Comments by "RR OO" (@RROO-qy8je) on "Stewart Hicks" channel.

  1. Before even watching the video i'll answer the thumbnail. Why did Minimalism fail? Because human beings have souls and aren't robots. It just shows how the government views us. As soulless slaves meant to live and work in ugly enviroments and then die. That's it. There's also the excuse of money. Yes people indeed want affordable homes. But did these ugly buildings solve the housing crisis? As a matter of fact No. The housing prices are insane and there are an impressive amount of homeless people. Building cheap buildings is also more expensive long term since they break down. The problem isn't how much a building costs but more on how well the government deals with it. Beauty is essential. We are advanced enough to figure out a way to make affordable buildings that also have character. Even in the past peasents were far poorer and less educated than us now, yet their houses still had some sort of character. As a matter of fact people from all over the world travel to Medieval villages to admire the simple beauty of those peasent houses. Not even public art is beautiful anymore given that the main purpose of it is an art sculpture. Developers have hit jackpot with the Minimalism movement. They have to pay less on buildings which leads to more profit for them. Sorry for the paragraph but it frustrates me where we've ended up and how easily people are fooled into accepting it as if there's no other option.
    2
  2. Art Deco technically is as old as Modernist architecture. It was invented around the same time so its not that unusual to bring it back. But what makes Art Deco better than Modernist architecture besides the beauty is that it was a natural continuation from the previous architecture styles. Modernist architecture on the other hand was something completely different that had nothing to do with the past. I say we revive Art Deco and go on from there inventing new architecture styles that make sense with what came before it.
    1
  3. We have thousands of years of knowledge about architecture. This knowledge can only be earned from thousands of years of civilizations experimenting and improving their architecture based on the enviroment. What we did was let all this knowledge go to waste and just decided to start from the start because we wanted something different and "innovative". But its pretty hard to invent something different from architecture that's already been perfected as much as possible. So what's the opposite of perfect and beautiful? Ugly and disorganized. Sure its more expensive but its totally worth it. For example we spend so much on climate change and saving the enviroment but when it comes to the enviroment humans live in we use the cheapest stuff. Building based on natural techniques not only helps us but also helps the enviroment by using natural materials.
    1