Brutalist architecture during the 50's-80's. Gives buildings an efficient, functional look. It's mainly concrete and was used by many government buildings.
They're pretty cheap to make but cost a lot to maintain, hence why you see many of them in the former Soviet Union (which adopted this design for the later part of the century.)
Pretty cool stuff, here's a nice picture of an apartment complex.
How in any world does that look more efficient than a traditionally styled hotel. It looks like they couldn't decide where to put any of the rooms and actually managing it has to be hell.
in the past the elite would build beautiful buildings that say "look how powerful we are and how much good we're doing", now it is some kind of orwellian doublethink bullshit "look at this crap, isn't it wonderful. what? you don't share the same subjective tastes as us? that is because you are not an intellectual, tee hee"
It, more or less, gives an efficient vibe while trying to look beautiful. Kind of like how many university buildings went for the brutalist look with windows in some of the weirdest places yet still looked aesthetically pleasing.
The only reason it gives off a dystopian vibe is because of how 1984 and other dystopian movies depicted Soviet buildings (which happened to be Brutalistic) and communism to be dystopian.
It doesn't look all too bad, many of the designs were shit though. And no one really cares for them anymore since the fad died out in the 70's-80's when the Soviets popularized them.
>gives an efficient vibe
>trying to look beautiful
It seems like they literally did everything they could to make their building the opposite of beautiful and completely unpleasant to see. Like a Picasso of architecture.
Not that anon, but I dunno, brutalist buildings do just have an imposing vibe about them.
And the reason why the Soviets used it happens to coincide with the reason why it's considered dystopian
>cheap tricks for mild interest
>clear exterior structural supports
All these things reduce the cost of building, and that's the point. They're cheap, and you don't have to expend a lot of labor or time on them. Something usually associated with a country ruled by a powerful but frugal government.
Can we turn this into a thread about architectural disasters please
DC has far to many ugly brutalist federal buildings. Imagine this building, but dirtier and some ratty ass chain fence in that gap between the top and the building proper
Can we talk about how Art Deco is the best architecture?
They fugged up, Ill post another image how it looked before communism.
I like the architecture of the battersea and southwark power stations in London.
I thought it was brutalism, because it seems quite brutal to me, but wikipedia tells me it's art deco...
What's so great about brutalism? The tiny windows? The depressing raw and decaying concrete? The way it drags down everything around it and makes people want to kill themselves when they look at it?
I always thought a 100% brutalist city would be pretty cool.
The main problem I see with brutalism is that it contrasts horribly with other buildings. But if everything was brutalist then it would ramp up the dystopia factor to 11 and be as imposing as possible.
It's much better than the so much more common buildings of painted concrete with large windows and balconies.
Whether they're painted in pale beiges and pinks, or like a rubik's cube, raw concrete decays and gets dirty in a much more pleasing way.
Get out, brutalist peasants, that is imposing
Concrete is a shit material because of the decay. These commieblocks have to be constantly repaired because they're literally falling apart and were originally designed to be just a temporary solution.
Maybe so. but I'm not talking about a utilitarian aspect, and I can probably agree that it isn't necessarily a good idea (the architects that wanted to build it everywhere in london were idiots), but purely aesthetically it really pleases me, and it looks completely solid.
I don't see how it's any more depressing than brickwork either.
Esthetically it's shit. If we're talking about commieblocks, they're literally a cheap solution created from prefabricates, it's ultimately about time and money and even their creators realized how fucking ugly they are.
The nordweststadt in Frankfurt looked like that back when my parents where students.
>raw concrete decays and gets dirty in a much more pleasing way.
You're mentally ill. Brualist-fags confirmed for the scat fetishists of architecture.
The origins of brutalism are perfectly simple, and comes from the fallacy that modern = good, because if modern = good,
>old = bad
>old = beautiful
>beautiful = bad
It really is that simple, and architecture is far from the only area of culture to suffer from this.
I'm stunned at how retarded virtue signalling takes precedence over architecture.
>live in a district of town that's still mostly Victorian architecture
Feels so good man
That picture is bullshit. I'm German and I googled my ass off. Guess what, I can't find a single reference to leftists pushing for the modern facade, it seems like it was the idea of a architect all along. Fuck off back to /pol/.
Some people will be triggered, but more important than the style of a specific house is a diversity. I like modernism as much as gothic shit because you can see that this house was part of history. If I see a house that was built before the founding of the US I want to be able to see that. I don't want fake gothic shit merely pretending to be imposing. If I walk trough a city it's more important that I can feel the history by just being there.
I loved the reading room in Bizzell, except during finals week.
Monumentalism is also really nice
Get out, /pol/. Nazis wouldn't know beauty if it hit them in the face.
That looks pretty decent, and if I imagine it with some nice colorful and symmetric banners, fire bowls, statues, and whatever Goebbels would come up with for a propaganda event there, it would make a pretty good-looking building altogether. Also that fucking streetlamp and iron wall are not the fault of the architect
back to posting aesthetically pleasing architecture
>Baroque is overkill desu. Exhausting to look at.
I agree with you at times, but the sole craftsmanship of baroque buildings is always an incredible beauty in its own sense for me
Pic related is obviously not baroque btw, (neo-)classicism a best
>mfw people treat doric columns as outdated
I really hate when people think "change" is good. When your body tries to change it's called cancer and you die. When you change architecture it looks like shit and your town should be razed.
If you're easily distracted or unnerved by it, try to ignore the nazi ornaments, just thought this was a great example of a perfectly ornamented facade for a home
When will the "originality first" meme finally die out?
The Reichstag and other 19th century architecture are called (neo-)Historicist . Looking at styles from the past and blending the best stuff together. The doorway and windows are clearly classicist but other ornaments aren't. This elevates the building from "muh greek pillars and triangles" into something original yet tasteful.
>18th and 19th Century
>Guys! Let's build a public building that will enshrine *insert European nation* ideals.
>Rook arike buildings, rook arike buildings everywhere.
>Let us also export this to our colonies and wipe out their native public building cultures.
What do you count as the defining Historicist attributes of the Reichstag?
>when someone enjoys vulgar bourgeois architecture near me
All the peoples of Europe can hardly be considered one nation and yet they shared similar architecture for centuries until asscunts like you ruined art forever in the 1920's.
Commie, get out. Enjoy your towerblocks.
The fact that it looks classical with other stuff added onto it.
>Even if this was true, I don't see the problem with it.
There's no point in arguing about it since it's bullshit, but it's pretty disgusting that you don't see a problem with people refusing to preserve history simply because it hurts their feelings.
Its mostly just British, American and French Architecture that went Neoclassical. The Anglos because 1) Brits got sick of Tudor-Era shit. and 2) Ameriniggers aping Greco-Romans because muh freedom, muh republic.
France following the revolution and rome. Again aping Greco-Romans.
Italian architecture's classicalfaggotry gets a free pass.
The rest seem to do gothic shit and other continental Europenis architecture
Who /gothic/ here?
>Yeah that's what I mean. What are the non-classicist elements?
I don't know what these things are called, so I just highlighted all the things that don't look classical. Then again, I could be wrong. I'm not an architecture student, just some looser on a cambodian traditional art forum.
I mean preserving history's nice and all, but it's not an act devoid of politics and problems itself. Heritage is a pretty suspicious institution in most circumstances. Besides, destruction is just as much a part of history as creation.
REEEEEEEEE FUCKING ANGLOS!!!!!
>Besides, destruction is just as much a part of history as creation.
What a ridiculous argument. You construct museums to preserve history. I don't think anyone who isn't an ISIS tier "demolish the stuff I don't like" type would think that destroying things and then trying to forget about them is ever a logical course of action for a society to take.
I can see where you're coming from with the windows, don't really know how to categorize them except for Gothic ones, they're the most obvious. The statues I viewed as pretty classicist, at least in the way they themselves are modelled, but I guess they way they're featured in the architectural sense is more Historicist (or non-classicist) than Classicist.
>I don't think anyone who isn't an ISIS tier "demolish the stuff I don't like" type would think that destroying things and then trying to forget about them is ever a logical course of action for a society to take.
When did I say anything about forgetting? Destroying and forgetting aren't the same thing. I'm just saying that monuments to hierarchy shouldn't be celebrated unquestioningly, and taking it down and building something new is a way of doing that. It's a million miles from what ISIS does.
Besides, history gets forgotten all the time.
A lot of people think this is an architectural abortion, but I'm rather fond of it. From the outside. Inside is pretty shit, which is a fucking shame.
Don't really know how to call this style, but it's an extremely pleasant-looking bourgeois house
Much more than architecture has changed in our world. Is brutalism not the perfect expression of modernity's ugly under belly? With its cold expression, sheer unmovable force, and overwhelming grayness, does it not capture the cold anonymity of our latter day systems=society?
People hate it because they already feel brutalist, and they want splendor from the past to cheer them up. They could learn to love it if they find their own voice in it.
Me too, mate ;_;
We would live in a car commercial if everything was meant to make us happy. That's the ideology of materialism and I'm half sick by it. I don't want to be treated like a giddy, stupid child by architects and artists. The marketing people ram enough of that down my throat all day long. It's a relief to see a structure that acknowledges my weariness and my suspicions about the present world.
I also love other architecture. Washington DC is a nice example of architectural richness created by variety. It's music to walk down its streets and see modernism clashing with brutalism, dancing with art deco, singing with neo-classical and Victorian.
There is a place in our cities for brutalism.
Ceilings that high up can't be tacky. You only look up at it to appreciate the craftsmanship, otherwise you're not seeing it at all, unlike buildings with low ceilings, in which case then yes, they shouldn't be distracting.
>There is a place in our cities for brutalism.
No. There is not. Surroundings play a huge part in how people feel. Do you WANT to feel like shit? Because that's the kind of feeling brutality junk induces; suicide.
>we would live in a car commercial if everything was meant to make us happy
So you're saying we should intentionally make people unhappy in order to remind them of how shit their life is.
The future is in efficiency
>he doesn't want to live in a cold, unfeeling house
>he doesn't enjoy feeling empty and devoid of feeling
Cyborg body when
>Besides, history gets forgotten all the time.
And this is a tragedy.
>monuments to heirarchy
See, this is the problem with your kind. You are unable to think about constructing something in a way that doesn't involve celebrating whatever it represents. It's a museum.
Holocaust museums and the Hiroshima museum aren't celebrating tragedy. They're there to provide the public with information.
>I tried being happy once and it was awful
Yeah, fuck all those architects who try to make beautiful architecture. Nice stuff is for fags.
Everything should be ugly and painted shades of grey or black. The only way this picture could be any better would be if the plants were all dead and rotting, to remind everyone that death is inevitable.
When did I say anything about holocaust museums? Again you're assuming I said something I didn't. I'm talking about stately homes and stuff like that. Different institutions of heritage handle the remembrance/celebration balance in different ways, and you'd know that if your worldview allowed for nuance.
>When did I say anything about holocaust museums?
You didn't. I was making a comparison.
> Different institutions of heritage handle the remembrance/celebration balance in different ways
And? You're not allowed to construct museums dedicated to past eras?
> and you'd know that if your worldview allowed for nuance
What's nuanced about being against constructing a museum because the past makes you butthurt?
man why is everyone on this board a sperglord. every other post on here is
"fuck you idiot you're full of shit dumbass"
so much sarcasm and bitterness... impossible to have decent conversations when people act like this.
For one thing most governments are probably grateful for modern architecture with what it would cost in trying to keep every nook and cranny of those motifs maintained there wouldn't be any funds left for unesco heritage sites.
im a leftist IRL and modern anti-aesthetic art is hideous. its association with leftism is a symptom of leftism being corrupted by narcissistic middle class brats who just want to "rebel" superficially. it is alienating and therefor contrary to the interests of the regular, working person in the same way multiculturalism is. indeed you will see anti-aesthetic modern art champion by the same upper class "leftists" who go all in on multiculturalism and despise any western traditionalism.
the ceiling is baroque. most tacky things have a baroque character but baroque isn't tacky. it would be tacky if the the art work were bad, the subject matter were lowly or if it were unfitting with its surroundings.
Architecturally illiterate pleb here.
What style would you consider this building?
It's a nice looking parking garage, don't cha think?
That appears to be a parking garage. It would probably fall under brutalism. It reminds me of some South American brutalist projects. But I too am architecturally illiterate.
Thanks anon, circular buildings are my fetish
It might look powerful and beautiful for a moment when you look at it and it gives off that romantic vibe you get when you read your favourite postapocalyptic/hopeful distopian/what the hell ever you are into fiction. Those things are really, really depressing when you actually have to live in or near them. I see them often as I am from an ex-socialist state, thankfully I live away from them, but they are horrible. Socialism fucked up Eastern European towns to an incredible extent. I have never heard the term brutalism before this thread, and some of the stuff actually does look good. But actual commie buildings are grey, dull and depressing. One could argue this was on a purpose.
Not him, but is there really a definition of beauty beyond what we personally enjoy?
I've always liked brutalist architectural design, though the concrete itself is something i can take or leave (ironically, since concrete is basically the point of brutalism). If i could take every brutalist building and replace grey meh-concrete with gleaming white stone, i would.
There's something about the enduring look of it, the strong lines and monument-like slightly-too-big design of it that makes me feel good about humanity.
Brutalism doesn't try to fit in with nature. Brutalism doesn't try to fit in with anything! Brutalism tells everything to fuck off! Because if you're doing it properly (most people did not do it properly) it should be built out of materials that will make it outlast everything else anyway.
Simpler/less gaudy Art deco - especially with its focus on symmetry and geometric shapes - inspires this same feeling in me. I think it really is the resemblance to ancient temples they both tend to evoke. While the Brutalism tends to do it in a far more abstract way, i still look at them and think of them as the modern version of those ancient stone cut monuments.
I guess in the end i like a building that looks like it will still be there when the rest of the world has been burnt to cinders. And yes, an illogical part of my brain tells me that futuristic buildings = better, and for some reason blocks of shaped concrete are more futuristic looking in my mind than a far, far, far more complicated glass skyscraper.
Perhaps because in my mind brutalism is the architectural equivalent of the way all our technology has started going recently. Becoming simpler and simpler shapes.
tl;dr - Im really, really weird i guess.
>Academia got infected with cultural marxism
>somebody unironicly holds this opinion
>But if everything was brutalist then it would ramp up the dystopia factor to 11 and be as imposing as possible.
I'd love to live in s a shitty dystopian brutalist playground.
Neon, hookers and dirty butchers peddling suspect meat.
A thin dusting of Cocaine on everything.
hoverbikes zooming overhead as some android gangsters make their getaway from the space gestapo.
I really love Antebellum houses. What kind of house would fit well in a mountainous area like Idaho, but still give the Greek feel of an Antebellum house?
Nah bro. That idea is fucking cool.
Normally that sort of thing clashes, but if you're going to build a museum of Germany, what could be better then trying to capture the old and the new at once?
>ultural Marxism: An offshoot of Marxism that gave birth to political correctness, multiculturalism and "anti-racism." Unlike traditional Marxism that focuses on economics, Cultural Marxism focuses on culture and maintains that all human behavior is a result of culture (not heredity / race) and thus malleable. Cultural Marxists absurdly deny the biological reality of gender and race and argue that gender and race are “social constructs”. Nonetheless, Cultural Marxists support the race-based identity politics of non-whites. Cultural Marxists typically support race-based affirmative action, the proposition state (as opposed to a nation rooted in common ancestry), elevating non-Western religions above Western religions, speech codes and censorship, multiculturalism, diversity training, anti-Western education curricula, maladaptive sexual norms and anti-male feminism, the dispossession of white people, and mass Third World immigration into Western countries. Cultural Marxists have promoted idea that white people, instead of birthing white babies, should interracially marry or adopt non-white children. Samuel P. Huntington maintained that Cultural Marxism is an anti-white ideology. Critics of Cultural Marxism have maintained that Cultural Marxists intend to commit genocide against white people through mass non-white immigration, assimilation, transracial adoption and miscegenation.
I kind of agree with it, but I don't think it's intentional or organised and I don't think 'the jews' are behind it. (I don't label it cultural marxism though, just rampant 'muh feelings' and dumbing down)
I bet the Hohenzollern wouldn't say no if the government called them one day and asked "Hey guys, are you interested in forming a constitutional monarchy?" Also implying that:
>restoring their buildings = restoring the monarchy
No, no, no. Not a constitutional monarchy. The governance must be rebuilt on the actual Prussian Monarchy. Not only in it's autocracy, but in all of it's peculiar: it's relations with the other monarchies and nobilities of Europe, and the patchwork of German states and statelets, it's customs and offices, it's means of doing business.
And while we're at it, it's place inside of Berlin itself, it's relations to other buildings, the traffic and movement of peoples and animals throughout the city, etc.
>restoring their buildings = restoring the monarchy
Are you implying that buildings are distinct from their use?
>Yea it did. Grow up.
reread your comment and tell me who needs to grow up.
>It hit subverted, if you don't like the term "cultural Marxism" then fine but it was subverted.
Nothing was "subverted" m8 there's no conspiracy. It's like saying business was "subverted" by right wing interests.
Cultural marxism is a 4chan meme, I've never heard of it anywhere other than this site and I've never gotten a good definition of it here. It's used to mean "things I don't like" in most cases.
If you think ugly buildings get built because of a marxist political coup in Academia then you need to get your head checked.
He tried being buttbuddies with Stalin, but he wasn't having it.
So instead he offered his service to Mussolini to rebuild Addis Ababa. In his own words his own plans were "…models so severe, that one might think the colony was a space without time, and therefore, without history, and without any particular geographical meaning."
And then yeah, when 1940 went around, Corbusier was a Vichyite.
constructivism is also based
the light stone 'edges' are called quoins, the brick pattern is just a standard running bond.
if you like brick look up alvar aalto, berlage, and mario botta
The cultural Marxism meme actually originates with an essay by a protege of Lyndon LaRouche which was eventually picked up and embelleshed by the likes of Pat Buchannan, whence it spread to the backwaters of Conservative talk radio and eventually /pol/.
The whole thing is a profound illustration of the dangers of political commentary that is not based on scholarship or intensive reading.
It gets better
>Brutalism became popular with governmental and institutional clients, with numerous examples in Britain, France, Germany, Japan, the United States, Canada, Brazil, the Philippines, Israel and Australia.
Brutalism confirmed for nazi, soviet neo-liberal shit.
its two almost diametrically opposed styles/ settings but baumschlager and eberle use some greek references. arno lederer also does this.
they build on mountainous sites with greek influences.
i like it. i used to walk around boston city hall all the time and eat lunch there.
like anything else in art it is a symbol and generally people in this thread have touched on what those indicators mean to them.
from what i understand the intentions of initial bldgs were to usher in a new advanced culture, bring about societal changes, shift paradigms etc etc. it largely failed in this but the flag was carried on by what
i will say there is a difference between eastern bloc architecture, brut, and just using concrete i.e. a tadao ando or something
I like the contrast with old architecture, some places are even building on top of them
>crumple tin foil and put it on a building
I do have to say, using a lot of raw concrete is something that I actually do like a lot.
What I mostly hate in Architecture is top down solutions imposed by power. Any attempt to define 'good architecture' and make the land conform to it is obscene to me.
Hence, not liking architecture associated with government power, which unfortunately, brutalism jumped all over.
both those buildings are ugly. the lower one at least has logic on its side. there are better examples from either time period, I'm sure.
what the OP pic really says is that OP thinks D&D is cool and that a 20th century building should have -- and therefore looks "good" because -- it has a bunch of faggy, decorative "battlements" that serve absolutely no purpose.
>it has a bunch of faggy, decorative "battlements" that serve absolutely no purpose.
Aside from, you know, looking pleasing? Also what is the connection between neo-Gothic architecture and DnD?
>while a lot of it is bad many good things can come out of historicism or a style revival such as europe
It's possible, but I don't consider this tacky thing to be an example.
Strange variations like carpenter gothic are cool though.
so an architect should never do anything new because of your cultural baggage. you honestly think they intentionally built something ugly to make fun of rednecks? how far up your own ass are you?
its true i feel the same about neoclassical banks.
that was my attempt at a bad joke. the pastiche of style always produces garbage.
thats funny i was just looking at a carpenter gothic page on wikipedia. was really nice and reminded me of some buildings at seaside, florida particularly the church.
Not sure how much either of you know about architecture, but the purpose of that sort of decorative embellishment (beyond "looking nice", which is the intentional end result) is to "add visual interest" as designers and architects say. What they mean by this is that the top building has varied elements and patterns, things that break up the straight lines and solid forms of what a building is and does (delineates interior space from exterior space and provides protection from both the elements and other people). A building such as the above in OPs picture deviates from the necessary with small flourishes that give the viewer something to count, something to cast the eye over and points of reference on the building's face (or streetwall) help the viewer to identify different parts of the building. Visually, it's intended to be "easy to look at" as well as easy to identify and navigate from the outside.
The second building (Brutalist is apt) is intended to be jarring, or disconcerting, or at the very least make the viewer uncomfortable to the point where he thinks about the structure or is forced to look away. The solid lines and indistinguishable forms are meant to confuse. Unlike capital M Modern Architecture, it is not exclusively designed with function in mind, though function is important. It is designed to be an imposing, inhuman object. The visual flourishes added to the above building help the viewer to scale the structure. Those cues being absent from the Brutalist structure are intentionally absent, specifically to make it difficult for the viewer to scale the structure at a glance.
I like both buildings, but I admit Brutalism is an acquired taste, and certainly a difficult style of building to live with.
Brutalism for life
Durability and strength, the shit that would survive a nuclear war.
Honestly, I like Brutalism, but dislike how its often used. I think Brutalism has potential to make city environments that are more natural and less alien to human perceptions, more evocative of natural environments by evoking the image of rockfaces.
Lies, all the way down. For example, there is no "Museum of the African Arts" in Berlin.
The Stadtschloss is being rebuilt, but the interior is going to be modern because we never had any plans for what the inside looked like.
Also, most of the disputes about the building were centered around what to build there, not how to build the Stadtschloss. Some people wanted the palace of the republic back, some people wanted a nice open park. A lot of ideas about how to use the land were pitched back and forth.
This is what it looks like today.
Art Deco attracts me in a way no other buildings except roman ones. I have a huge boner for Art Deco buildings and roman inspired buildings.
Imma post some Art Deco buildings from my country.
It just breaks my heart to know that the commies broke down so many of those beauties here in Romania...fuck those commie blocks most of them are ugly as fuck and doesn't provide any cosmopolitan aspect to the cities. The skyline of the city looks terribly dystopian and ugly
There are a number of neoclassical building projects so hope has definitely not been lost.
Pic built in Stockolm 1995-1998
>Putting fake turrets and shit on your building
You're not a castle. Those architectural features once had a purpose, but it's been 500 years since they lost their relevance, now they're like an architectural appendix, vestigial and useless.
Brutalism a shit, but so is that pseudo-medieval crap.
Brutalism is love.
Brutalism is life.
>Cultural Marxism focuses on culture and maintains that all human behavior is a result of culture (not heredity / race) and thus malleable. Cultural Marxists absurdly deny the biological reality of gender and race and argue that gender and race are “social constructs”.
I do this
>Cultural Marxists typically support race-based affirmative action, the proposition state (as opposed to a nation rooted in common ancestry), elevating non-Western religions above Western religions, speech codes and censorship, multiculturalism, diversity training, anti-Western education curricula, maladaptive sexual norms and anti-male feminism, the dispossession of white people, and mass Third World immigration into Western countries.
I don't do this
>Cultural Marxists have promoted idea that white people, instead of birthing white babies, should interracially marry or adopt non-white children.
I definitely don't do this
>Samuel P. Huntington maintained that Cultural Marxism is an anti-white ideology.
So am I a cultural marxist or not? I'm confused
learn to read between the lines
>In view of the previous opposition, including high cost, and most importantly, the psychological and political objections, successive German governments had declined to commit themselves to the project.
>and most importantly, the psychological and political objections
translation: the left threw a massive tantrum over the proposed reconstruction...
>According to this compromise, three façades of the palace would be rebuilt, but the interior is to be a modern structure to serve as a cultural museum and forum.
>According to this compromise
...and when they couldn't stop it completely at least managed to sabotage it as much as possible
>I'm German and I googled my ass off
German media not reporting on the left being cunts? I'm shocked.
I don't actually visit /pol/. Huh, the number of times I've been told /pol/ is a boogeyman, I guess there must be some truth to it. Either way,
>Berlin’s non-European art and antiquities collections
>wipe out their native public building cultures.
Well, this is a strong contender for stupidest statement of the week. Do you really think that, for example, Indians stopped building Hindu temples in the traditional style in the mid 18th century when the British colonised them and started building gothic churches with a statue of their god instead of an altar?
If some building styles have fallen out of fashion it's more because of advances in engineering than because of colonisation.
Speaking of low cost production, high cost maintenance, should we make regulations against cheap, large buildings that decay easily during peacetimes? They're basically sending a check to future generations.
Yo fuck you OP. Brutalism is fucking beautiful.
serious question, do you mean that the east is somehow better in some way? Or africa? what in any way is better outside the west than in.
These look much more like early functionalism than art deco. Only truly deco style is >>567518
Also, while I generally dislike brutalism with all its probems, there are indeed some instances where it really shines. Imo all these buildings, while fa from perfect has something great going on.
The first passage establishes a theory, which is pretty sound. The second passage is how the theory is understood, published, and put into practice, or at least at most major universities. Third passage is the practice put to the extreme, but that's the far, far fringe.
Thing is, it's not some active group, it's just groupthink at-large. It looks like some single group, because it's the organizational culture of higher (and probably lower) academia, but it's not. It's just what happens when our ideas about status have been steadily disrupted over the last century, with a dose of connecting technology thrown in the mix.
School for me has been an exercise in watching people get brainwashed into this weird, identity-based self-hating perspective.