[CGII]

Originally Posted by Tyler Xyroadia

AH! A curmudgeon after my own heart! Yes thats it! let disdane and contempt flow through you!

Let us be hounest. In the 60's and 70's people began to hink of buildings as "Art" and not in the good way. Now, I am fairly open when it comes to 'real' art. The type you stuff in a museum. If you want to pile up some trash bags and jam some spikes into it and call it "Art" well, that is fine, it doesn't hurt me.

But if you want to make a BUILDING based off that (cough Gehry cough) well bloody hell stay out of it then!
Because that is what happened. When you see those above 'buildings' you don't think "Ah, that is a good space to live and work" you think. "Bloody hell, that is a surreal concrete sculpture... Building? Seriouslly?"

Now, I know "some" people seeit and say "Ah! How daring! How creative! How bold!" And once again, for "art" that is fine. But NOT for buildings. These "things" belong in MOMA, not with peole inside them.

The majority of the discourse would tend to believe that 'conceptual architecture's' birth was at Palladio's Villa Rotunda; a philosophical and artistic statement which is almost completely unlivable as a house.


wikipedia.org