What do yo think of the house that wittgenstein designed?

I'm more interested in his children's dictionary to be honest

i want the window and door handles to become standard. elegant as fuck

Looks autistic.

He should stick with philosophy, imho

What's with the fucked up window dimensions, why do the ones in the middle need to be slightly smaller?

I actually think it's dope as fuck for something built in the 20's. I really like how all the door open up to the patio at the back. Too bad it's in such a shit area. Would be nice if it had a pool.

pure inconsequential autism, like his philosophy

I wish I had grown up in Vienna/central europe in the early 20th century. What a god-tier time and place to be alive

More importantly what's up with the prison cell window on the bottom right

Pretty cool actually

Did he know anything about natural lighting? It looks like it would get no natural light inside. That place looks like it would be depressing.

Nigger there's windows everywhere.

it's bad

>two windows juxtaposed at such an angle that one would see the other window and its contents
trash. absolute trash. in fact. the window placement is lukewarm shit mustard

Well, yes, it's a single house. That's a terrible critique, you're arguing against its functionality as though it was meant to be a set of private offices.

Go back to Red-dit

dude, looking out the window and seeing into another window from at leasr a quarter of the view, and into the damn house itself, probably to see someone picking their nose, is poor window placement.

hell the whole house is just a flimsy way to hide from himself and the world that he had to take shits from time to time.

Needs more brutalisme.

I will never understand how such an abomination was allowed to come into existence. Brutalism has ruined cities.

why is modern architecture obsessed with flat white squares? Chinese/japanese stuff is way more aesthetic and fits in with nature better, though I guess that's the western rational logical patriarchal mindset for you

>Brutalism has ruined cities.
You're fucking gay.

>Brutalism has ruined cities

True, but it's an underrated album by the band Idles

Sorry, I'll fuck off back to /mu/

High-tier
No understanding of architecture.

>Brutalism is beautiful XD

Fuck off contrarian fag.

>>Brutalism is beautiful XD
What? It looks cool. I'd imagine I'm not even a contrarian with this opinion.

Nah brutalism is dope you faggot.

You most certainly are.

there's some neat ideas involved in it. exterior looks boring but IIRC it was intentional. the project was more of a meme hobby than anything.

a friend of mine drove by it and said the neighborhood sucks.

this. i think he had brilliant ideas but his writings are kinda just something to skim through for nuggets. one of those guys whose influence outweighs his accomplishment.

but maybe i'm just a pleb faggot

this would look much better without the foliage.

0/10

He put an absurd amount of thought into it, though it doesn't arrest your attention if you just happen to pass by.

nah faggot, the plants miss the whole point of the design. it would go from a 7.5 to a 9 just by fixing that.

What do you think of Malaparte's house?

A mud hut or, better still, a cave on that rock would be a significantly more appealing option.

I don't have problems with brutalism as such but this is too much for me. Where the fuck are windows?

Brutalism is cool.

I think the problem with brutalism in cities is that it is very jarring when put beside other kinds of buildings as the brutalism totally dominates the landscape. It is so the aesthetics are so aggressive you can't really have it without it also warping the aesthetics of other buildings.

I think we should just have 100% brutalist cities instead. It would be deliciously dystopian. Working in a brutalist building, living in a brutalist house, going drinking in a brutalist pub, buying groceries at the brutalist supermarket. I wonder what the suicide rate would be like.

Hey, that's where Godard filmed Le Mepris

>brutalism is cool
Where are you from you fucking faggot? I live in an ex-commie shithole and there is nothing "cool" about brutalism. It is disgusting and out of place. It might seem "cool and 0MG s0 w31rd xDD" to Westerners but you mongoloids have no idea what it is like to live in a commie-block. It is unhealthy for the spirit. It is ugly, every single building is unpleasant for the eye. You feel like a lab mouse inside any of those ridiculously low ceiling flats, where every single square meter that you possess has been calculated by commie "geniuses" to suit the bare minimum of your needs.

tl;dr kys

Is there a name more aesthetic that Wittgenstein? I don't know why but I really dig that name.

I think it is very obvious that is was designed by the early Wittgenstein - the autism is palpable.

Late Wittgenstein, after the tragic realization that his thought spawned the abomination that was the Vienna circle, and he in turn became a real philosopher, could have produced something more aesthetically pleasing than this, which looks like the result of a special needs class banding together to make a "creative" house in minecraft.

>deliciously dystopian.

It was at this point that Crawling in my Skin started playing in my head. Holy shit you are a faggot.

There's a certain majesty to overwhelming ugliness, it is so forceful. It has an immutable quality that beauty simply does not, if you surround a brutalist building with other nicely decorated buildings the brutalist building will dominate the street and mar the aesthetics of everything else. Aggressive truly is the word for it.

You should also realize brutalism was invented by westerners and western countries are full of brutalist architecture. Here in the UK virtually every public building constructed between the 1960s and the 1980s is brutalist and it is awesome, I love them.

In a city near me there's this one street where there's only one massive brutalist building beside a buncher of smaller more conventional buildings and whenever you walk by it you're always caught in its shadow, it just has this inescapable aura that assaults your eyes every time you walk by.

It's like the exact opposite of the kind of effect really elaborate churches have, they instil a sense of awe but rather than being the uplifting awe of divinity it is the crushing oppressive awe of dread.

Dystopian aesthetics are cool.

It reminds me of half life 2

You would never ever live in that, stop trying to intellectualise bullshit just to be contrarian. Ugliness (brutalist architecture) is depressing. Beautiful architecture is beautiful because it uplifts the soul. This monstrosity only evokes feelings of melancholy, powerlessness and disharmony with the natural landscape; not to mention brutalist buildings being poorly designed by almost every measure. They let in very little natural light, they age like shit and they have shitty proprotions literally just because the people who designed them thought they were being rebellious (contrarian for the sake of contrarian). Its bullshit.

>literally 20 cm of column
that entire part doesnt look stable.
hell be fine

There's a certain majesty to overwhelming shittiness, it is so forceful. It has an immutable quality that beauty simply does not, if you surround a huge pile of rancid shit with other nicely decorated things the rancid pile of shit will dominate the scene and mar the aesthetics of everything else. Aggressive truly is the word for it.

Holy fuck "vocational" architects are such dumb autistic brats

He said with a snarky, childish grin on his face.

It's not western, it's jewish and intentionally soul-crushing. Also, can tell you've never been to China or Japan. Things are not how you think. Most buildings look like they're made of cardboard and often aren't much sturdier.

You have just confirmed the point I made in my previous post.
>You should also realize brutalism was invented by westerners and western countries are full of brutalist architecture
That does by no means imply that brutalism is the dominant style in any Western city. It isn't (whereas many cities in ex-soviet shitholes are infested with that architectural plague)
>In a city near me there's this one street where there's only one massive brutalist building beside a buncher of smaller more conventional buildings
Case in point. The disgusting concrete buildings stand out because of how depressingly ugly they are in an environment where you would normally expect beautiful old-school architecture.

In an environment where brutalism is dominant (e.g. the commie-block where I grew up), there is no such thing as "an inescapable aura that assaults your eyes every time you walk by". There is nothing poetic to it, it is only hideous and insulting. I do not know what is your motivation for supporting brutalism (but I suspect it is exactly the "its so weird and cool xDD" mentality most westerners have - that is why you keep praising utter shit from the third world, etc. while simultaneously ignoring your own culture) but no sane person would want to live in a commie block. It is a nightmare. In other words - grow up

I actually like looking at those buildings.
Where do i start with architecture/buildings?

Here's the thing, I like beautiful architecture too. But I also think it's important to be able to appreciate aesthetics that invoke negative feelings well.

I fully agree, brutalism evokes melancholy, powerlessness, the industrial world, and it is so forceful and violent in its evocativeness that cannot be ignored. It is one of the few forms of architecture that does what it does well so masterfully that it overwhelms the senses of the onlooker. This is why I compare it to elaborate cathedrals, when you enter the Vatican for instance the gentle, graceful aura of the aesthetics make you feel small in a good way - you are awed by the sheer majesty and scale. Brutalism is the exact opposite, it is so violent and aggressive in its aesthetics that it makes you feel small in a demoralizing way - you're so overwhelmed by the oppressive aura it radiates. It's like a great big monument to the most insidious and savage parts of the spirit.

Indeed in order to truly appreciate beauty it is important to appreciate this kind of ugliness.

This is true. I've been to a lot of ex-commie countries and the architecture is depressing. I climbed up a hill in Bratislava and across this river was endless rows of hellscape communist blocs. This style was sanctioned by the jewish soviet union and forced upon its vassals to break people's spirits, then a lot of those jews came west and started promoting/sanctioning the same building styles. It's aesthetic warfare, jews have no concept of beauty.

Yeah, it was so god-tier time and place it made both nazism and communism happen.

>That does by no means imply that brutalism is the dominant style in any Western city. It isn't (whereas many cities in ex-soviet shitholes are infested with that architectural plague)
It's not. The point I'm making is that westerners are going to be familiar with brutalism. It's not a weird strange foreign aesthetic that people don't see every day.
>The disgusting concrete buildings stand out because of how depressingly ugly they are in an environment where you would normally expect beautiful old-school architecture.
This is fundamentally a difference in perspective. Fundamentally my aesthetic tastes allow for a degree of ugliness, disgust and despair where you do not. In this instance you're just describing something that my eye would see positively. I like disgusting concrete buildings that dominate the environment, you don't.

>that is why you keep praising utter shit from the third world, etc. while simultaneously ignoring your own culture
The block of flats in that pic is in Scotland. The house posted beforehand was from Canada.

What are you so triggered for anyway? Do you get this mad any other time someone likes an art-style you don't?

You're defending something because it succeeds at invoking feelings the architects wanted. You're totally being a pretentious twat to admire and appreciate ugliness. no one wants to feel these emotions that brutalist archtecture tries to evoke except a tiny minority of depressed weirdos who think there's something romantic about the hopelessness of it all.

Of course it succeeds at what you describe because that's why you're measuring its beauty by. Architecture shouldn't be measured by its ability to invoke negative feelings, it should be positive. That's why 'harmony', natural lighting, good proportions, lighter colours, speak to the soul in positive ways and are so important.

Architecture, especially architecture that dominates city centers, public spaces, utilities etc should be built to uplift the soul. You could endlessly argue about the subjectivity of it all, but almost everyone agrees that brutalism does not achieve this goal.

Why the fuck do you think so many millions of people tour Europe on their holidays? Western Europe attracts so many sightseers in large part due to its beautiful traditional architecture - they're awe-inspiring and many are incredible artistic achievements. Its a shame that so many people refuse to return to higher standards of taste and aesthetic all because they think its an anarchistic style.

>What are you so triggered for anyway? Do you get this mad any other time someone likes an art-style you don't?
You cannot possibly comprehend the experience of growing up in an ex-commie shithole. Communism is basically an experiment gone wrong - forcing the people outside of their culture and history (by the most repressive means imaginable; e.g. neighbors reporting one-another for having wrong opinions and being consequently sent to internment camps for "reeducation") for the sake of entering the grand new age of a communist dystopia where life boils down to not having an empty stomach. I could write about this topic for hours but I do not have the time. The point I am trying to make is the following: brutalism is the symbol of such a terrible society. It perfectly captures every aspect of living in such a nightmare: soulless, insulting, hideous, poor. And why am I triggered by your posts? Because you, a Westerner (just like many other Westerners) have this twisted respect for such atrocities. I can't describe what it felt like when I visited a Western city for the first time in my life at the age of 16. My mind was blown. It was beautiful. Westerners have forgotten to respect their own history and culture for the sake of praising abhorrent garbage from the rest of the world. That is why I despise you. You had something amazing and you are willingly trading it for what? Commie blocks? Fuck you.

Lemme preface this with one thing
>Of course it succeeds at what you describe because that's why you're measuring its beauty by
Woah, buddy. I never said brutalism is beautiful, in fact I explicitly said it isn't. What I said is that it's overwhelmingly ugly and this ugliness is a quality to be appreciated. You seem to have this mentality that we should have a vision of what artistic quality is and then direct all aesthetics towards that, my view is very different. I'm considering aesthetics based on the effectiveness of how the artist is able to impress his own vision upon the observer. Which is something brutalism is among the best at, which even you anti-brutalists can't deny since it resonates in you strong enough to hate and despise brutalism. It invokes the most negative characteristics of the soul in such an effective way that the artistic merit is undeniable.

The flipside is of this is that the appreciation of negativity in aesthetics like brutalism can heighten the appreciation of beautiful aesthetics elsewhere. And the reverse is true. If you're starved of beauty a majestic building would be so much more inspiring, and if you're surrounded by beauty an ugly building would only be that much more dreadful. It is aesthetics like these that stress the limits of emotion and understanding, it would be incomplete to reject either. To truly affirm life is to embrace both.

There is beauty, I like beauty and so do you. And there is also ugliness, I like ugliness and you do not. Saying ugliness sucks because it's not beauty misses my argument. I'm not telling you ugliness is beautiful, I'm telling you ugliness is worthwhile.

Your argument is trash and people like you should be removed from society.

>Unironically referencing Crawling in my Skin ironically at this point in time

Yeah, yeah, yeah I get it. You hate communism and communist rule in Eastern Europe sucks. That's cool, I understand that.

But you seem to be projecting your hatred of communism and westerners who praise communism into my appreciation of brutalism. Brutalism is not the property of communism, it is an aesthetic unto itself. I'm not praising communism, I'm praising brutalism on its own merits. Likewise earlier I pointed to Mussolini's headquarters as an example of impressive dystopian aesthetics, that's not praising fascism, it's praising the aesthetics of Mussolini's headquarters. I don't "have this twisted respect for such atrocities", I have an aesthetic appreciation for brutalism. And as I told you brutalism was invented in the west anyway. Likewise if communist regimes built classical architecture this wouldn't make classical architecture communist, nor would it necessarily have to mar an appreciation of classical aesthetics

I get that ones own life informs ones aesthetics. But you should appreciate that my life is not yours. I've never visited an Eastern bloc country, my encounters with brutalism are limited to Britain.

If you hate communism more power to you. But don't expect it to spoil my enjoyment of brutalism.

...

You are constantly appealing to the fact that you live in a post-communist country. Yet, I live in one as well and I have no problems with brutalism. In fact, only after communism ended did we really witness a drop in aesthetic standards.

>I'm considering aesthetics based on the effectiveness of how the artist is able to impress his own vision upon the observer.

And this is what I just said was fucking bullshit. Architects have no right to suck each others dicks and circlejerk over who can ruin a city the most with their hideous buildings. Gas yourself. There's no artistic merit in extreme ugliness for the sake of ugliness, just like there's no beauty in one of my turds.

>What I said is that it's overwhelmingly ugly and this ugliness is a quality to be appreciated.
>I'm not telling you ugliness is beautiful, I'm telling you ugliness is worthwhile.

Incorrect. Ugliness in itself is an evil to be detested, and avoided wherever possible.

>There's no artistic merit in extreme ugliness for the sake of ugliness
And why isn't there?
I disagree.

Lately an architect is nothing but a technician who also happens to be a clueless, infatuated bunch of badly digested diffuse intelectual references desu.

I'm not an architect?

Because its lazy, and I don't know, maybe because 'beauty' is the direct opposite to 'ugliness'. It takes far more skill to build something that meets traditional criteria for beauty/aesthetics than it does to build massive concrete monstrosities. The only skill that it may involve is elaborate interiors and shapes, which can just as easily be incorporated into traditional architecture.

>And why isn't there?

Why ought there be? You're going to have to justify this. This is exactly the kind of thing an "art fag" would say.

Im sure that hospital would be just the uplifting environment needed for a sick person. Imagine being this Jewish to think this is a good design for a hospital.

The ideally, truly cleaned-up Human, about whom all of the literary artists nowadays seemingly want to write, is a robot. Any Robot, let us note, can be rendered as brilliant, as shiny, as rationalized, and as streamlined, with “clean lines,” as is desired, as well as most perfectly elegant, according to the tastes of the day. The Robot is destined to become the centerpiece of the Palace of Discovery… It is he who is the end-all and be-all of so much civilizing “rationalistic” effort…admirably Naturalistic and objective (the Robot occasionally becomes intoxicated, however! the sole human trait of the Robot at this time)… Ever since the Renaissance there has been this tendency to work with everincreasing enthusiasm towards the advent of the Kingdom of the Sciences and the Social robot.

...

The Renaissance splendidly paved the way, through its Judaic fanaticism and its worship of the pre-scientific, for this stinking evolution towards all things seamy. This catastrophic promotion of all the world’s castrati into the Kingdom of the Arts… As a cultural manifestation of the “boys from the Freemasonic laboratories, and as claptrap even more bound-up, more constricted than Positivism, naturalism has since the Renaissance carried forth the same gigantic stupidities, the same calamitous prejudice in favor of
the ultimate power of vapidity. This trick has not fallen on a deaf Jewish ear…

Sterile, conceited, destructive, swinish, and monstrously megalomaniacal, the Jews are currently accomplishing, to full capacity, and under the same standard as their conquest of the world, the degradation, the monstrous crushing, and the systematic and total annihilation of our most natural emotions as conveyed in all of our essential, instinctive arts, in music, painting, poetry, theater… Replacing Aryan emotion with the Nigger’s tom-tom.

Surrealism, an extension of naturalism, is art for hateful robots, an instrument of Jewish despotism, swindle and imposture… As an extension of imbecilic naturalism, and as the rod and pruning shears of the Jewish eunuchs, surrealism is the registry of our emotional disenfranchisement…the ground for our hecatomb, our communal mass grave for idolatrous Aryan cretins, duped and cuckolded on a cosmic scale… And then it’s an entirely done deal! admirably done…for mugs like us!… At surrealism’s door, long quivering with impatience, with reductionism, and with objectivism, to all of its degrees, all or nearly all of our great writers ceaselessly hone themselves down to the infinitesimal, to the loss of that “jingling bell,” to the loss of the very last bit of substance. Were they to continue to handle themselves somewhat badly, were they to apply themselves to fantasy, were they to be drawn into idealism or romanticism, there are those who would immediately and fatally so smooth them out, after so many analyses, as to put them on their way towards surrealism…

But quantifying value by the effort put into it is literally the LTV, you a communist or something?

>maybe because 'beauty' is the direct opposite to 'ugliness'.
That's why I'm praising it. Ugliness as the direct antithesis of beauty can be just as much of a powerful artistic force to impress the vision of artist into the mind of the audience. When considering art based on the evocative ability they both can be very impressive. Which IMO is a more meaningful way to consider art rather than grading it on how beautiful it is. In the case of literature on this board we should be very aware that grim stories are often much better than nice stories, despite not being uplifting in any way. They carry the same kind of oppressive aura that I'm praising in Brutalism.

You still haven't said why its good to have brutalist buildings that evoke NEGATIVE feelings: why are NEGATIVE feelings evoked from such buildings to be admired, especially ones that impose themselves in public spaces? They evoke negative feelings, why do you seem to think its good that such buildings exists for this purpose? There is nothing noble about it. If your goal is to design cunty buildings that crush the souls of people who use it, live in it or live near it; you are a cunt, a communist, a Jew or all three.

How does a hairline like that even come about? I don't understand.

That's exactly what I've been doing for this entire thread. But your only response is
>that's bullshit
I've explained extensively why I appreciate brutalism. If you disagree you disagree and that's fair enough. But don't pretend like you're right and I'm wrong just because.

>tfw no brutalist hermitage to write futurist manifestos in on a smartphone