/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.11329061]

To those of you who deny the possibility of a cyclic or nonlinear history, give me one good reason we don't build like this anymore. You want to know what I think? I think we can't. I think the knowledge and skill is long, long gone, if "we" ever had it to begin with. I think it has nothing to do with economics, despite all of our machinery, if we wanted to even replicate, much less match the marvels of the past. We would find we couldn't.

Prove me wrong.

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

[Anonymous No.11329066]

>>11329061

[Anonymous No.11329068]

>>11329066

[Anonymous No.11329071]

>>11329068

[Anonymous No.11329077]

>>11329071

[Anonymous No.11329079]

>>11329077

[Anonymous No.11329082]

>>11329079

[Anonymous No.11329087]

>>11329082

[Anonymous No.11329093]

>>11329087

[Anonymous No.11329109]

>>11329093

[Anonymous No.11329117]

labour costs?

[Anonymous No.11329301]

>>11329117
ONE GOOD REASON.

[Anonymous No.11329322]

>>11329068
>>11329071
>>11329077
>>11329082
>>11329087
>>11329093
>>11329109
>>11329301
Really? That's it? Your best shot at convincing us of architecture we'll never build again? A wooden shack and a couple of brick walls?

Dumb kraut- go munch a wurst you fat hosenwhore.

[Anonymous No.11329522]

>>11329061
Because art (as it was done from the 18th century and before) is not profitable anymore and nobody talented wants to put the effort in, as you can reproduce Mona Lisa with Microsoft Paint nowadays

[Anonymous No.11329528]

Modernism, dumb dumb

[Anonymous No.11329529]

Those buildings and sculptures were created by monocultures. As a society becomes multicultural, trust in society declines rapidly. This results in less desire to spend money on things that benefit the common good. Robert Putnam goes into this quite a bit.

[Anonymous No.11329535]

>>11329301
these are nice pictures at least, thanks op

[Anonymous No.11329536]

>>11329522
Yes, this is my point. There has been a fundamental shift in the nature of man, our drives, our values, our priorities, our ideals and needs. I live in the Northeast US. I grew up walking amidst buildings from the 1700's-Victorian era... with ugly, plastic sided, drab, grey boxes plopped next to them. That ornate beauty, those structures which have stood for centuries, now becoming sparse, crowded, eclipsed by the shapeless ugliness which now rises around them.

It's the Soviet high-density style. Make one's outer world gray, orderly, and uniform. Their inner world shall follow. Mediocrity is the enemy.

[Anonymous No.11329541]

>>11329529
This makes some sense. I'll look into it, thanks.

[Anonymous No.11329552]

>>11329535
Welcome. I love this kind of thing.

[Anonymous No.11329558]

>>11329536
>I live in Northwestern US
kek Idk why you are even expecting anything of cultural worth then. If you want good and recent architecture you can go to (even Eastern) Europe, Japan, Singapore, Taiwan, Qatar and Kuwait — by recent I mean recently done, not that the art style is brand new, that's just being too picky. It might not have the same mastery and beauty of older art (likely due to budget and efficiency constraints) but they are still aesthetically appreciatable.

[Anonymous No.11329559]

[Anonymous No.11329562]

>>11329529
>>11329541
This sounds like Jordan Peterson tier nonsense.

[Anonymous No.11329587]

>>11329061
costs and it's sorta seen as fascist. No seriously, the damn commies tried to build architecture like that, but found it to be too expensive:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stalinist_architecture#Attempts_to_decrease_costs_(1948%E2%80%931955)
Most of that's just decorative and doesn't really add much nowadays. There was a bit of a case for it back when you were making buildings from actual stone, all the archways were needed because the material was brittle and putting holes in rocks actually helped because it made things lighter. I do think we'll see super detailed architecture, not necessarily renaissance style architecture, in the coming years because of digital manufacturing. David Best has already shown you can do quite a lot with just 2d CNC cut sheets. At some point we'll be able to '3d print' a building. With current 3d printing processes complexity is basically free. When this happens to buildings things will get interesting. I don't think we'll see a return to renaissance style though. Sure renaissance style has a bunch of rules to it, but it may prove difficult to get computers to follow them, and if we really want complexity we need to have computers do some of the art. So I think the style will be whatever the computer can describe best. And by complexity, I mean details down to the millimeter, like walls covered in ridiculously detailed fractal patterns or having a biomedical institute covered in a ball and stick representation of the human genome. Producing large highly detailed parts is being discussed for airplanes.

[Anonymous No.11330151]

>>11329522
>is not profitable anymore
You don't get it do you? It never was profitable. That's the point.

[Anonymous No.11330169]

>>11329061
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nqVs_dUgTKM
>ywn adventure through a gothic castle and the surrounding lands with your beautiful eastern european gf
gotta tell ya, why even.

[Anonymous No.11330182]

>>11330151
Anon I could not help but notice your png was not optimized.
I have optimized your png.
Your png is now optimized.

[Anonymous No.11330205]

>>11329061
Anon I could not help but notice your png was not optimized.
I have optimized your png.
Your png is now optimized.

[Anonymous No.11330214]

>>11329061
art in architecture is not sci/math, history is not a real science. gtfo

(also wonders and beautiful thins are still being made, but not for plebs)

[Anonymous No.11330230]

Redpill me on architecture

[Anonymous No.11330240]

>>11330230