[yongjik]

Being utilitarian is being beautiful. When I look at the Brooklyn Bridge, I feel the same sense of aesthetics I would get from Roman aqueducts.

The problem of some American architecture is not that they are too utilitarian - it's that they stopped being utilitarian in search of some nebulous artistic merit.

[quotemstr]

The Brooklyn Bridge is utilitarian, but also constructed with an eye to aesthetics and beauty. Contrast it with your typical highway overpass.

The same thing applies to the aqueducts, by the way. Sure, they were engineering projects, but they were constructed with an eye towards elegance and beauty.

Want to see a purely utilitarian aqueduct? Look up the Acqua Felice, built to restore Rome's water supply in the 16th century after a thousand years of interruption. Sure, it did the job, but it's much uglier than the old Roman aqueduct right next to it.

Now, modern buildings aren't just ugly because they focus entirely on function (like the Acqua Felice) -- they're intentionally and deliberately ugly and inhuman. Modern architecture is awful.

https://www.romeartlover.it/Furba14.jpg

[artursapek]

> Modern architecture is awful

I agree. There's a community of us who feel this way! https://twitter.com/Arch_Revival_

[rsynnott]

> Modern architecture is awful.

A bit broad, surely?

It’s worth noting that when you look at 2000 year old buildings, you’re generally looking at stuff that both lasted 2000 years, so was probably of fairly high end construction, and that survived 2000 years without someone saying “we should pull that down and build an office block”. A lot of the stuff that didn’t survive mightn’t be so inspiring, and after the stuff around at the moment goes through the same filter, in the 40th century people may marvel at how amazing 20th century architecture was!

[Joeri]

Unless it is actively preserved for the entire duration I doubt any modern concrete building will survive 2000 years. Brickwork may last that long, depending on the quality of the masonry. There is definitely some selection bias with ancient architecture, the buildings built to stand forever are the ones that have stood forever.

I wonder how granular people will look at this period of history in 2000 years. Just like how we tend to lump a period of half a millennium together as “roman times” people in 4000 ad might consider a 17th century cathedral and a 21st century court house to be from the same era.