Why dont we build cool stuff anymore?

why dont we build cool stuff anymore?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erich_Mendelsohn
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Communism.

wtf are you talking about

this building is sooooo fucking cool

More like capitalism

People want to prop up these shitty buildings as soon as possible to start making a profit
Why would they waste money on making the building look good?

It starts to catch on again, check out art nouveau.

We do, just no your country.

Its expensive and the money is (((better))) spent placating brown people

Because it's all going to be ruined by shitskins anyway.

It's too expensive.
I'm serious. Most governments don't give enough of a shit to fund projects like they used to, and the private corporations go for the cheapest design they can.
The eternal Jew in every one of us ruined architecture.

Not profitable enough in the short term, the costs of large projects are generally available to a large public instead of a few private figureheads, shareholders, etc. Also in general inefficient to build, takes tons of bureaucracy in general to organize. Really you should have used a picture of some megaproject instead of just some building.

Because our culture is dead and we live in the rotting carcass of a former high culture.
Ever wonder why the sumerians stopped building zigguats, the pre-egyptians stopped building pyramids and the romans stopped building colloseums?
Our high culture is done and over.

In germany they even remove the plaster from old buildings to make them look more ugly.

The idea came from a guy called (((Erich Mendelsohn)))
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erich_Mendelsohn


>a Jewish German architect, known for his expressionist architecture in the 1920s, as well as for developing a dynamic functionalism in his projects for department stores and cinemas. Mendelsohn is a pioneer of the Art Deco and Streamline Moderne architecture, notably with his 1921 Mossehaus design.

His way is make old stuff ugly or tear it down and replace it with something ugly.

Because we dont have the talent to build them, the style is too decadent for modern tastes and we dont build beutiful stuff anymore, just "efficient" dsigns.

Boils down to money cost

It used to actually be cheap, particularly after we started mass producing, but someone decided that the old way of building wasnt good so we switched to modernism

Nowdays, if you want to build something in traditional style, you need to hire a lot of specialists because traditional style is no longer the mainstream, making the prices go up.

TL:DR
Old knowledge that is now lost knowledge, making it cost more to fund traditional architecture

American neo-urbanism is an absolute failure. It has some good ideas but fails in delivering by relying on cheap, tacky, and disposable construction techniques and lack of coherent styles

We really need to make a stand and reclaim our old urban centers in the Northeast. This property cycle needs to end. Not gentrification, not weak pseudobohemianism but prepared colonism

It's cheaper to build shitting things

>anything
>too decadent for modern tastes

You took a time machine or something son?

Your critic is spot on user, but remember , the US is a still a very young country, and you can see this mix-up of different architectures in all civilization, it takes time for a culture to really create a distintive architectural style.

Here in the american continent, we basically mix up the designs of the old world, with very little original ideas.

Coliseums are like, the pinnacle of low-culture, at least what they were used for. Also Art Deco isn't all terrible, some of the stuff in the US in the 20s and 30s is pretty good, about the last wave of consistently good and culturally significant looking buildings I can think of, like the Empire State Building, Chrysler Building, etc.

My Taco-Delorean is waiting outside of my house, LOL.

The men of today are feminised faggots

...

It's a step in the right direction, we wont achieve a coherent theme or style for a city unless one is proven and agreed upon by most architects and city council, its just the way it works

Or you could simply install a central authority like a fascist state or a monarchy and the problem would be instantly solved

You are correct aswell, it does boil down to a shift in old styles to this new modernist style

Jugend has been arround for a while and it's a welcomed change but it's hardly on its way to become mainstream

niggers ruin everything

my town has few niggers and we build nice things all the time. had a trump rally here with 0 protesters

I drive past this basket a few times a year. It's magnificent.

downtown (all new construction)

You can't make North American cities look good, they're not catered to humans, they're catered to cars.

The only solution is to turn half of the streets into pedestrian walkways, bike lanes and building plots but you guys think cars are the greatest shit ever and will never want to give them up. Cars ruined cities, this is just a fact, get rid of cars and cities improve.

Carmel, Indiana (and Indiana in general) is truly the greatest place

It doesn't necessarily look bad but its nothing compared to European cities architecture

Miles ahead of rest of USA though

because we're busy giving ourselves visual depression by building shit like this

Market driven, functionalism >>>> aesthetics these days. It's fucking terrible, I know.

It looks clean, but it looks like shit to me like sterile and no real artistic design

To busy being all one with the niggers that destroy everything.

i think this is a very well thought out answer and has a lot of merit behind it. i like it,but im not giving up muh car

why.jpg

capital ism

Maybe it's not the greatest, but it's still a little slice of heaven in a negrofied America

As someone thinking about becoming architect but only to make traditional buildings, is it even worth pursuing an architect degree today? Will I ever be able to live off designing traditional buildings?

I have two passions in life, which is boats and architecture, and I have applied to both in university, but I want to know whether there is any real future with an architecture degree?

This glass building looks like an unfinished square building in minecraft.

Take the degree and live off state money.
Win-Win

We don't want to inspire, we want to depress

As an architect you will be told by the customer what they want, and then it's your job to make it pretty, you have very little freedom. I don't see why you'd think it'd be different than that.

Ofcourse I understand that but surely there is a lot of independent work such as presenting ideas to city council?

>local governments being allowed to construct things

Limited government.

> is it even worth pursuing an architect degree today?

Everything is regulated to death (unlike when the modernists couped the art, no education whatsoever was needed back then. Corbusier, Gropius etc. had no formal educationj. fug.) so if you want to design traditional buildings you need 1) to be a head of an architect office, with at least 10-20 years work experience as a slave 2) be the guy who pays it all.

>Will I ever be able to live off designing traditional buildings?

Probably, but the road there is unexplored and full of shit. I'm trying to beat it.

>but I want to know whether there is any real future with an architecture degree?

Well, of course you will have work to do, but at first all your works are kind of translations: from oldspeak to newspeak. I need to design cheap and/or globalist shit while wanting to do something completely different. also practically all your student comrades and work partners will be commie/cuck idiots.

There's no profit in it.

Alright thanks, so basically it's a massive grind and hassle until you're a top dog and can start deciding things, I'm really excited at the thought of designing Gothic or Renaissance buildings but I never see any of it built today

I like this one. I think Sup Forumstards only hate post-modern architecture because they want to LARP as nazis.

The future is better, because it's the future. Get that through your thick skulls.

>presenting ideas to city council
You'll only get to make state or government owned buildings if you're famous among architect circles, or if (((someone))) gives you a good reputation when you've in fact no completed projects. All other buildings are made by private companies or rich people.

>>As someone thinking about becoming architect but only to make traditional buildings, is it even worth pursuing an architect degree today?
Unless you're the son of an influential politician or whoever can get you on some proper project, you will be extremely lucky if you get to design the toilet in your professor's building when you're 50.

Other than that, expect doing shitty jobs like signing off on blueprints imported from China, doing energy certificates for buildings, or other pointless bureaucracy. You will never design your own building in your life, except as a hobby.

Fuck off

Commencing dump

That's a very wealthy zip code.

All of the major cities in the Northeast were built around trolleys and most still have the potential for them to be reinstalled. Any reclaiming of cities would require reclaiming of services, public transportation being one.

I'm from Philadelphia so I'm very partial to Georgian and Federal. Not that that I'm advocating for that on a countrywide basis, but it works in the greater Philadelphia metropolitan area and our smaller surrounding cities.

...

It would not be difficult to transform modernist monstrosities into garden-houses. Such buildings could: provide privacy in cities, look "hippie-ish" and be useful.

yea. they built a lot of cheap housing on the east side recently though so it's probably going to go to shit within the next 15 years

It looks like the retarded cousin of real architecture but still a step in the right direction.

Really makes you think..

Looks gay

It spit in the face of Chicago architecture and I love it.

this is beautiful

Spread this to your normie lefty friends, it will activate their pine nuts.

Don't talk shit about Ohio. That building is amazing and you wish your shit state could have it.

No. Architecture is a really different field than how it's conveyed to younger people. I used to want to be an Architect, my grandfather was one, and my father is a city planner and was in historic preservation so I've always been around elements of it. Just do something else that'll give you a disposable income and get into designing, construction, or preservation as a hobby, you'll have a lot more freedom

On the other hand, there is a slowly growing movement of neo-classical architecture, especially in berlin, leipzig, dresden, frankfurt, düsseldorf, hamburg etc and many smaller cities. There are also man reconstruction efforts going on like the Stadtschloss in Berlin, the Frankfurt Old Town, the Dresden Zwinger and the area around the Frauenkirche.

Trump's penises aren't that bad

It is everything that is wrong with architecture nowadays.

Keep dumping im saving all

Louisville Derby fag here. I used to resent the conspiracy that the large blue blood families kept Louisville from growing like Nashville, Indy, or Cincy. Now that I'm older, I get why.

This one activates my almonds every time.

We have modern building techniques that render ornate protrusions obsolete. Old buildings use a lot of expensive and hard to build curves and arches to maintain stability, modern materials and building techniques allow us to build modular cubes.

Modular cubes are cool as fuck.

Spread them around, I don't do social media but it may make a difference.

Cool story, bro.

Look how cool everyone is:

actually it fits in nicely. the curves and color of the building match the river. each tier of the building is the same height as a surrounding building.

It looks better than a lot of other new construction. If only they'd go for better materials, it'd be great!

Cheap material sticks out like a sore thumb with its gimmicky-ness and ghettoizes pretty quick.

...

the decorations and orante flourishes didn't really have a structural function afaik. without aesthetics you are missing on eof the three pillars of vitruvius:

>Firmitas (strength)
>Utilitas (functionality)
>Venustas (beauty)

...

It's like they knew that it will be demolished one day.

They were not sure about the stability, they were just not smart enough to imagine such a thing happening, they were right for the wrong reasons.

Architectural education decided to abandon all tradition and focus on making something "new" and disgusting each time so as to avoid all cohesion and culture.

Incidentally these educational establishments are run by Jews.

Looks fucking awful.

Architecture-fags:
Is post-modern architecture purely a product of efficiency (cheap materials, cubic design, etc.) or is it a philosophy centered on rejection of cultural norms defining design?

Yes.... quite the (((coincidence)))

Both

Imagine showing Alexander the Great how an iPhone works.

We have some pretty cool shit man, we're just desensitized to it.

It's meant to turn people into zombies who hate their life, never feel right where they live, and purchase whatever form of escapism they can. The official justifications for it are a bit more flowery.

It goes hand in hand with post modernist philosophy

A lot of them are artistic abstractions of old architectural structures eg: dentils above the triglyphs and metopes of classical architecture represent wooden rafters of archaic wooden temples.

Classical architecture is dead because it is packed with information and history and the average man cares not or lacks the education to appreciate it. Buildings used to be built for the upper classes, but now they are built for the unwashed masses.

Picture shows the organic aspects of gothic and other architectural styles.

Because its cheaper to make shit.

Most of the cosmetic structure in new buildings is Styrofoam.

Learned that the hard way when i had a job installing commercial Christmas lights.

>pic
Is this not just convergent eveolution?
That we independantly discovered structural patterns that nature had already been using for millions of years

...

No architect would admit that it is point 1, but it plays a huge part. Actually, modern architecture is quite expensive. See:

...

The advent of almighty technology has compromised our ability to appreciate, and our incentive, to construct aesthetically pleasing architecture at all levels of society. Technology has not made us much better, its a massive tradeoff overall. Some things have been pretty gnarly, like medical advances, other things, not so much. The nuke for instance has the ability to utterly wipe out the earths ecosystem and weather patterns and shit. It also makes human beings less social, less responsible, less smart in ways, and less close and involved.

Social programs

Some of us do

Chicken or egg.

Check out the progression of architectural expression on this one.

Where is that

Stalin era architecture is aesthetic af, shame they abandoned it in favor of cheap ugly commieblocks.

Really? Antlers instead of a forest with high trees?
Nigger.