ygmarchi wrote:Once buildings were usually built from materials from the surrounding areas, so they merged better with the environment.
Given the cost of transporting materials, I would guess that most of the bulidings we see in this picture are also built from relatively local materials. Local materials don't ensure beauty. Where the materials come from have effectively nothing to do with the result. Craftsmanship and good design will help, a lot.
ygmarchi wrote:The buildings surviving from the past are often the most valuable and beatiful of their times.
Generally they are also the most expensive, built by the wealthiest people, else they wouldn't have survived. We've been taught they are the most beautiful, but that's not a universal truth. Many are just pastiches of older design elements.
ygmarchi wrote:In the past architectural style had the time to settle though a process of refinement,
now it's often simply the effimeral fruit of the architect whims.
Architects are artists more than engineers, and sometimes move a little too far and fast for the viewers of their work. But give it time. We'll get used to it and will then be able to see the beauty in at least some of the newest buildings. (And you should know that many modern buildings have no architect behind them at all, just "design/build" companies.)
ygmarchi wrote:Poorer places tend to have uglier buildings,
but it's where there's only money and greed without culture that you find the worst buildings.
Are you referring to the neighbourhood in this picture? Is it poorer? Or is it the result of money and greed without culture? I can't tell just by looking at the picture.
Rob
[quote="ygmarchi"]Once buildings were usually built from materials from the surrounding areas, so they merged better with the environment.[/quote]
Given the cost of transporting materials, I would guess that most of the bulidings we see in this picture are also built from relatively local materials. Local materials don't ensure beauty. Where the materials come from have effectively nothing to do with the result. Craftsmanship and good design will help, a lot.
[quote="ygmarchi"]The buildings surviving from the past are often the most valuable and beatiful of their times.[/quote]
Generally they are also the most expensive, built by the wealthiest people, else they wouldn't have survived. We've been taught they are the most beautiful, but that's not a universal truth. Many are just pastiches of older design elements.
[quote="ygmarchi"]In the past architectural style had the time to settle though a process of refinement,
now it's often simply the effimeral fruit of the architect whims.[/quote]
Architects are artists more than engineers, and sometimes move a little too far and fast for the viewers of their work. But give it time. We'll get used to it and will then be able to see the beauty in at least some of the newest buildings. (And you should know that many modern buildings have no architect behind them at all, just "design/build" companies.)
[quote="ygmarchi"]Poorer places tend to have uglier buildings,
but it's where there's only money and greed without culture that you find the worst buildings.[/quote]
Are you referring to the neighbourhood in this picture? Is it poorer? Or is it the result of money and greed without culture? I can't tell just by looking at the picture.
Rob