Comments by "mpetersen6" (@mpetersen6) on "The Lunatic Responsible for Destroying Every Beautiful City in the World" video.

  1. 7
  2. 4
  3. 2
  4. 2
  5. I'm not going to say beauty is in the eye of the beholder. What I will say is that property, especially in Urban Centers is expensive. Add in construction costs. Full masonary structures top out at around 14 or 15 floors. Unless you want the lower floors totally useless for anything. Steel framed buildings can of course go much higher. Early steel frames buildings were able to be clad in stone, brick or terracotta cotta. Ornamental work could be cast iron or terra cotta. But once you get so high just how practical is that. Especially if the building has no set backs. With set backs if the attachment of the ornamental work suffers a failure due to weathering at least it has some chance of landing on one of the lower set backs than street level. The Prudential building in Boston had a lot of trouble with losing widows. As to most glass boxes I agree they are soulless and depressing. The one exception I can think of is the Pan Am building on Manhatten. At least it's not a square box. Trump's recent Executive order requiring classical style architecture for federal buildings has of course met with disdain from the "art community". In reality the requirement for classical architecture has problems. Two buildings i can think of in DC that shouldn't be in a classical style are the Smithsonian's Air and Space Museum (one of the most visited museums in the world) and Nation Museum of Modern Art. Current architecture need not be joyless. Calatavara's Milwaukee Art Museum is one example. Built as an annex to the original Lake Front structure (a soulless box). The new building if one watches the sunshade opening looks like a bird taking flight. It may not be to everybody's taste. But it is striking. At least the glass box isn't as bad as brutalism
    1