Comments on: Saving lives obviously had preference

By: Sam J.

Sam J. — Wed, 16 Sep 2020 03:59:20 +0000

“…Exposed concrete and cinderblock don’t stand up well to the elements…”

It’s my understanding that concrete last just fine it’s the steel rebar reinforcement that rust then cracks it up that’s the problem.

They have rebar made of glass and even better Basalt.

By: Sam J.

Sam J. — Fri, 11 Sep 2020 21:26:11 +0000

I still say some brutalist things are beautiful. They have a bold look to them. It’s a matter of taste. This is beautiful.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-_esFB5WytDQ/UDAfNwW1mXI/AAAAAAAARX0/NGsYHY3aN5c/s1600/1974-pinzgauer-710K-710-K-Steyr-Puch-5-door-station-wagon-military-4×4-5.jpg

I’m not so sure I wouldn’t call this brutalist. It certainly has that taste about it but classic Greek.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e5/Hera_temple_II_-_Paestum_-_Poseidonia_-_July_13th_2013_-_04.jpg/1200px-Hera_temple_II_-_Paestum_-_Poseidonia_-_July_13th_2013_-_04.jpg

By: Dave

Dave — Fri, 11 Sep 2020 19:12:04 +0000

“Some Brutalist buildings have great beauty if you understand they are a machine and that the buildings form is a manifestation of that machine.”

That’s a good way to think when designing a cement factory or sewage-treatment plant, but when building something for the public to interact with, beauty is more than mere functionality. Roger Scruton explains better than I can:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bHw4MMEnmpc

By: RLVC

RLVC — Fri, 11 Sep 2020 01:14:16 +0000

You don't deserve to inherit nothing, citizen.

By: Harry Jones

Harry Jones — Thu, 10 Sep 2020 23:11:04 +0000

Exposed concrete and cinderblock don’t stand up well to the elements. Knock them down after a few decades and it won’t matter.

Sandstone also fares poorly outdoors. All those nice statues and frilly bits turning to formless blobs. Oh, well.

If all things must pass, even a pyramid won’t last. But that’s not a problem if you can just make a new one.

The core of culture is technology: knowing how to put things together. You can’t have nice things if you can’t make nice things.

Holding on to old, worn out things is the mentality of poverty and the spirit of declinism.

Build everything to last at least five years and at most fifty years.

By: Sam J.

Sam J. — Thu, 10 Sep 2020 23:05:30 +0000

“…American buildings should have been Soviet blocks…”

There’s nothing wrong with these buildings at all. Well more accurately they are not perfect but were functional. They should have had more design cycles but people were living in wooden huts and tents. The buildings were a vast step up from that.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khrushchyovka

People degrade cheap housing but it beats “no housing” every time. Ornate buildings no one can afford are useless. You might as well talk about putting everyone up in yachts and how it so horrible everyone doesn’t have a nice yacht.

By: Sam J.

Sam J. — Thu, 10 Sep 2020 22:33:16 +0000

“…Brutalist… What were the builders thinking? Who ever gazed upon a brick or cinder block and said, “I want a whole building that looks like this!…”

There’s absolutely nothing wrong with Brutalism if the building is following the function of the lowest cost for it’s function. Some Brutalist buildings have great beauty if you understand they are a machine and that the buildings form is a manifestation of that machine.

Brutalism for Brutalism’s sake, I don’t agree with that.

Here’s an example in motorcycle form.

http://retrowriteup.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/IMG_7551.jpg

as opposed to

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9e/Rattle_the_Runway_Ride_2009-1.jpg

Of course there is a bit of Brutalism that can look very nice like this.Probably the best compromise.

http://tuscantraveler.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/Italian-Scooters_large.jpg

By: Kirk

Kirk — Thu, 10 Sep 2020 19:22:44 +0000

If you mean the people who constructed the buildings vs. the ones who chose the designs and listened to the oh-so-correct architects, I think you might want to re-examine your premises. The construction guys just execute the plans laid out by the theorists and chosen by the executives, and I’ll guarantee you that the actual builders and worker/craftsmen who laid the bricks and did the work would have rather built something beautiful that they could look at with some sense of pride.

I’m pretty sure that most of the folks who actually worked on that Brutalist architecture shared your opinion on its merit, but since they weren’t the ones writing the checks? It got built to specification.

By: Kurt

Kurt — Thu, 10 Sep 2020 19:21:03 +0000

Most architecture is built to be functional and when it isn’t no one cares if it’s torn down. But occasionally there’s an architect or artist who creates something that can inspire future generations. Who can create a new standard or benchmark for the future to surpass. It would be a pretty sad society that created nothing for it’s succeeding citizens to value.

By: Dave

Dave — Thu, 10 Sep 2020 18:56:56 +0000

If the “historic buildings” are Brutalist abominations from the 1960s, I’ll be very happy to see them reduced to rubble. What were the builders thinking? Who ever gazed upon a brick or cinder block and said, “I want a whole building that looks like this!”