Comments by "" (@CheeseBae) on "Why Originality In Architecture Is OVERRATED" video.

Students should never be asked to be "original." Can you imagine going to a math class and the teacher demanding you to solve an equation in an original way?
53
@johnperic6860 Modernism isn't rooted in the Arts and Crafts movement, in fact they are diametrically opposed. A/C was a reaction against the industrial revolution; it wanted to return to an era of individual craftsmanship. Modernism destroyed individual craftsmanship and fully embraced industrialism. To say they're related is a stretch at best.
8
@johnperic6860 Nope. The Arts and Crafts movement was essentially a nostalgic look back at medieval guilds and workmanship that was lost in industrialization. Modernism in art and design is usually characterized by its deliberate break from the past. But sure, if you stretch hard enough you can find connections between any two movements.
7
@johnperic6860 I'm referring to Modern architecture and Modernists like Le Corb, Mies, and Gropius who were outright hostile toward the past. They have next to nothing in common with Arts and Crafts. If you're using "modern" in a loosey-goosey sense to include it's widest possible usage, maybe.
7
@TheNightshadePrince Art Deco was not a clean break from history like Modern was. Much of Art Deco was inspired by ancient Egyptian and in some cases even Mayan architecture. While there are some similarities between Art Deco and Modern, as they have many of the same influences (ex. Italian Futurism, Industrialism, etc), they are not the same either. Again, the major difference is that Modern avoided anything from history, whereas Art Deco did not.
4
@markholland7322 copying generic buildings from the 1920s like Villa Savoye, the Lovell House, or The Schindler House is ALLOWED. It isn't that architects today do not copy or aren't inspired by history, it's that some clowns want to limit what they're allowed to be inspired by.
3
@johnperic6860 Modernisme and Modern architecture aren't even remotely the same, despite their similar names. Your confusion is because, in the late 1800s in Catalonia, Art Nouveau was called "modern." That's because what we call "Modern" today hadn't truly been invented yet. Gothic architecture was also called "modern" in the middle ages, so is it Modern now too? This lame attempt at a gotcha-ism, "but but Art Nouveau is Modern so you like Modern!" is tiresome and tedious.
3
@johnperic6860 I'm not confusing anything. You're trying to muddy the waters by using the widest possible meaning of the word, "modern," when this video is about ARCHITECTURE and when we speak of Modern architecture we are talking about Le Corbusier, et al. Their architecture has been called, "Modern," for a century now. Your insistent attempt at this "gotcha" is tiresome and yet here you still are, continuing to beat this dead horse.
3
@johnperic6860 Gaudi did not build Modern architecture, he built in a form of Art Nouveau architecture. Prairie school is not Modern architecture, it is an outgrowth of Arts and Crafts. You need to decide if you're talking about architecture or philosophy, and you also need to decide if you're talking about Modern architecture (formal) or "modern" architecture (informal). Actual Modern architecture was a complete rejection of the past, while Art Nouveau and Arts and Crafts were a continuation or an evolution of traditional architecture. I'm not sure why this is so difficult for you to understand, and why you continue to beat a dead horse?
3
@johnperic6860 You're talking about philosophy while I'm talking about architecture, which is the subject of the video. In the field of architecture, there is a specific period that's called "Modern." It does NOT include Art Nouveau, Arts and Crafts, etc. and it's been this way for a century. Your informal usage of "modern," as it concerns architecture but is actually more about philosophy, is so vague, ambiguous, and subjective that one could spend a lifetime debating what it does and does not include. So yes, Postmodern isn't Modern, but it can be "modern" if you're using the informal and subjective definition. That's why I prefer to stick to official definitions and why you keep chasing your tail. Feel free to write another book tho.
2
@johnperic6860 Again, in the field of architecture, there's a specific era that's called "Modern." I'm not sure what else to tell you other than go to wikipedia to verify I'm not making this up? At the end of the day you're using that term in a subjective manner.
1
@johnperic6860 and again, you're still talking about philosophy and I'm talking about architecture. They are absolutely separable because Modern architecture only refers to a single period in history, no matter how hard you want to believe otherwise. Keep chasing that tail.
1
@johnperic6860 it depends on whether you're using the actual definition of "Modern architecture," or your own subjective and informal definition that's actually for philosophy, not architecture.
1
@johnperic6860 how long are you going to play this little game? You're oversimplifying many incredibly diverse movements as being under one umbrella just because they might share a few philosophical breadcrumbs. There are massive philosophical differences between Arts and Crafts, Le Corbesier, Gaudi's Art Nouveau, and Frank Lloyd Wright's organic architecture. Your use of the word "modern" in the context of architecture is so broad it becomes meaningless. At this point your replies are just banal.
1
@johnperic6860 Is there an echo in here?
1
@johnperic6860 Define "modernist" and I'll tell you.
1
@johnperic6860 I have no interest in discussing subjective opinions with you. You won't even define the word you've been arguing endlessly about. Stop being so impossibly obtuse and make your point.
1
@johnperic6860 I never provided a definition outside of the standard and objective definition of "Modern architecture." Again, I'm not interested in debating subjectivities with you. Your definition of "modernism" is so loose that it doesn't mean anything at all.
1
@johnperic6860 Modernism (capital M) in the context of architecture refers to Modern architecture, which is clearly defined. You're not even talking about architecture, you're talking about philosophy, which is completely different.
1
@johnperic6860 What's called "Modern" in architecture vs philosophy are completely different. That's the silly mistake you keep making. If you want to know whether or not those buildings are Modern architecture, then google it. "But but I want to know what YOU think..." Again, I have no interest in arguing subjectivities with you. The world doesn't revolve around your opinion. Modern architecture absolutely was a rejection of the past, whereas Arts and Crafts was a romanticization of the past. That isn't my opinion, that's the textbook description of those movements.
1
@johnperic6860 if it's an easy yes or no answer, then you should be able to Google it.
1