Relatively low-density classic design could not create the units per acre needed at a feasible cost to accommodate the millions of illegal "refugees" that the government is welcoming into the country and graciously sticking the taxpayer for the cost of this largesse.
Of course, in the name of "equity", all of the "supremacist" citizens of any color could be relocated to high-density taxpayer funded "ugly" housing while their existing attractive homes and future royal developments are redistributed to the less fortunate illegal brethren. I think this was already tried by the Bolsheviks and the Chinese Communist party elite.
I love old architecture. I sometimes go up and down streets in Chicago, remotely from Texas, to see the style of architecture from fin de siècle Cook County. Reminds me of my childhood in the 1960's. English architecture from the past is worth preserving.
Although building with a coherent architectural vision...and enforcing that vision in law...is occasionally done with a positive result (Australia's Canberra, Bavaria's alpine villages, Washington State's Leavenworth come to mind) it seems to be done most commonly in the USA not so much to put forth a grand vision of beauty but to force a uniform adherence to a developer's uninspired corporate branding in HOA-ruled residential developments. In the rare cases of beautiful modern architecture in larger cities it is more piecemeal and random, most likely because cities are eager to attract development and to place as few limitations on developers as possible, along with developers wanting the most bang for the buck. 'Build it as tall as you can and as cheaply as you can' appears to be the operative rule in an industry where the price per square foot holds sway.
I remain hopeful that technical advances in large scale 3-D printing will one day usher in an architectural renaissance in the USA, with elaborate and ornate facades and interior embellishments possible at a manageable cost.
Even though modest, I always liked the cozy looking row houses Mrs. Bucket (pronounced bouquet, dear) lived in (from the show Keeping Up Appearances). Perfect size house, and perfect size yard.
I agree that developers are destroying the world with ugly buildings. But I don’t like the idea of not being able to modify my own property without getting permission from someone else.
I have dealt with architects for the last 20 years. Squares, rectangles. and white. If I knew it was going to be that easy, I might have changed course.
Ha! I’ve been waiting for this! I am a young designer so my perspective basically is modernism did have some unique and interesting ideas about materials and space planning. However in practice, it prioritizes form over function for forms sake. Not always the best!!
Side note, I was in england in May and saw poundbury as our tour guide wanted to show us. So cute and regal! Lots of wide open spaces too which surprised me.
One of things maybe agree with on the left is more density in towns / neighborhoods. It is more efficient living than say Los Angeles IMO. But I know John Philips thinks the exact opposite... and that’s okay!
I tried to build a treehouse in Poundbury, and I was shot with a crossbow.
Why IS modern architecture so awful and ugly? Is it just because ugly is cheaper/easier/faster to build?
Sounds like my HOA....
Relatively low-density classic design could not create the units per acre needed at a feasible cost to accommodate the millions of illegal "refugees" that the government is welcoming into the country and graciously sticking the taxpayer for the cost of this largesse.
Of course, in the name of "equity", all of the "supremacist" citizens of any color could be relocated to high-density taxpayer funded "ugly" housing while their existing attractive homes and future royal developments are redistributed to the less fortunate illegal brethren. I think this was already tried by the Bolsheviks and the Chinese Communist party elite.
I love old architecture. I sometimes go up and down streets in Chicago, remotely from Texas, to see the style of architecture from fin de siècle Cook County. Reminds me of my childhood in the 1960's. English architecture from the past is worth preserving.
Although building with a coherent architectural vision...and enforcing that vision in law...is occasionally done with a positive result (Australia's Canberra, Bavaria's alpine villages, Washington State's Leavenworth come to mind) it seems to be done most commonly in the USA not so much to put forth a grand vision of beauty but to force a uniform adherence to a developer's uninspired corporate branding in HOA-ruled residential developments. In the rare cases of beautiful modern architecture in larger cities it is more piecemeal and random, most likely because cities are eager to attract development and to place as few limitations on developers as possible, along with developers wanting the most bang for the buck. 'Build it as tall as you can and as cheaply as you can' appears to be the operative rule in an industry where the price per square foot holds sway.
I remain hopeful that technical advances in large scale 3-D printing will one day usher in an architectural renaissance in the USA, with elaborate and ornate facades and interior embellishments possible at a manageable cost.
Beautiful architecture, music brings out the best in people.
Even though modest, I always liked the cozy looking row houses Mrs. Bucket (pronounced bouquet, dear) lived in (from the show Keeping Up Appearances). Perfect size house, and perfect size yard.
Thank you for an important lesson in real estate 101 🙂 Ann.
I agree that developers are destroying the world with ugly buildings. But I don’t like the idea of not being able to modify my own property without getting permission from someone else.
I have dealt with architects for the last 20 years. Squares, rectangles. and white. If I knew it was going to be that easy, I might have changed course.
This SCREAMS for Rod Serling:
"A prince, ruler of a withered empire, takes emotional refuge in a small town, the product of his own making..."
Ha! I’ve been waiting for this! I am a young designer so my perspective basically is modernism did have some unique and interesting ideas about materials and space planning. However in practice, it prioritizes form over function for forms sake. Not always the best!!
Side note, I was in england in May and saw poundbury as our tour guide wanted to show us. So cute and regal! Lots of wide open spaces too which surprised me.
One of things maybe agree with on the left is more density in towns / neighborhoods. It is more efficient living than say Los Angeles IMO. But I know John Philips thinks the exact opposite... and that’s okay!
Ann,
Great to see a positive posting on architecture from you. And even positive on your nemesis: The New York Times.