The mid in fake midcentury modern • Hacker News Board

Re: The mid in fake midcentury modern

#421

Post by bombcar » Wed, Dec 07, 2022, 10:20 PM UTC

kansface wrote: post #379

ericmay wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To latch on to this great post there are a couple of other worthwhile discussion points: We're still in a nuclear war mental model. We can't build beautiful things if we think they'll be destroyed in a war. We still have a societal level PTSD from World War I, World War II, Korea, Vietnam, the Soviet Union, and other things. World War I veterans came back with horrific problems. That's why architects like Frank Lloyd…

We did build beautiful things post war! A driving tenant of Modernism was to bring good design to the masses through mass manufacturing - better living through ~science~ good design (see eg MoMA's Good Design Exhibition [1]). If you are thinking chiefly about architecture, consider the Sydney Opera House or the Gateway Arch. If you are thinking about houses, consider the Kaufmann house [2] or the Stahl House[3]. The…

I mean the houses are "designed" insofar as plans are drawn up, etc. They're just all the "same" and the builders want the ability to "add uncharges" so you have a basic house that looks pretty decent, but once you select all the available admins (the three car garage, dormers on every root, gables everywhere) you end up with a McMansion.

Re: The mid in fake midcentury modern

#422

Post by yunwal » Wed, Dec 07, 2022, 10:24 PM UTC

pixl97 wrote: post #400

yunwal wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree. I think within a given context like “architecture in the neighborhood I live in”, there’s an objective component to beauty/ugliness. There are universal human needs and desires that are being deprived by bad modern architecture (being in touch with nature, feeling comfortable, human communication and expression).

Again, 'modern architecture' is the failure point of your argument, as in "This has changed and is only a modern problem" being the primary failing. In the past most architecture sucked, it has since been bulldozed and replaced by architecture that sucked. Why? Because architecture that sucks is generally cheap. I would say the past I would say architecture sucked even worse most of the time. I'm sure 40 years from n…

It’s an attractive theory that only the prettiest buildings survive, but doesn’t seem to be supported by the evidence. Photographs from the turn of the century reveal that there are simply fewer unattractive buildings.

https://www.worksinprogress.co/issue/against-the-survival-of...

There’s an interesting theory at the end that suggests maybe every generation sees it’s own architecture as ugly, because it’s more common, etc. This seems possible, but there’s little evidence of it in the past, and it’s strange that it doesn’t happen as much with other aesthetic preferences (music, art, film). There are certainly some “born in the wrong generation” types, but it doesn’t seem as common or to span generations like the aversion to modern architecture.

Re: The mid in fake midcentury modern

#423

Post by bombcar » Wed, Dec 07, 2022, 10:24 PM UTC

ask_b123 wrote: post #342

mjhay wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you like complicated rooflines, you'll love McMansion Hell: https://mcmansionhell.com/

This is very good! But now I wonder if there's something similar for good architecture.

She has it behind the paywall ;)

> Did you just join my team of patrons?! Yes, yes you did. THANK YOU! As an official patron, you'll have access to my patron-only feed, the **NEW Discord server**, as well as access to the "Good House of the Month!" - The antidote to the month's house roast.

> You'll also receive a special slideshow featuring a curated collection of abandoned McMansions!

https://www.patreon.com/user?u=3844491

Re: The mid in fake midcentury modern

#424

Post by bombcar » Wed, Dec 07, 2022, 10:30 PM UTC

throwaway4aday wrote: post #288

nine_k wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't speak about Austin, TX, but here in NYC a number of aesthetically pleasing buildings have been built in last, say, 30 years. Even asymmetric ones, like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/8_Spruce_Street >, look great; I'm saying so as someone who used to see downtown Manhattan every day during commute. (One thing I miss after switching to WFH.)

That might be a very subjective opinion. Personally, I find the weird creases on that building disconcerting and unpleasant to look at.

Yeah, that's ... weird. But then again (in my opinion) all skyscrapers look like crap and only become "iconic" by being there for a long time and people get used to them.

Re: The mid in fake midcentury modern

#425

Post by p_j_w » Wed, Dec 07, 2022, 10:32 PM UTC

bombcar wrote: post #418

nemo44x wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

New construction in Europe is awful as well. Cheap, vinyl casement windows abound, brick veneer, pebble siding and disposable kitchens and fake flooring. They make homes that look like they could survive a bombing, but they're actually fragile and cheap buildings. > building $10m houses out of shitty plywood and fake bricks glued on the fascade A 10m home is probably not build of veneer. High quality construction is…

$10m might be getting into actually architected houses, but certainly down in the $2m you find absolute junk. It's famous enough that it has a website dedicated to it: https://mcmansionhell.com It's surprisingly "affordable" to have an entirely custom house designed and built, but the only people who bother are people who are certain they'll be in an area for quite awhile. Otherwise you either buy a developer's house…

>https://mcmansionhell.com

Thank you for this. I've had an absolute blast looking at this.

Re: The mid in fake midcentury modern

#426

Post by bombcar » Wed, Dec 07, 2022, 10:33 PM UTC

lotsofpulp wrote: post #340

ericmay wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If I'm a shareholder of a company that builds office blocks, I'll be demanding dividends and a return on my investment. Sorry I'm not following the point here. Can you elaborate? > Unless the customer (e.g. Apple and their giant do(ugh)nut) specifically ask for something that isn't structurally significant, a construction firm isn't going to add it. That's my point. There isn't any competition in the marketplace or…

Everyday people have insufficient wealth to shop around for homes or dictate design.

Many "ordinary" people who buy homes could custom-build, but it costs more in time and hassle and money (mainly the first two, to be sure) and then you're limited on locations.

Re: The mid in fake midcentury modern

#427

Post by bombcar » Wed, Dec 07, 2022, 10:38 PM UTC

majormajor wrote: post #373

recursivedoubts wrote: post #5

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 (…

What does "cultural unity" that you drop in at the end have to do with it? Much of the blandness of recent stuff is bad in very consistent ways already. Clearly you and I disagree, for instance, on if victorian houses can be aesthetically pleasing on their own, but would you rather have a street full of plywood boxes or would you rather have my victorian-styled house sitting next to your [whatever] and someone else's…

That's a big part of what people don't realize - city centers and old neighborhoods will have houses of vastly different ages (my town's center has houses that were built this year next to houses that are almost 200 years old).

But most of the houses in America aren't those. They're in developments of different ages, and the houses in those developments look roughly the same. You might notice some differences in the very old 40s developments, because of 80 years of additions and remodeling, but most of the houses will have survived and few will have been rebuilt.

When a city builds up slowly, you get many different things mixed together, and that is more interesting.

Re: The mid in fake midcentury modern

#428

Post by antiterra » Wed, Dec 07, 2022, 10:38 PM UTC

SoftTalker wrote: post #394

gfxgirl wrote: post #267

This is the equivalent to "why does modern music suck" (said by every generation of the next generation's music) Scott Alexander posted something similar https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/whither-tartaria And the response he got was arguably predictable..., others didn't agree that modern architecture is ugly. Sure there are some ugly buildings. But, for example, for me. I went to some 1929 building that I'm sure…

Modern (popular) music sucks because it's not human. It's produced by software, quantized, gridded, autotuned, copy/pasted, and though the result is technically perfect, it isn't human. Modern architecture is the same. It's copy/paste design, assembled by software, the human element is gone. When buildings were designed by artists on paper there was no avoiding the designer's humanity and creativity being infused int…

Music produced by software that’s quantized and gridded has been some of my favorite stuff for decades and listening to it does the same thing any recorded music can do such: remind me of something, occasionally teach me something new, be a tool for growth or mourning or comfort. Something being virtuousic or analog or raw doesn’t necessarily make it good. Simplicity or rigidness is not inherently bad. sometimes you want Raphael instead of Bosch. You may want The Knife instead of Fleetwood Mac, or Parry Grip instead of Paganini.

There was a time that the pinnacle of stereotypically bad music was Girl From Ipanema on an elevator. Except it’s a great song, even played for muzak.

Compound that with how the barriers around genre have gotten so much more flexible that you can chart with a Nine Inch Nails + Billy Ray Cyrus + Hip Hop song, and it kinda seems like we’re in a golden age.

Re: The mid in fake midcentury modern

#429

Post by bombcar » Wed, Dec 07, 2022, 10:43 PM UTC

nemo44x wrote: post #189

Jackim wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you saying that Victorian homes, as a rule, are aesthetic disasters? I'm curious to learn more about this as it's not something I've heard before. If you have any recommended reading about that I'd greatly appreciate it.

A lot of people refer to them as the "late 19th century McMansion". They were built with intricate looking woodworking which was available suddenly to a lot more people due to the mechanization of woodworking tools. It didn't require a craftsman to spend days carving things like it used to which made those types of details only available to the truly wealthy. The beginning of 20th century was a complete rejection of…

In support of this, actually doing detailed tours of many "victorian houses" and then compare them to actual mansions of the era shows significant differences.

Like our McMansions of today, the houses often combine aspects that on their own can be nice in ways that don't quite "fit".

Re: The mid in fake midcentury modern

#430

Post by bombcar » Wed, Dec 07, 2022, 10:44 PM UTC

throw33away wrote: post #312

recursivedoubts wrote: post #5

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 (…

I think new playgrounds are much better now than when I grew up in the 80s. The new ones in 80s did have some good things going for them but there is much more variety now and they look great.

Playgrounds passed a point somewhere in the late 90s where suddenly it was cheap enough to manufacture quite interesting climbing things, and so you suddenly went from the basic swings + slide + weird steel tower thing to complex adventure sets.

https://www.byoplayground.com/products/koala-keep for example