Comments by "On The Piss" (@On_The_Piss) on "The Aesthetic City" channel.

  1. How many affordable or state homes are there? Or this monstrosity only for the wealthy?
    2
  2. "Better" according to who? You? @ponysoldier6770 
    1
  3.  @LA_HA  🫡
    1
  4. Also, I'm curious to know which of modernism's "problems", as you put it, this development solves? I don't see any new ideas here.  @AlexandrePRODHOMME 
    1
  5. You have to start somewhere? How is this even beginning to solve issues around housing availability and city planning? It does neither. Unless you can show me evidence otherwise? @excellentcomment 
    1
  6. And in turn, don't generalise modernism as many in here are all too willing to do. @dragonmaster1334 
    1
  7. Modernism rooted in white supremacy. That argument could be made I suppose, although it doesn't really align with Nazi Germany's love of classical architecture and its persecution of modernists, does it. @CheeseBae 
    1
  8. Thank you. @the_yiga_blademaster 
    1
  9. The next issue is accessibility to developments like these. They are not accessible to normal people - only the mega wealthy - so they solve no issues around housing availability or city planning. They are merely "pretty" to look at, which to me, is shallow. @AlexandrePRODHOMME 
    1
  10. "Our" cities? Who do you mean exactly? This luxury development is far out of reach for the ordinary citizen. Give me a break.
    1
  11.  @myworld4257  OK
    1
  12.  @Blatsen  Architecture is inherently political, it always has been and always will be.
    1
  13. I don’t.
    1
  14.  @the_aesthetic_city Your video is subjective nonsense. You describe modernism as “hideous” without explaining why. If we’re dealing in subjective emotive opinion, I find “classical” architecture to be busy, tacky and garish. Next time present your video from both sides. 🤡
    1
  15.  @the_aesthetic_city also, moving backwards to traditionalism is not a “revolution”, it is regression. Traditionalism was never a movement “for the people”, it was the opposite in fact - architecture designed for a tiny, wealthy, royal few.
    1
  16.  @Scbalq  Hitler also hated modernism, just saying
    1
  17. It is frustrating to see your apparent misunderstanding of the difference between "modern" and "modernist". This video also shows a glaring misunderstanding of what modernism actually is. @randomdude4207 
    1
  18.  @ligametis Nope, according to this video you’re wrong - beauty is objective, and you don’t get to have an opinion.
    1
  19.  @the_yiga_blademaster  Thank you for explaining this better than I could.
    1
  20. That just shows how little you actually know. You hold nostalgic fantasies of what you THINK it's like to live in one, but you really have no idea. I'd argue most who argue in favour of them have never actually lived in one. @johnsmith8055 
    1
  21. Tell me, for how long have you lived in Paris? @CheeseBae 
    1
  22. Yes, correct. I'm actually not the one calling for the demolishing of classical buildings like those in the comments are calling for the demolishing of modernist buildings, I am absolutely for protecting them. My issue is trying to build NEW buildings in a classical style, I find that tacky. Perhaps you should remind those in the comments that we can both protect classical buildings, and build functional, comfortable modern buildings in the same spaces. The town in this video isn't "classical", it's merely pretending to be. It has no history, no cultural importance, it's just a concrete box with some tacky decorations plastered on it's side. @lmk10000 
    1
  23. Further to my previous point, you're right that the wealthy prefer to reside in classical buildings - because they are the only ones that are able to afford the exorbitant costs involved in their preservation - which, again, is an argument for modernism - since modernism is accessible to everyone. It is cheaper, easier, and more functional.  @unconventionalideas5683 
    1
  24. Perhaps you could answer my question? For how many years did you live in Paris? @CheeseBae 
    1
  25.  @CheeseBae  Yes. You visited. You’ve never lived there. As suspected. Got any more shallow, subjective “arguments” to make? It’s been 2 weeks, give it a rest. 🥱
    1
  26.  @Nehmi  Another meaningless subjective argument.
    1
  27.  @williamstringer6519  Queenslanders are indeed beautiful, and practical for the heat!
    1
  28. Thanks for your opinion, really convincing. @LudwigVaanArthans 
    1
  29.  @TheValdevor  You mean MODERNISED traditional buildings. You know, owned by those that can AFFORD to modernise traditional buildings. They would never live in those traditional buildings in their original format. Guaranteed.
    1
  30.  @TheValdevor  pedestrian zones? As if there were footpaths at the time these buildings were built? No they were covered in horse droppings, sewerage was literally poured out of the windows onto the street. Pedestrian zones are a modernist concept. Don’t get it twisted. In fact, most of what you now take for granted was pioneered by the modernists. You’re just too ignorant to understand this.
    1
  31.  @lr6477  Who’s arguing for post modernism? Not me. But let me guess. You don’t even know what the difference between post modern and modern is.
    1
  32.  @TheValdevor  100% agree with you.
    1
  33. I'm assuming the traditional Spanish house you live in is renovated? @signodeinterrogacion8361 
    1
  34. @@user-qn3gy4bv8u they’re*
    1
  35.  @dystopian2153  The average person can’t afford these places, are you crazy? 🤣
    1
  36.  @whispofwords2590  Said like someone who has never actually had to live in classical building, with its total lack of natural light, tiny windows, small rooms and lack of communal space.
    1
  37.  @whispofwords2590  Your argument is totally subjective. You can’t tell me what I think looks good. Modernism is designed around practicality, you know - actually living in these spaces. Again, I bet you’ve never actually lived in a classical building. I have. I grew up in an 1860’s villa. It was cold, damp and dark.
    1
  38.  @whispofwords2590  Yes, neoclassicism. The Nazis liked that style too. Rehashing old ideas because you lack new ones.
    1
  39.  @whispofwords2590  I don’t think you actually know what modernism is, what it strives for, what its ideology is. You have no idea, and that is precisely the problem with videos like this.
    1
  40.  @whispofwords2590  “modern projects”. Look mate, if you aren’t willing to at the very least learn what modernism is, then I’m not really interested in arguing subjectives about what “beauty” is. Modern ≠ Modernism. Get back to me when you learn the difference.
    1
  41.  @whispofwords2590  You just proved my point. You are against “modernity” but are happy to modernise badly designed classical buildings because you know as well as I do that nobody actually wants to live in them. There’s more to life than aesthetics, I wish people like you would understand that.
    1
  42.  @whispofwords2590  lazy decoration is not good design. You can’t polish a turd. No matter how hard you try.
    1
  43.  @whispofwords2590  lol “beauty is not subjective” - source? Trust me bro
    1
  44.  @whispofwords2590  You didn’t mention it because you have no idea what it is.
    1
  45.  @PeshekNJ  Why are you talking to me about America? I don’t care about America. I’m not American either.
    1
  46. OK? I already know that. US cities are the reason cities were built into the car-centric hellscapes we have today. My city included. I'm not American, I was never defending American cities, so I'm not sure what you're on about. @PeshekNJ 
    1
  47. Believe it or not, there is space for both.
    1