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

31–40 of 382 posts

Re: Most people prefer traditional architecture

#31

Post by georgefrowny »

Joker_vD wrote: post #15

Well then. The solution is obvious: we need to educate the public so that it attains the correct tastes. It's doable: after all, the architecture students do manage to obtain the taste for the modernist architecture during their time in the college/university. Or maybe do nothing, it's not like the public opinion really matters in the technocratic settings.

My theory is they end up preferring buildings that are easy to draw in AutoCAD.

Akin's Law 38: "Capabilities drive requirements, regardless of what the systems engineering textbooks say."

Re: Most people prefer traditional architecture

#32

Post by plorkyeran »

like_any_other wrote: post #19
vel0city wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personally I'd rather spend my time in the building with large windows and tons of natural light than holed up in that dark old castle thing. That prison building is overly stylized to my taste. And given how complex the exterior is and seeing it's state it's obvious it's hard to maintain. Unless you like all the gunk growing all over the building all the time. Is the old building "fancy"? Sure. So is that fragile ch…

Then you're part of the 20% of people who prefer modern styles, for whom 99% of buildings are built. You have plenty of choices, while the rest of us are lied to about why buildings look like they do and why we can't have what we want.

I think the prison looks better from the outside, but if you asked me which building I wanted to spend time in I'd pick the school without hesitation (assuming they were both being repurposed for the same non-school/prison use).

There is a clear preference for other people to build in traditional styles, but as soon as you have to care about more than what the facade looks like from the outside people choose the uglier functional option.

Re: Most people prefer traditional architecture

#33

Post by antisthenes »

perilunar wrote: post #16

There's more to architecture than just the façade, which is what people are rating when they are just looking at photos of the exterior. The interiors, structure, and services, etc. of modern building are often far superior to older ones, and i suspect many 'ordinary' people would agree.

If it's my building, e.g. the building that I live in - I care more about the ease of maintenance and repair than any facade.

Because I spend 80% of my time indoors, and 20% working in the garden, so frankly don't even care what the building looks like.

Maybe only care that the property looks neat when it's time to sell.

As it stands, these studies are just cherry-picked navel gazing with extra steps. You can't design a study like this well. There are hundreds of thousands of buildings, and tens of thousands of variations of subjective preference. And all of those go out of the window as soon as practical concerns (like affordability) arise.

Re: Most people prefer traditional architecture

#35

Post by Analemma_ »

perilunar wrote: post #16

There's more to architecture than just the façade, which is what people are rating when they are just looking at photos of the exterior. The interiors, structure, and services, etc. of modern building are often far superior to older ones, and i suspect many 'ordinary' people would agree.

Yes, every time people get grumpy about modern architecture and look over to see if I agree I tell the story about how I used to work at a company in Boston which moved from a beautiful 19th century building to a soulless Modernist steel-and-glass skyscraper. And thank fucking god: the old building was too hot in the summer, too cold in the winter, had too little natural light, and was too cramped. The Modernist building was better to actually be in in every way. Buildings are there to be used, not just looked at in pictures.

Re: Most people prefer traditional architecture

#36

Post by georgefrowny »

VorpalWay wrote: post #30
Joker_vD wrote: post #15

Well then. The solution is obvious: we need to educate the public so that it attains the correct tastes. It's doable: after all, the architecture students do manage to obtain the taste for the modernist architecture during their time in the college/university. Or maybe do nothing, it's not like the public opinion really matters in the technocratic settings.

I can't tell if this is serious or sarcastic. I'm going to err on the side of serious though. Maybe the majority is actually correct, and traditional architecture is just plain better. I certainly find it more welcoming than the modern concrete and glass box jungle.

I do actually like the "concrete jungle" style like the Barbican and Salk Institute (by all accounts a pleasantly human place to work despite the famously stark-looking courtyard).

I think the biggest problem with them is that the minute you stop maintaining things like gardens in contrast to the concrete and let it get dirty and scarred, it looks apocalyptic and stressful very quickly. Whereas even quite dilapidated neo-classical-ish buildings look innately reasonably pleasing.

Re: Most people prefer traditional architecture

#39

Post by Zigurd »

beachy wrote: post #3

> Respondents preferred the traditional design by 74 percent to 26 percent. There was almost no variation by social class, and only modest variation by political party. Older people were, as in most studies, more traditional than younger people, but even 18–24s still preferred the traditional design by 61 to 39 percent. I might be missing something but isn't this all a bit of a no-brainer? In the old days, buildings…

The worst architecture is a combination of cost optimization and aiming for looking traditional-ish. That's a recipe for future blight.

Re: Most people prefer traditional architecture

#40

Post by nobodywillobsrv »

This feels frustrating.

They are comparing "same buildings" with AI but I would imagine they are not controlling cost.

Imagine gargoyles and metal dragons on drainpipes and all the ornamentation now and how much that would cost.

People prefer ancient dry stone walls over fences but they cost orders of magnitude differently.

I wonder if with robots and what not if we will see a resurgence in detail and ornamentation and other kinds of expensive but nice constructions.

Post reply on HN