Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by jdm2212 1240 days ago
That doesn't answer the question of "why did anyone let them build this crap". Why didn't the non-brain-damaged architects get to put up buildings?
6 comments

And also the conclusion that modern architecture is literally the result of brain disorders seems a bit too much.
It's a ridiculous premise but as to why let an architect build how they want? And why do they all look so similar?

Just fads. Same way web site designs follow trends.

You can revert a website with some difficulty, good luck reverting a 5-10 building project!

In Paris suburbs, they replaced this:

https://www.gettyimages.fr/detail/photo-d%27actualit%C3%A9/j...

Hope that helps you understanding.

Brutalism might be better than shanty towns, but it's still ugly af.
It was also cheap af to build in series, something that can't exactly be said of Vegas casinos.

I assume that, once time has made its effect and most of these buildings have been replaced, people will have good opinions about the remaining ones.

Brutality architecture is cheap and easy. It uses minimal materials: typically concrete and steel, and is simple to construct for poor people.
There theory is that pretty much everyone in Europe and USA had PTSD from the Great War.
World War II more so than the Great War. The former basically destroyed most of Europe, displaced millions and resulted in the massive collective traumas from deportations, mass murder, carpet bombing, etc.

Brutalism really only emerged in the 1940/1950 after WWII.

That question has an obvious answer : those architects are better at architecture than normal brain architects. Architecture is mainly functional, not esthetical
Citation needed? Architecture is ofcourse esthetical.
Aesthetics take the backseat when a two-digit share of your population has no roof. People these days tend to forget that these buildings replaced shanty towns.