The EU wants to kill this diversity
The EU wants to kill this diversity
Elijah Stewart
Other urls found in this thread:
currentaffairs.org
twitter.com
Noah Hall
Ugly archaic buildings
shame they weren't destroyed in WW2
Oliver Garcia
But seriously why does modern architecture in europe suck? Why not just elevate the previous style?
Leo Taylor
Ah yes, soon the famous death squads from the European Commission will raid our cities to destroy our architecture
Christopher Taylor
No, but they'll assure you none of it will be (re)build.
Austin Adams
cost of construction / return on investment
Isaiah Bennett
>our
?
David Brown
why include Italy 3 times wheres Poland ffs
Nicholas Bell
No, that's Italy, Greece and Spain.
Caleb Morales
>second row left
makes me woder if hitler was actually a good painter and it was just the buildings being fucked up
Adrian Thomas
whats this?
Thomas Lewis
How so?
Most architects and politicians support the disgusting modern architecture anyway, everywhere in the world.
Elijah Martinez
The middle left is all kinds of fucked up.
Jason Jones
"modern architecture" is always blocks of concrete or weird combinations of glass and steel melting parked cars and killing birds.
I dont know why, but all modern architects always design something super ugly. Its almost like they do it on purpouse.
Nathan Johnson
where's bottom left?
Charles Clark
nigger what?
Blake Murphy
poortugal
Connor Brooks
>netherlands
>belgium
>germany?
>netherlands again?
>italy
>?
>spain?
>portugal
>germany again?
Kevin Gutierrez
Wyatt Adams
Says the depressed finn with shit architecture
Joshua Watson
this building looks like it's gonna fuck your sister and there's nothing you can do about it
Aiden Young
Shut up nigger, brutalism is based
Jackson Davis
Am i supposted to react to japan knockoff style on right, the concrete glass monsters in the back or the shopping centers on left?
>that black rectangle thing on left
Yup, peak modern architecture. Or these "lovely" two black rectangle shapes in middle connected with two black rectangles.
Hudson Sanchez
Kys uncultured swine
Jace Flores
Is middle right Slovenia or Czech Republic?
Robert Bailey
>netherlands again?
Nah, the signs are in French.
Last one could be Austria. Might even be Strasbourg too.
Jaxson Brooks
r/Lost_Architecture/
take a look at that sub and claim again there isnt a concentrated effort to destroy heritage
>inb4 le redddiiit
Owen Robinson
well spotted
the one I'm most unsure of is middle right, it looks med but it's not italy
Aaron Green
Yeah I'm not sure about that one either. My first guess would have been Spain maybe but could also be something like Croatia.
Lincoln Thompson
That is so fucking ugly
Jonathan Richardson
Only the first one looks like the Netherlands.
t. expert on the Netherlands
Anthony Turner
>azulejos
>ugly
ultra yank pleb
assuming no country is repeated I think Spain is the bottom left since I'm pretty sure I saw those wooden balconies there.
thanks
Kayden Hernandez
Could very well be yeah. Then maybe Portugal or Croatia. The orange roof tiles made me think of Croatia but the multicolour buildings is more of a Portuguese thing.
Chase Mitchell
>japan knockoff style
that looks nothing like Japanese style at all you filthy pleb
On the other hand
these shits are basically variations of windows panes on walls of different colors. Wow such impress. Much creation!
>Yup, peak modern architecture. Or these "lovely" two black rectangle shapes in middle connected with two black rectangles.
wat?
Easton Young
They do do it on purpose.
Cameron Phillips
Good Good Good
Okay Bad Bad
Okay Bad Good
Zachary Turner
I have a lot more faith in the EU than whatever the fuck the alternative is.
Cameron Powell
It's much easier and cheaper to get glass panels on steel frames than intricate ornaments on every part of the building
currentaffairs.org
Caleb Allen
>Modern architecture is bad, we should go back to the time where everyone was dying of tuberculosis because we shat on the street
Only brainlets think this. Anything in Singapore is better than the old husks of Europe
Charles Thompson
>The Tour Montparnasse. Who can possibly defend this? And if there’s something clearly wrong with it, which there is, what is it and why don’t we talk about it more in other cases?
The fact is, contemporary architecture gives most regular humans the heebie-jeebies. Try telling that to architects and their acolytes, though, and you’ll get an earful about why your feeling ismisguided, the product of some embarrassing misconception about architectural principles. One defense, typically, is that these eyesores are, in reality, incredible feats of engineering. After all, “blobitecture”—which, we regret to say, is a real school of contemporary architecture—is created using complicated computer-driven algorithms! You maythinkthe ensuing blob-structure looks like a tentacled turd, or a crumpled kleenex, but that’s because you don’t have an architect’s trained eye.
Another thing you will often hear from design-school types is that contemporary architecture ishonest.It doesn’t rely on the forms and usages of the past, and it is not interested incoddling you and your dumb feelings.Wake up, sheeple! Your boss hates you, and your bloodsucking landlord too, and your government fully intends to grind you between its gears. That’s the world we live in! Get used to it! Fans of Brutalism—the blocky-industrial-concrete school of architecture—are quick to emphasize that these buildingstell it like it is, as if this somehow excused the fact that they look, at best, dreary, and, at worst, like the headquarters of some kind of post-apocalyptic totalitarian dictatorship.
Kek. So it even has its own name: brutalism. Buildings which reflect the depression of its author.
That a actually looks decent. Not sure how badly it will look in winter though. And all the greens need nonstop expensive maintenance. And ofc the reflectove glass panels will kill the birds and melt parked cars away...
Michael Campbell
Greenery always makes things look better. Even the shittiest of houses look nice with plants covering it
Xavier Nelson
even as someone who almost exclusively likes pre 19th century stuff uptill art nouveau,i have to admit there are some splendid examples of brutalism
its the generic rectangles that annoy me
Anthony Rivera
Tower of Babel
Your God is dead
Liam Morales
>how depressing
Oliver Adams
enjoying the commie blocks you russki piece of shit?
Joseph Taylor
>how brutal!
Evan Jenkins
>such blocks!
Cameron King
>blocks bad!
Evan Rodriguez
>pictures of asia in a eu thread
american geography TFOOOEEEE
Carter Lopez
I love how the only way you can make these shitheaps looks decent is by using deceitful photography by playing with the lighting and angles.
Take an actual street-level photo at high noon with no special effects or touchups of any sort if you're so convinced your shit has any merit.
Ian Price
well the larpers argue that modern architecture is bad, and there is no good modern architecture in Europe to refute them.
Jordan Ward
basically architects around the world shuld just log into my main minecraft world. society as a whole would benefit
Blake Jackson
the cognitive dissonance is real rofl
Angel Roberts
Do you like this? Do you think that this looks good?
You belong in a padded cell.
Jace Foster
>cognitive dissonance
Evidently you have no clue what that actually means.
Regarding your pic, they still look bad (no, "MUH GLASS" doesn't magically make your shitheap look good), especially if you zoom out and frame it within the surrounding buildings.
Xavier Johnson
The surrounding buildings are all horrid too.
Gabriel Lee
Wow looks ok from 2 kilometers away
Xavier Cox
actually it looks better in your pic. The only reason "muh Gothic" buildings were made of "
muh stones" is that glasses were more expensive then. Notice what the rosettes were made of (hint not stone) when they could've easily carved them.
Here is your stones
Satisfied?
Jason Stewart
Indeed, but they make the glass dildos look even worse because the whole set has absolutely no coherence or harmony of any sort whatsoever.
Camden Gonzalez
very good thread
Connor Watson
>he literally went on an autistic tirade about "MUH GLASS"
>mfw
Also, you're wrong. Making a whole building out of glass is objectively retarded because, beyond its usefulness for viewing and for sunlight, glass is very poor building material (of course architects never really concern themselves with such matters, they just screech "MORE GLASS" and let the mech engineers figure out how to manage the HVAC systems for a building with such a horrendous thermal envelope). The rosettes are never intended to be the main structural element of a building, they're there for lighting and for aesthetic reasons.
>Here is your stones
>Satisfied?
The courtyard looks alright, but the building façade is dogshit.
Mason Parker
The central structure would look nice with a more natural planted pond
The surrounding wall or whatever that is is literally eye cancer
Hudson Cox
>muh engineers
You can engineer all you want but without modern materials those building won't stand. It's pissed easy to rebuild those gothic building now just like it was pissed easy to build mud huts back then. Why did the avant-garde architects not build mud huts back then? Because it was easy
>The rosettes are never intended to be the main structural element of a building, they're there for lighting and for aesthetic reasons.
So you are saying that glasses made those building aesthetic. I agree!
Josiah Jenkins
good goyim
Hunter Wright
> hey, let's build a park and make sure it can never get any sun
Colton Taylor
>core message is that the state will crush you and there's nothing you could do about it
>based
Connor Baker
>You can engineer all you want but without modern materials those building won't stand.
jesus, only an architect could ever be such a brainlet as to think that only glass or shitty-looking vinyl can possibly function as a building exterior for structure purposes
>It's pissed easy to rebuild those gothic building now
No, it isn't. One of the big issues with contemporary buildings is that of labor cost, and those gothic buildings are very labor-intensive, hence why nowadays we collectively just give up and accept uglier buildings.
>Why did the avant-garde architects not build mud huts back then?
Because architecture back then wasn't a circlejerk of pretentious brainlets far-removed from the end users as it currently is. Because mud huts are a poor choice from a functional perspective. Because mud huts aren't durable.
Stop projecting your "muh avant-gardism" on others.
>So you are saying that glasses made those building aesthetic. I agree!
In limited quantities, sure. Entire buildings made out of glass is simply garbage.
Nicholas Parker
Most of these look kind of ugly desu. I cannot understand this obsession with overwrought facades decorated with with eye-rape patterns
Jack Baker
Ugly
Tiny
Can't install an AC
Have to hire a fucking CRANE to get your new furniture in through the windows
Hot water by boiler
Impossible to fix the wiring if needed
Overpriced
Fuck those e*ropean houses
Luke Morris
>No, it isn't. One of the big issues with contemporary buildings is that of labor cost, and those gothic buildings are very labor-intensive, hence why nowadays we collectively just give up and accept uglier buildings.
so there is nothing hard about it except for labors. There is no challenge no creativity just brute-force labor. Why do we even need electricity at all? Our ancestors lived just fine!!
Grayson Lee
>There is no challenge no creativity just brute-force labor
Even if you had infinite labor, you couldn't make anything beautiful or creative. You would just spam glass because that's all your brainlets are capable of understanding.
And, most importantly, the architect isn't the one doing the hard work or meeting any challenge. The civil engineers and mechanical engineers are the ones who do that.
Easton Bailey
>muh creativity
>all gothic structures look literally the same
oh wow look at pic related compared to and
arr rook same!
David Morris
If you've really run out of arguments to such an extent that you completely ignore the content of my posts and just write nonsense like "all gothic structures look literally the same", you might as well just stop posting.
Isaac Clark
how creative can you be with gothic building? No matter how you do it they will end up looking the same. The only difference between them is, again, labor cost. You have expensive and big gothic cathedrals or small and cheap gothic cathedrals with the same variety of saints. Wow much creativity!
Hudson Taylor
>No matter how you do it they will end up looking the same.
No, they will not.
Also, you fixate on gothic buildings as though it's the only possibly alternative to post-WW2 architecture. It's not. And even within gothic architecture, it's not limited to just cathedrals.
Again, you might as well just stop posting. You're just sperging out because not everybody venerates "MUH GLASS" like you idiots do.
Dominic Fisher
>itt
James Brooks
>you are sperging because you embrace the zeitgeist of the 21st century
Jacob Thomas
That's a piss-poor justification if I've ever seen one.
You're literally just saying "me and my clique of brainlet architects venerate MUH GLASS because the clique of brainlet architects from a generation ago also venerated MUH GLASS". It's completely circular reasoning.
You lot just have an autistic obsession with MUH GLASS.
Parker Thompson
>glass bad stone good
Chase Jenkins
Yes, for reasons which I already listed previously:
Carson Miller
>noooo you can't just demolish these old buldings and build something more useful in their place
Nathaniel Harris
>the only property of glass is reflecting heat
>we don't need building taller than 30 stories at all!