Totally agree... nothing remarkable in this field for decades.
The same can be said about cars.
As much as we love our ‘65 Mustangs or a 1957 Chevy; no way would we ever want to return to those days of dangerous and unreliable cars.
Today’s car is safer, faster, more efficient, more comfortable and reliable. They are better in every way than cars of 10-25-50 years ago.
Except they are as ugly as a Hildebeast.
Terrible commentary. Relies on low-hanging fruit and a ignorance of styles and movements.
Yes some buildings are ugly, and some architects were not that good, but it isn’t a subject that you can just saw everything made from X to Y point is terrible, while (insert olden time here) was when it was all good.
Except the word he used wasn't "garbage."
The same can be said about forms of art being taught in all education centers. If the art has to be explained then it sucks.
Of course, as with modern "music" and modern "art", modern "architecture" is most often lacking in this important element.
Didn’t really agree with this for a host of reasons, but it is still an interesting video.
Primary reason for much of the “tower blocks” was making cheap housing for an ever increasing welfare state. Kind of a chicken and egg situation.
There was a lot of crappy architecture in the past. We are generally not familiar with it because it was not considered noteworthy or worth preserving. Generally speaking, the older architecture that we view as being good or great only got to be older by virtue of the fact that people considered it good or great.
How can “modern architecture” be modern if it first emerged over a hundred years ago? How long does it take before it becomes old, stale, boring, prosaic, pedantic, ordinary, and conventional architecture?
22. Continue discrediting American culture by degrading all forms of artistic expression. An American Communist cell was told to “eliminate all good sculpture from parks and buildings, substitute shapeless, awkward and meaningless forms.”
23. Control art critics and directors of art museums. “Our plan is to promote ugliness, repulsive, meaningless art.”
A prominent architect once said of Boston City Hall that it looked like the crate Fanueil Hall came in.
Love that line, and so true!
Watson’s got a point. But what about his ugly beard? :- )
I like Rivendell from the LOTR movies. Question, what motivates the architect? Glorifying self and man, or glorifying God and His creation? Brings to mind any outer space aliens. Has anyone topped humans for beauty?
Corporations have at least some sense of balance when they contract with an architect for a headquarters building or a regional office. They must consider how a new building is going to enhance their product marketing, productivity, employee morale, public perception, etc. But above all, the building's purpose, cost and life expectancy have to fit with the corporation's long-term projections for growth and profitability.
No such constraints would likely apply for a federal building, a VA hospital, or a federal courthouse. (I was looking for a sketch of a proposed mint from the 1980s but couldn't find it. Talk about form before function!)
What would Howard Roark think?