# Why did modern architecture fail? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 24, 2009, 4:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-modern-architecture-fail/487218 "2009-02-24T16:53:44Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![smiling\_bandit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e9a140/32.png) [@smiling\_bandit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smiling_bandit)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2009, 8:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-modern-architecture-fail/487218/81 "2009-02-25T20:48:48Z")
> [@GorillaMan](#): > > My hunch is that **smiling bandit** is vaguely alluding to atonality or to serialism in particular, but I may be wrong. Bleg. Yes, you are right. I’m not very good with my music terminology. ---
**Author:** ![straight\_man](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/straight_man/32/3027_2.png) [@straight\_man](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/straight_man)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2009, 8:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-modern-architecture-fail/487218/82 "2009-02-25T20:49:39Z")
> [@GorillaMan](#): > > Mind you, it’s still not hard to find [exceptions](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lloyd%27s_building). True, and I might also add that I find both Gehry and Libeskind very hit-and-miss\*. On the one hand, Gehry’s [tower](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gehry_Tower)is rather fetching, but on the other hand, I’m not a fan of the EMP or the Disney concert hall, and it’s hard to conceive of a tackier building than [this](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chiat/Day_Building). But the Swiss Re building is quite pretty in a non-obtrusive way (for those without phallic obsessions), and the International style of architecture makes downtowns more united in form and less grey. \*I know that neither of them designed that building. Actually, I can think of more striking examples than the one you gave. ETA: nobody has brought up brutalism, but if they do, I agree —brutalism sucks. ---
**Author:** ![Key\_Lime\_Guy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/48db29/32.png) [@Key\_Lime\_Guy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Key_Lime_Guy)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2009, 9:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-modern-architecture-fail/487218/83 "2009-02-25T21:00:55Z")
> [@Zsofia](#): > > You are aware, I assume, that Chartres and other medieval cathedrals aren’t asymmetrical by design, but rather from a hodgepodge of factors including the fact that it takes a very long time to build a cathedral and fashions change, and that every so often parts would burn down? Sure, but if symmetry were a controlling design principle, the hodgepodge of factors wouldn’t have mattered. Clearly they accepted asymmetry and perhaps even found it beautiful. ---
**Author:** ![GorillaMan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/50afbb/32.png) [@GorillaMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GorillaMan)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2009, 9:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-modern-architecture-fail/487218/84 "2009-02-25T21:08:14Z")
> [@jayjay](#): > > Don’t forget [the Gherkin](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/30_St_Mary_Axe), which I actually like from the photos I’ve seen of it. I don’t know that I’d like it that much if I had to live or work within visual range of it, or if I had some heartfelt connection to the City of London. It’s generally popular among people who do or have either. The City is an area which has always constantly changed, and in any case it’s not easy to get a view of it from up close, at least in a way that makes it look all that different from other office buildings. > [@smiling\_bandit](#): > > Bleg. Yes, you are right. I’m not very good with my music terminology. In that case, you’re all the more wrong with your description of what was going on. Take [this](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rThdkUL9wkw) example of mature serialism - no consonance? Hardly. Indeed, the Bach quotations, beginning 30 seconds in, don’t sound out of place, not least because of the amount of dissonance in the chorale from which they come. Edit: brutalism? Done well, it can be good, albeit with the unfortunate tendency of concrete to get terribly stained. I went off to find a picture of the Hayward Gallery, which I really like, and found [this](http://www.flickr.com/photos/dbullock/2683083846/)…rather an appropriate banner for this thread 😃 ---
**Author:** ![straight\_man](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/straight_man/32/3027_2.png) [@straight\_man](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/straight_man)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2009, 9:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-modern-architecture-fail/487218/85 "2009-02-25T21:18:06Z")
> [@GorillaMan](#): > > I went off to find a picture of the Hayward Gallery, which I really like, and found [this](http://www.flickr.com/photos/dbullock/2683083846/)…rather an appropriate banner for this thread 😃 Wow, nice pic. I don’t think I’ve ever seen brutalist architecture look whimsical before. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Capt.Ridley\_s\_Shooting\_Party](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/cc9497/32.png) [@Capt.Ridley\_s\_Shooting\_Party](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Capt.Ridley_s_Shooting_Party)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2009, 9:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-modern-architecture-fail/487218/86 "2009-02-25T21:22:04Z")
> [@straight\_man](#): > > Just to clarify, you mean [this Edinburgh](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Edinburgh_Scottish_Parliament01_2006-04-29.jpg)? Yeah. The Scottish Parliament’s outside of the protected zones of the Old and New Towns, though. It still doesn’t stop UNESCO going insane over that and similar developments, though. The real shame of the Scottish Parliament is that it borders Holyrood Palace and is at the bottom of the Royal Mile. Once more, modernist architects fail to take into account any sort of local context. [QUOTE=GorillaMan] Then there was the issue of cities which had had the shit bombed out of them, and needed rebuilding - yes, mistakes were made, but not all of them can be blamed on the style of architecture. [/quote] :dubious: Not all of them, but a great many, and the other mistakes are irrelevant to the thread at hand. Do you accept that good design is vital for the continued health of a town or city? That city planners have a responsibility to the future growth of a city. That “experimental architecture” like that seen in Cumbernauld has a very high risk of looking dated within a decade? Would _you_ live in Cumbernauld, given a choice? > [@](#): > > Then, as Key Lime Guy has already pointed out, the Disney Hall did go through a protracted planning procedure, and it also does a really good job as a concert hall. And a lot of people do like the way it looks. I still don’t get what your point is, beyond ‘I don’t like the way it looks, so these things shouldn’t be allowed’. Should a pastiche of Carnegie Hall have been put there, instead? The building’s acoustics and internal plan have very little to do with the outer shell, so I don’t see the relevance that comment has: any modern concert hall costing hundreds of millions of Dollars is going to have decent acoustics, and, one would hope, be fit for purpose; it would have been a great concert hall whether the outer had been clad with wood or yet another Gehry twisted metal horror. ---
**Author:** ![GorillaMan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/50afbb/32.png) [@GorillaMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GorillaMan)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2009, 9:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-modern-architecture-fail/487218/87 "2009-02-25T21:56:25Z")
> [@Capt.Ridley\_s\_Shooting\_Party](#): > > Do you accept that good design is vital for the continued health of a town or city? That city planners have a responsibility to the future growth of a city. That “experimental architecture” like that seen in Cumbernauld has a very high risk of looking dated within a decade? Would _you_ live in Cumbernauld, given a choice? I think you’ve misunderstood my reference to Cumbernauld. Of course it’s a shithole. However, your protectionist stance is at odds with the right course of action, which would be to tear down the failed developments and rebuild from scratch, precisely because you seem to resist anything modern (not necessarily modernist) being built. Except wooden-clad concert halls - are you serious, there, that you’d rather major public buildings be simple brown blocks than actually have a spirit of adventure? That you don’t like the Disney Hall is only your personal opinion, as I’ve already pointed out, it is not some objective measure of the qualities of that piece of architecture. ---
**Author:** ![Capt.Ridley\_s\_Shooting\_Party](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/cc9497/32.png) [@Capt.Ridley\_s\_Shooting\_Party](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Capt.Ridley_s_Shooting_Party)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2009, 10:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-modern-architecture-fail/487218/88 "2009-02-25T22:44:03Z")
[QUOTE=GorillaMan] I think you’ve misunderstood my reference to Cumbernauld. Of course it’s a shithole. However, your protectionist stance is at odds with the right course of action, which would be to tear down the failed developments and rebuild from scratch, precisely because you seem to resist anything modern (not necessarily modernist) being built. [/quote] No, the right course of action is to prevent shitholes from being built in the first place, through proper restraint of proposed developments. What sort of suggestion is leveling towns every half century when the current fad sweeping the architectural world wears off? > [@](#): > > Except wooden-clad concert halls - are you serious, there, that you’d rather major public buildings be simple brown blocks than actually have a spirit of adventure? What? Again, no, you miss my point by a country mile. You brought up the interior of the Disney Concert Hall as proof that it is well designed. My point, being, that the interior is largely independent of the exterior shell, and the building would have functioned well as a concert hall no matter what the outside looked like. Nobody was seriously suggesting cladding the outside in wood like a garden shed. Good God, no! > [@](#): > > That you don’t like the Disney Hall is only your personal opinion, as I’ve already pointed out, it is not some objective measure of the qualities of that piece of architecture. Then, I guess having a proponent admit the “correct” course of action being to level a town every fifty years is as objectively damning of the current state as we’re likely to find! ---
**Author:** ![GorillaMan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/50afbb/32.png) [@GorillaMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GorillaMan)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2009, 10:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-modern-architecture-fail/487218/89 "2009-02-25T22:51:25Z")
> [@Capt.Ridley\_s\_Shooting\_Party](#): > > No, the right course of action is to prevent shitholes from being built in the first place, through proper restraint of proposed developments. What sort of suggestion is leveling towns every half century when the current fad sweeping the architectural world wears off? Of course it would be great if mistakes were never made. But they are, and will continue to be, which is why kneejerk protectionism isn’t always a good idea. > [@](#): > > What? Again, no, you miss my point by a country mile. You brought up the interior of the Disney Concert Hall as proof that it is well designed. My point, being, that the interior is largely independent of the exterior shell, and the building would have functioned well as a concert hall no matter what the outside looked like. I’ve not seen inside it, and I don’t think anything I’ve said suggested otherwise. My knowledge that it’s a good acoustic comes from the reports of others, along with (absolutely fantastic) recordings which have been made there. A concert hall is far more than the auditorium, though, and the sense of ownership a public can have of a place is important - it’s perhaps what’s never really been there in London, with the Festival Hall or the Barbican, but is _certainly_ there in the Bridgewater Hall (to bring it close to home again 🙂 ), with the design and layout of the building as a whole being crucial. I’ve alluded to this before, and I want to now ask it outright: what do you think a modern concert hall should look like? ---
**Author:** ![ralph124c](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/8797f3/32.png) [@ralph124c](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ralph124c)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 12:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-modern-architecture-fail/487218/90 "2009-02-26T00:34:55Z")
Here it is-the biggest abortion I have seen (MIT Stata Center):[Stata Center - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stata_Center) According to my MIT friends, the windows leak, the floors are warped, and the rooms are extremely weird.:smack: ---
**Author:** ![GorillaMan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/50afbb/32.png) [@GorillaMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GorillaMan)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 12:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-modern-architecture-fail/487218/91 "2009-02-26T00:42:38Z")
> [@ralph124c](#): > > Here it is-the biggest abortion I have seen (MIT Stata Center):[Stata Center - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stata_Center) > According to my MIT friends, the windows leak, the floors are warped, and the rooms are extremely weird.:smack: As for leaks and so on, I think your link sums up the situation, that buildings at the cutting edge of what’s possible might become problematic. The screwup seems to me a failure to decide who would be liable before problems arose. As for ‘rooms being weird’…I’ve seen ‘weird’ rooms in lots of buildings, but weird is in the eye of the beholder. I’d like to know what their particular objections are…if the lack of right angles is causing them trouble, then my reaction is to phone for the wahmbulance. ---
**Author:** ![vison](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/e47774/32.png) [@vison](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/vison)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 12:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-modern-architecture-fail/487218/92 "2009-02-26T00:47:59Z")
Piece of crap. Why the hell should anyone be stuck with an inadequate building? Would you be content to have a car that won’t start, with tires that won’t stay inflated, that uses 15 gallons of gas to go 5 miles, because it’s designed by some famous guy? It’s a con job, and people keep falling for it. A building is meant to be lived in, or for people to work in. If it cannot meet those simple expectations in the most basic manner, then the buyers have been had. ---
**Author:** ![MichaelQReilly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/df705f/32.png) [@MichaelQReilly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MichaelQReilly)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 1:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-modern-architecture-fail/487218/93 "2009-02-26T01:22:50Z")
> [@GorillaMan](#): > > I’ve not seen inside it, and I don’t think anything I’ve said suggested otherwise. My knowledge that it’s a good acoustic comes from the reports of others, along with (absolutely fantastic) recordings which have been made there. A concert hall is far more than the auditorium, though, and the sense of ownership a public can have of a place is important - it’s perhaps what’s never really been there in London, with the Festival Hall or the Barbican, but is _certainly_ there in the Bridgewater Hall (to bring it close to home again 🙂 ), with the design and layout of the building as a whole being crucial. > > I’ve alluded to this before, and I want to now ask it outright: what do you think a modern concert hall should look like? I really don’t want to get that involved in this thread, because I’ve argued my point to death, but I remember the last time we did this, somebody brought in a bunch of site about the all the maintenance problems and problems with light reflection that Disney Concert has. So I don’t really think you want to use that particular building to prove your point. ---
**Author:** ![jayjay](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jayjay/32/6765_2.png) [@jayjay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jayjay)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 1:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-modern-architecture-fail/487218/94 "2009-02-26T01:36:39Z")
> [@ralph124c](#): > > Here it is-the biggest abortion I have seen (MIT Stata Center):[Stata Center - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stata_Center) > According to my MIT friends, the windows leak, the floors are warped, and the rooms are extremely weird.:smack: Gehry again, naturally. ---
**Author:** ![Capt.Ridley\_s\_Shooting\_Party](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/cc9497/32.png) [@Capt.Ridley\_s\_Shooting\_Party](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Capt.Ridley_s_Shooting_Party)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 9:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-modern-architecture-fail/487218/95 "2009-02-26T09:59:02Z")
[QUOTE=GorillaMan] I’ve alluded to this before, and I want to now ask it outright: what do you think a modern concert hall should look like? [/quote] The [Schermerhorn](http://www.nashvillesymphony.org/img/press/ssc/north_front_lg.jpg) in Nashville (finished 2006), looks quite nice, and makes good use of natural lighting and modern materials. > [@](#): > > As for ‘rooms being weird’…I’ve seen ‘weird’ rooms in lots of buildings, but weird is in the eye of the beholder. I’d like to know what their particular objections are…if the lack of right angles is causing them trouble, then my reaction is to phone for the wahmbulance. My reaction is to execute the architect. ---
**Author:** ![GorillaMan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/50afbb/32.png) [@GorillaMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GorillaMan)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 10:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-modern-architecture-fail/487218/96 "2009-02-26T10:32:56Z")
> [@Capt.Ridley\_s\_Shooting\_Party](#): > > The [Schermerhorn](http://www.nashvillesymphony.org/img/press/ssc/north_front_lg.jpg) in Nashville (finished 2006), looks quite nice, and makes good use of natural lighting and modern materials. I think it looks vile. (Seriously.) Therefore, using your argument and assuming it’s not the case that your opinion is somehow superior than mine, it equally has no place being foisted on any city centre. ---
**Author:** ![Capt.Ridley\_s\_Shooting\_Party](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/cc9497/32.png) [@Capt.Ridley\_s\_Shooting\_Party](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Capt.Ridley_s_Shooting_Party)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 10:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-modern-architecture-fail/487218/97 "2009-02-26T10:47:55Z")
You assume wrong 😉 ---
**Author:** ![even\_sven](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/dfb087/32.png) [@even\_sven](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/even_sven)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 11:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-modern-architecture-fail/487218/98 "2009-02-26T11:10:34Z")
> [@Capt.Ridley\_s\_Shooting\_Party](#): > > The [Schermerhorn](http://www.nashvillesymphony.org/img/press/ssc/north_front_lg.jpg) in Nashville (finished 2006), looks quite nice, and makes good use of natural lighting and modern materials. I think it looks quite tacky. See, look, we all have opinion! Isn’t having variety what makes this world great? ---
**Author:** ![Capt.Ridley\_s\_Shooting\_Party](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/cc9497/32.png) [@Capt.Ridley\_s\_Shooting\_Party](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Capt.Ridley_s_Shooting_Party)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 1:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-modern-architecture-fail/487218/99 "2009-02-26T13:23:01Z")
[QUOTE=even sven] I think it looks quite tacky. [/quote] I said it looks _quite_ nice; it’s a step in the correct direction, which, for the purposes of this thread, should be defined as the complete opposite of whatever people like Gehry think or do. [QUOTE=even sven] Isn’t having variety what makes this world great? [/quote] No. Building nice buildings is what makes the world look great. Gehry and co. don’t make nice buildings. There is no virtue in variety in of itself if the constituent buildings are so ugly that they’re bordering on being in violation of natural law. ---
**Author:** ![GorillaMan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/50afbb/32.png) [@GorillaMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GorillaMan)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 3:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-modern-architecture-fail/487218/100 "2009-02-26T15:05:11Z")
> [@Capt.Ridley\_s\_Shooting\_Party](#): > > No. Building nice buildings is what makes the world look great. Gehry and co. don’t make nice buildings. There is no virtue in variety in of itself if the constituent buildings are so ugly that they’re bordering on being in violation of natural law. Define ‘ugly’. Objectively. While we’re at it, define ‘nice buildings’. As for ‘natural law’, I suppose you could just pick one of any number of definitions, or make up your own. Regarding that Nashville thing, which looks like something I’d expect at a Vegas hotel, you already know I think it’s ugly, so that must also be bordering on a violation of natural law? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-modern-architecture-fail/487218.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-modern-architecture-fail/487218.md?page=6)