We've seen your monuments and skyscrapers, now post the most vapid, spiritless, city "art" from your country

We've seen your monuments and skyscrapers, now post the most vapid, spiritless, city "art" from your country.

This cost $500,000 from a German designer.

Other urls found in this thread:

google.fi/maps/@60.1548009,24.9195262,37a,20y,30.43h,78.18t/data=!3m1!1e3
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

>giving money to Germans for """art"""

Why?

Jesus christ. It`s awful.

...

...

is he a german or a (((german)))?

at least that's a part of your culture and not just a blue circle

Whoever is in charge of Calgary's city art purchases must hate the city, or must be doing it for money laundering
Here's another local favourite

...

This shit

lol more like hollywEEd ammirite?

>art simulator 2017

That's not so bad

the only art we have

There's worse although that does look like Sebastian aka the brutalist "sculptor" who's an expert at maximizing kickbacks to corrupt politicians so his lousy dumb fuck "art" is everywhere. Pictured is actually considered one of Mexio's city "landmarks" it's a fucking blight on the city.

...

I like that one desu

Pictured is his worse, it's offensive on so many levels even as a white guy I want to kill the motherfuker.

I know but thats actually a ventilation system for the sewer

You may think
> you must be abnormal to use those stairs

Untill you realise only normal people can walk stairs

I'm well aware of that, it certainly doesn't excuse not putting something in more tasteful in that place although I guess what really irritates me about the caballito is it's replacing the statue of Carlos IV, although in all fairness I like it better where it is now (let's not talk about the whole restauration fiasco) even if apparently no one cares about despoiling Reforma out of all classic and baroque elements.

But really there's no way to excuse leaving aside the poor taste and the ofense you could have used the 30 million pesos they threw at that thing on just filling that area with trees, maybe even buying some terrain to open a couple of real parks in that area. You would still have enough left to do some architectural remediation on the facades in that avenue and even to buy some white marble blocks for INBA students to do a couple of nice statues to add to the new gardens.

But ofc they don't give a fuck about taste, much less improving the urban environment for the people who have to live there, something monumental, even if it's hideous, probably made for some great pictures. It's how the fuck we ended with pictured, another example of something I wouldn't mind seeing torn down. Like there isn't enough visual pollution in that area.

It looks awful

...

the WWII Memorial of the Victims of German Invasion
it's not only butt ugly, it even caused series anal pain for some libtards who say this memorial was erected by the current right wing government to downplay the Hungarian government's part in the deportation process of the Jews during the final year of WWII

stop
m8 do you even know who is luis barragan?

do yourself a favor ffs
besides, this monument wasnt constructed as it was designed iirc, the colors are off

The sculpture outside of the Kimbell Art Museum in Fort Worth, Texas.

(Picture 1, front?)

The sculpture outside of the Kimbell Art Museum in Fort Worth, Texas.

(Picture 2, back?)

It's a damn shame since the Kimbell is a great museum.

What did the """""artist""""" meant by that?

Near-enough everything built after the First World War is simply dreadful and must be swept away.

why is that offensive? is it because it's red?

>luis barragan
I don't see what's so special in his works.

...

Sometimes it's urinating, sometimes not. They even keep moving it around between a couple spots, don't know where you'll run into it. It's, I don't know man

finns are european after all

Why doesn't this disgusting shit get knocked down by angry Finns?

...

its special, because he developed an archiectural languge that explores humans emotions of serenity, with meticulous detail and dominion of light, and human scale, and mantaining a vernacular palette of materials and colors in a time where international soulless architecture took over everything he managed to pull off purity of form respecting context


(you may be aware that building something is not the same as painting a canvas)

...

someone please post the literal vagina russia sent us to commemorate 9/11
I don't know if it was supposed to be a subtle insult or something but I get butthurt every day when I see it

How much does 9 meters of concrete and steel weigh

>$500,000

How is that even possible?

Just smash the legs with a sledge hammer, the Germans had at the Berlin Wall.

I know who the man is, I'm the one who's posted pics from his Mexico City home here, the torres de satelite however are shit, I've driven through there, they're a fucking eyesore.

Maybe if you clad the complex in stone and put some gardens in the top so at least you have something like ivy coming down. or some water features, you might be able to save them through intervention. But as it is they're depressive and ugly in waht is already an urban nightmare. Have you actually seen this firtshand?

Has anybody ever walked up to the middle of that and take a poo off the edge of it?

>he makes ugly, meaningless shit, then lies and claims it's beautiful and meaningful
>pretentious wankers are dumb enough to believe this nonsense
How is this any different to the other degenerates? You can find ugly, meaningless shit in any nation on Earth. This work is an example of the disease of international soullessness, not any resistance to it.

The place it's at now isn't very prominent anyway, it's next to these drab looking buildings. Actually they don't seem to be moving it around just like that, but it was originally in another place. Now it's way out there google.fi/maps/@60.1548009,24.9195262,37a,20y,30.43h,78.18t/data=!3m1!1e3

...

So fucking ugly and day

This one isn't great but I don't think it's terrible either. Try this instead though, right in Melbourne

True to form desu, Melbourne is such a pozz-hole.

If they're incapable of making thought provoking, inspiring, practical or even "cool" why fund them? why turn your cities and towns into a fucking dildo?

Its the jew im telling ya.

That looks pretty nice though. Really made me think.

I hope you meant this one:
Which, granted, while it's not good, is perhaps the least offensive thing in this thread.

A giant chicken bone in my former high school.
Is worth as much as a Ferrari (€250 000).

theyre shit because the context is shit

no need to believe. human scale and emotion through space are the most common subjects in architecture. nothing meaningless about shit that has been studied for centuries. look for vitruvius: de architectura

It's literally always the jews.

folk art is even shittier than jewish desu

>worth
>cost
Different things.
It cost a lot, but it's only worth its sale price as scrap metal.

The difference is that what was being built centuries ago looks good, and what has been built in the last century does not look good. You can pull out all the theory you want, the fact remains, undeniable: Barragan's work is dog-shit. Modernism is dog-shit. It takes some nerve to pull out Vitruvius in defence of this rubbish.

Can someone actually explain what's offensive about it, because I don't understand.

this one looks pretty cool to be honest.

o-ok senpai

i didnt pull out vitruvius to defend anyone you fucktard.
according to you modern architedcture is spoused with meaningless shit, as if it were similar to what happens in painting

nothing farther from truth. it is modern that actually brought back discipline and classical values to architecture.even if it deviated into international style, even if it wont age well due to lack of ornament...modern put emphasis on studies of classicism again. you can read a fucking book sometime, you'd knoe

while im not taking any stance like you pleb, the truth is that postmodern is the real degeneration, many times filled with meaningless shit, while modern ideology was very solid and clearcut in its roots.

You don't have to break through the concrete and steel.
You just have to compromise the structure.
Think 9/11. What would theterrorists do?

They had Allah with them, context was slightly different.

They built this thing by one of the freeways near where I live. It's also kinda disorienting because even though it's clearly too small to be an actual building, it's still weirdly tall. And above all I'm at a loss as to why it exists in the first place

>everything must be figurative, literal, meaningful and stroke *my* ego
And that's why too much vidya is bad.

>Flag

Opinion discarded

Well, most public art is intended to be devoid of meaning, to decrease the risk of it offending anyone. That's why most of it is designed by graphic designers, rather than artists.

It's meant to be purely decorative, and in many cases, it also is. In other cases, it ends up unaesthetic and "soulless" like in some of these pics.

I don't play vidya. And wtf just imagine it a FUCKIN GIANT CHICKEN BONE PAINTED IN PINK AND GREY

The movement that brought back discipline and classical values is Neoclassicism, not Modernism. Neoclassical architecture is good. Despite its lack of adherence to classical standards, Neogothic architecture is also good.

Indeed pretty much all architecture more sophisticated than tribal dwellings, up to ~1920 was, with perhaps the exception of the German Biedermeier movement (at least, the interiors), if not "good", then at least not repulsive. Even some Art Deco and Art Nouveau buildings are tolerable.

But Modernism is disgusting, as is Brutalism, and pretty much everything else since. The best a modern building can hope to be is boring enough to be inoffensive. You have tried to suggest that the classical architectural theories justify awful piles of rubbish. The fact is that it's irrelevant; theoretically unsound architecture of the past has been good, and architecture of the more recent past and the present, that you call theoretically justified, is not good. Something has gone wrong and it doesn't appear to be a matter of theory.

It's rather ironic that you accuse me of plebeian sensibility while speaking in favour of what is architecture's equivalent of communist revolution - a destruction of all that is good, true and beautiful, a debasing, a degrading, a bringing down of everything lofty to the filthiest proletarian depths. You and your beloved "architects" are nothing more than petty vandals, leaving dirty stains upon the great cities of man.

No, personally I would settle for pretty, it's one thing to be inclussive and allow for different conceptions of beauty, it's another to impose ugly on pleasing a fringe minority.

Art is primarily concerned with aesthetics, losing sight of that is simply dishonest.