I am delighted to have found this interview, and this channel. Thank you for putting into words, conversation and writing, explaining why we went from warm, inviting, detailed and enduring workmanship in architecture to cold, austere, hostile, ugly and inferior materials building.
What a fantastic interview this is. Many thanks to the staff at Cave of Apelles and in particular to Carl Korsnes for making this possible. We were so happy to have Stevens Curl in Oslo for the conference BUA 2023 (Beauty and Ugliness in Architecture seminar 2023). What a pleasant and interesting interview this is. Great work!
@@anders7741 Architecture is more than an ornate surface. Architecture kind happens trough the symbiotic impact of wt happens between surfaces. I only have the highest respect for historical buildings, but there so many things I disagree with on this presented discussion on „modern and lack of ornament = ugly. It’s like they have discredited Jackson Pollock for just being drops, but these drops become people and a lot more open to the imagination and interpretation. This discussion feels so biased and unscientific. Modern architecture challenged all the bad impacts of the architecture that came before, ornamentation does not mean good environment. The human scale problem presented is also kinda ridiculous. This can be turned around at 180°. One could argue an overly ornamental building, done in a bad matter (compare demo drawings of St. Peter’s in Rome) oppresses the human. Overly high ceilings like 5m, especially in tight bathrooms operas the human and make him feel lost. Finally I think it’s kinda of a vulgarity to discredit all modern architecture without an exception. It’s kind of like behaving like those people that hater on the Edison bulb. Three are not so many examples of historical „common people’s home“ so only the most influential and artistically developed building remained. I can assure you that living conditions in their ornamental buildings wasn’t nice at all. It’s ok to not understand modern architecture, I personally do not like postmodnistic buildings because I don’t like the tacky and weird reintroduction of historical elements in a chaotic way. I prefer buildings that calm me and have a connection with nature. I would totally agree with the ideas of prof. Curl when it comes that there are bad buildings existing somewhere in a way as discribed by professor curl, but I don’t like the argumentation in it absoluteness and harshness and presenting a clean and organized building as a crime against humanity. Superficiality and Supersimplification, I can say, is a crime against humanity and scientific and democratic discussions. I, personally ive in a modern building built in 1987. White and grey, It has a flat roof, flat walls, big windows, Overhangs. The Sun wanders nicely through the building and it’s never dark (only at night), it can be ventilated properly, it has a fixed core and anything else could be rearranged, walls could be even moved. It sits basically in a park. And I doubt it would become better if someone would violently toss some random ornaments on it.
When I started Architecture, one professor told us in the first lesson: "There are two Gods in architecture. Frank Lloyd Wright and LeCorbusier. You have to believe in those two, what else you believe ... I don't care."
Well that professor has a huge arrogance, FLW I like but Corbusier I truly despise him. They call many modernist architects gods too but I never appreciated that. The part that gets me the most angry is the restriction of styles in design class, it almost makes it totalitarian, and these are supposed to be the freest design classes for students, which are not.
I'm an atheist, but I appreciate religious architecture, it's often beautiful and generally it has a deep connection with history and the region it exists in.
I'm an architect and a Christian. It just true how embedded atheistic presuppositions have destroyed architecture, but more than anything individualism. Is not a moral judgement, but architecture has to look for trascendental and inmaterial ideals to acquire beauty. That's why I'm on my way to educate myself in Classical and Traditional forms. And btw this is something that any atheist can learn and practice, I'm pretty sure most current classicists are irreligious, even thou they know architecture has a religious component.
Look up classical theism if you haven't friend! It really connected the dots for me, if you regard God as reality itself then beauty becomes God speaking to us. I don't think the whole atheism/theism dichotomy is as hard as many portray it, often it's a matter of perspective.
A superb interview. Curl is passionate about this subject and rightly so. These are horrible blots on the landscape, devoid of meaning and utterly depressing to look at, never mind those poor people forced to live in them.
An erudite explanation of how the dreadful concrete monstrosities that infest cities all over the world. Professor Curl's book dismantles the pretentious nonsense that underpins "modernism" in architecture. We live with the dreadful results of this architectural style daily.
A captivating interview! Resounding applause to the Cave of Apelles for hosting the venerable Professor Curl. His searing critique of Modernism emerges as a guiding light of intellectual heroism, and his masterful polemic, Making Dystopia, deserves a place on every architect's desk.
The event was actually made possible through the seminar Beauty and Ugliness - that took place in Oslo 12 - 16 May 2023. We included and encouraged a trip to Cave of Apelles.
I enjoyed this interview immensely. I had thought of persuing architecture as a young college student, but decided against it because I couldn't imaging myself designing the hideous, monstrous crap that passes for "modern architecture."
When modernists are replacing once a beatiful streets to create an uninhabitable ugliness it's one type of a disaster, but imagine when whole cities are formed that way. This is what happened in my country, georgia, while it was part of USSR. This interview finally sorted my ideas of 20th century left and especially communists being somehow very aligned with modernist architects and there admiration towards totalitarian mindset. Being 4th year architecture student only now, I see, what university should have tought me and failed to do so. Professors were very busy admiring modernism and conceptions mostly. I would like to read all books of James Stevens Curl, but it's quite hard to find any of them both physically and online, I would be grateful if somebody helped me find them, escpecially one about egyptian revival and mentioned in video, making distopya.
great interview. We have major destruction of historical structures in Ukraine and now Palestine I shudder to think how new modernist structures will continue the destruction of culture, aesthetics and our downward spiral towards Dystopia and alienation of human identity
Enlightening and Eye-Opening - a masterful critique of the disfunction and dogmatism of Modern architecture and fallacies of contemporary urban planning. Professor Curl's insightful analysis is a must-listen for anyone interested in architectural history and its profound influence on our built environment.
This interview deserves so much more viewers. Thank you. Look at "The Line" project in Saudi Arabia. The totalitarianism in modern architecture is very much alive.
This is one remarkable interview, Its very educational and I am pretty sure I have learned a lot of new information and it has shook the ideology that was carved in my college years about the heroes of the modernism and the whole movement of simplicity ... I am pretty surprised how I got convinced to change my opinion and to do more research to learn more based on what i have heard in the interview . I am truly glad i found you through my instagram . well done connecting your social media and well done on such a well curated interview . thank you .
This was fantastic, I’ve always felt like I was missing information from this story or as if there were gaps in the narrative. This really clears things up. 🙏🏻
49:25 very interesting conversation, here Mr Curl goes straight to the point about the problem of modern architecture, but everywhere we are witnessing this impoverishment... so good question, what to do? perhaps as Julius Evola says "Let people of our time talk about these things with condescension as if they were anachronistic and antihistorical; we know that this is an alibi for their defeat. Let us leave modern men to their “truths” and let us only be concerned about one thing: to keep standing amid a world of ruins. Making the values of truth, reality and Tradition clearly visible to those who, today, do not want "this" and are confusedly looking for "the other" means giving support so that the great temptation may not prevail in everyone, where material world now seems to be stronger than spirit."
Since my early days in college, I've consistently believed that my perspective was flawed. However, after years of engaging with discussions like this, I find myself resonating strongly with the content. Despite having undertaken numerous projects in a contemporary style, I hold a personal aversion to it. The prevailing trend in the market nowadays seems to be heavily biased in that direction.
The wholesale destruction of beauty in public spaces shifts psychology from contentment to wanting- a certain type of wanting defined by a need to fill an existential vacuum that opens up as a result of the absence of the beautiful. This drives people towards consumerism and misanthropic thinking. People begin to see themselves in competition to one another and seek refuge in consumption. All of this makes sense in a capitalist political economy.
Wonderful interview. I appreciated that the spotlight was also on the modernistic influence in the churches, which deserves its own uprising. This channel is a tremendous source of good.
happened the same in Brazil, oscar niemeyer and Lucio Costa, modernism architectures, participated at the destruction of our ancient senate house, Monroe's Palace, in Rio de Janeiro, and then, they projected our new capital, Brasilia, horrible.
Approximately 1 billion birds per year are killed in North America alone by collisions with glass buildings. This doesn't need to be the case. I'm grateful that James noted the awful environmental degradation caused by modernist monstrosities. Thank you for creating this interview. I'm going to get his book.
Professor Curl is one of the most important reference figure in our cultural life. His point of view should be "the" point of view, beacuse we should fight for our architectural idenity in every part of the world. Modernism erases this identity. Vita Sackville-West He wrote that the house must be an integral part of the countryside, of nature. Modernism generates forms foreign to any experience. it is removed from any context.
Excellent conversation. Interesting perspective and historical knowledge of the subject. A deeper purpose, social engineering through building leading to the Nihilism and futility, refusal of reflection on greater ideas, construction, and ideologies of Existentialism. Mahe Ohna ✌️ Favour All
I like this man a lot. Gropius, Pevsner, &c were, quite obviously, talentless, garbage humans. I didn't know they claimed to have been inspired by the Arts & Crafts movement, though. It's such an absurd idea, it has me almost floored! Also, I would never trust an architect who couldn't draw. How does he visualize?
27:00 Mazdakism, Zoroastrianism dualistic religion that rose to prominence in the late 5th century in Iran from obscure origins. According to some scholars, Mazdakism was a reform movement seeking an optimistic interpretation of the Manichaean dualism.
“Beauty I think consoles, it gives pleasure, it is sensuous, it appeals to the eye, to the ear, to the intellect, it calms, it doesn’t disturb, it doesn’t do violence to you… so beauty will also involve I think a degree of handcraft, it will grow naturally from its surroundings, it will respect the soil… it should be sociable in the sense that it will respect its neighbors. And that means that certain geometries would be coherent, maybe the language. “ - James Stevens (51:06 Defining beauty)
100 times better than the one with Michael Diamant. At least one person in a conversation about architecture knows what he's talking about. I agree that modernism and its worst proponents have a lot to answer for this binary oversimplification that everyone is either Modernist or Classicist is nothing but empty rhetoric. You can't criticize Modernism and not at least touch upon the reactionary movements that came after. Would've loved to hear what Professor Curl thinks of Critical Regionalism for example.
Radicalism and exaggerated pomposity is a typical signature of any revolutionary movement. It in itself is not a sign of bad ideas. I live in Tel Aviv, where the Bauhaus old district has more of the genre houses than Berlin it is beautiful to live in and walk in the street. What came after in the 1970 architecture is something else. Then is where the art of city life in architecture was lost.
This was quite informative and very entertaining. Seeing a posh Englishman interacting with a young Norwegian was very...instructive? shall we say to this American. I understand the culture of my father (English) as seen from the perspective of another country much better. I also am unfortunately reinforced in my belief that it will never be England that can recognize what was done to smear Germany, and specifically Hitler. Prof. James Stevens Curl is well versed in architectural history, but needs to branch out a bit when it comes to the history of the Third Reich. Not a lovely bunch, but they were to the majority of Germans, and tradition was indeed important there. Until their efforts were infiltrated and corrupted, which is what the cult the professor referred to does so extremely well.
It is just common sense to build out of the materials that your surroundings offer you. The buildings built in that way 'fit' in the environment and don't 'poke' your eye like modernist buildings do. In my opinion, nobody will in the future go and admire modernist buildings like so many tourists go and admire historical buildings.
He makes some very interesting points however he does throw it away in places by making personal remarks that have no bearing on his thesis. But it is definitely time to examine where has the modernist movement brought us and why.
I absolutely LOVE the story about undiagnosed misogyny being the root of so many strange behaviors that we , the world population 2024 are engaged in dealing with . Keep talking gentlemen, so glad you both have your voices .
May I suggest that the host should at least try to limit, if not eliminate, the filler words. He "um"ed too much. Granted that rhetoric perhaps is not his main concern, those "um, like, you know" just make one less professional. Good interview, the topic sould be heard and discussed more.
Clips of this interview have been referenced on social media and I was excited to experience it in full context. While Mr. Curl makes several valid criticisms, I’m taken aback by his narrow-minded, shallow, and unsophisticated interpretations of the historical/retrospective political and philosophical themes. His commentary is dripping with bias and emotion and I wish he would have been more objective in his justifications.
How can person be so arrogant to say, that one era of architecture is wrong the way this man did? It has nothing to do with opinion. It has to do something with humility, that is important in every field and wich this man does not possess. It is a shame.
You might as well ask how someone can say that crime is wrong, or a child breaking his toys during a tantrum. Modernism is a childish tantrum that the rest of us are paying for
Your comment is completely relativistic and nonsensical. It isn’t just a matter of opinion or humility. In fact, the ones without humility were and are the modernists. There is a transcendental ethos and telos behind classical architecture and a satanic inversion of hierarchy behind modernism.
Very interesting and coherent with the direction the world is turning in all other aspects of life...
I am delighted to have found this interview, and this channel. Thank you for putting into words, conversation and writing, explaining why we went from warm, inviting, detailed and enduring workmanship in architecture to cold, austere, hostile, ugly and inferior materials building.
Absolutely agreed, the uglifying of our culture is anti-human and totalitarian to it's core.
The worship of money.
What a fantastic interview this is. Many thanks to the staff at Cave of Apelles and in particular to Carl Korsnes for making this possible. We were so happy to have Stevens Curl in Oslo for the conference BUA 2023 (Beauty and Ugliness in Architecture seminar 2023). What a pleasant and interesting interview this is. Great work!
There is no such thing as ugliness in architecture, my former professor once said.
@@M.A.K.666 Yes, I also have heard many professors in architecture say the same🙂
@@anders7741 Architecture is more than an ornate surface. Architecture kind happens trough the symbiotic impact of wt happens between surfaces. I only have the highest respect for historical buildings, but there so many things I disagree with on this presented discussion on „modern and lack of ornament = ugly. It’s like they have discredited Jackson Pollock for just being drops, but these drops become people and a lot more open to the imagination and interpretation. This discussion feels so biased and unscientific. Modern architecture challenged all the bad impacts of the architecture that came before, ornamentation does not mean good environment. The human scale problem presented is also kinda ridiculous. This can be turned around at 180°. One could argue an overly ornamental building, done in a bad matter (compare demo drawings of St. Peter’s in Rome) oppresses the human. Overly high ceilings like 5m, especially in tight bathrooms operas the human and make him feel lost. Finally I think it’s kinda of a vulgarity to discredit all modern architecture without an exception. It’s kind of like behaving like those people that hater on the Edison bulb. Three are not so many examples of historical „common people’s home“ so only the most influential and artistically developed building remained. I can assure you that living conditions in their ornamental buildings wasn’t nice at all. It’s ok to not understand modern architecture, I personally do not like postmodnistic buildings because I don’t like the tacky and weird reintroduction of historical elements in a chaotic way. I prefer buildings that calm me and have a connection with nature. I would totally agree with the ideas of prof. Curl when it comes that there are bad buildings existing somewhere in a way as discribed by professor curl, but I don’t like the argumentation in it absoluteness and harshness and presenting a clean and organized building as a crime against humanity. Superficiality and Supersimplification, I can say, is a crime against humanity and scientific and democratic discussions.
I, personally ive in a modern building built in 1987. White and grey, It has a flat roof, flat walls, big windows, Overhangs. The Sun wanders nicely through the building and it’s never dark (only at night), it can be ventilated properly, it has a fixed core and anything else could be rearranged, walls could be even moved. It sits basically in a park.
And I doubt it would become better if someone would violently toss some random ornaments on it.
When I started Architecture, one professor told us in the first lesson: "There are two Gods in architecture. Frank Lloyd Wright and LeCorbusier. You have to believe in those two, what else you believe ... I don't care."
Well that professor has a huge arrogance, FLW I like but Corbusier I truly despise him. They call many modernist architects gods too but I never appreciated that. The part that gets me the most angry is the restriction of styles in design class, it almost makes it totalitarian, and these are supposed to be the freest design classes for students, which are not.
modernism is a strong ideology... @@javierpacheco8234
Great interview! Curl is a genius. Greetings from Brazil.
I'm an atheist, but I appreciate religious architecture, it's often beautiful and generally it has a deep connection with history and the region it exists in.
I am also athiest and kinda conflicted. It is just so pretty.
I'm an architect and a Christian. It just true how embedded atheistic presuppositions have destroyed architecture, but more than anything individualism. Is not a moral judgement, but architecture has to look for trascendental and inmaterial ideals to acquire beauty.
That's why I'm on my way to educate myself in Classical and Traditional forms. And btw this is something that any atheist can learn and practice, I'm pretty sure most current classicists are irreligious, even thou they know architecture has a religious component.
@@cristianfernandez1874 ?
Architecture doesn’t a have religious component
@@NapltnThat would be one of the presuppositions he was talking about.
Look up classical theism if you haven't friend! It really connected the dots for me, if you regard God as reality itself then beauty becomes God speaking to us. I don't think the whole atheism/theism dichotomy is as hard as many portray it, often it's a matter of perspective.
A superb interview. Curl is passionate about this subject and rightly so. These are horrible blots on the landscape, devoid of meaning and utterly depressing to look at, never mind those poor people forced to live in them.
An erudite explanation of how the dreadful concrete monstrosities that infest cities all over the world. Professor Curl's book dismantles the pretentious nonsense that underpins "modernism" in architecture. We live with the dreadful results of this architectural style daily.
Marvellous interviewee.I learnt a great deal, I hadn't appreciated how many of those early German modernists positioned themselves with the Nazis.
A captivating interview! Resounding applause to the Cave of Apelles for hosting the venerable Professor Curl. His searing critique of Modernism emerges as a guiding light of intellectual heroism, and his masterful polemic, Making Dystopia, deserves a place on every architect's desk.
The event was actually made possible through the seminar Beauty and Ugliness - that took place in Oslo 12 - 16 May 2023. We included and encouraged a trip to Cave of Apelles.
I enjoyed this interview immensely. I had thought of persuing architecture as a young college student, but decided against it because I couldn't imaging myself designing the hideous, monstrous crap that passes for "modern architecture."
When modernists are replacing once a beatiful streets to create an uninhabitable ugliness it's one type of a disaster, but imagine when whole cities are formed that way. This is what happened in my country, georgia, while it was part of USSR. This interview finally sorted my ideas of 20th century left and especially communists being somehow very aligned with modernist architects and there admiration towards totalitarian mindset. Being 4th year architecture student only now, I see, what university should have tought me and failed to do so. Professors were very busy admiring modernism and conceptions mostly. I would like to read all books of James Stevens Curl, but it's quite hard to find any of them both physically and online, I would be grateful if somebody helped me find them, escpecially one about egyptian revival and mentioned in video, making distopya.
I'm going to buy his book. Maybe i could scan it and email you the pdf
You may enjoy Leon Krier as well if you liked this interview
great interview. We have major destruction of historical structures in Ukraine and now Palestine I shudder to think how new modernist structures will continue the destruction of culture, aesthetics and our downward spiral towards Dystopia and alienation of human identity
Enlightening and Eye-Opening - a masterful critique of the disfunction and dogmatism of Modern architecture and fallacies of contemporary urban planning. Professor Curl's insightful analysis is a must-listen for anyone interested in architectural history and its profound influence on our built environment.
This interview deserves so much more viewers. Thank you. Look at "The Line" project in Saudi Arabia. The totalitarianism in modern architecture is very much alive.
This is one remarkable interview, Its very educational and I am pretty sure I have learned a lot of new information and it has shook the ideology that was carved in my college years about the heroes of the modernism and the whole movement of simplicity ... I am pretty surprised how I got convinced to change my opinion and to do more research to learn more based on what i have heard in the interview . I am truly glad i found you through my instagram . well done connecting your social media and well done on such a well curated interview . thank you .
This was fantastic, I’ve always felt like I was missing information from this story or as if there were gaps in the narrative. This really clears things up. 🙏🏻
49:25 very interesting conversation, here Mr Curl goes straight to the point about the problem of modern architecture, but everywhere we are witnessing this impoverishment... so good question, what to do? perhaps as Julius Evola says "Let people of our time talk about these things with condescension as if they were anachronistic and antihistorical; we know that this is an alibi for their defeat. Let us leave modern men to their “truths” and let us only be concerned about one thing: to keep standing amid a world of ruins. Making the values of truth, reality and Tradition clearly visible to those who, today, do not want "this" and are confusedly looking for "the other" means giving support so that the great temptation may not prevail in everyone, where material world now seems to be stronger than spirit."
Since my early days in college, I've consistently believed that my perspective was flawed. However, after years of engaging with discussions like this, I find myself resonating strongly with the content. Despite having undertaken numerous projects in a contemporary style, I hold a personal aversion to it. The prevailing trend in the market nowadays seems to be heavily biased in that direction.
The wholesale destruction of beauty in public spaces shifts psychology from contentment to wanting- a certain type of wanting defined by a need to fill an existential vacuum that opens up as a result of the absence of the beautiful. This drives people towards consumerism and misanthropic thinking. People begin to see themselves in competition to one another and seek refuge in consumption. All of this makes sense in a capitalist political economy.
Wonderful interview. I appreciated that the spotlight was also on the modernistic influence in the churches, which deserves its own uprising. This channel is a tremendous source of good.
This is really infomative, I would suggest you add images of the buildings that you are talking about in the interview.
happened the same in Brazil, oscar niemeyer and Lucio Costa, modernism architectures, participated at the destruction of our ancient senate house, Monroe's Palace, in Rio de Janeiro, and then, they projected our new capital, Brasilia, horrible.
Would be interesting for Prof Curl to give a few examples of good modern buildings. The whole movement can't be entirely bad
Modernism, in its architectural manifestations, is also known as "brutalism". Well named.
I Hope you guys make some shorts about this to share on instagram
We are working on it 😉
Approximately 1 billion birds per year are killed in North America alone by collisions with glass buildings. This doesn't need to be the case. I'm grateful that James noted the awful environmental degradation caused by modernist monstrosities. Thank you for creating this interview. I'm going to get his book.
Thank You, from Portland, Oregon.
Great interview I hope everyone listen
Sadly, McKim, Mead & White's Pennsylvania hotel near the former location of penn station was also demolished recently.
Please send the link for his essay on relativism!
Very enjoyable interview!
Professor Curl is one of the most important reference figure in our cultural life. His point of view should be "the" point of view, beacuse we should fight for our architectural idenity in every part of the world. Modernism erases this identity. Vita Sackville-West He wrote that the house must be an integral part of the countryside, of nature. Modernism generates forms foreign to any experience. it is removed from any context.
Don’t you kind it’s kinda stupid to call a whole style of buildings stupid?
Excellent conversation. Interesting perspective and historical knowledge of the subject.
A deeper purpose, social engineering through building leading to the Nihilism and futility, refusal of reflection on greater ideas, construction, and ideologies of Existentialism.
Mahe Ohna ✌️ Favour All
The Catholic Church is one of the worse offenders on modern architecture. Blame Vatican II for that.
I need to get that book into my hands. If I can find it, Brno isn't far. :D
Großartig. Danke.
Read the book and loved the interview. But.....What kind of tie is the young man wearing? I like it.
I like this man a lot. Gropius, Pevsner, &c were, quite obviously, talentless, garbage humans. I didn't know they claimed to have been inspired by the Arts & Crafts movement, though. It's such an absurd idea, it has me almost floored!
Also, I would never trust an architect who couldn't draw. How does he visualize?
27:00 Mazdakism, Zoroastrianism dualistic religion that rose to prominence in the late 5th century in Iran from obscure origins. According to some scholars, Mazdakism was a reform movement seeking an optimistic interpretation of the Manichaean dualism.
“Beauty I think consoles, it gives pleasure, it is sensuous, it appeals to the eye,
to the ear, to the intellect, it calms, it doesn’t disturb, it doesn’t do violence to you… so beauty will also involve I think a degree of handcraft, it will grow naturally from
its surroundings, it will respect the soil… it should be sociable in the sense that it will
respect its neighbors. And that means that certain geometries would be coherent, maybe
the language. “ - James Stevens (51:06 Defining beauty)
I love this guy! he's AWESOME! :)
He is a poet!
100 times better than the one with Michael Diamant. At least one person in a conversation about architecture knows what he's talking about. I agree that modernism and its worst proponents have a lot to answer for this binary oversimplification that everyone is either Modernist or Classicist is nothing but empty rhetoric. You can't criticize Modernism and not at least touch upon the reactionary movements that came after. Would've loved to hear what Professor Curl thinks of Critical Regionalism for example.
I haven't heard a podcast of this quality since I discovered the Andrew huberman podcast
Radicalism and exaggerated pomposity is a typical signature of any revolutionary movement. It in itself is not a sign of bad ideas. I live in Tel Aviv, where the Bauhaus old district has more of the genre houses than Berlin it is beautiful to live in and walk in the street. What came after in the 1970 architecture is something else. Then is where the art of city life in architecture was lost.
I love The Hoover Building.
This was quite informative and very entertaining. Seeing a posh Englishman interacting with a young Norwegian was very...instructive? shall we say to this American. I understand the culture of my father (English) as seen from the perspective of another country much better. I also am unfortunately reinforced in my belief that it will never be England that can recognize what was done to smear Germany, and specifically Hitler. Prof. James Stevens Curl is well versed in architectural history, but needs to branch out a bit when it comes to the history of the Third Reich. Not a lovely bunch, but they were to the majority of Germans, and tradition was indeed important there. Until their efforts were infiltrated and corrupted, which is what the cult the professor referred to does so extremely well.
I love this old curmudgeon! He's so funny, his accent and facial expressions are like out of a movie, and he spits some amazing talking points!
It is just common sense to build out of the materials that your surroundings offer you. The buildings built in that way 'fit' in the environment and don't 'poke' your eye like modernist buildings do. In my opinion, nobody will in the future go and admire modernist buildings like so many tourists go and admire historical buildings.
bitter food is good for the liver
"given resources", we need state funds to save buildings. Come on man.
We have saved buildings for thousands of years without a “helping” state. Break out of the socialist mindset, we are meant to be free
Curl made the argument of cost trade off that it might be cheaper to maintain old buildings vs raze them & build new ones
so interesting
He makes some very interesting points however he does throw it away in places by making personal remarks that have no bearing on his thesis. But it is definitely time to examine where has the modernist movement brought us and why.
Architecture and homelessness scandals
I absolutely LOVE the story about undiagnosed misogyny being the root of so many strange behaviors that we , the world population 2024 are engaged in dealing with . Keep talking gentlemen, so glad you both have your voices .
Dorian Gray got a podcast?
Am I wrong for liking brutalist architecture? It gives me Halo 2 vibes.
Pontificating architects are hilarious
May I suggest that the host should at least try to limit, if not eliminate, the filler words. He "um"ed too much. Granted that rhetoric perhaps is not his main concern, those "um, like, you know" just make one less professional.
Good interview, the topic sould be heard and discussed more.
Oslo, previously known as "Christiania".
I think much modern architecture is indeed very ugly. But after listening to this snobbish critique I want to defend it! Wtf?
Clips of this interview have been referenced on social media and I was excited to experience it in full context. While Mr. Curl makes several valid criticisms, I’m taken aback by his narrow-minded, shallow, and unsophisticated interpretations of the historical/retrospective political and philosophical themes. His commentary is dripping with bias and emotion and I wish he would have been more objective in his justifications.
How can person be so arrogant to say, that one era of architecture is wrong the way this man did? It has nothing to do with opinion. It has to do something with humility, that is important in every field and wich this man does not possess. It is a shame.
You might as well ask how someone can say that crime is wrong, or a child breaking his toys during a tantrum. Modernism is a childish tantrum that the rest of us are paying for
Your comment is completely relativistic and nonsensical. It isn’t just a matter of opinion or humility. In fact, the ones without humility were and are the modernists. There is a transcendental ethos and telos behind classical architecture and a satanic inversion of hierarchy behind modernism.
Can agree with a lot of things but there are a lot of really bad and outdated old man opinions as well