Comments by "Labas Labas" (@ligametis) on "What Makes Buildings Beautiful (And Why Beauty Does Matter)" video.

@Colum Mulhern You sound like architects do not have freedom after finishing studies. You can design whatever you want if you have money. If you don't, then you have to please developers because it is their money. Simple as that. In the US, you often are not even allowed to build modern looking high quality houses. Just look at all those McMansions. I personally love brutalism and bare concrete, I am also sad that we left that style behind and moved to glass boxes. Beauty is still subjective even if you can make statistics that some particular styles are more pleasing to a larger group of people.
18
You think they don't see something like this? They see, they know and they still think what is being designed nowadays is still better.
16
It looks tasteless when people choose modern interior but historical exterior. Better just be outdated and have both sides oldschool.
15
@colummulhern8865 You are so ignorant if you think another neoclassical revival is the only way to go. People like different things. What a surprise! And many love modern architecture, it might no longer be brutalism, but new glass buildings are pretty popular. Brutalism have a lot of details to love. From industrial vibe, to materials, forms, relationship with nature.
8
@Eric Dew I find beutalism and bare concrete pleasing. So what is the solution then? It is still about forcing someone to follow particular style. With the same analysis you are also allowed to have historical old school interior while people are living with modern exterior.
8
@Colum Mulhern I personally hate Haussmann architecture and planning. He demolished most of historical city, made it boring and monotonous. As being from Eastern post-soviet Europe I always loved brutalist architecture, pretty much since childhood. In my city Vilnius there is awesome brutalist sports palace right in front of the castle. Way better than modern glass apartments, office buildings or skyscrapers nearby. On the other hand I like small and cozy historical wooden cabins with carvings, sadly they are being demolished atound due to city growth and modernisation. But old palaces or grand houses is not what I find attractive.
7
@Kungs Zigfrīds But they become ugly when there is too much of it. That is why people wanted that change, that is why quite a few cities embraced modernism. Even my grandpa told that people started to hate that old style architecture when it was everywhere. Clean and minimal felt and looked cool, people wanted it and didn't care some old houses got demolished. Many people like change and something new even if there is a large group that prefers stagnation. Look at baroque interiors. How the hell you imagine living inside such rooms? It looks so inconvenient, inefficient. Same applies to exterior even if you don't feel that way.
7
@fatboyRAY24 So you like historical or you like modern? You can't really choose both. Otherwise you get McMansions. It is not best of both world, it is tasteless mismatch. People have accepted that historical interiors are inconvenient, overcrowded, uncomfortable and it is expensive to maintain ceiling painting, fancy rugs on walls. Why people don't see the same reasons for why historical exterior is not being chosen?
5
@Eric Dew Clean but unique forms, surface that reminds natural gravel, less windows and it looks like a cliff or a mountain if vegetation is incorporated right. What was pointless I think was historical revival in late 1800s, early 1900s. It was the same old styles but just worse as it was used on way more modern and larger buildings.
5
@gabrielebianchi8976 maybe then even pro-traditional architects change their mind when it needs to be created in digital environment while complying with all requirements.
4
@marlygee1 Old buildings didn't really stood the test of time. They were being constantly demolished just because they got old. 1800s to build grander newer ones in industrial cities with grand avenues and in 1900s to modernise cities even more for offices and cars. Now we have a lot less of those old buildings and with the help of historical preservation we protect and appreciate some special ones. But if they were all around they would become tiresome. There is jo denying they were overcrowded. Even in classical Greece or Rome, even in Renaissance architecture was a lot more restrained than in 1800-1900.
4
Would you love to live in some baroque interior? It doesn't even seem convenient.
3
@kinnish5267 There are plenty of buildings from that decade.
2
@colummulhern8865 there are great examples of eco brutalism. Habitat 67 or housing complex in Ivry sur Seine.
2
@CampingforCool41 I believe there must be some good ratio between mundane and very unique. Having unique buildings everywhere can be a mess, while same looking buildings are, well, mundane and boring. In the past there were churches and palaces for variety, nowadays we no longer build them and something has to replace their impact on cities.
2
@Metronoma1 this tradition architecture is just boring and unimaginative for most students
2
@Kultus1337 why do you say that is how it is intended. Maybe better to go with functional exterior and fancy baroque interior. I don't see how mixing styles in any way makes much sense. I understand finding use for true heritage, but building new buildings that look old is questionable.
2
@kungszigfrids1482 new glass Lidl designs look very good compared to most grocery stores that look like metal sheds
2
@Shrekshya Khadka Exactly. I saw a story how in some US suburb family chose to build something different. A modern high quality house. And received a lot of criticism. In Europe in almost all cases nobody would care, but there it was some massive deal. There were endless lines, probably hundreds of similarly looking repetitive older houses in that area. With some McMansions here or there. How can you be so protective of boring old and against something unique new?
2
@Nemo_Anom it is children who think name brutalism comes from brutal. It just means bare concrete. It is a very adaptable material that you can create large, self sustaining, organic continuous shapes. It is beautiful. Way better that random ornamentation on 1900 buildings.
2
How about most historical buildings? Those don't usually have ornamentation. He mostly shows churches, palaces, upper class houses. Most used to live in stone or log huts. I also don't understand his example about buildings going out of style, no longer valued and being torn down after 50 years. That was the same situation with buildings built in 1900, people had such opinions about buildings he praises in this video.
2
@Ania My answer is often, "so what?". Usually that is not a problem for professors to provide information about basics, main rules you that usually don't change much in most fields. Even in physics it is fine to often study from 70s books. IT seems something that, of course, needs newer information. Like you wouldn't want to study genetics from decades old book as it is a new field too. Architecture also seems only have incremental changes since early 2000s. City planning changed more.
1
@JToroPaz probably mostly true, but modern boxes can also be very expensive. Curved multi layer reflective glass, massive hanging parts, cantilevers, exotic stone or wood.
1
@MihaiRUdeRO Good old post-soviet Lithuania. I love brutalism here and I am sad when it gets demolished. To be fair I am even jealous of what was Yugoslavia, Romania. Now those countries have even more of that awesome heritage.
1
I don't understand his example about buildings going out of style, no longer valued and being torn down after 50 years. That was the same situation with buildings built in 1900, people had such opinions about buildings he praises in this video.
1
@mano0n have you seen what is being shared on most influential architecture sites? Going historical is seen as tasteless and outdated.
1
@MVSSENJU many old houses since 1800s have steel sweet roof, many old updates houses have modern single piece windows without old wooden frames. So they aren't exactly that unique from each other. Arches is pretty simple detail, new apartment buildings also have unique details at such minor scale.
1