/lit/ - Literature

I think we've had this thread already
is this deja vu, or the simulation is repeating?

>>15625632
The Fountainhead by Ayn Rand.

>>15625653
Careful, remember where you are posting

>>15625653
I had no idea. What does Rand have to say about architecture?

>>15625674
>What does Rand have to say about architecture?
that neo-classical architecture is for subhuman sheep, the prime-movers are all doing their own thing

>>15625691
>the prime-movers are all doing their own thing
Agreed. I'm going to have to check this out (worryingly). Thanks for the rec.

>>15625632
Schopenhauer’s aesthetics might be interesting to you, also based Boston.

Architecture is the worst artform because you are forcing everyone to look at it. Don't like Rap music, cubism, or Shakespeare? That's fine just ignore them. Don't like brutalism? Well get fucked because we are going to build a huge brutalist monument outside your window

>>15625674
>What does Rand have to say about architecture?

A bunch of things, but it's mainly just the theme that she uses to advocate her thesis, which is that society is advanced by willful, uncompromising men who give birth to new creations. It may be Rand, but it's also the only novel I can think of where the main topic is architecture. Worth a read though it's a tad long.

>>15626137
This except that’s why it’s the best

>>15626221
This. Manifesting your aesthetic vision in the privacy of your home is easy. Projecting it into the public square, however, takes extreme force of will.

>>15625632

Great job White Plains Library

>>15626111
Does Schop specifically discuss architecture?

>>15626499
Yes book three of world as will and representation, not all he talks about but he starts with architecture.

>>15625632
>Architecture is the highest art form
What if you went on the roof of the highest building in the world and held up a book of poetry? Poetry would then snatch the title away no?

>>15625632
If you really appreciate architecture you wouldn't have posted that brutalist monstrosity.

>>15625632
Tanizaki has one on Japanese aesthetics, forget what it’s called

If you appreciate architecture, why do you need a book to tell you what you already appreciate?

You could go far back to Vitruvius's writing on architecture, but I would just suggest looking at architecture -- not just the building but the plans, which is the essence of the building.

>>15625632
the "this will kill that" chapter in Hunchback of Notre Dame is all about how the original highest mode of human expression was architecture, but it's since been transferred to printed literature

>>15626598
Monstrousness isn't a bad thing. In-fact, it is the condition of the awesome and the sublime.
>>15626766
>why do you need a book to tell you what you already appreciate?
I don't. No book can reason me into a position that I've already arrived at through revelation. I just want to hear from people who have shared this revelation with me. Thanks for the rec.

>>15625632
Excuse me? No.
Cooking is the greatest artistry.

>>15625632
Brutalism is fucking horrible.

>>15626992
milquetoast pleb take

>>15626992
Not trad enough? Needs more greek columns?

>>15627262
>>15627028
wow ur just like every other undergrad ever

>>15626943
its a craft

>>15625632
Bachelard really springs to mind. Even though The Poetics of Space doesn't really deal with architecture as a field, it does relate how certain spaces, rooms, and buildings can resonate with certain fundamental aspects of our selves.

>>15625632
>Architecture is the highest art form
this line of thinking is why cities look ugly and architecture is full of retards

>>15626137

>>15626598
the supreme irony is that hating brutalism is an NPC opinion

>>15628055
i think spengler has a passage somewhere in decline about how the basic form of culture is the dwelling because all men make them the way bees make a hive, and the considerations that go into the structure of the dwelling are a portrait in microcosm of the entire culture. when you think about it, almost nothing in any contemporary house makes sense, even though there's an logic behind the origin of each room and its placement. we spend our lives in a labyrinth constructed by the dead for purposes we ourselves have forgotten

>>15629364
>spengler
Cringe

>>15627262
>IT'S SO BLEAK AND INHUMAN I'M GONNA CUUUUUUUM

>>15629134
Cities look ugly because not enough people think that architecture is art.

>>15629383
>>I'M GONNA CUUUUUUUM
Can't even get the meme right.
But yeah, it's unironically a work of art.

>>15629412
>art
If the 20th century has taught us anything, it's that 'art' is a meaningless quality.

>>15629489
It's always been a meaningless word.

>>15629343
No it isn't. Your type has been around on /lit/ for years. Everyone who's new to architecture thinks that all the ugliest architectural styles (especially brutalism) are in fact the most beautiful. You think it's a sign of your sophistication. The normies hate brutalism, therefore it must be great, you think. No, it's everything architecture shouldn't be. It's ugly and alienating.

>>15625632
> In the 1960s, Mayor John F. Collins reportedly gasped as the design was first unveiled, and someone in the room blurted out, "What the hell is that?"
kek

>>15629383
Damn Boston looks like a shitty UK seaside town...

>>15629383
God, brutalism is hideous. Why does it always attract /lit/ plebs?

>>15625632
Goethe and Spengler.

>>15630384
it doesn't have to be

>>15631627
That's disgusting

>>15631627
Is this part of the Atlantic Wall?

Architecture as an art form is dead because architecture can only be beautiful under an authoritarian regime, since the monarch or autocrat will not care for things like "profitability" as we do in our liberal systems -- he will simply give the order to construct a vast panoply of architectural beauty in order to showcase his power. Literally none of the architecture we deem beautiful today would have been made under our systems in the West because our architects look to make the largest amount of profit rather than create something beautiful.

>>15629704
i like brutalism because it reminds me of the rock churches of cappadocia

>x is the highest art form

>>15625653
Unironically. I didn't really give a shit about architecture until reading this. Also Hunchbach by Hugo. Hugo had a huge boner for architecture and goes into its effects on culture in like four different chapters.

>>15625632
>Architecture is the highest art form
>he doesn't realize it's actually music
oh no no no

>>15626736
>Tanizaki
In Praise of Shadows?

>>15625632
De Architectura by Vitruvius.
also Vignola and Palladio
>>15625691
The spiteful hag should've been burned
>>15626137
>>15626221
That's why it should be regulated for propriety and not efficacy at the expense of beauty, or to serve the ego of the architect
But at the same time formless functionalism and abstract monstrosities reflect our zeitgeist perfectly.
Ultimately >>15632825 is right, take for example the founding of Saint Petersburg under the express order of Peter I who ordered every mason of Russia to put all their focus on constructing the new and beautiful capital.

>>15631627
repellent to the human soul.

>>15631652
>>15631729
>>15633273
im sorry you can't enjoy good architecture anons

>>15630384
>>15629704
>>15627275
brutalism isn't about self serving aesthetics or an ugly caricature of modernity. it's about an uncompromising use of the best materials and engineering techniques currently available to simultaneously create a sublime transcendent presence while remaining strictly utilitarian.

>>15633338
genuinely even worse.

>>15632825
Nah. It's just receded from the public realm and into the private one. There's still beautiful architecture out there.

>>15625653
came here to post this nice

>>15633345
they are not utilitarian though. they are actively hostile to human life and function. the effect a space has on people is a part of utility.
If you actually had to live in that box you would understand. Or perhaps you wouldn't, and had to life in you to begin with.

>>15633345
>use of the best materials and engineering techniques
HAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHJAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHA
OH NO NO NO NO
HHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHA

Brutalism is beautiful.

>>15633520
Not everyone is a faggot like you that needs art to make them feel happy all the time. Brutalism is sobering, and that is well and good.

>>15633532
reinforced steel and steel frames weren't the best materials in the mid to late modern era (50s-80s)? have you seen the shapes they were able to make for the time?

>>15633912
*reinforced concrete

>>15633345
Brutalism has soul even if it's not "pretty". It doesn't look mass manufactured, and I guess I would rather see it around more than the soulless McMansions and cheap prefabricated kitsch that plagues the USA.

Also, OP, read some fucking art/architecture history books, unironically. There should be some offered in the Thames and Hudson World of Art Series, as well as the Oxford History of Art series.

>>15632968
Why faggot
Support your views instead of just memeing dead philosophers

All these fucking midwits getting filtered by brutalism hahahahahahaha
>muh soul
hahahahahhahah

>>15625632
how can anyone who's lived in boston defend this building?

>>15625632
Silly anon, we all know YouTube Poops are the highest form of art.

>>15635095
They're just npcs repeating the line about 'haha le dumb trad, brutalism is epic'. There are a thousand of these clones on twitter, they infest every university. It's just the opinion you're supposed to have.

>>15635213
So you inversely prefer the look of trad cathedrals because it's unpopular?

>>15629383
boston is quite brown

>>15633520
i used to work in a classic-period brutalist building and i loved it, it was very comfy

>>15633273
>bugman pretends he has a soul

>>15632968
>not realizing that architecture and music are the same thing
real smoothbrain hours in this thread

>>15633345
there's nothing particularly special about it, it can be impressive but it needs to be well contextualized in order to do so. What I've loved most about architecture is that it doesn't need much context, if any, to be really meaningful; in essence it literally creates its own context.

>>15635606
fuck i sound like such a pseud in this but my point still stands

>>15635213
Brutalism is not that bad itself, the problem is that most of it is built in city centers where it clashes with the historical buildings or it's in the periphery in the form of shitty public housing and are full of niggers and gyppos
The center of le havre looks decent

>>15635213
The opposite is the case. Twitter is infested with those "trad" architecture cretins who don't know a lick about the discipline. You're probably one of them.

>>15635866
Every single person who has ever been to university knows it's more fashionable to like brutalism than 'trad' architecture. You're just a sneering mindless faggot who thinks being able to dimly grasp a social dynamic and copy people is a marker of education and taste.

Brutalist architecture is plebeian. Futurist Architecture is patrician

>>15635887
Architects appreciate a variety of forms of architecture, brutalism included. You're just a commoner with a common soul, incapable of resonating with more avant-garde expressions. You're the aesthetic equivalent of the guy that never grew out of eating chicken nuggets for every meal.

>>15635934
>. You're just a commoner with a common soul,
proving my point, this is nothing but an identity to you, a fashion statement. And it isn't even your own taste, you're just imitating other people. Pathetic behavior

reminder that all anti-brutalism posters are reacting primarily to the name itself and if it was named neo-traditionalism or neo-monolothisim or whatever they'd be all over it like white on rice

>>15635950
Nice try though

>>15635943
Yes, people with great souls tend to lord it over those without. Now go post more based and trad Doric columns on your 5k followers Greek bust twitter account using your chicken nugget soul.

>>15635923
that is truly brutal

>>15635950
In 150 years they'll be hailing it as trad.

>>15635986
In a good way

>>15635981
>I imitate academic consensus, this makes me an aristocrat
You're a sad petit bourgeois lemming. I bet you're unattractive as well, 'great soul' lol

>>15635998
>I imitate BASED and TRAD retards on a bottom-feeder social media platform
Things could be worse for me, I suppose. I'll keep reading great books written by renowmed academics and artists, you stick with tweets.

Architecture is the scummiest art form, because innocent people will be subjected to your bad ideas for decades.

I worked in a building that won awards for architectural innovation. It was a horrible building to work in.

The thing about architecture is that architects always need other people's money to realise their art, so the "art form" is not about having a good idea or design but about how well you can sell your idea or design to someone with enough money to let you build it. Which buildings get built is a function of the charisma of the architects, not the merits of their ideas, so in that way architecture is not an art form at all.

Everybody already knows what good buildings are: lots of space, lots of light, minimalist and tasteful in design and ornamentation but ultimately conservative in styling and layout, and incorporating as much planting and landscaping as possible. Every building that is actually nice to be in - to live in, work in, or pass by on the street - is like that.

Architects should be shot.

>>15636074
>Architecture is the scummiest art form, because innocent people will be subjected to your bad ideas for decades
My thoughts exactly.
Why dont you fagrchitects build more with bamboo and papier-mache instead of concrete and steel? At least your monstrosities will be easier to tear down.

>>15629343
I suppose you should be congratulated, since you have managed to avoid the NPC circles enough to form such an uneducated opinion.

>>15636141
When was the last time you spoke to someone that liked brutalism?

Also Rossi. Kenneth Frampton(architect). Peter Eisenman. Robert Venturi. Patrick Schumacher. Parametric architecture. Just look up their most famous books. If you can stomach through those you can actually understand architecture these fucking nitwits in this thread don’t know shit brutalist architecture is old as fuck and outdated. Nobody is a Pure functionalist anymore same with trad cucks who think this Greco Roman Columns gain any type of new architectural experience in this day and age.

Aldo Rossi - the architecture of the city
Robert Venturi - complexity and contradiction
Kenneth Frampton - critical regionalism
Eisenman - ten canonical buildings
Zumthor - atmospheres
Life and death of great American cities - Jane Jacobs
Between spaces - (can’t remember his name)
The autopoeisis of architecture - Patrick Schumacher

>>15625632
We should have an Architecture board because why not? /his/ never discusses it. And other arts have their own boards so I don't see why there shouldn't be an architecture board.
>It would be slow!!
Good. Slower boards can be very comfy.
>What if it devolves into shitposting?
All boards eventually fall into it.
>What if there isn't enough support?
We have a Papercraft and Origami board. Not to mention a board all about graphic design. I'm pretty sure there would be enough people to support an Architecture board.

>>15636242
Architecture is a malleable subject which can be interpreted in lit. Plus finding books about the theory and subject can difficult I guess...

>>15636242
great idea. I'd like to see some "architecture for this feel" threads.

>>15636258
I definitely agree. I'm just stating that it should be thought about.

>>15636270
Oh I see. I read that wrong. Yes I agree an arch board would be a blast.

>>15636268
I would imagine that it would have a good balance between actual good discussions and the typical joke threads.

>>15636281
>Yes I agree an arch board would be a blast.
Then we should start advocating for it. We would need to start some traction.

>>15636294
How would we do that? Start blasting all the other threads? Oh Kevin Lynch - image of the city. Also site planning. Both good books.

>>15636304
you'd post on /qa/. It absolutely will not happen though, nobody ever listens to anons asking for new boards

>>15636074
>architects always need other people's money to realise their art,
Describes art since the beginning of time. Artists have always needed patrons.

I think brutalism looks neat, respect those who don't but no respect for anyone who thinks about it harder than that. Academic architecture is a real-time IQ shredder.

>>15636309
>you'd post on /qa/. It absolutely will not happen though, nobody ever listens to anons asking for new boards
Somebody should post a thread. It doesn't hurt to try anon.

>>15636184
>>15636222
Good posts. Thanks.

>>15636222
>>15636184
>Aldo Rossi -
disgusting

>>15636352
This looks fine. What's wrong with it,

>>15634905
Because music is the most universal and natural of them all

>>15625632
Hegel regarded it as the lowest. Now, as art it of course ranks high above other human endeavours, but nonetheless it is too bound up with utility to serve as a pure expression of spirit. He considered the lyric (poetry) as the highest, because in that form the expression remains identical to the force which expresses it - it is abstract, rythmic and exists only in thought. Architecture, while a product of thought and expressing thought, once erected, necessarily stands outside thought and in relation to use.

>>15636656
Oh and also the lyric is verbal - can’t forget that!

>>15636656
>and exists only in thought
in language. Nothing personal, kid.

>>15636686
Sure, by thought I was speaking rather loosely, I merely meant that it wasn’t externalised into a sensuous material. In the spoken word or the written text the substance (if Derrida-san will forgive me for using that word) lies beyond the sounds or the marks, which are themselves indifferent to what is communicated through them.

>>15636704
>wasn’t externalised
No. Derrida-san will not forgive you -- there is no "external", "il n'y a pas de hors-texte" (there is no outside-text).

>>15636309
There should just be a 'patricians chamber' (or really whatever you would call it) board where you can post anything that would be related to claimed higher tastes, higher knowledge or higher opinion. The board could include things from philosophy, literature, architecture, politics, art, human aesthetics, aesthetics in general, music and film, etc. It could become a bit of a wank but as long as the posts are confined only to subjects, ideas, things related to the patrician/plebian dichotomy, as well as good moderation - I think such a thing would be ideal for many anons on this site.

>>15636743
>why yes I did get 119 in an online IQ test, how did you know?

>>15636749
yes

>>15636743
>>15636749
I should have added to take it with a grain of salt - but maybe you can't see the humor in potentially calling a place 'patricians chamber' and what might take place in such a board. In my opinion having 4chan dedicated boards to niche subjects doesn't really produce anything but maybe I'm just not paying attention. I just always see threads on /lit/ asking about music recommendations, film recommendations and art recommendations, probably because the clientele of this place is filled with the type of people that would claim to have higher intellectual standards, no surprise judging by this thread either. You can always sieve through other boards if you are dedicated enough and gain the same, maybe even better and lesser known information than you could on such a board.

>>15636352
There's that Aldo Rossi cemetary that looks more like a prison yard for the dead.
https://failedarchitecture.com/graveyard-of-postmodern-architecture/
Like brutalism it makes for some great abstract photos, especially in monochrome, but it's just so soulless.

>>15637619
Right next door is some old fashioned classical cemetary that's almost full. I defy anyone to say they wouldn't rather spend the day there.

>>15636734
Oh cruel fate! Caught in the spider’s web, and for me as for the fallen angel, “which way I fly is hell”!

>>15627262
>have you heard of critical theory? My professor just told me about it.

>>15636242
this. arch threads prop up sxporadically on /his/, /fa/ and /lit/. We need an /arq/ board

>>15625632
War is the greatest art form.

>>15637793

>>15625632
You really need a book to tell you architecture is the highest art form? Fuckin look outside and find a building smaller than a book, retard.

Architecture is a byproduct/expression of the values of the society.

>>15631627
Most people who seem to like brutalist architecture seem to really like green plants on concrete. At least 50% of the op posts on r/brutalism rely on nature making these buildings look good. There are some that look fine. But all of them would like better in a 'classical' style.

>>15636074
>The thing about architecture is that architects always need other people's money to realise their art, so the "art form" is not about having a good idea or design but about how well you can sell your idea or design to someone with enough money to let you build it. Which buildings get built is a function of the charisma of the architects, not the merits of their ideas, so in that way architecture is not an art form at all.
Great post.

Check out Ruskin!

>>15635950
Anti-brutalist poster here. I'm reacting to how repulsive it looks. Enthusiasts of brutalism remind me of those art students who are always eager to prove that beauty can be found in the ugliest things like dog shit or sewage or women vomiting.

>>15632851
I'll accept this defense.

>>15637745
>>15636309
>>15636304
>>15636268
I posted our interest on a Board suggestion thread in /qa/. Please come join it

>>15640238
ok

>>15636074
>>15636139
t. salty civil engineers

>>15625632

>>15626137
No, it is the one with the most responsibility to be good.

>>15627262
It is literally bad for your mental health.
What it needs is dynamite.

brutalism is inferior in everyway to greco-roman architecture

change my mind

>>15630384
Once you have to "study" beauty, you are lost. You can only search it and create it, but once you need to be "learned enough" to know beauty then you are truly lost.
Beauty is self evident, you don't need a manual to know that, since it requires irrational, not "rational" forces. Art speaks to the soul, not the mind. The mind can study it and appreciate it, but never can it experience it. The mind can observe and judge, but only in subservience to this architecture's appeal to the soul.

>>15635923
After having read the manifesto, I can say that futurism is a much more broader and successful aesthetic. However, I still prefer brutalism because I am attached to the idea of the monumental and permanent building.

>Ugh.. Brutalism??? ewwww!!!!!! where are the gargoyles??!!

>>15642760
so you're saying brutalism is beautiful in the same way that armpits are beautiful?

>>15642784
I'm saying it is not beautiful because the justification for its existence is on a rational, not aesthetic basis, thus making it an abomination to observe. It fails in one function that all architecture should follow, and that is to appeal to the soul. It praises itself on utility but in irony lacks in this one utility. It is selfish and parasitic, since it does not consider the consequences its appearance has to people around it. It only cares about numbers and the so-called rational functions of a building.

>>15642752
You're a faggot so your opinion is worthless.
QED.

>>15642718
>t. pussy
Imagine letting a building make you sad lmao

>>15642812
>>15642827
once again, greco-roman architecture is more functional, more beautiful and more well-designed than brutalist architecture

check and mate

>>15642836
It doesn't make you sad, it makes you more sick in the head is what I am saying. When at home, one should too feel at home. Once one does not feel at home, but rather like at a dentist, then it would not surprise me the least to find him mentally ill down the road.
Tissue need not accompany you when near brutalism (though its ugliness is indeed tearworthy) but a ton of TNT is always a good addition.

>>15642777
Holy trips of truth

>>15642777

>>15642760
I know nothing about architecture yet I find modern expressions of it beautiful.

>>15642841
See >>15642827

>>15642870
>it makes you more sick in the head is what I am saying.
Imagine being this weak. Your aesthetic ideal is a cozy Grandma's cottage -- no ambition, no striving.

>>15642944
>replying to a worthless post
man i bet you feel silly!

>>15642934
So do fetishists find the morbidly obese beautiful.

>>15633345
it's about blahblahblahblahblah shut up faggot it looks ugly and no matter how much you talk it will still look ugly.

>>15642957
>Imagine being this weak. Your aesthetic ideal is a cozy Grandma's cottage -- no ambition, no striving.
You take one example for home and think that it ought to apply to the whole world. Perhaps that is the flaw in brutalism - that the insanity in the head of these "artists" ought to exist outside of their fever-induced imagination.

>>15642957
>slabs of rotting concrete in ugly geometric shapes
yes very impressive. the pyramids dab on all this stuff anyway

>>15642965
All the greatest men in history found the montrous beautiful.

>>15642957
Aesthetics are supposed to look beautiful. That's what aesthetic means. Brutalism is ugly. Ugly is not beautiful. Therefore brutalism is not aesthetic. I'll take a cozy grandma cottage over your ugly monstrosity. The grandma will probably have better taste in interior and exterior design anyways.

>>15642981
Brutalism IS beautiful though.

>>15642980
No, they didn't. They found the beautiful beautiful. That which is monstrous/ugly is the opposite of beautiful.

>>15642975
Nowhere did I claim that. I'm a true aesthetic eclectic. I want expressions of all kinds to flourish.

>>15642988
The monstrous can be and is beautiful.

>>15642986
Fair enough. If you genuinely think brutalism is beautiful, then that is that. Just don't pretend it's some crazy deep thing that needs hours of study for you to "get". That is when you start exposing yourself as an artfag who doesn't care about the artform or beauty and only about impressing others.

>>15642991
No, you thought that was my ideal that one ideal that ought to be in the home should apply everywhere. Your counterargument was an appeal to greatness, as if in an argument was cozy vs your ideal, which stemmed out of your misinterpretation in the first place.

>>15642996
>Just don't pretend it's some crazy deep thing that needs hours of study for you to "get".
Historically, this has been the purview of proponents of classic architecture. It's going to happen either way.

>>15642994
Then you don't know the definition of monstrous. This is equivalent to saying "1 can be and is 2" or "dark can be or is light".

>>15643004
Read Kant.

>>15643003
Yes, and I will be ready when it does to call out artfags.

>>15631627
>only looks good when its in ruins
really makes you think

>>15643003
The difference is that classical is renown for its beauty even for the uneducated, whereas you need to almost be brainwashed to believe that brutalism is beautiful, as if you were joining a cult.

>>15643009
Read a dictionary. Next you are going to say white is black.

>>15642980
All the greatest men do not gather around observing architecture, and I am certain they would find brutalism worthy of abortion.

>>15643026
that is to say, most people who observe architecture aren't these greatest men.

>>15643018
Meh. Anything can become an object of desire. I'm sure at least some of the brutalists are genuine.

>>15643018
It is just a form of signalling for middle class people. They are anxious about not being upper class and one of the ways they can distinguish themselves from the lower classes(and their middle class fellows) is to adopt prestigious opinions that the lower classes won't.

The entire identity of the urban progressive is based around desperately deluding themselves about the reality that they are the economic and social peers of fat white suburbans by reading the New Yorker and repeating whatever Harvard tells them to think.

>>15642784
>>15642965
Yes. This is right, and is really the only genuine path I see for modern art, like brutalism. Bataille saw this path a century ago, which you reached with your post.
Bataille:
I challenge a lover of modern art to waste away for a canvas as a fetishist does for a shoe.

>>15643036
So are scat fetishists genuine. Anything can indeed become an object of desire. Even Messytails knew this, and what fate awaited him.
With this sort of argumentation there is no beauty since it is all subjective.
I think people generally will agree on most things but often will find disagreement on liking what most dislike.

>>15643040
Brutalism is just a form of signalling for artfags. They are anxious about not being cool and not having "taste" and one of the ways they can distinguish themselves from people who genuinely like the artform (and their artfag fellows) is to adopt prestigious opinions on ugly monstrosities that the people who genuinely like the artform won't.

The entire identity of the artfag progressive is based around desperately deluding themselves about the reality that they are the artistic peers of actual art-lovers by reading the art section of the New York Times and repeating whatever Harvard tells them to think.

Even the ugly can be beautiful.

>>15643045
>With this sort of argumentation there is no beauty since it is all subjective.
No, not at all. It is just different for different people, since they have different objects of desire, and so place value on different things based on their constitution. That you find beautiful classical architecture and the guy who likes brutalism not liking it does not mean you should give up instilling its value in people and trying to build new timeless monuments and buildings.

>>15643072
Even metal can be wood.
Even white can be black.
Even 0 can be 1.

>>15643072
even the cold can be hot.

no, that would be warfare and sex in no particular order

>>15643060
brutalism is just a form of signaling for tradLARPs. they see the word and assume it must be something bad because it has brutal in it. thus they pretend to have cultured opinions regarding architecture by calling anything and everything they find ugly and banal brutalist

>>15643018
now the appeal to the authority of the untutored folk, for which the anon naturally presumes to speak being an authentic man himself

>>15643087
*sets you on fire then hands you a winter coat*

>>15642996
and here you're already backing off from you attack on brutalism because you know nothing about architecture nor have any principles upon which to stand because your opinions are formed by a vague sense of resentment. you're no better than the agree to disagree simps, ya coward

>>15643004
the monstrous is sublime, the sublime is beauty. pablum for a tired consoomer after a hard day's consumption isn't beauty, it's just a bromide

>>15643085
>>15643087
Yes. Unironically.

>>15639094
sounds more like you're trying to match up to your self image of authentic manly rebel among effete phoneys rather than critique a piece of architecture

>>15643021
>what is grey

>>15643060
This, but replace "brutalism" with "greek columns" and "New York Times" with "based and trad twitter accounts"

>>15643117
No he just knows it's subjective you tard