Why is modern architecture so shitty? Who is behind this?

Those buildings exist even in England and France and the US, they aren't some kind of bolshevik patent.
They were built to draw rural population into the cities to work in factories and they did their job, but without any kind of step two, so we're stuck with them.

The brutalist buildings in my town look like total dog shit, the only thing they remind me off is the stench of piss and scum

It's cheaper. That's it.

Brutalism is the future you bourgeoisie cunt. This is now a Brutalism thread.

It's the future.

Capitalist scum wish they could design this.

...

Looks like Nowa Huta.

I've recently watched a PJW video on commieblocks and modern architecture in general, and he was just frothing with hatred for the things but in the entire 20+ minute video I haven't heard a single fucking viable solution, just a fucktarded proposal, that people should be allowed to live in normal single family homes as if making cities 40x the land area is something a person with functioning brain would ever seriously consider

He did the same thing with music and then he started talking about "real hip-hop" like Hopsin... Fucking Hopsin... The 30 year old cringe lord. I can't take anything he says seriously after hearing that.

Some modern architecture looks nice, especially the older stuff.

Pic related is cheap and commercial, but I think it's kind of clever in its minimalism, and (dare I say it) comfy.

That thing in your OP is downright offensive to me.

Architecture is the most visible aspect of culture.
If you get all cultures architecture to look the same, its a good first step into decimating cultural differences all together.

architecture has never been better than it is today

utility & aethetics can coexist easily. A building that houses many people doesnt necessarily have to be an eyesore.

do these people reject plaster on some twisted ideological principle or what the actual fuck?
those buildings could actually look pretty nice...

He also shittalked glass/metal/plaster refits of those buildings claiming they simply swap one shit facade for another, but I really don't know what's the preferred alternative.
Does he really think anyone is going to bother building apartment blocks that look like Sagrada Familia?
Arches, reliefs, buttresses and gargoyles are fucking time consuming and expensive and I really don't know if everyone would like to live in actual Gotham city.

disgusting

They should make something like this again

> when your buildings are so horrendous you have to use plants to filter out the eyesore

I'm pretty sure that everyone who hates post-modernist architecture and brutalism doesn't know anything about architecture in general.
They just want LE KOOL CHURCHES N SHIEET XD!!!!!!

Brutalism is nice for museums and stuff

I don't like commies, but they got architecture right. It makes sense on a societal level.

the only thing they got right is in the top left of that photo
everything else is shit
Khrushchevkas are mass produced 100% utility 0 aesthetics purpose build human anthills designed to urbanize the feudal shithole that was Imperial Russia.
They should have been leveled and replaced with prettier buildings looong ago.

>16 posters
>32 replies
lmaoin at the one dude and his reddit buttbuddy defending brutalism. It's disgusting. You stop being into the whole 'lol le cool dystopia aesthetic' once you actually spend any amount of time in it. Protip: It's not good. It's a grey conrete (but you already knew that) nightmare which reminds you of death and looks more like a factory than something anyone should live in.

I really like all the nature though, if the house itself wasn't so fuckugly it might be really comfy with a circulare or square apartment complex with a little park in the middle

Before and after.

You could put some pretty coating on the outside. Perhaps metal to make it look cool and futuristic. If you can't look like a comfy old building, look like a swag new building instead.

Might be a bit expensive though.

Anyone else like Mid Century Modern?

> enriched

...

These buildings are only nice from afar, because then you can see interesting patterns. The problem is: In the human street perspective, these buildings lack detail. The neighbourhood can be made interesting by varying with colours.

Old Queenslander style.

> Raised construction allows better ventilation, prevents some flooding
> High ceilings, large windows
> Plantation asthetic without the "muh slavery" baggage
> All-around veranda for shade and entertaining

I think modern architecture is fine for houses, but not for public/corporate locations.

That looks like a pain to paint/wash/maintain

le corbusier is responsible kill him when we invent time travel

Oh god it is. And the roof tends to come the fuck off when a hurricane comes through. But its pretty damnit

>it's kind of clever in its minimalism

This

I love you a lot :)

Just a reminder that the Art Nouveau style that pseudo-trads fap about is just as artifical as modernism. It was built upon the ruins of real, authentic medieval cities.

If you look at it, it's really just two boxes, but you mess with the angle/proportion of the roof, put a few windows in the right place, and you've got something that actually looks pretty comfy despite its minimalism.

Of course, by the later 1960s and the 1970s, it's like they either forgot or stopped caring about proportions & balance, so that style of house starts to look a lot less clever and a lot more carelessly slapped together.

>In mother russia nature does not surround city
>city surrounds nature

But when building on top of the old and expanding, one should remember to preserve some of the buildings for later generations to enjoy and learn from.

...

>I've recently watched a PJW video on commieblocks and modern architecture in general, and he was just frothing with hatred for the things but in the entire 20+ minute video
That's the cunt with The Thinker as his banner, yeah? What a surprise. Does he think he's going to convince anyone by spraying spittle at the lens of his camera with rants so poorly researched skimreading wikipedia for five minutes beforehand would fix many of his errors; or does he know that his content is strictly for people that already agree with him to simply work themselves into an orgasmic hate frenzy. He's the poster child for youtube """intellectuals"""; ignorant and probably quite stupid; but also arrogant and with an overinflated sense of self worth, which leads them to feel compelled to broadcast their uninformed opinions as if they had value.

The Stockholm School of Architecture is a modernist building, not a post-modernist one.

Jews and leftist hate beauty and excellence because beauty is a constant reminder that equality is fiction.

>this thread

I'm glad you enjoyed yourself

like you know jack shit about art you fucking pleb

I could heem literally any of your grandmas, while fighting off the eastern savages, pleb

Belgrade was bombed from the air in ww2

Yeah, you need to be mentally ill do design something like that.

What's the point of these threads?

>heem
What did he mean by this?

Or jsut good maintenance. Many of these buildings don't have muhc upkeep given to them which is actually a big problem for many infrastructure and buildings nowadays.

It's just hard to really get good money into Restoration and upkeep nowadays fora lot of buildings regardless of age.

looks comfy desu

I can honestly tell you the grime and general un-cleannes has little to do with the actual condition of these buildings
sure, they are undoubttedly disgusting, even for the people who have buildings like these in their own countries
and that actually takes us back to the original argument, and that is "Khrushchyovka" was a work of the devil

People and companies who wanted to save money being from China brutalist architecture makes me ill

kek'd

I'm suspect of this picture, can it be confirmed?

>aspies try to convince themselves that they like brutalism or modern architecture because they want to be special and different
>wonder why no girls ever touch their peepee

Looks like fucking trailer trash senpai

Yes, both by the Germans and the Allies.
But the way it was rebuilt was shit.

>let's build brilliant ornate buildings here
>but none of them can be more than 2 storeys
Why?

>women prison

Uhhh? I mean really? Fucking oppressors.

then

now

Because of the structural limits of building with blocks of stone, and the practical limits of building the workplaces of hordes of dilapidated 70 year olds with more than two flights of stairs in the time before elevators were invented.

Jews

>Be creatively bankrupt and physically unable to make beautiful things
>Justify it as conforming to some bullshit modernist shite
Commies, everyone

>says a middle class white teenager with Maga hat on

It's worse than that. I asked my dad who lived in a commie country in Eastern Europe why all the buildings were shit. If they built a lot of stuff from scratch, why not make it look good? His response was "The focus was on utility, not appearance. Unnecessary frills were seen as bourgeois and classist. We were all supposed to be equal, so everything was ismple and stripped down."

Modern college Marxists justify it as >muh brutalism is beautiful.

Actual Commies explicitly didn't WANT them to be beautiful and the Baroque sense, as they shunned the entire society behind that kind of architecture.

*IN the Baroque sense

>The focus was on utility, not appearance
this is true
>Unnecessary frills were seen as bourgeois and classist. We were all supposed to be equal, so everything was ismple and stripped down."
this is horseshit

He was literally in the Communist Party. He just told me what they told him. Communism isn't monolithic, there were differences between regimes.

The future is vertical forrests/gardens/jungles with drones all around them.

>Actual Commies explicitly didn't WANT them to be beautiful
This building was build by a commies.

You disagree with this? I don't like brutalism and Communist architecture, but utility is more important than appearance. Baroque was awfully kitschy.

Of course you can combine both beauty and utility like Bauhaus.

>He was literally in the Communist Party
Everyone who wanted to be something was in the party.
My father in law could recite you all mantras of Evening School of Marxism-Leninism (that's an actual name of actual institution) and even he would say this is total bullshit. They built plain looking concrete lego shit, because they had to build a metric fuckload of it in limited time with limited resources.
Every time those two constrains weren't present they built amazing looking stuff.

>mfw these are the people I share the board with

Maybe a /pol/vasion isn't so bad after all

Just what a pleb would say.

Congratulations, you played yourself

Sure, but the reason I mention it is that he was pretty high ranking. Not just a member, but part of executive committees and the like.

I'm not saying I buy it (I don't), I'm saying that's what the Party line was in those days, in his country. It's pretty obviously just covering their asses, but it was presented as "our buildings look like this on purpose, and not because we had to rebuild cities in a few months"

That picture looks like an apocalypse aftermath

I havethe never understood why Finns praise Alvar Aalto. I mean, look at this shit!

doesn't look bad

Or this fucking thing.

Why do art and architecture pseuds never know the difference between "modern" and "contemporary" ?

because they're mentally stuck in early 20th century

Or this horrendous piece of garbage which is supposed to be one of the most prestigious cultural buildings in Finland.

what's so garbage about it? it's simple and elegant; white colour and vertical windows really work well
don't get me wrong, there are many examples of shitty new architecture, but that's not it