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

The mid in fake midcentury modern

nplusonemag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

501–510 of 512 posts

Re: The mid in fake midcentury modern

#501

Post by idiotsecant »

svieira wrote: post #326
idiotsecant wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It seems more likely that brutalist architecture is uniquely terrible Interesting, it seems to me that brutalist architecture is actually pretty appealing aesthetically. I might go so far as to say that objective beauty and taste simply does not exist and anyone claiming that it does hasn't thought about it very hard yet.

> anyone claiming that it does hasn't thought about it very hard yet. Or maybe you haven't given enough thought to what "beauty" might mean such that it could be objective. Not everyone means by "beauty" "that which I find appealing". Some mean "the will's response to truth": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transcendentals A wonderful example of this is given in _All Hallows Eve_ by Charles Williams: > "Over here," Jon…

I think you've just done a better job proving my point than I ever could.

Re: The mid in fake midcentury modern

#502

Post by throwaway82388 »

crazygringo wrote: post #485
throwaway82388 wrote: post #446

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The question about cars is largely one of personality. Who drives bland cars? People who feel social pressure to not stand out, possibly who feel powerless, or who appreciate anonymity. Who drives flashy cars? People who feel important, who feel in control of their own circumstances and image, who think of themselves as iconoclastic.

Funny, I couldn't disagree more. When I think of "people who feel important, who feel in control of their own circumstances and image" I think of people who choose understated cars, because they're confident in themselves and have nothing to prove or compensate for by feeling the need to show off flashy colors. But when I think of people who are insecure and not getting enough emotional approval elsewhere in their li…

That stereotypical insecure sportscar owner is certainly real. But not every one of them is insecure. Some just feel like they’ve won and deserve the spoils. And of course there are far more variables than I listed. I was just making some sweeping generalizations. I’ve met both. Old money, true to stereotype, tend to drive inconspicuous cars. I’m not old money, but I do the same.

Re: The mid in fake midcentury modern

#503

Post by david927 »

xboxnolifes wrote: post #416
david927 wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a fine, valid rationalization. But I would disagree with one aspect: part of it is that they like it . We don't have fine taste anymore and we don't have a desire to impress in a classical way. It used to be you would recite a Latin phrase at dinner and everyone would be impressed. Those days are gone. When money is king, everything else is demoted.

> It used to be you would recite a Latin phrase at dinner and everyone would be impressed. Those days are gone. Because anyone can do that, it's not impressive. You don't need to have studied Latin to know a Latin phrase. We have google translate and the entire internet. It's no longer an "exotic" thing. Hell, I see people still do things like that, with Latin or some other relevant language. It's weird to think that…

I think you missed my point by taking the example too literally. I'm saying that being well-educated (in a classical sense -- deeply knowing Latin, Greek, Philosophy, Mythology, etc) used to be considered impressive. It would dictate your value, socially, to a large extent.

That has transitioned to being good-looking, along with the amount of your wealth and how you spend it. Education and intellectual endeavors are no longer in the mix.

Re: The mid in fake midcentury modern

#504

Post by david927 »

cjohnson318 wrote: post #380
david927 wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a fine, valid rationalization. But I would disagree with one aspect: part of it is that they like it . We don't have fine taste anymore and we don't have a desire to impress in a classical way. It used to be you would recite a Latin phrase at dinner and everyone would be impressed. Those days are gone. When money is king, everything else is demoted.

De gustibus non est disputandum. The thing about taste is that it's relative.

It's really not -- at least not in the finer things, which is what we're talking about.

Yes, you can enjoy pistachio ice cream; feel free. But the Louvre doesn't choose what it puts on its walls randomly. The curators don't shrug their shoulders and say, "Well, I mean, it is relative."

Re: The mid in fake midcentury modern

#505

Post by atmosx »

bulbosaur123 wrote: post #389
atmosx wrote: post #356

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most buildings in Greece are build by civil engineers. Architects are not needed and rarely involved. The result is very small houses with many rooms and "spaces" but all very small and ugly. For example, it's common to have 3 bedroom in 120m².

Wait, since when is 120m2 considered small for 3 bedrooms? That's quite a large apartment.

Since forever. The 3 bedrooms are box-size, there just enough space for a bedroom, a closet and an office - you can't walk around without bumping.

Re: The mid in fake midcentury modern

#506

Post by com2kid »

sbaiddn wrote: post #497
com2kid wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> On the other hand, 1950s brutalist buildings, by their own architect's admission, are ugly. Plenty of brutalist buildings are not ugly. https://preview.redd.it/1w5r7lmno0491.jpg?width=4032&format=... Interesting uses of lines and perspective, a willingness to have large sweeping architectural shapes that were not possible before, huge stairwells, open air walkways, plenty of windows for natural light. Yes the concr…

Let me guess. A university or a museum. It's.. not pretty. A wannabe portico that is more reminiscent of a jail hallway. Its lined with buttock crushing benches to "rest". As you (necessarily briefly) sit on this bench, at no point are you allowed to fathom that you'll ever escape the concrete that envelops you on every side. Concrete floor. Concrete walls. Concrete ceiling. But! There's hope in the horizon! A few tr…

> But! There's hope in the horizon! A few trees grow in the courtyard. these are the only things that shatters this prison cell. That introduces hope and, yes, beauty. None of it manmade.

It is a wonderful campus to be on. Open air walkways between classes, vines growing everywhere, lots of natural light.

Concrete allowed for playing with new shapes and angles, the beauty is in the flow and dynamism of shapes.

Go browse the top posts of https://www.reddit.com/r/brutalism/top/?t=all plenty of amazing buildings there.

Interiors like https://i.redd.it/e7yucwdqia461.jpg are wonderful to be in, and new technologies in construction materials and techniques made those interiors possible at a much lower price compared to what was possible before.

https://www.reddit.com/r/brutalism/comments/hlqa2l/geisel_li...

That is just cool.

I'm not going to claim Brutalism has a good track record vs art deco or modern styles that incorporate natural material (loved me some mixed textures!) but claiming everything brutalist is ugly is just false.

(another good entry, https://i.redd.it/5volkc9zx4561.jpg)

Re: The mid in fake midcentury modern

#507

Post by bombcar »

throwaway4aday wrote: post #495
bombcar wrote: post #424

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I don't think that the Art Deco style skyscrapers look like crap. I quite enjoy them. I think most modern sky scrapers look like crap because they're all done in a modern style with no decoration. Other styles never really got a chance to express themselves since everything was taken over by the modernist look.

Art Deco are the best, but I wonder how much of that is "the skyscraper looks good" and how much that is "it looks good on the ground".

Re: The mid in fake midcentury modern

#508

Post by cjohnson318 »

david927 wrote: post #504
cjohnson318 wrote: post #380

Earlier quoted context omitted.

De gustibus non est disputandum. The thing about taste is that it's relative.

It's really not -- at least not in the finer things, which is what we're talking about. Yes, you can enjoy pistachio ice cream; feel free. But the Louvre doesn't choose what it puts on its walls randomly. The curators don't shrug their shoulders and say, "Well, I mean, it is relative."

Well, that's a strong opinion. Sounds like you've got everything figured out.

Re: The mid in fake midcentury modern

#509

Post by david927 »

cjohnson318 wrote: post #508
david927 wrote: post #504

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's really not -- at least not in the finer things, which is what we're talking about. Yes, you can enjoy pistachio ice cream; feel free. But the Louvre doesn't choose what it puts on its walls randomly. The curators don't shrug their shoulders and say, "Well, I mean, it is relative."

Well, that's a strong opinion. Sounds like you've got everything figured out.

Are you pointing out my conviction or just signaling the lack of yours?

Re: The mid in fake midcentury modern

#510

Post by cjohnson318 »

david927 wrote: post #509
cjohnson318 wrote: post #508

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, that's a strong opinion. Sounds like you've got everything figured out.

Are you pointing out my conviction or just signaling the lack of yours?

I think that the statement "taste is not relative" is so strong and counterintuitive that it must be thoroughly supported, otherwise it is absurd.
Post reply on HN