Modernism is anti-human 👽🤖 ▶️ Watch the Bring Back Beauty-episode with Michael Diamant & Carl Korsnes at caveofapelles.com, KZfaq, Rumble. 🔉Listen to it on Spotify, iTunes, SoundCloud, Podtail.
Пікірлер: 15
@joedawson7205 Жыл бұрын
True. True where architecture is concerned, art, music, literature, all.
@Nyllsor9 ай бұрын
Fjodor Dostojevskij would agree, his critique of rationalism in 'The Underground Man' even uses architecture as a metaphor, saying something in the lines of that if you build a house which you never imagine anyone living in, it is a destructive part of the pshyche doing its work although it might seem creative.
@some1947 Жыл бұрын
True tho.. if everyone makes buildings that are veery different than the building next to it, the framework would definitely look stupid
@miketackabery7521 Жыл бұрын
This is so true
@marlonjormungand7845 Жыл бұрын
🙌🏼
@blikketty77 Жыл бұрын
If he doesn't know that all of those "classical and traditional" buildings created by religions and monarchies were designed or approved by individual narcissists, he needs to go back to history class.
@blikketty77 Жыл бұрын
@Marcus It's really simple. The further you go back in time, then those buildings were either designed for functionality, or to impress / recruit (whether it be religion or form or government). Nothing gets designed in a vacuum, everything is influenced by that which came before. This applies to all art. So claiming that some era has some magic inspiration that isn't what came before, whether it be the classical buildings he praises or the modern building he despises, is ignorant. Funny how you claim my statement is a absolute but can't see his.
@sebastiantarebustos244 Жыл бұрын
complete nonsense
@miketackabery7521 Жыл бұрын
@@blikketty77OMG just go back to the founders of modernism. They ALL write that all that came before must be jettisoned in the name of rationality. And they did.
@blikketty77 Жыл бұрын
@@miketackabery7521 they may have said it but it's just nonsense. Structurally and functionality wise it was mostly the same old crap, but omg the bldgs looked completely different on the outside because the people with the money to build them were fine with it. Tempest in a teapot , demonizing modernization while worshiping things that were built as a result of or influenced by buildings that were built as a result of even worse people.
@M.A.K.66611 ай бұрын
There is beautiful in simplicity and modesty. True commitment to detail, true usability that comes with self expression trough flexibility and adaptability. Stone structures und the Styles that come with it are often a delusion. These is nothing worse than a „beautiful“ and „ornate“ facade that covers total bulls**t. There is an certain naivety, superficially, especially in Appartement buildings. One could argue that an overbearing building ignores human needs and schales and puts itself in front and above the user, because of Scale and monumentality. Personally I am a fan of light and Air, that means big windows. The mentioned style is not suitable Eiter for flexibility or big windows.
@DrPhd-nm9ex11 ай бұрын
This traditional house are not stylish in my opinion. Too upoty
@troublemak3r1345 ай бұрын
They are objectively stylish, I think you are looking for a different term? Maybe gaudy at times but stylish traditional architecture is a necessity. It has been proven multiple times especially by the university of Oxford that our brains have reduced stress and more creative thinking and better immune systems when in traditional buildings, whether we like traditional or not, it will take a positive effect on us .There is absolutely no way that a human, whose brain was built to love beauty and complexity, does not find traditional architecture beautiful in favour of minimalism or beauty. What is it that you don’t like about traditional architecture? Is it all or just a specific architecture that you had in mind when you heard traditional architecture?