/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.6366421]

Why futurists has such bad taste for architecture?

Does /lit/ actually enjoy futurist (and atomic age retro futurist) aesthetics?
Also, postmodern architecture general.

[Intinina !Djz3gdLuOU No.6366429]

>>6366421
Its all subjective friend XD

[Anonymous No.6366440]

No, pure ideology.

[Anonymous No.6366466]

They have bad taste in architecture because they neglect history and the humanities. While I can't stand most of the experiments architects have been doing, I'd rather see new ideas than the cheaply made faux-Greek/Roman architecture. I hope they finally land on something worth replicating soon, though. Deconstructivist architecture has been a monumental failure. The only thing worse that I can think of is brutalism. I really don't like the modern idea that things ought to be simple. I love the atmosphere of old European cities with all of their sumptuousness. Maybe those old cities are boring to Europeans -- I wouldn't know -- but as an American who's used to ugly rectangular prisms made of glass and steel, I can't help but appreciate the older stuff.

[Anonymous No.6366476]

Fresco's architecture gives me a pretty anachronistic feeling, it reminds me very much of some late 50s architecture (pic related). Feels like that futurism goes against the stream towards a reactionary aesthetic, it's not about the function or making it cheap, it's about crushing the traditional concept of urban comfort.

[Anonymous No.6366498]

there's no comparison between pro war continental futurism and plastic american atomic age futurism. those are two completely different things in any way shape or form.

also, not literature.

[Anonymous No.6366505]

>>6366466
Yes, but the greek and roman architectural tradition is based on aesthetics of beauty. Futurism is based on a supposition of functionality. (even when it doesn't look functional).
What is wrong with being modern and keeping tradition?
I watched once a series of documentaries by Alain de Botton on Modernism x Tradition. The name was "The Perfect Home", I believe. It was pretty good, he gives some good insights in developing a cozy and modern but yet traditional architecture. I enjoyed it.
There is a book on it, I still have to read it. "Architecture of Happiness" is the name.

[Anonymous No.6366528]

>>6366498
>pro war continental futurism
I'm not talking about futurism as the art movement from Italy, I'm talking about futurism as the ideology of the technology speculation through futurology.
Yes, of course these are two different things.

Still, it's literature related, since it's history and aesthetics.

[Anonymous No.6366871]

futurism without the egg yolks: just look to seattle.

[Anonymous No.6367057]

When the fuck will they start to build structures entirely coated in some form of plantlife

better yet when the fuck will they start to genetically engineer tree seeds to grow into house shapes by themselves

[Anonymous No.6367149]

I always thought that Jetsons were a direct parody on futurology.
The pointlessness of these architecture type only to make it seems "from the future" is pretty upsetting.
This is sort of an outdated sci-fi environment. it's not applicable to fiction, it's not applicable to reality.

[Anonymous No.6367444]

Futurist buildings look horrid to me. They're superficial and the "function over aesthetic" part is complete bullshit. We live in the 21st century, yet we still marvel at old gothic architecture because we live in cheap, impersonal and inoffensive mass produced houses.

Pic related is my local town hall. I'm not saying no-one should innovate, merely that these flat pieces of shit are not innovation, they're regression. Just because they have curves doesn't make them "good".

[Anonymous No.6367451]

i cant stand buildings that are just dominated by huge windows all around

[Anonymous No.6367465]

>>6366421
I really like retro futuristic stuff.

[Anonymous No.6367471]

>>6366466
i think it's just a grass-is-always-greener type thing. i'm from vienna, and mostly it just all looks the same to me. i'd rather live in NY or something. love the big ass buildings in manhattan, the chaotic smaller ones in brooklyn, ethnic neighbourhoods, beaches (beaches probably don't count as architecture though)

[Anonymous No.6367481]

>>6367444
>merely that these flat pieces of shit are not innovation, they're regression.
>implying notions of linear progression of hegelian architecture towards end state of objectively superior aesthetics

[Anonymous No.6367492]

>>6366440
kek

[Anonymous No.6367493]

>>6367481

I was saying they are regression to innovation, not aesthetics. Instead of saying "ok, this is functional, now lets make it aesthetic with all this 21st technology we supposedly have", we say "ok, here is the husk of a building, we're done now".

[Anonymous No.6367500]

>>6367444
how's this for you?

just look at all those edges.

[Anonymous No.6367501]

>>6367471
>ethnic neighbourhoods

do you really find the minority ghettos of the large US cities something to be envious of?

[Anonymous No.6367514]

>>6367465
Actually, the point is, it's ugly but yet charming.
No, I wouldn't live in a place like that, and I believe that no one would stand it.
But I think that this impulse to construct futuristic re-imagined cities is a very rich part of our unconscious.
I think that people would love to construct it, but never live on it.

Pic related is a city plan from the Renaissance , look for images of the idea of the utopic cities suggested by the Venus Project and we can see a very interesting similarity.

[Anonymous No.6367515]

>>6367500

A bit too edgy. This is basically the same thing they did with the futurist curvy shit. They thought they could get away with the fact the houses are all just squares by repeating it lots of times.

[Anonymous No.6367516]

>>6367493
Maybe they like minimalistic husks, and the more husky it is the more aesthetically pleasing they find it.

[Anonymous No.6367532]

>>6367516

>Maybe they like minimalistic husks

Clearly they don't because that's not "minimalistic". Its simplistic. It takes up a large chunk of land and encloses a lot of space, too much space for even 4 humans.

[Anonymous No.6367537]

>>6367501
we have significant minorities here, and what happens is they live mostly in council housing, mixed in with the lowest-class local populace. there's not a lot of businesses, little culture, nothing going on really, it's sorta depressing. i feel like it might actually be in everyones interest to have a certain degree of clustering. really can go both ways, i guess. some communities might help each other out and try and be productive, others might just wallow in self pity and their collective victim status

i lived in a hostel in brighton beach (brooklyn) for two weeks and it was interesting for sure. can't really comment on what's it like to live there. it seemed alright. very safe, even when i was over in the BRONX. there was an incident with a junkie who stabbed her dealer dead a block from where i lived though. idk

[Anonymous No.6367547]

You guys don't get it, you are talking about modern architecture, OP is talking about FUTURISTIC architecture.

It's like those geodesic domes, people say that it's scientifically progressive and ecological sustainable et cetera.
But who would actually enjoy to live under such oppression of a steel sky? Who would like to live in a honeycomb dome?

[Anonymous No.6367581]

>>6367547

But that's another thing. I'd rather shit like this >>6367516 than all these shitty wheel cities and geodesic shapes. They're not hard to construct, they're not complicated, they're just designed to make stupid people think "wow, how sciency, truly the future is here!". They're not original.

[Anonymous No.6367582]

[Anonymous No.6367583]

>>6367547
>geodesic domes
had to google that. the idea isn't really about steel, it's about the form and its advantages, isn't it? i'd love me one of those actually

[Anonymous No.6367614]

>>6367532
Minimalism primarily refers to an aesthetic, not towards the sort of frugality/sustainability/simple living thing that's hip now.

Minimalist architecture is actually mostly rich people paying for a lot of empty space.

[Anonymous No.6367620]

>>6367547
what! cloud 9 all the fucking way, i would love that shit.

[Anonymous No.6367623]

>>6367582
>hey, want to live in constant darkness your entire life
>why of course, friend!

[Anonymous No.6367624]

>>6367547
>But who would actually enjoy to live under such oppression of a steel sky? Who would like to live in a honeycomb dome?

[Anonymous No.6367637]

>>6367547
What do we mean by futuristic though? Geodesic domes and other space frame systems are very much 20th century architecture, coming from people like buckminster fuller and frei otto. A lot of the avant garde 'futuristic' architecture is nothing like that these days. Now the research focus is very much on design computation and the usage of new fabrication technologies. Look at people like Arthur Mamou Mani, Robert Stuart Smith and Theodore Spyropoulos if you want todays 'futuristic' architecture.

[Anonymous No.6367640]

>>6367637
could you post some nice concept render pornography of what constitutes futuristic now?

[Anonymous No.6367648]

>architects treat public space like their own little ideological playground and get billions of taxpayer dollars for their ugly circlejerks

You all deserve to be put to the wall.

[Anonymous No.6367654]

>>6367582
My God... what is this? A Human Hive?

>>6367637
I know that Geodesic Domes are pretty much applicable, but it would demand a full restructure of the idea of urbanism, and that is why I call it futurism. It's real but it's not a reality in the present.

I will research these people, I actually was waiting for more names of architects in the thread.

[Anonymous No.6367663]

>>6367582
Makes me want to try my hand at DwarfFortress again to be honest.

[Anonymous No.6367666]

>>6366421
>>6367465
>>6367492
>>6367500

Stupid as fuck.

We have some of this bullshit in my town and it's pretty fucking sad. We have a giant mesh wire face outside of a building with a ton of homeless just one block away. Wtf.

[Anonymous No.6367674]

>>6367582

This is cool. There have been huge inovations recently in growing agriculture crops in enclosed greenhouses, the future of humanity is underground and I'd love to see some cool ass huge underground buildings in my lifetime.

Cool shit.

[Anonymous No.6367678]

>>6367614
People wouldn't hire an architect known for their minimalism unless they already had some interest in that lifestyle. Look at people like John Pawson, souta de mouro and barragan. They tie minimalism as a lifestyle into their design philosophy, it much more than just an aesthetic choice.

[Anonymous No.6367683]

>>6367654
>not wanting to live in a neopolis

[Anonymous No.6367688]

>>6367582
>>6367623
It's like a space-age hobbit hole.

[Anonymous No.6367691]

>>6367674
>you will become a dwarf within your lifetime

[Anonymous No.6367699]

>>6367683
"Hey guys, have you heard, some people don't like modern architecture! So let's put some cheap neoclassical adornments in the top of this modern building."

Unconvincing.

It looks like a giant shopping center.

[Anonymous No.6367711]

>>6367683
Why? Why can't we just have pretty buildings? Why do things need to look imposing or awesome?

[Anonymous No.6367716]

>>6367699
That's the beauty of it. Imagine the muzak in those elevators.

[Anonymous No.6367717]

>>6367691

>tfw you will be dwarf fortress: the game

[Anonymous No.6367721]

>>6367654
>>6367640
sure, heres a Robert Stuart Smith libary design. Its worth having a look on their websites if you interested in what they do. These guys teach at the AA DRL in London and are pretty influential. The graduates and tutors often work on some of the big name practices such as Zaha Hadid, Fosters and Rogers Stirk Harbor, who are increasingly interested in these computational design methodologies. It it a research area though, so you see a lot of pretty renderings and not much built, although that is changing as technology develops.

[Anonymous No.6367755]

>>6366505
Architecture of Happiness is worth reading. You should also check Living Architecture, an organisation he set up. They get good architects to design unique holiday houses for rent, its a pretty cool initiative.

[Anonymous No.6367763]

>>6367721
inhuman. how's someone supposed to hang out around that nightmare?

[Anonymous No.6367771]

>>6367721
Look at it, it must be really expensive to build one of these. It's not bad, but...

>>6367755
Interesting Anon, I will check it.

[Anonymous No.6367780]

>>6367763
>things made by humans that you like
>human
>things made by humans that you dislike
>inhuman

ayy

[Anonymous No.6367848]

>>6367763
Check the robert stuart smith website, there are more drawings which explain it, helsinki library.
>>6367771
You should also check out architecture dependsz by jeremy till. I have the feeling you might like it.
Also perhaps look into Sam Mockbee and rural studio. They build using recycled materials for this community in Alabama, usually for under 10 thousand dollars or so per house. Its a pretty amazing project really, pic related is a house they made.

[Anonymous No.6367880]

>>6367763
on a chair or something, gramps

[Anonymous No.6367882]

>>6367500
this is gorgeous imo

[Anonymous No.6368211]

what's some essential reading on architecture? I've always been curious about it

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » No.6368518]

>>6367882
It looks like a trash heap.

Paolo Soleri has some interesting ideas.

[Anonymous No.6369993]

>>6368211
i would start off by reading De Architectura by Vitruvius. Basically a Roman guide for building and city planning. Has had a huge influence on western architecture, from Palladio through to Corbusier.

I might compile a list of essential reading if people are intersted.

[Anonymous No.6369995]

>>6366421
Quality thread

[Anonymous No.6370003]

>>6368518
seriously played out gay scifi aesthetic is better than some brutalist cubefuckery?

i cant believe its not butter

[Anonymous No.6370023]

I already live in pragmatic soviet style gray concrete box. No aesthetics.

[Anonymous No.6370048]

>>6367514
>but never live on it.

Looks somewhat familiar. Copenhagen 1728.

[Anonymous No.6370097]

>>6367514
This is basically a star fortress. They are built this way because they are easier to defend.

[Anonymous No.6370103]

>>6369993
>De Architectura by Vitruvius
what

If interested in how we got to where we are now, on the evolution of thought, I'd suggest Kenneth Framptons "Modern Architecture: A Critical History".

[Anonymous No.6370123]

>>6369993
People are interested.

[Anonymous No.6370135]

>>6366421
You are in correct. It is clear futururists have the best idea of architexture.

[Anonymous No.6370161]

Are we seriously arguing about "pretty buildings" on /lit/?
First "pretty" is highly subjective. So I rate my buildings and cities in terms of function, not form. I also note function is slave to application, after all a shopping mall and a farm house would not be the same. Other things to note is climate has a large impact on function. Also the modern home that most people use has roots as disposable forwarding bases from WWII. It is kind of sad that some older designs can compete with our modern stuff in quantitative performance. But a big part of it is people don't know anything about the homes they live in, and often push pretty finishes over real performance gains.

[Anonymous No.6370184]

>>6367514
That's not "aesthetic design" that's "oh fuck we're going to be blown up with cannonballs oh jesus what the fuck do we do" design.

They angle the walls to deflect the balls and allow more musqueteers (or riflemen) to fire back from their ports/battlements.

[Anonymous No.6370192]

>>6370023
I love commie blocks and brutalist architecture.
I'm hijacking this thread in the name of pure concrete.

[Anonymous No.6370201]

>>6370192

[Anonymous No.6370206]

>>6370201

[Anonymous No.6370209]

>>6366421
Dragonball Z is cool.

[Anonymous No.6370213]

This is my favourite building. It was the Customs House of Brisbane City (Australia) prior to the Port of Brisbane being built further down the river. The big green dome is copper, and back in the day it would have shone in the sun like a beacon. Ships would have been directed to sail up the river "to the big shiny dome, you can't miss it" to report to customs. Beauty and function together.

The bottom floor is an old warehouse for impounded goods. The rest is old offices (now mostly unused) and a big hall for entertaining people. The building is owned by the University of Queensland and rented out for events.

I like it because it's not stupidly big and retarded, like the giant penis-buildings of wannabe nations like America or Nazi Germany, it has a little bit of history, it's a pretty building, and it's a useful building.

It's also a nice place right in the centre of the CBD.

Pic related is the view from the river. The other side is much the same (except, obviously, without entrances to the bottom floor because that's underground on the other side).

I think people fail to realise that most buildings have always been shit. It's not that they built more pretty buildings in ye olde days, it's that only the pretty ones survived. The slums got bulldozed and the boring wooden magistrate's hall got burned down in a fire in 1887 or whatever.

[Anonymous No.6370214]

>>6367471
As a german, I can see where you are coming from, but disagree.

I personally think there is nothing more ugly than symmetric american suburbia.

[Anonymous No.6370289]

>>6366421
>futurist
tatlin was GOAT

[Anonymous No.6370349]

I want /lit/'s thoughts on this revamped opera house

[Anonymous No.6370384]

>>6367149
Why did they build them like that? I remember watching this show as a kid and always wondering about the foggy world below. was it poisonous or something?

[Anonymous No.6370400]

>>6370214
>I personally think there is nothing more ugly than symmetric american suburbia.
They may be ugly I admit, but they are functional. They can be a great, safe place to raise your kids where you can purchase a large, affordable, new house with a backyard for the kids to play a game of flag football in. Something you can't do so easily in yurop

[Anonymous No.6370407]

>>6370384
I think they showed a few times that the world "below" generated so much smog, they just raised the buildings a little bit every morning to escape.

Kind of like the giant ice cube battling global warming in Futurama, the ice cube has to grow every year.

[Anonymous No.6370425]

>>6370289
Hey, I saw a model of this in Stockholm. Neat.

[Anonymous No.6370440]

>>6370349
Handsome building. Looks a bit cheap but that's probably just the freshness of the revamp. It'll look better once it's weathered a bit.

[Anonymous No.6370455]

>>6370349
I think it's better if they annex a modern pavilion than building a pastiche classical extension that will look fake and cheap.

[Anonymous No.6370576]

>>6370349
las vegas tier

[Anonymous No.6370591]

>>6370400
I agree that it is functional, I was never doubting that.

But that is actually possible in Europe aswell, there are small towns and suburbia over here, you know?

[Anonymous No.6370603]

>>6368518
>Marxists will actually defend millionaire architects building houses for the proletariat which they find soul crushing.

[Anonymous No.6370614]

>>6370400
but in yurop the kids just go to the designated football fields of the neighbourhood and play there, rather than staying in their private space.

american style suburbs seem impersonal to me because you have to drive everywhere so your house turns into this private hub from which you enter your private car to drive to the impersonal huge stores that multiple suburbs use and shop in anonimity and drive back to your private hub, shiftly moving ten paces from air conditioned shell to air conditioned shell

[Anonymous No.6370713]

>>6370400
>but they are functional.
if you have a car

[Anonymous No.6370736]

>>6370123
okay heres a rough list to start from.

Frampton, K. (2007). Modern Architecture: A Critical History
Hall, P. (2002). Cities of Tomorrow: An intellectual history of urban planning and design in the twentieth century.
Colquhoun, A. (2002). Modern architecture
Koolhaas, R., & Mau, B. (2002). S,M,L,XL.
Forty, A. (2000). Words and Buildings: A vocabulary of modern architecture.
Junichiro Tanizaki, In Praise of Shadows (1993)
Summerson, J. (1980). The Classical Language of Architecture.
Banham, R. (1980). Theory and design in the first machine age.
Jencks, C. (1978). The Language of Post-Modern Architecture
Pevsner, N. (1966). An Outline of European Architecture.
Gaston Bachelard, Poetics of Space (1958)
Le Corbusier. (1986). Towards a new architecture.
Loos, A. (1998). Ornament and Crime: Selected Essays.
Vitruvius, the ten books of architecture

Bear in mind these books are only describing the cultural context of Architecture. There is a ton of other material on things like design methodologies, drawing & model making, technology, law and practice. It’s quite a broad topic.

Anyway please contribute. I'll put it into an infographic later.