Brutalism

you are right, however, if you see what threads keep unbanned on pol it makes no difference at all. i have never seen pol so filled with sliders and shills since the last us election.

on topic,
i believe it has to do with our brainwash/dumbing down agenda.
the amazing old cathedrals, the paintings, the sculptures from past times were amazing because they were a representation of a holy thruth and god.
in times of lack of belief in a superior being like god back then, its hard to come up with sth appealing to the masses and all you have left is simple geometry.

I'd need some xanax to look at that comfortably.

The problem I have with a lot of modern buildings like that is that they look like they belong 50 years in the future, not now.

that building always reminds me of the first Jurassic park movie.

>fantastic: has greenery
>complete ass: no greenery

really stimulates my atheist high IQ soul

It flutters my fascist heart!

Butalism along side lots of greenery gets me hard

Before /pol/ ruined my life I was into architecture a bit. Mind you - even when I look back in my early 20s when I was a clueless cunt, I still had this weird and inexpiable sort of resentment towards lefties. I wasn't militant about it, heck I didn't even know how to articulate it, I just knew - it was shallow shit.

I tried to be "into it" going to every museum of modern art I passed by. I tried to like it but somewhere in the back of my mind, there was a voice...these fucks do this lazy shit, and every next artist in line sees the lazy no-effort and thinks "if he can get away with it - so could I" and it's basically a race to the simplistic lazy bottom.

Hence modern art being 90 degree square boxes and blank canvases.

Brutalist architecture came along the way. I was thinking "ok, maybe these museum things are lazy but I guess architecture needs some effort and dedication..." and brutalist architecture caught my eye since I live here where a lot of commie shit is around.

Nope. It's ass. It's an excuse to be lazy. It's nothing. I'm not some pompous faggot who thinks everything has to be baroque complex, but just putting slabs of concrete at 90' angles with protruding beams and random wedges is architecture, I'm a Royal Majesty King.

I fell for the Corbusier meme, I fell for Zaha Hadid meme (she's not brutalist - but still). Sad to say, but it's (((trash))).

>le postmodernism = everything I dislike maymay

Excuse me?

jesus christ literal hell

You somehow believe that every contemporary artist doesn't actually like what they do. So they became artists for the... profit? To sound smart? What is your narrative? Literally noone ever thought "if he can get away with it - so could I" and became an artist, in which world do you live?

Try this one

Why do they make buildings in a color/material that will look permanently dirty

Wtf I love brutalism now

why do they have a shopping trolley on their balcony, I am guessing they not only had to steal it but possibly drag it up the stairs if it didn't fit in the elevator

You gotta be...silly. You answered the questions yourself.

Today's fleet of "artist" are lazy, inept ideologues whose "art" gets selected for either pushing political agenda or money laundering. Money laundering is more inclined to "high art" like paintings, all of which are degenerate pieces of laymen simplistic pretentious trash.

Think Rhotke, LMAO, "muh 45 page essey on 2 color gradient" get the fuck out of here.

Conceptual art are where the gutter trash resides. People from college, lazy millenial fucks who made a conscious decision that they will NOT work a day in their life and will do anything that will enable them the permanent "artfag" lifestyle. You can achieve that only by following examples - what works.

So they will do "art installations" or "exhibitions" where they'll make some utter pointless, cringe inducing shitstain contraption and elaborate on its meaning using pretentious semantics and pseudointellectualism.

Bring a steel rod, a brick and a bucket full of piss, put the steel rod over the bucket, balance the brick on top and call is a symbol of internalized oppression of aboriginal people and their struggle with urban development of the 21st century.

You may call that art - but for one reason. You either aspire to be an artist or you wanna be "in on it"...and you know you don't have the drive nor the talent to practice something, for example painting, for decades to hone the craft. You're in it for the same reason Instagram whores post their ass with "empowered quote".

You're in it for quick attention and big likes. But you can go fuck yourself.

So you're telling me that the millions of people who are into modern art are collectively aware that it's worthless but they just decide to pay thousands of dollars on art degrees and work part time jobs since the art business is not lucrative for 99% of the people in it just to not have an actual full time job? People dedicate their lives to this shit, and you're insane if you think they don't buy it. Whether or not is has any merit, neither me or probably you are in a position to answer since we don't know shit about it. Like it or not, it's real.

>money laundering
Please explain, with a reference, why art that you dislike is more vulnerable to money laundering than art you like.

You mean if it isn't

I blame Warhol

>He doesn't have his own shopping trolley
Are you poor? Do you use the common shopping trolley? Like a fucking pleb?

HAHAHAHA the delusions. The fact that stupid fucks get IN DEBT to "study art" is a testament and an answer in itself to your post.

> I wanna be An Artist
> ok, at this school, we'll take 100 000 from you for it
> cool

Fast forward 5 years later, you're doing an installation, empty room with a square frame and LGBT colors inside. The installation was made TO RAISE AWARENESS on the plight of faggots and blah blah blah...some opportunistic local politician decides taking a photo in front of that shit would give him more points to make retarded clueless poor and indoctrinated, and indebted millenials vote for him.

> wow I got pain I'm a professional artist.

OK.

LMAO. nytimes.com/2017/02/19/arts/design/has-the-art-market-become-an-unwitting-partner-in-crime.html

You delisional fuck. And mind you this is not any kind of "expose" but a meek, pussyfooting article on a propaganda outlet.

> he thinks people pay 100 million for a degenerate painting "because they are art afficionados"

Hahahahahahahhah...........good grief...

Only retards pay for modern art

All the art that's inside the billionaire banker's estates look along the lines of this.

The Juden never fall for their own schemes the same way a competent drug dealer never does their own product.

>I REALLY FUCKING LOVE LEGO

Were you expecting me to not read your link? Where in the article does it state
that certain eras or styles of art are more money laundering, rather than systematic problems with the methods and culture of art auctions and auction houses?

are more vulnerable to money laundering *

It takes talent and years of practice to paint like Caravaggio

Conceptual art doesn't necessarily rely on technique

So it's easier to justify to pay a million dollars for some broken scaffoldings shaped like an anal plug

How is that money laundering?

So is it the presence of nature and the absence of non-brutalist buildings?

I'm with you 100% user. Keep on fighting the good fight.

>Easier to justify an absurd quantity of money for something
there
key word, justify

Would look eight billion times better next to a tropical forest with orangutans and ewoks swinging around

Please spell it out, I don't follow your logic.

How does neo-Caravaggio being more technically proficient than scaffolding buttplug make it more easy to justify spending money on mr buttplug's work, and how is that money laundering?

Looks like a Halo level.

...

...

I don't think this would be considered Brutalism. A pond focal point and a roof of trees is the exact opposite of Brutalism. A cursory google of this building supports this claim.

This feels uncomfortably bulbous, like a pore that has been left to fester.

There are elements of these that I can appreciate. In a desert town this would feel very at home. Probably never intended for the satellite dishes, and the narrow windows on the far left seem weak and tiny in a massive block of concrete.

Frankly it's exhausting having to defend modern art. Not because it isn't art, but because the discussion over what quantifies as art will inevitably come down to conflicting definitions and the debate takes more effort than it's worth.

If nothing else, I'd encourage you to see the merits of what conceptual art can provide if people are given a platform to experience it.

15 of the 20 most expensive paintings ever sold were from the 20th century or later.

...

...

...

This is what that thing on your pic replaced. Communism is a mental illness.

...

...

...

...

...

What is the "superior" alternative?

...

Even a mud hut.

...

>illegally acquire money
>purchase modern art
>critics value it at millions
>money is clean

With so many people in every one of these threads posting "money laundering" over and over like the martians from Sesame Street it shouldn't take so much effort to wring out an answer and a reference to my simple query as to why one form, style or era of art is more susceptible to be used for laundering money than another.

This is perfection

Because the guy who came up with the idea lived in a dry climate. The people who implemented it do not.

BRÜTALISM

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

some of the buildings look awesome, some just out of place.

The biggest problem imo is that the concrete walls look dirty after a few years so the building looks like shit from the outside even if it's perfectly neat on the inside

>not having one of these

...

...

This isn't photoshop btw

...

12 hours
Will anybody provide?

Some architects did it because they genuinely had a thing for it and a grasp for the aesthetic. Others, especially of the mid-sized college campus variety, did it cuz it's a dirt cheap style.

>its a /pol/tard doesn't know what modernism and post-modernism means thread

Like dude. Why do you need to make an outlandish massive conspiracy theory about how the WHOLE postmodern (and in part modern too since brutalism is not postmodernism) art movement is a facade for money laundering to make sense on your head that it exists? Art evolved, and I'm not even saying that it's good, and I'md efinitely NOT saying that money laundering doesn't happen, but you're extremely delusional if you think that it doesn't have any substance to it, and it somehow managed to fool millions of artists around the world into thinking it's real.

tl;dr
Art has
>high value
>market speculation
>value of an artwork is very subjective, so market is easily manipulable
>cash purchases
>totally unregulated and mostly ignored by police

In a step-by-step
>Have $50k dirty money
>Find hungry artist
>Pay him $5k for an artwork
>Declare that the artist is "rising" and now the artwork is valued in $50k
>Give your accomplice $45k
>He buys you the artwork for $44k
>now you have $44k of clean money

>"Bruh, it's the FUTURE!"

So I can sell a trash bin of used tampons for 44k?

No, it's a money laundering scheme.

Are you being deliberately obtuse?

You should be thankful that you don't have to launder any criminal proceeds. How the fuck do you clean up that 45k that you give away to your mate to purchase the artwork with so that it doesn't raise suspicions?

...

i think the anglos had more to do with that being destroyed

>DO IT AGAIN HARRIS

I wouldn't have a problem with brutalism if they like painted the walls or whitewashed them or some shit. Bare concrete is so tacky.