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

41–50 of 512 posts

Re: The mid in fake midcentury modern

#41

Post by micromacrofoot »

hcarvalhoalves wrote: post #22
crazygringo wrote: post #8

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…

The rational explanation why the majority of items are neutral tones/grey is because this maximizes the market. This can be seen on automobiles, where silver is the most common color because it’s easier to sell second hand, so manufacturers learned to optimize for this.

Yes exactly. When choosing colors or amenities for my home, my real estate agent and contractors would bristle — "that's not going to be good for resale value"

This has impacts on the industries surrounding as well. If I want a custom siding color, it's going to be more expensive. We're normalizing everything around the most widely palatable, so it's all fairly bland.

Re: The mid in fake midcentury modern

#42

Post by sbaiddn »

pavlov wrote: post #12

Reminds me of the Parisian art critic who was appalled when they built a modernist colossus that destroyed the beautiful harmony of his home city. The rest of his life he would scrupulously choose walking routes to avoid seeing the monstrosity. The building in question was the Eiffel Tower.

Which is a monstrosity.

Re: The mid in fake midcentury modern

#43

Post by twic »

zozbot234 wrote: post #7

Related: Whither Tartaria? https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/whither-tartaria Follow up: https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/highlights-from-the-co...

Scott loves attributing increasing prices to Baumol's cost disease, but I'm not sure I've ever seen him do the work of establishing that it's actually what's happened.

> If stonemasonry is a low-tech industry, and new high-tech industries are arising all around it, stonemason wages could get prohibitively high (compared to everything else) until nobody wants to hire them anymore. This would create pressure for architectural styles that require as little masonry (or, generalized, human labor) as possible.

Stonemasons make about £20 an hour:

https://uk.indeed.com/career/stonemason/salaries

More than an unskilled labourer, but not even twice as much.

Re: The mid in fake midcentury modern

#44

Post by openplatypus »

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 can be signs that you're getting depressed.

Re: The mid in fake midcentury modern

#45

Post by crazygringo »

krona wrote: post #27
crazygringo wrote: post #8

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…

> But otherwise, the answer to most of the rest of the essay is: economics. Correct proportions cost nothing . And that's just for starters.

Were proportions mentioned in the article? I couldn't find it.

But I'm intrigued now -- I thought I've heard all of the complaints about modern design, but I'm not sure I've ever heard anyone say that proportions have gotten worse. What specifically are you referring to?

The only particularly noticeable thing I can think of is cars having gotten more "bulbuous" rather than sleek, but that's entirely due to crumple zones for safety.

Re: The mid in fake midcentury modern

#46

Post by version_five »

ericmay wrote: post #23
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 (…

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…

Two random comments:

1. When I was younger I though brutalist concrete buildings were ugly, now (even if they still are) i find they are usually the most interesting thing in a city core.

2. > Even their own houses typically look like architectural garbage.

Agreed. I can't believe how cheap and ugly so many of the "rich people" houses are. It seems to be a competition for who can have the most different rooflines, and for uses of stone veneer

Re: The mid in fake midcentury modern

#47

Post by red72 »

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 (…

No post body was provided.

Re: The mid in fake midcentury modern

#48

Post by Victerius »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #21
Victerius wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's come to the point where I find some conventionally attractive individuals not particularly interesting. For example, men who look like this: https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQ8c7xV... There are so many men who look like this now, on Instagram and TikTok. It's boring. They all look the same. When everything is beautiful, nothing is.

In real life, most men are nowhere near as good looking outside of some enclaves in SoCal and NYC. Perhaps the look still sells on TikTok and Instagram because that is people’s escape.

You're right, but my point is more about uniformity. Society seems to have tacitly agreed that there's only 3 beautiful looks for everything. You can be beautiful - and by "you", I also mean buildings and inanimate objects -, but only if you fit this narrow criteria.

Give me diversity. Give me creativity.

Re: The mid in fake midcentury modern

#49

Post by phkahler »

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 (…

>> interesting to note that even individual aesthetic disasters like victorian homes, when combined in a neighborhood with common roof-lines, etc. form a charming aesthetic that has been singularly unachievable except in ersatz form since...

I just assumed it's all about cost savings. Architecture has been affected by the race to the bottom as much as anything.

Re: The mid in fake midcentury modern

#50

Post by dr-detroit »

ericmay wrote: post #23
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 (…

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…

No post body was provided.
Post reply on HN