Comments by "paolo masone" (@paolomasone3754) on "The Aesthetic City" channel.

My problem here is that classicism vs "modernism" is treated as an either/or proposition. We do not live in an either/or society. In fact, one of the major problems with "Modernism" (not to be confused with modern architecture) is that it was put forth as an either/or proposition; I think LeCorbusier coined the phrase "[modernist] architecture or revolution." You and so many of your commentators seem to be falling into the same trap --which by the way is just another form of authoritarianism.
8
@the_aesthetic_city I don't think that Lyndonarana said not to study classical design; just the opposite. I read that lyndonarana said to also study modern and other examples of good design.
7
Then study how to do it in the most beautiful, economical and appropriate way! This may be modern or it may be traditional. You are cutting off one of your hands by denying the reality of the requirements for getting to build these days.
6
@FranceFloorball1 I would love to have a living space with a 4 m ceiling height. What a beautiful celebration of human beings occupying architectural space! Those buildings probably also have very tall windows which allow a connection to the outside and a possibility for solar heating the interior and using less electricity to light the interior space....
3
@carlosimotti3933 no point to your comment..........
3
@lecaprice2572 Albert Speer, Hitler's architect, was a peerless designer in the classical idiom. Check him out. I think he is an excellent example to refute the idea that an architectural style epitomizes a political point of view.
3
I went to architecture school in late 1970s - early 1980s in US. Your spiel sounds exactly like what we were all saying back then. The result was Post Modernism. This "new approach" resulted in some really fine buildings, but the vast majority of it was crap! What were we thinking? After many years of trying to design modern building according to historical forms, i and most other people became modernists because it is more appropriate. Classical design ideas are very important and can and do inform the best modern architecture. But they are not the only good design ideas. I used to teach classical architectural design at University in Texas back in the 1980s. They learned many compositional strategies applicable to both classicistic and modern architectural design. It was well received by most students and faculty. Problem is, it takes many years of study to be able to design in the classical mode and most people are too lazy to do it --just like with good modern (not "Modernist") architecture. You need to be really immersed in it. Take a clear-eyed look at the traditional architecture of early 20th century US architecture. It seems to follow "the rules of design" but it induces a deadly ennui. Look at the work of Frank Lloyd Wright. He hated classical architecture! Yet his work touches the soul of nearly all who experience it. It is not simply comfortable and efficient. Also, builders, not to mention your developer (the person who hires or fires architects), and your own construction document teams simply don't have the sensibility to make the important elements correctly. Truthfully, I would much rather live in a place like Tjuvholmen, in Oslo than one of those fake Disneyesque places like Seaside, Florida USA. I could go on and on.
2
Do you even know what Brutalism is?
2
@o.3825 I so agree! Computers were a life-saver for me. Much less staying late at work to redraw revisions. And, artistically, it is about the quality of the image --not the way it was made. I have seen too too many awful drawings and watercolor attempts!
2
@Novusod No, the public is NOT fed up with modernism. They are fed up with crap architecture and urban design that is more about profit than public good. I have seen garbage from both "modernist" design and designs that that are not even half-baked replications of some foggy ill-informed notion of "classical" design.
2
@the_aesthetic_city well, I guess you need to redo your little video here, because that is not what you say.
2
WRONG!! There was plenty of crap built in previous centuries.
1
@Raingothic sure, just like a lot of well-designed modernist buildings. Take a look at the work of Frank Lloyd wright, Richard Neutra, the Eames, Notre Dame du Haute (le Corbusier), and on and on and on.... Stop being so ignorant!
1
there are plenty of modern buildings that use traditional masonry, wood, concrete, glass, ceramics, metals, and other materials found in historical architecture.
1
Proportion (classical and otherwise), decoration, and facade composition are most definitely taught in modern architecture schools; I don't know where you come with your assertion that it is not. You seem to think that modern architecture is "functionalist," meaning all design decisions are base solely on the most banal meaning of "function." I know of very little modernist architecture that subscribes to this view. If it did it was because in the immediate post WW2 Europe it was necessary to give people basic shelter, quickly.
1
wonderful information! Too bad the vast majority of the images were on the screen for only a couple of seconds! Rather superficial, really.
1
Good for you! I agree that architecture school faculties are full of a$$h@les! I taught at one for a few years and regret being one of those despicables a few times. I did teach studios on classical design, however...
1
@adaslesniak you are naive. I taught drawing in architecture schools for a number of years and the most important thing I learned was that people have different ways of imagining. Your point of view is akin to bigotry.
1
change will happen. then that will change too.
1
@Fessel34 the nightmare of many architects has often been that engineer who thinks everything is a "technical problem."
1
In other words you wish to bathe freely in your ignorance and impose it on the rest of the world.
1
@kaasmeester5903 Nothing new about it. It was called "Post Modernism" back in the 1970s and we jettisoned so much of it as bad design and moved on to a new modern architecture which is greatly appreciated by "the common people" as appropriate to their lives.
1
@carlosimotti3933 obviously it triggers YOU
1
@thebreadbringer It's a useless term anyway because nobody, even the belligerent mr simotti, even knows what it means!
1