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

Most people prefer traditional architecture

worksinprogress.news

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 383 posts

Re: Most people prefer traditional architecture

#281

Post by hardbass »

Nursie wrote: post #276
hardbass wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not an architect or high priest of anything.

No, but it appears you are part of a pretty small minority.

I find it very irritating looking at fake or overdone things. I don't think that's minority. Each era of architecture was suited in some way to the building materials and technology of it's time. I do not understand this movement to rob concrete, steel and plywood of it's natural voice and force it to conform to design styles made for different substances and tech.

Re: Most people prefer traditional architecture

#282

Post by mrweasel »

hardwaregeek wrote: post #96

Perhaps there’s a difference between what people prefer looking at and what’s actually nicer to inhabit? Architecture is optimizing for people inhabiting the building, not just staring at it in a photograph. It’s like if you asked someone to judge a phone based on a photo. Yes there’s some aesthetic judgement but it matters more if the phone is usable. I know that personally I find New York’s prewar buildings more be…

This is probably entirely fixable, but I don't do particularly well in modern homes. When we looked for a house, we specifically didn't want one built after 2000 (or there about). The indoor climate in many modern homes, and hotels as well, triggers something. Maybe it's allergies, maybe I don't do well in dry, recycled air, I don't know, but living in a newly built house would mean having a constant running nose and red eyes.

From a energy conservation point of view I get it, but something in my also tells me that pressure testing houses is a bit off. I don't think I'm meant to live in an airtight box with an HVAC system.

Re: Most people prefer traditional architecture

#283

Post by keiferski »

hardwaregeek wrote: post #96

Perhaps there’s a difference between what people prefer looking at and what’s actually nicer to inhabit? Architecture is optimizing for people inhabiting the building, not just staring at it in a photograph. It’s like if you asked someone to judge a phone based on a photo. Yes there’s some aesthetic judgement but it matters more if the phone is usable. I know that personally I find New York’s prewar buildings more be…

Architecture built today is mostly optimizing for the developers’ budget and the local regulations.

Re: Most people prefer traditional architecture

#284

Post by mschuetz »

nl wrote: post #217
kelseyfrog wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You would have to convince the design community that form can follow things other than function. Until form is no longer synonymous with function, design will eschew ornamentation.

Zaha Hadid and Frank Gehry would like a word. Taste is subjective, but is there really a more beautiful building in the world than the Heydar Aliyev Center?

Just looked it up, and I find it rather bland. It's not bad, but not great either, and the immediate surroundings are barren and boring.

Re: Most people prefer traditional architecture

#285

Post by hardbass »

saimiam wrote: post #51
petsfed wrote: post #43

Next thing you're gonna tell me that English speakers overwhelmingly prefer novels written in English. Cultures have visual languages just the same as they have written and spoken (and signed) languages. The crucifix symbol has an understood meaning in most European cultures, because of how foundational Christianity is to their cultures. Is it really so surprising that people prefer buildings in a visual language the…

Seems to me that your positions are in opposition to each other. 1. There’s a traditional visual language that people instinctively prefer. 2. Modern architectural sensibilities have superseded traditional visual language through repetition. I’m reading this to mean something like “people like their own traditional foods but since they've been drowning in pizza for the last 70 years, they’ve forgotten about their tra…

Building design is not sex.

Re: Most people prefer traditional architecture

#286

Post by spwa4 »

Al-Khwarizmi wrote: post #278
hardwaregeek wrote: post #96

Perhaps there’s a difference between what people prefer looking at and what’s actually nicer to inhabit? Architecture is optimizing for people inhabiting the building, not just staring at it in a photograph. It’s like if you asked someone to judge a phone based on a photo. Yes there’s some aesthetic judgement but it matters more if the phone is usable. I know that personally I find New York’s prewar buildings more be…

I would argue that the inner spaces are also nicer in traditional architecture. Taller ceilings where those of us who are tall can walk below a hanging lamp without hitting anything, or just stretch, taller windows that let more light in, etc. Obviously no one likes having a small or no elevator, or poor insulation, but that's related to technological progress, not aesthetic trends. If we kept building in the traditi…

Yep. Simple, ~20m2-30m2 square boxes, densily packed (with ideally thick walls) is by far the easiest kind of space to use. Then maybe one 50m2 for having a big living room.

> In fact, at least in my (small) city, fully renovated old buildings ... are where the most expensive flats per m2 are. Considerably more than in new buildings.

Isn't that because of location? These places tend to be right next to the rail/bus station in the middle of the city.

Re: Most people prefer traditional architecture

#287

Post by dfdydx »

Theodores wrote: post #173
boh wrote: post #61

Modernism is the act of using cheaper resources and more standardized/cheaper methods of production. The aesthetic is more of a side-effect of those limits. Ugliness has become a cultural norm in order to suit the modern economy. It may come as a surprise but it required years of cultural development and education for most people to accept the work of Dieter Rams as some aesthetic pinnacle rather than soulless mass p…

In Europe we had this minor disagreement in 1914, which we would prefer not to talk about. One consequence of this was the decimation of skilled craftsmen. Millions of them were sent off to become machine-gun fodder, to never return to their respective trades. Along with them was their craft. The next generation of apprentices never had the mentors they needed, hence that was that, the end of what you might call trad…

Yet buildings from the 20s and 30s, after the apparent death of all skilled craftsmen made it impossible, used elaborate ornament eg art deco.

Re: Most people prefer traditional architecture

#288

Post by torginus »

asdff wrote: post #127
torginus wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think most developers have a captive market. They don't really compete, they build whatever they want, and still sell, because somebody somewhere will still buy, since they know they can sell for more.

The units are basically commodities. Same floor plans same amenities same building about the same rent. True across the country for these sort of newer buildings, only real difference is the pool doesn't close for the season for those in milder climates. It is designed to be this way for investors more than consumers. Investors want these units to be as fungible as possible so they can better compare local market dyn…

> Investors want these units to be as fungible as possible so they can better compare local market dynamics. Commodity trading has a lot of advantages for the investor after all.

I think you hit the nail on the head. Lot of the finance machine works on standardization, like the are some building techniques, like spray-on insulation that work perfectly fine, but banks wont approve a loan on a building like that because its hard to inspect and repair.

This ironically makes these crappy buildings built to investor standards expensive, since banks will give cheap loans for it, on account of having low maintenance costs.

Of course all this exists only on paper.

Re: Most people prefer traditional architecture

#289

Post by jojobas »

analog31 wrote: post #236
boh wrote: post #61

Modernism is the act of using cheaper resources and more standardized/cheaper methods of production. The aesthetic is more of a side-effect of those limits. Ugliness has become a cultural norm in order to suit the modern economy. It may come as a surprise but it required years of cultural development and education for most people to accept the work of Dieter Rams as some aesthetic pinnacle rather than soulless mass p…

Modern materials and production methods eliminated the need for ornamentation to prove a craftsman's skill and attention to detail. I'm thinking of something like a violin. You can't pick up a violin and judge the perfection of the fitting between the wood surfaces that are glued together. If that work isn't perfect, the instrument will eventually fly apart. But you can look at the "scroll" and "bees sting" which are…

There's plenty of traditional architecture that's not baroque, and is therefore not very rich in ornamentation. An austere brick home with a tiled roof still wins over a modernist cube house in both form and function, if not cost.
Post reply on HN