Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Crimes in Concrete

firstthings.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 134 posts

Re: Crimes in Concrete

#51

Post by deogeo »

LeanderK wrote: post #28
deogeo wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> modernist parts of Chicago, London and New York seem be appreciated at least as much as other cities and districts with well-regarded pre-20thC buildings. Not according to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/America%27s_Favorite_Architect... - modernist buildings barely show up in that list. Of course you're right - beauty is subjective. So when a simple popularity poll fails to show support for their chosen style, archi…

> Not according to (..) I am not sure, searching for "modern" reveals 27 hits and postmodern 14. Also, landmarks dominate the top 10 so i am not sure whether the poll more accuratly tracks the most liked building and not style. A style with more distributed votes would suffer (and, for example, there are more hits for postmodern than for art-deco).

Among the top 50, 5 are any sort of 'modern'. But is this ratio reflected in the types of buildings being built? Perhaps I would not be so bitter if only (27+14)/150 of new buildings were (post)modern in style. But, much like in art, it looks like the style can only exist if it suffocates all others.

Edit: By 'suffocate all others', I mean in an academic sense. Look at the designs produced by major architectural schools. They have been purged of older styles, just like the art world was purged of 'traditionally beautiful', confining it to art history.

Re: Crimes in Concrete

#52

Post by deogeo »

IfOnlyYouKnew wrote: post #39
hairytrog wrote: post #13

The only pre-20thC buildings that remain are the ones that survive. The ones that survive are the ones we like and that are able to survive (not plywood and well built). Survival is the real measurement of how much we like it - it is the ultimate arbiter of aesthetics/beauty/cultural significance/engineering excellence, and it trumps all the chatter of self-appointed critics. If it's garbage, we tear it down or stop…

> The only pre-20thC buildings that remain are the ones that survive. This has become a cliché talking-point, but it isn't entirely true. Or, at least, it doesn't fully apply here. The best contrast to "modernism" would be the episode directly preceding it, namely Art Nouveau or Jugendstil. There are lots of European cities both large and small that were predominantly built in this style, because it coincided with th…

Tangential, but what's with the censorship on that street view? Freedom of panorama issues?

Re: Crimes in Concrete

#53

Post by LeanderK »

deogeo wrote: post #51
LeanderK wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Not according to (..) I am not sure, searching for "modern" reveals 27 hits and postmodern 14. Also, landmarks dominate the top 10 so i am not sure whether the poll more accuratly tracks the most liked building and not style. A style with more distributed votes would suffer (and, for example, there are more hits for postmodern than for art-deco).

Among the top 50, 5 are any sort of 'modern'. But is this ratio reflected in the types of buildings being built? Perhaps I would not be so bitter if only (27+14)/150 of new buildings were (post)modern in style. But, much like in art, it looks like the style can only exist if it suffocates all others. Edit: By 'suffocate all others', I mean in an academic sense. Look at the designs produced by major architectural scho…

> Perhaps I would not be so bitter if only (27+14)/150 of new buildings were (post)modern in style. But, much like in art, it looks like the style can only exist if it suffocates all others.

This is a poll about americas favourite architecture and not in which style to build. I think the poll is largely a function of fame. Buildings are being build in all sorts of style, but I think the sobering result is that a style in itself is not really saving anyone. I also don't think style can only suffocate? A lot of cities are mixed in style.

Re: Crimes in Concrete

#54

Post by [deleted] »

stupidcar wrote: post #48
ppod wrote: post #2

It's fascinating how neatly being politically conservative or progressive lines up with the corresponding architectural view. I like brutalism, but I disagree with the removal of Scruton from that position, it seems political. What annoys me about articles like the above is that they seem to ignore the possibility that aesthetics involves a lot of subjectivity. The argument seems to boil down to, "of course it's ugly…

> The argument seems to boil down to, "of course it's ugly, just look at it" Yes, but only because the heart of the modernist movement has been an attempt to deny, belittle and mock the idea that the instinctive aesthetic reaction of the majority to their creations is important or valid. If you think their constructions are ugly, that's not their problem, it's your problem. Firstly, you're too stupid, conservative an…

[deleted]

Re: Crimes in Concrete

#55

Post by jjtheblunt »

hairytrog wrote: post #13

The only pre-20thC buildings that remain are the ones that survive. The ones that survive are the ones we like and that are able to survive (not plywood and well built). Survival is the real measurement of how much we like it - it is the ultimate arbiter of aesthetics/beauty/cultural significance/engineering excellence, and it trumps all the chatter of self-appointed critics. If it's garbage, we tear it down or stop…

Sadly, false: "Survival is the real measurement of how much we like it".

Many structures survive because their destruction would release regulated toxins, which were unregulated when built.

Re: Crimes in Concrete

#56

Post by deogeo »

titanomachy wrote: post #32
1024core wrote: post #21

San Francisco is undergoing exactly such a crime wave. The new apartment buildings are just glass and steel, with no redeeming features whatsoever. Compare these new buildings to the Flood Building or the Hobart Building, and you'll shed a tear or two.

The Hobart building is pretty to look at. But if I'm actually going to spend my time in the building, I would much rather have the floor-to-ceiling windows of a generic modern steel-and-glass tower. I wonder how much of this design trend is due to the development of better materials (e.g. more insulating glass).

And when you look out from those large floor-to-ceiling windows, you will see another steel-and-glass tower. And when you go outside, you will be surrounded by them, as will your children when they try to play. But I'm sure as long as you're bunkered in your room and ignore the outside world, steel-and-glass towers are great - location is irrelevant when it comes to real-estate.

Re: Crimes in Concrete

#57

Post by dsfyu404ed »

jjtheblunt wrote: post #55
hairytrog wrote: post #13

The only pre-20thC buildings that remain are the ones that survive. The ones that survive are the ones we like and that are able to survive (not plywood and well built). Survival is the real measurement of how much we like it - it is the ultimate arbiter of aesthetics/beauty/cultural significance/engineering excellence, and it trumps all the chatter of self-appointed critics. If it's garbage, we tear it down or stop…

Sadly, false: "Survival is the real measurement of how much we like it". Many structures survive because their destruction would release regulated toxins, which were unregulated when built.

One way to read that is the regulation is preventing progress.

Re: Crimes in Concrete

#58

Post by IfOnlyYouKnew »

deogeo wrote: post #52
IfOnlyYouKnew wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The only pre-20thC buildings that remain are the ones that survive. This has become a cliché talking-point, but it isn't entirely true. Or, at least, it doesn't fully apply here. The best contrast to "modernism" would be the episode directly preceding it, namely Art Nouveau or Jugendstil. There are lots of European cities both large and small that were predominantly built in this style, because it coincided with th…

Tangential, but what's with the censorship on that street view? Freedom of panorama issues?

Privacy. There were some complaints about street view when it was introduced, and Google allowed any resident to block their house.

Re: Crimes in Concrete

#59

Post by [deleted] »

deogeo wrote: post #52
IfOnlyYouKnew wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The only pre-20thC buildings that remain are the ones that survive. This has become a cliché talking-point, but it isn't entirely true. Or, at least, it doesn't fully apply here. The best contrast to "modernism" would be the episode directly preceding it, namely Art Nouveau or Jugendstil. There are lots of European cities both large and small that were predominantly built in this style, because it coincided with th…

Tangential, but what's with the censorship on that street view? Freedom of panorama issues?

[deleted]

Re: Crimes in Concrete

#60

Post by dsfyu404ed »

deogeo wrote: post #49
pjc50 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Scruton was a tobacco shill years ago: https://www.theguardian.com/media/2002/jan/24/advertising.to... He's incapable of not being political. Publishing conspiracy theory garbage about Soros at the time of a major hunt for antisemitism in public life was what got him fired. (The author of the original article, Dalrymple, is also a full time culture warrior)

Complaining about modern architectural style is being a culture warrior, but designing and building it is neutral and impartial...

Building at the high end (the kind of stuff HN cares about) is partly an exercise in artistic style which winds up being political.

Building at the low end is apolitical. With razor thin margins that crap doesnt make the cut. No matter how many millions of square feet of warehouse and pole barn you build there is no room for opinions, style and politics when your margin is pennies on the dollar.

Post reply on HN