View Single Post
  #45  
Old Posted Dec 27, 2017, 6:03 PM
Wolf13 Wolf13 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 1,664
While I can get on board with many parts of the general message being conveyed (academic romance for brutalist abominations, fear of drawing negative attention, etc), there are some good reasons why things are no longer the way they are:

Skyscrapers - some people like them, some people like living in them or near downtowns, where property value is high. Have to create density to create value. Furthermore, you cannot just press the reset button, ban high rises, and ruin peoples' home and property values.

Ornaments - I like them, but it isn't easy to integrate them with modern tastes. But the real reason is... money. It's not a finite resource. Ornaments are expensive

Brick and stone? Costs tons of money. Intricate detail? Money. All these whimsical details? Time and money

Furthermore, labour. Extra fin masonry/painting isn't nearly as widely practiced and as such will catch a fierce premium on a large project.

A developer can quickly bankrupt a project or themselves if all these wishes are heeded.

However, there's no reason that all these state-sponsored projects should be as hideous as they are (such as the Boston City Hall), while you can bet that the government overpaid.


Yes, there are exceptions. Still, I empathize with the main point to some degree when it's illustrated through extremes like that Viennese museum, or that brutalist london alley and St Peter's Cathedral.
Reply With Quote