Nice buildings

13»

Comments

  • focuszing723
    focuszing723 Posts: 8,154
    edited August 2020
    rjsterry said:

    I mean if you want to live in Jane Austen World, it's great. It's just like so many places that had a heyday and then not much else happened: it feels like it's an exhibit rather than a city.

    Things that don't change die.

    Nah, I can understand that logic with natural selection, but with regards architecture in a hundred years I know which place will stand the test of time. Simple classic natural stone, not a Hodgepodge of steel and concrete akin to the eyesores of the 70's.
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,660
    rjsterry said:

    I mean if you want to live in Jane Austen World, it's great. It's just like so many places that had a heyday and then not much else happened: it feels like it's an exhibit rather than a city.

    Things that don't change die.

    Stamford is the worst example of this.

    Just feels odd.
    _
  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 29,785
    focuszing723 said:

    rjsterry said:

    I mean if you want to live in Jane Austen World, it's great. It's just like so many places that had a heyday and then not much else happened: it feels like it's an exhibit rather than a city.

    Things that don't change die.

    Nah, I can understand that logic with natural selection, but with regards architecture in a hundred years I know which place will stand the test of time. Simple classic natural stone, not a Hodgepodge of steel and concrete akin to the eyesores of the 70's.
    You might get another hundred years out of them. It mainly depends on whether they meet the needs of the occupants. If a building isn't used it won't be maintained and then it will fall down very quickly.

    And tastes change: this was the plan for the Royal Crescent in 1945.



    http://royalcrescentbath.co.uk/HistoryWhat if.htm
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • focuszing723
    focuszing723 Posts: 8,154
    The places getting knocked down are the concrete eyesores though, after tens of years not hundreds.
  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 29,785
    Only because in the last 30 years or so we have chosen to label old as beautiful. The idea of conservation areas and preserving some supposed aesthetic high point is relatively recent. For most of the rest of history, buildings were only kept if they served a purpose. The current fashion for idolising old buildings is just a reaction to the previous fashion for idolising modernity, which was itself a reaction against Victorian and Edwardian ideas of what made good buildings.
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • focuszing723
    focuszing723 Posts: 8,154
    rjsterry said:

    Only because in the last 30 years or so we have chosen to label old as beautiful. The idea of conservation areas and preserving some supposed aesthetic high point is relatively recent. For most of the rest of history, buildings were only kept if they served a purpose. The current fashion for idolising old buildings is just a reaction to the previous fashion for idolising modernity, which was itself a reaction against Victorian and Edwardian ideas of what made good buildings.

    I honestly don't think so. In a hundred time people will derive just as much pleasure from the design and a sense of history, also places akin to Bath will continue to be well needed tourist traps. I doubt many will flock to Milton Keynes!
  • focuszing723
    focuszing723 Posts: 8,154


    Tradition and a sense of history.
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,660
    Dutch houses - massive windows.
    _
  • thistle_
    thistle_ Posts: 7,218
    First.Aspect said:

    I'm surprised there's not a bit more love for art deco here.

    I prefer the industrial version: https://www.flickr.com/photos/52470375@N06/49929151818
    Inside is pretty nice but I can't find any pictures. I think they were a bit funny about us taking pictures in there: of the equipment I can understand but the preserved decor is something to shout about.
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,660
    thistle_(mbnw) said:

    First.Aspect said:

    I'm surprised there's not a bit more love for art deco here.

    I prefer the industrial version: https://www.flickr.com/photos/52470375@N06/49929151818
    Inside is pretty nice but I can't find any pictures. I think they were a bit funny about us taking pictures in there: of the equipment I can understand but the preserved decor is something to shout about.
    Bit fascist looking for me.
    _
  • focuszing723
    focuszing723 Posts: 8,154


    Ahhh yesss.
  • hopkinb
    hopkinb Posts: 7,129
    The Mezquita in Córdoba.

    Mosque, mosque, mosque...what's that? Bl00dy hell, a massive renaissance cathedral. All in the same building.



  • First.Aspect
    First.Aspect Posts: 17,354
    rick_chasey said:

    thistle_(mbnw) said:

    First.Aspect said:

    I'm surprised there's not a bit more love for art deco here.

    I prefer the industrial version: https://www.flickr.com/photos/52470375@N06/49929151818
    Inside is pretty nice but I can't find any pictures. I think they were a bit funny about us taking pictures in there: of the equipment I can understand but the preserved decor is something to shout about.
    Bit fascist looking for me.
    Nah. Take it back, don't let them steal it.

    Some of that industrial stuff is fantastic. If you ever see the inside of a Victorian pumping station or anything like that, you wonder at where all the money came from.
  • laurentian
    laurentian Posts: 2,558
    First.Aspect said:

    rick_chasey said:

    thistle_(mbnw) said:

    First.Aspect said:

    I'm surprised there's not a bit more love for art deco here.

    I prefer the industrial version: https://www.flickr.com/photos/52470375@N06/49929151818
    Inside is pretty nice but I can't find any pictures. I think they were a bit funny about us taking pictures in there: of the equipment I can understand but the preserved decor is something to shout about.
    Bit fascist looking for me.
    Nah. Take it back, don't let them steal it.

    Some of that industrial stuff is fantastic. If you ever see the inside of a Victorian pumping station or anything like that, you wonder at where all the money came from.
    I think that probably goes a little way to adding some weight to the argument that older = nicer/better. There do seem to be many examples of Victorian stuff being built to a design rather than to a budget (if that makes sense). The Natural History Museum being an example that springs to mind.

    Although hardly a tourist trap (and arguably not a "building", the sewers beneath London (Bazelgette?) are still functioning now that they are serving many many more people and businesses than were there at the time of their building - either magnificent foresight or magnificent design (or a bit of both) but either way, probably way outside of any budget that would be agreed to do an equivalent job nowadays.
    Wilier Izoard XP
  • focuszing723
    focuszing723 Posts: 8,154
    laurentian said:

    First.Aspect said:

    rick_chasey said:

    thistle_(mbnw) said:

    First.Aspect said:

    I'm surprised there's not a bit more love for art deco here.

    I prefer the industrial version: https://www.flickr.com/photos/52470375@N06/49929151818
    Inside is pretty nice but I can't find any pictures. I think they were a bit funny about us taking pictures in there: of the equipment I can understand but the preserved decor is something to shout about.
    Bit fascist looking for me.
    Nah. Take it back, don't let them steal it.

    Some of that industrial stuff is fantastic. If you ever see the inside of a Victorian pumping station or anything like that, you wonder at where all the money came from.
    I think that probably goes a little way to adding some weight to the argument that older = nicer/better. There do seem to be many examples of Victorian stuff being built to a design rather than to a budget (if that makes sense). The Natural History Museum being an example that springs to mind.

    Although hardly a tourist trap (and arguably not a "building", the sewers beneath London (Bazelgette?) are still functioning now that they are serving many many more people and businesses than were there at the time of their building - either magnificent foresight or magnificent design (or a bit of both) but either way, probably way outside of any budget that would be agreed to do an equivalent job nowadays.

    That's a good point, they planned for future demand too.
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,867
    First.Aspect said:

    rick_chasey said:

    thistle_(mbnw) said:

    First.Aspect said:

    I'm surprised there's not a bit more love for art deco here.

    I prefer the industrial version: https://www.flickr.com/photos/52470375@N06/49929151818
    Inside is pretty nice but I can't find any pictures. I think they were a bit funny about us taking pictures in there: of the equipment I can understand but the preserved decor is something to shout about.
    Bit fascist looking for me.
    Nah. Take it back, don't let them steal it.

    Some of that industrial stuff is fantastic. If you ever see the inside of a Victorian pumping station or anything like that, you wonder at where all the money came from.
    even the outside of those pumping stations is a statement
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,660
    The most striking building I've ever been in, by far, is the Sagrada Familia.

    An absolute monstrosity on the outside, inside it really feels otherwordly.




    It's hard to find a picture that does the feeling justice. I've been to *a lot* of cathedrals (bit of an interest of mine), but that was the only one where I got the sense of awe and wonderment that I imagine people had when other super cathedrals were built.

    Really sticks in the memory like no other cathedral I've been in. Remarkable.
    _
  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 29,785
    laurentian said:

    First.Aspect said:

    rick_chasey said:

    thistle_(mbnw) said:

    First.Aspect said:

    I'm surprised there's not a bit more love for art deco here.

    I prefer the industrial version: https://www.flickr.com/photos/52470375@N06/49929151818
    Inside is pretty nice but I can't find any pictures. I think they were a bit funny about us taking pictures in there: of the equipment I can understand but the preserved decor is something to shout about.
    Bit fascist looking for me.
    Nah. Take it back, don't let them steal it.

    Some of that industrial stuff is fantastic. If you ever see the inside of a Victorian pumping station or anything like that, you wonder at where all the money came from.
    I think that probably goes a little way to adding some weight to the argument that older = nicer/better. There do seem to be many examples of Victorian stuff being built to a design rather than to a budget (if that makes sense). The Natural History Museum being an example that springs to mind.

    Although hardly a tourist trap (and arguably not a "building", the sewers beneath London (Bazelgette?) are still functioning now that they are serving many many more people and businesses than were there at the time of their building - either magnificent foresight or magnificent design (or a bit of both) but either way, probably way outside of any budget that would be agreed to do an equivalent job nowadays.
    Everyone forgets about the cost wrangles after the thing is built. Wren famously had endless disputes with the funders of St Paul's Cathedral. History is full of building projects that never happened or were drastically scaled back because the client's tastes didn't match their wallet.
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • laurentian
    laurentian Posts: 2,558


    building projects that never happened or were drastically scaled back because the client's tastes didn't match their wallet.

    . . . this is my world every day!
    Wilier Izoard XP
  • Pross
    Pross Posts: 43,550
    I like Georgian architecture, especially the country houses and more grand town houses but having worked in a few converted town houses in Bristol they don't really work practically especially when listed status minimises the opportunity for them to be modernised internally.

    The result of giving so many of the buildings protection is that, as RJS says, they stop being of use and therefore end up becoming unused and falling into disrepair. I know of Grade 1 listed buildings that have become ruins because it has become impractical to renovate.
  • darkhairedlord
    darkhairedlord Posts: 7,180
    thistle_(mbnw) said:

    First.Aspect said:

    I'm surprised there's not a bit more love for art deco here.

    I prefer the industrial version: https://www.flickr.com/photos/52470375@N06/49929151818
    Inside is pretty nice but I can't find any pictures. I think they were a bit funny about us taking pictures in there: of the equipment I can understand but the preserved decor is something to shout about.
    It's a bit trumpton.. I much prefer the factory in chigley.

  • bompington
    bompington Posts: 7,674
    darkhairedlord said:

    thistle_(mbnw) said:

    First.Aspect said:

    I'm surprised there's not a bit more love for art deco here.

    I prefer the industrial version: https://www.flickr.com/photos/52470375@N06/49929151818
    Inside is pretty nice but I can't find any pictures. I think they were a bit funny about us taking pictures in there: of the equipment I can understand but the preserved decor is something to shout about.
    It's a bit trumpton.. I much prefer the factory in chigley.

    Let me get this right: fascist.. Trumpton... surely just coincidence?
  • focuszing723
    focuszing723 Posts: 8,154


    Burj Khalifa. I wouldn't want to live in it or it's shadow, but as an engineering feat it is pretty impressive.
  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 29,785
    darkhairedlord said:

    thistle_(mbnw) said:

    First.Aspect said:

    I'm surprised there's not a bit more love for art deco here.

    I prefer the industrial version: https://www.flickr.com/photos/52470375@N06/49929151818
    Inside is pretty nice but I can't find any pictures. I think they were a bit funny about us taking pictures in there: of the equipment I can understand but the preserved decor is something to shout about.
    It's a bit trumpton.. I much prefer the factory in chigley.

    I quie like the look of that. Some nice modernist touches and bold use of colour.
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 29,785
    laurentian said:


    building projects that never happened or were drastically scaled back because the client's tastes didn't match their wallet.

    . . . this is my world every day!

    Champagne taste; beer money.
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,660
    focuszing723 said:



    Burj Khalifa. I wouldn't want to live in it or it's shadow, but as an engineering feat it is pretty impressive.

    What a waste of a high view.

    “As you can see, Dubai is built on a desert, so you can mainly see.....sand”
    _
  • First.Aspect
    First.Aspect Posts: 17,354
    I think that about London and New York, to be fair. All you can see is, well, London and New York.

    The Khalifa is absolutely gopping though, albeit not as bad as this:

  • focuszing723
    focuszing723 Posts: 8,154
    First.Aspect said:

    I think that about London and New York, to be fair. All you can see is, well, London and New York.

    The Khalifa is absolutely gopping though, albeit not as bad as this:

    That is a bloody eyesore. It does seem unfair a wacky architect designs some statement for whoever and the people who live/work there have to put up with it.
  • First.Aspect
    First.Aspect Posts: 17,354
    Who is going to complain?

    Kim Yong Un probably drew it in class with a crayon. And then built it all by himself between rounds of golf.
  • focuszing723
    focuszing723 Posts: 8,154
    edited August 2020
    That explain it.

    The plan for a large hotel was reportedly a Cold War response to the completion of the world's tallest hotel, the Westin Stamford Hotel in Singapore, in 1986 by the South Korean company SsangYong Group.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ryugyong_Hotel

    It's some kind of build length for not much reward.

Categories