3 ms·

Interesting essay. I would come back on two points: The modernist style of which the author is so fond has been softened since; it was too harsh an aesthetic t

by pbowyer 13y ago

Interesting essay. I would come back on two points: The modernist style of which the author is so fond has been softened since; it was too harsh an aesthetic to appeal to many people (outside the design world, where it is still very popular) Flat UI design doesn't strip back to functionality; it's another aesthetic trend like skeumorphism.

return0 13y ago
Indeed, flatness is not even functional in many ways. Our vision is designed to recognize shadows and bevels instantly as indicators of depth, which can make many "skeuomorphic" designs easier to work with compared to their flat equivalents.
lmm 13y ago
I consider myself a modernist, but I was surprised to find I preferred the Harrods frontage to the modernist building in the picture below it.
- pbowyer 13y ago
  Me too. In interior decor, I always thought I liked it clean and modern, but the more I look around I realise I like it comfortable and homely. Not Laura Ashley or shabby chic, but not stark and unfriendly either. Not white walls and chrome. Even in an office, I like colour and warmth. Clean lines, light and airy, colour and not too much over-ornate art... there has to be a name for this design movement.
  - icebraining 13y ago
    Have you seen postmodernism? It seems to fit more or less with that, at least to my layman eye.
- brudgers 13y ago
  The Harrods building has a well proportioned facade. One could say it has good bones. It is only the idiom which organizes its ornament which has fallen out of fashion. None of this should surprise us. Typologically, it is a modern building. There are not 18th Century department stores. The building has elevators and escalators. The comparison to Sullivan's building is silly. The sites are differently constrained. Harrods low profile fits its context outside the urban core. Carson Piere Scott is sitting in Chicago's Loop; it is downtown where land is expensive. Hence it's greater overall height and lower story to story height. But even more relevant is that Sullivan's architecture is a series of additions and renovations. The building was not birthed fully formed, but is several projects joined together as additional land was available. Part of his job was to tie these pieces together, and that's what its facade reflects.

by pbowyer 13y ago

return0 13y ago

Indeed, flatness is not even functional in many ways. Our vision is designed to recognize shadows and bevels instantly as indicators of depth, which can make many "skeuomorphic" designs easier to work with compared to their flat equivalents.

lmm 13y ago

I consider myself a modernist, but I was surprised to find I preferred the Harrods frontage to the modernist building in the picture below it.

pbowyer 13y ago
Me too. In interior decor, I always thought I liked it clean and modern, but the more I look around I realise I like it comfortable and homely. Not Laura Ashley or shabby chic, but not stark and unfriendly either. Not white walls and chrome. Even in an office, I like colour and warmth. Clean lines, light and airy, colour and not too much over-ornate art... there has to be a name for this design movement.
- icebraining 13y ago
  Have you seen postmodernism? It seems to fit more or less with that, at least to my layman eye.
brudgers 13y ago
The Harrods building has a well proportioned facade. One could say it has good bones. It is only the idiom which organizes its ornament which has fallen out of fashion. None of this should surprise us. Typologically, it is a modern building. There are not 18th Century department stores. The building has elevators and escalators. The comparison to Sullivan's building is silly. The sites are differently constrained. Harrods low profile fits its context outside the urban core. Carson Piere Scott is sitting in Chicago's Loop; it is downtown where land is expensive. Hence it's greater overall height and lower story to story height. But even more relevant is that Sullivan's architecture is a series of additions and renovations. The building was not birthed fully formed, but is several projects joined together as additional land was available. Part of his job was to tie these pieces together, and that's what its facade reflects.