Live data from Hacker News

The mid in fake midcentury modern

nplusonemag.com

71–80 of 512 posts

Re: The mid in fake midcentury modern

#71

There's so much in this essay to unpack, it's all over the place -- more of an extended rant than any particularly cohesive argument. But one of the early points is "why is everything so gray instead of colorful?" Which is easy to answer -- when all your cars and buildings are super-colorful, they clash. They become garish and ugly and screaming for attention. Thank god we've moved to more neutral tones that actually…

Adding to this and using some every day examples.

Why are expensive "sports cars" almost always ugly (Bright yellow or neon green??).

One would think if you had that sort of money you would realize that a bright green car is tacky as F, but that is the point. To turn heads - this is why they bought the car in the first place.

Why are most cars not coloured like this - because it is ugly and most people don't drive a bright green "Honda civic" so people can look at them.

On the housing front almost every city has bylaws and restrictions on what you can and cant do. In the US you also have HOA's with even more restrictions.

As an example - I live in what was formerly a small village . In order to "preserve the heritage" of the area everything is architecturally controlled.

Developers always need to submit your plans for review, but this area is further restricted and has its own set of "rules" outlined in a 34 page document which is on top of the city guidelines.

So all the houses in this area look similar regardless of age by design. There are houses from the 1800's a few blocks away and my house which was built in 2000 fits in just fine from the exterior view. The interior is a different matter because it is not controlled and so it uses modern techniques like steel I-beams.

Re: The mid in fake midcentury modern

#72
post #10

There are two schools of thought: those that think that beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and those that think, like Steve Jobs famously quipped, that some people just have no good taste. After fighting with this concept for years, I decided to embrace the superiority and smugness that comes with the latter: the vast majority of people have no understanding of beauty and aesthetic. The only thing that stops the w…

Keep going though. It’s not just about “taste”. We have always needed opinionated people to be able to push their ideas. That’s what Linus is, Jobbs was, like him last year or hate him this year Musk, Eminem, Pulitzer, Jefferson, Tesla or Edison, Stuart Mill, the Wrights, and so on to any major or minor scale… The best things come from opinionated people who were told they couldn’t go against the grain like that. We’…

I'd consider Zuck opinionated compared to the other FAANG companies. I appreciate his bet on the Metaverse. I don't think it's a good idea, but I can appreciate having an opinion.

Re: The mid in fake midcentury modern

#73

Why is it the articles which would most benefit from pictures are the ones with the fewest?

It even changes the name of the building it's criticizing to make it more difficult to find. After a search I located it, it's The Greenpoint (not "The Josh" as the article claims). You can look it up on Google maps, it's 21 India St, Brooklyn, NY 11222. It seems fine to me? Not particularly nice, but I'd take it over brutalism or international style buildings any day of the week.

If anything, I'd say that modern buildings are a lot more pleasant than those that were being built in the 60's and 70's.

Re: The mid in fake midcentury modern

#74
A short essay that made me notice other people's mistakes when talking about beauty (and numerous other topics):

2-Place and 1-Place Words by Eliezer Yudkowsky

People use "beauty" as if it's a 1-place word (objective metric), rather than a 2-place word ("beautiful to entity X").

Now anytime anyone says "X is best" I follow up with "for who? and in what context?"

https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/eDpPnT7wdBwWPGvo5/2-place-an...

Re: The mid in fake midcentury modern

#75

If everything appears ugly to you, ask yourself: 1. Is it really? Or this is some weird sentiment towards things that passed? I prefer modern “ugly” architecture and “modern” medicine, then flamboyant, impractical and wasteful building accompanied by poor health; maybe we just recentred our attention? … alternatively 2. you are depressed; and I don't mean it in a snark way; futility, greyness and ever present gloom c…

I would describe your second point as gaslighting. Tastes are different and many people dislike modern (and post-modern) architecture.

Talking with architects about this, they told me that building differently today is too expensive, doesn't go well with industrialized construction.

I argue that architecture is an academic shitshow. It's design for competition juries and not for the people using it. Which is btw very contrary to the initial ideas of Bauhaus, which is why i personally consider it a big failure, despite it's apparent success.

Re: The mid in fake midcentury modern

#76

This feels less like it tells us anything about the world but more about how small the author's conception of it is. Reminds me of people who complain about how music is "bad these days" but they're only talking about what they hear on the radio and aren't really exploring what the landscape has to offer A lot of what gets created is for functional purposes, and it has always been that way. As time goes on, the funct…

You're not wrong to an extent about the good stuff sticking around but I think you're missing the point. It's not like the aesthetics the author is complaining about were chosen for purpose like a farmer painting his barn red because red is cheap. The slice of the economic ladder from which the author cites his examples is mostly rich enough that small variations in cost or performance are not really a driver of styling trends. Widget designers and real estate developers are specifically choosing conformist blandness aesthetics on purpose, not simply tolerating them as a means to some other end.

Re: The mid in fake midcentury modern

#77
post #10

There are two schools of thought: those that think that beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and those that think, like Steve Jobs famously quipped, that some people just have no good taste. After fighting with this concept for years, I decided to embrace the superiority and smugness that comes with the latter: the vast majority of people have no understanding of beauty and aesthetic. The only thing that stops the w…

can you help me make sense of your argument? If most people have bad taste, how can peer pressure prevent ugliness? Peer pressure almost by definition demands conformity.

Re: The mid in fake midcentury modern

#78

World Wars 1 & 2 happened, shattering the remaining sense of aesthetic unity we had that was followed by modernism which purity spiraled into the ubiquitous glass box, which was then followed by a post-modernist surface-level, purely negative rejection of modernism the post-modernists were unable to return to any pre-modern sense of aesthetics due to their ideological commitment to the ur modernist impulse of pride (…

A lot of people responsible for 20th century architecture believed more or less that beauty is Literally Fascism, so that's another component. The ugliness isn't always accidental.

Even before there was the idea that ornamentation was ultimately a waste of resources and is incompatible with the promise of efficiency that brings about the modern world.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ornament_and_Crime

Re: The mid in fake midcentury modern

#79

World Wars 1 & 2 happened, shattering the remaining sense of aesthetic unity we had that was followed by modernism which purity spiraled into the ubiquitous glass box, which was then followed by a post-modernist surface-level, purely negative rejection of modernism the post-modernists were unable to return to any pre-modern sense of aesthetics due to their ideological commitment to the ur modernist impulse of pride (…

>It is the pervading law of all things organic and inorganic, of all things physical and metaphysical, of all things human, and all things super-human, of all true manifestations of the head, of the heart, of the soul, that the life is recognizable in its expression, that form ever follows function. This is the law.

Emphasis mine.

Louis Sullivan is quoted as saying this in 1896, prior to any world wars. I think you can blame architecture being reduced to the sum of its usefulness to our friends in Chicago, who are far more worried about function over aesthetic. Ludwig Mies van der Rohe decided "less is more" in Chicago. Frank Lloyd Wright. John Root. Daniel Burnham. This continues today with the premiere skyscrapers in the middle east and Asia being designed by Chicago's Skidmore, Owings and Merril. It's too cold to care what you look like.

Re: The mid in fake midcentury modern

#80
This is a huge question with dozens of answers, but I think the shortest, most concise one is this: culture has emphasized novelty over quality. No one cares if you can demonstrate skill, unless it's in doing something new. Any list of celebrated architects and artists from the 1950s on will be comprised almost entirely of people that did something shocking or novel. There are many reasons as to why this happened, ranging from photography making it easy to create realistic images, to corporations having an interest in forced obsolescence.

The way past this, I think, will basically come down to two things:

1. Respecting craftsmanship, which is ultimately about quality and reaching certain standards rather than being novel

2. Becoming comfortable with abundance and not basing value on scarcity. As in, we can all have beautiful things and we don't need to use rarity to determine if something is "artistically important." This has been the path of the art market (hence the huge price tags) and more recently NFTs, which to me are just a huge step in the wrong direction

Post reply on HN