Quote:
Originally Posted by photoLith
It's ugly, cheap, and lacks a human touch.
|
It doesn't lack a human touch, it is just shy. When you get close to it and see the imprint of the wood used to mould it, the little spots where a bit of cement squeezed out between the boards, it almost takes you back to the 1960s and 1970s when they were being constructed. And exploring the interior of a large brutalist building is a really fun experience because no other buildings are designed quite like them, and every single one is unique. It's like being in another universe.
We don't have to save all brutalist buildings, but we do have to save the ones that exemplify brutalism as an architectural genre. It is a part of our architectural history and we shouldn't erase it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by photoLith
When they start tearing down shit suburbs that were built in the 90s in like 40 years will you be saying we have to preserve crap like that too?
|
Thirty years from now we probably will work to preserve buildings constructed in the late 1980s and 1990s, such as Scotia Plaza in Toronto. But we won't bother to save tract housing. We don't put any effort into preserving tract housing from 100 years ago, and my neighbourhood is full of them. They were just as identical then, but the craftsmanship is far better.