|
Phanatic posted:Or more usually, looking like half-melted rear end and being a nightmare to use. Okay, that's more accurate. I'm not a fan of either.
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 02:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 09:12 |
|
|
Phanatic posted:Nothing "happened" to them, they're part of the toolset. Nothing "happened" to classical concepts of art, but the world of art encompasses more than just those things. Yes but you don't see people trying to use a Calder as a park bench or a ceiling fan.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 13:29
|
|
|
The Skeleton King posted:What happened to the classical concepts of architecture? What happened to columns, arches, vaulted ceilings, domes, pillars, buttresses, statues, fancy doors and windows, and all the fine detail you get with it? Why is the modern idea of architecture just walls of glass/concrete or buildings that are made in unnatural, nonfunctional shapes. When did basic geometry become uncool? I thought people liked older styles of architecture, which is why people want to go and visit places like France and Italy. Progress of all kinds requires experimentation, and sensibilities also change. It's possible to appreciate more than one approach to architecture; whilst I love the high gothic cathedrals of my native England, and the detail and ingenuity that goes into them, I can also appreciate things like the Seagram Building, or the Rothko Chapel. Post-modern architecture attempts to explore ways of delineating space without recourse to the regular, structured approaches of the past. Is it successful? Sometimes. Similarly, not everything from the Renaissance was successful. It's very easy to romanticise the past. What remains of its architecture—the cathedrals and duomos and suchlike—often represents the pinnacle of achievement in that style; the half-assed stuff, the unremarkable stuff, has all been demolished to make way for newer things. Furthermore, architecture is locale-dependent. A cathedral built in the Vertical Gothic style in the middle of Tulsa would look absurd. Pushing the boundaries of the high gothic style winds you up with The Sagrada Família, which many people love (and personally I consider hideous), and it's a hugely important building in terms of the evolution of style. It is, however, an experiment, and opinion is still divided as to its success. Ultimately: not all change is progress, but all progress requires change. Some will love it; some will hate it. Jeherrin fucked around with this message at 14:04 on Dec 4, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 14:02
|
|
|
Jeherrin posted:I'm not sure I agree wholly. Buildings can still have sculptural qualities aside from functional ones. It doesn't make Zaha Hadid an intrinsically poo poo architect, it just means that she is poo poo at providing workable solutions. The question, of course, is whether architecture as a practice can, ever, exist independently of the requirements of a building. It's like there's fail-over if it's sexy. Bad architecture is good art is good architecture.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 14:08
|
|
|
Jeherrin posted:I'm not sure I agree wholly. Buildings can still have sculptural qualities aside from functional ones. It doesn't make Zaha Hadid an intrinsically poo poo architect, it just means that she is poo poo at providing workable solutions. The question, of course, is whether architecture as a practice can, ever, exist independently of the requirements of a building. Architecture independent of the requirements of a building is called sculpture. If you can make things that look nice but are not useful as buildings then congratulations on being an artist but you're a failure as an architect.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 14:34
|
|
|
The Skeleton King posted:What happened to the classical concepts of architecture? What happened to columns, arches, vaulted ceilings, domes, pillars, buttresses, statues, fancy doors and windows, and all the fine detail you get with it? Why is the modern idea of architecture just walls of glass/concrete or buildings that are made in unnatural, nonfunctional shapes. When did basic geometry become uncool? I thought people liked older styles of architecture, which is why people want to go and visit places like France and Italy. Human labour is expensive, materials are cheap. A handful of skilled construction workers can with modern tech and materials do what you'd need hundreds of unskilled labourers and masonry-workers to do in the past. A few hundred skilled construction workers can make things you couldn't even conveieve of in the past. The tradeoff is that modern tech makes modern buildings. It's kind of like asking "Why don't people make classical operas in the style of Wagner anymore?" Well, we already have the actual operas made by the actual Wagner, and to be honest I'd rather go see one of the many good modern bands play live than watch a piece by some wannabe romantic composer. It's not like this is decided centrally though, so maybe things will change. Roy fucked around with this message at 15:08 on Dec 4, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 15:06
|
|
|
Cacator posted:I was in Macau last month and this monstrosity looms over the city: At night, the entire thing lights up like a giant penis lighthouse. And the giant bulb at the bottom? Letters will be written in horribly colourful letters. And then entire thing lies immediately behind the main bus terminal, so EVERYONE sees the drat thing all the time.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 15:35
|
|
|
I guess you guys are right. Still, it doesn't excuse poo poo like what Gerhy does.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 16:02
|
|
|
The Skeleton King posted:I guess you guys are right. Still, it doesn't excuse poo poo like what Gerhy does. Is it a deliberate act of disrespect that the h in his name keeps jumping around in your posts but never lands where it should?
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 17:32
|
|
|
RagnarokZ posted:At night, the entire thing lights up like a giant penis lighthouse. And the giant bulb at the bottom? Letters will be written in horribly colourful letters. Uhh, not EVERYONE hangs around behind the Macao main bus terminal all hours.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 17:39
|
|
|
The Sagrada Familia is amazing it's like something out of a weird future where we're all hyper-evolved slug people with giant brains.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 17:47
|
|
|
GotLag posted:"She's not poo poo at architecture, just poo poo at providing workable solutions" as if providing workable solutions isn't what an architect is supposed to do. While I understand and to degree agree with your point, consider this: Sometimes, a city or organisation wants a large decorative statement that doubles as a museum or airport or whatever. For these occasions, form might well be more important than function - so effectively they want a sculptor who works in the medium of buildings. We tend to call those people architects.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 17:55
|
|
|
The Canadian War Museum looks like one of the spaceships from Independence Day
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 18:44
|
|
|
Computer viking posted:While I understand and to degree agree with your point, consider this: Ftfy. A really good architect should be able to deliver the form without horribly compromising the function.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 19:02
|
|
|
therattle posted:A really good architect should be able to deliver the form without horribly compromising the function. So not Gehry.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 19:05
|
|
|
Computer viking posted:While I understand and to degree agree with your point, consider this: how do you people grasp that the issue folks are having is that the buildings look cool but are useless and thus they failed as architects.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 05:00
|
|
|
Arcsquad12 posted:The Canadian War Museum looks like one of the spaceships from Independence Day What's the morse code say? E:NM. I got less lazy. "Lest we forget" and its French equivalent, "N'oublions jamais".
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 05:22
|
|
|
TheMadMilkman posted:So not Gehry. Definitely not.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 10:47
|
|
|
Lt. Tanaka posted:Great link by the way. This reminds me of the Tampa airport for some reason.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 10:54
|
|
|
Groovelord Neato posted:how do you people grasp that the issue folks are having is that the buildings look cool but are useless and thus they failed as architects. I think he's disagreeing on what the fundamental purpose of an architect is
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 11:12
|
|
|
Bogan Krkic posted:I think he's disagreeing on what the fundamental purpose of an architect is I think he's confused on what the fundamental purpose of an architect is. No one e-mails an architect, "I need something that'll triple my turn over and which people will avoid using at all costs."
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 11:16
|
|
|
I bet there's plenty of government bodies that want a building to make a statement or leave a legacy or improve an area aesthetically but don't give a poo poo at all what the building does or if it can do anything
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 11:32
|
|
|
Accretionist posted:I think he's confused on what the fundamental purpose of an architect is. No, but sometimes people decide "we want something so bizarre and dramatic it will be a tourist attraction in itself, and gently caress the people who have to work in there". Catering to that niche takes a certain set of sculpture-like skills that for good or bad are also classed as architecture. I'd be up for reclassifying Ghery and Hadid and their ilk as House Sculptors or something to separate what they do from the more sensible meaning of architecture, though "house sculptor" sounds unbearably hipster and I'm open for better suggestions. It's kind of like how some people will happily pay a large premium for a fancy lamp or chandelier designed by a big name even if it's kind of bad at actually lighting a room. A designer can simultaneously be bad at lighting and good at making showpieces that happen to be excused as lamps - and I'm not sure if that averages out to being a bad designer. Computer viking fucked around with this message at 11:52 on Dec 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 11:33
|
|
|
Architist?
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 11:42
|
|
|
Default Settings posted:Architist? With the -tist from "elitist"? It has a certain charm.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 11:53
|
|
|
Wankitecht? Indulgineer?
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 12:03
|
|
|
A non-Disney Imagineer.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 12:05
|
|
|
Formulator
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 12:13
|
|
|
Egonomist?
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 12:13
|
|
|
Here's a good one: Con Men.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 12:22
|
|
|
Anarchist-tect
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 12:45
|
|
|
poo faces
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 13:23
|
|
|
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_eye/2014/08/29/carbuncle_cup_2014_shortlist_for_britain_s_worst_building_design.html I sort of like the brutalist parking garage.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 13:55
|
|
|
Computer viking posted:No, but sometimes people decide "we want something so bizarre and dramatic it will be a tourist attraction in itself, and gently caress the people who have to work in there". Catering to that niche takes a certain set of sculpture-like skills that for good or bad are also classed as architecture. I worked as an interior architecture photographer's assistant for a few months, you wouldn't believe the number of people who buy expensive things because there's a name attached even though they're bad at their stated purpose. uncomfortable chairs, dim lamps, etc. that cost thousands. Then there's the interior designers that just jam as much expensive stuff into a room as they can. My friend is an architect, he said they unofficially study Geryh  as the supreme example of form over function. Just imagine trying to run HVAC or water piping anywhere in those 'gilded turd' interiors.
red19fire fucked around with this message at 18:33 on Dec 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 18:31
|
|
|
Lt. Tanaka posted:http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_eye/2014/08/29/carbuncle_cup_2014_shortlist_for_britain_s_worst_building_design.html Vauxhall Tower is beautiful in that picture, why is it on that list of nominees?
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 18:46
|
|
|
My dad shared this gingerbread house on facebook today and I thought of all you guys.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 19:03
|
|
|
Good thing he didn't make a Frank Gehry gingerbread house. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 19:18
|
|
|
red19fire posted:I worked as an interior architecture photographer's assistant for a few months, you wouldn't believe the number of people who buy expensive things because there's a name attached even though they're bad at their stated purpose. uncomfortable chairs, dim lamps, etc. that cost thousands. Then there's the interior designers that just jam as much expensive stuff into a room as they can. I forget who it was but someone from Artek stated in an interview that if their furniture wasn't ludicrously priced, no-one would buy it because if you're going to buy a reasonably-priced plywood chair, you may as well get the ultra-cheap knock-off from Ikea and they can't compete with that. e: They're actually both pragmatic and reasonably comfortable though. I'm sitting on a fifties Aalto stool (which I inherited) as I'm typing this. 3D Megadoodoo fucked around with this message at 19:40 on Dec 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 19:33
|
|
|
The B_36 posted:Vauxhall Tower is beautiful in that picture, why is it on that list of nominees? Probably something along the lines of being unfit for purpose. Could you imagine living in a house shaped like a pizza slice? You'd have wasted space everywhere.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 19:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 09:12 |
|
|
Neoclassicism is the ketchup of architecture.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 20:19
|
|
