before. The US and Europe cast away their ornate designs and focused on a burgeoning population in the US and rebuilding quickly in Europe.
      - wouldbecouldbe 3y ago
        I'm mostly stating an observation. But even so, that excuse would not hold up for the last decades. Architects still keep going to produce hideous things; and not at all being introspective about it. Probably has to do with utilitarian and post-modernism; and a general deconstructionism of beauty; which is nice as a philosophy but just not inline with the general experience of a human. On top of that, architectural ego's make it worse. Let alone Canada & Northern US, they combine it with a terrible city planning strategy, moving most utitilities such as shopping, entertainment & parcs, to a mall only reachable with car. Calgary must the most depressive unlivable city I've ever visited. Everything produced last decade is either boring and uninspiring for instance:https://c8.alamy.com/comp/2GMG3GJ/new-modern-apartment-block-of-flats-in-upton-park-in-newham-east-london-england-uk-2GMG3GJ.jpg https://c8.alamy.com/comp/2GMG3GJ/new-modern-apartment-block..., or has to be weird and original in the "brand" of the Architect (for instance Rem Koolhaas).
martibravo 3y ago
As someone from Barcelona, I really wanna see it finished completely. Those apartments had an expiration date the moment they were built in the 60s. Everyone who bought them at a discount knew that they were going to be torn down when the temple itself was finished. I feel it's like those people that buy a house near an airport, they pay pennies for it, and then start lobbying the government for a change in air traffic routes.
- unglaublich 3y ago
  Exactly. Nimbyism at its finest: all gains are mine; all losses should be covered. It's bizarre that at the same time, real estate investors think all value increases are rightfully theirs, but they should be protected from any decrease in value. You can hardly call it 'investing' if you're protected from the downsides.
  - pastacacioepepe 3y ago
    [dead]
  - bjackman 3y ago
    I don't oppose destruction of housing because of people losing their investment - expropriate it for all I care. But reducing the housing supply is bad for everyone. That's the important problem with nimbyism: it's not that it demands unfair advantages for homeowners as investors, it's that it prevents development that is needed for a better world. There's definitely an argument to be made that globally iconic feats of architecture have intrinsic value that's more important than a bit of housing. But you do need to account for the social impact of aggravating housing scarcity to make that argument.
    - bluGill 3y ago
      We need to build more housing, but that doesn't mean we need to keep existing housing. Most old buildings should be replaced - they were not built with modern codes in mind and so are expensive to heat, dangerous in fire, have not accessible bathrooms, or other such things wrong that are difficult to correct.
xyzelement 3y ago
If this logic holds, then we should be open to bulldoze the Sagrada Familia itself to make more apartments.
- martibravo 3y ago
  Sagrat Habitatge (Holy Accommodation in Catalan)
diggan 3y ago
> bulldozing that many homes in an overpopulated city As far as I understand, only one building (many flats though) would have to be removed in order to fit the staircase. Problem is that there isn't a lot of space available to put the people whose home you just removed, so seems unlikely to happen unless our local government suddenly solves some really hard problems.

wouldbecouldbe 3y ago

Modern Architecture is ludicrous. We build and build depressing neighborhoods in cities for us to all flee to historical centres to experience beauty for a minute. I mean if you are in the US you are lost anyway, but the Europe has some beautiful cities (Amsterdam, Venice, Palma, Rome, Vienna the list continues), but none of them are modern. The citizens should be helped to find replacement, but please let's put some beauty back in our cities and give prominence to Gaudi's architecture (although maybe it's not the prettiest it's at least fun)

helpmefindpurp 3y ago
> I mean if you are in the US you are lost anyway, but the Europe has some beautiful cities, but none of them are modern. stop treating us like some kind of zoo animals. The reason why the old tenaments were demolished is because their living conditions brought fire, disease, and discomfort with them.
rsynnott 3y ago
> and give prominence to Gaudi's architecture I mean... It's right there, you can't miss it. It's not like it's currently particularly well-hidden.
EdiX 3y ago
Ironically the Sagrada Familia is an example of modern architecture.
- martibravo 3y ago
  Yes, Catalan modernism is relatively modern. For me it's one of the most beautiful 20th century architecture styles.
- rob74 3y ago
  It was modern at the time, same as Art Nouveau and Art Deco, but then those were (unfortunately) pushed aside by Bauhaus, Le Corbusier and post-WW2 concrete brutalist architecture.
- javier123454321 3y ago
  I mean, it lacks most of the defining characteristics of modern architecture. It is highly ornate, for one. I would not put it in the category of modern, aside from describing the time period which it came to be. Art noveau seems more appropriate a description.
- wouldbecouldbe 3y ago
  Yeah modern in the historic classification of the term, not in the way of speaking. Most people normally consider modern housing last decades. Lots of building up untill the second world ware are gorgous, but not considered modern by most people. For instance Berlage in Amsterdam is modern in your classifcation. And his buildings grace Amsterdam, but most people would consider them "older", he was living around the same time of Gaudi. https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hendrik_Petrus_Berlage https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hendrik_Petrus_Berlage
  - pixl97 3y ago
    >Lots of building up untill the second world ware are gorgous I think you may have severely underestimated the population growth and need for housing after WWII. The world had not seen population growth like that before. The US and Europe cast away their ornate designs and focused on a burgeoning population in the US and rebuilding quickly in Europe.
    - wouldbecouldbe 3y ago
      I'm mostly stating an observation. But even so, that excuse would not hold up for the last decades. Architects still keep going to produce hideous things; and not at all being introspective about it. Probably has to do with utilitarian and post-modernism; and a general deconstructionism of beauty; which is nice as a philosophy but just not inline with the general experience of a human. On top of that, architectural ego's make it worse. Let alone Canada & Northern US, they combine it with a terrible city planning strategy, moving most utitilities such as shopping, entertainment & parcs, to a mall only reachable with car. Calgary must the most depressive unlivable city I've ever visited. Everything produced last decade is either boring and uninspiring for instance:https://c8.alamy.com/comp/2GMG3GJ/new-modern-apartment-block-of-flats-in-upton-park-in-newham-east-london-england-uk-2GMG3GJ.jpg https://c8.alamy.com/comp/2GMG3GJ/new-modern-apartment-block..., or has to be weird and original in the "brand" of the Architect (for instance Rem Koolhaas).

martibravo 3y ago

As someone from Barcelona, I really wanna see it finished completely. Those apartments had an expiration date the moment they were built in the 60s. Everyone who bought them at a discount knew that they were going to be torn down when the temple itself was finished. I feel it's like those people that buy a house near an airport, they pay pennies for it, and then start lobbying the government for a change in air traffic routes.

unglaublich 3y ago
Exactly. Nimbyism at its finest: all gains are mine; all losses should be covered. It's bizarre that at the same time, real estate investors think all value increases are rightfully theirs, but they should be protected from any decrease in value. You can hardly call it 'investing' if you're protected from the downsides.
- pastacacioepepe 3y ago
  [dead]
- bjackman 3y ago
  I don't oppose destruction of housing because of people losing their investment - expropriate it for all I care. But reducing the housing supply is bad for everyone. That's the important problem with nimbyism: it's not that it demands unfair advantages for homeowners as investors, it's that it prevents development that is needed for a better world. There's definitely an argument to be made that globally iconic feats of architecture have intrinsic value that's more important than a bit of housing. But you do need to account for the social impact of aggravating housing scarcity to make that argument.
  - bluGill 3y ago
    We need to build more housing, but that doesn't mean we need to keep existing housing. Most old buildings should be replaced - they were not built with modern codes in mind and so are expensive to heat, dangerous in fire, have not accessible bathrooms, or other such things wrong that are difficult to correct.

xyzelement 3y ago

If this logic holds, then we should be open to bulldoze the Sagrada Familia itself to make more apartments.

martibravo 3y ago
Sagrat Habitatge (Holy Accommodation in Catalan)

diggan 3y ago

> bulldozing that many homes in an overpopulated city As far as I understand, only one building (many flats though) would have to be removed in order to fit the staircase. Problem is that there isn't a lot of space available to put the people whose home you just removed, so seems unlikely to happen unless our local government suddenly solves some really hard problems.