As a former architect myself I can say this based on my own reflection and observations over the years: an architect's perspective on what is a "good" architecture can be just as narrow as anyone else's. Sometimes a "good architecture" to an architect is about landing on the cover page of certain magazines - or gathering likes on social media nowadays. The role of architects have been devolving into mostly playing with forms and shapes and often with a severe lack of understanding of the economics and operations of buildings and cities.
This approach fosters architecture into becoming a flat image, turning it into a consumerist product. The idea of "inventing" for the shake of innovation and originality is not new in fact. It is the motto of the modern era, which is still present. As a result of that pressure for innovation we have architects, including this guy, that think architectural innovation is the generation of new forms. But architecture is only in part related to form. If I understand correctly the message that he wants to convey is that the media enables people to publicly express their feelings about a building and exchange views. This is fantastic, but the danger in general in this media dominated world and that unbounded democratization of architecture is that common people don't understand the reasoning behind buildings. As a result, the focus can be easily lost and as it is commonly observed oriented towards form. We cannot blame people, but architects should be more responsible when giving public speeches!
+Hey You Art can only be represent in its own form. For music, we need to hear; for food, we need to taste and for architecture we have to occupy. Thumb up for you!
agreed I think he's wrong. He thinks he can make us love ugly buildings, the thing is he can only make them a trend, like instagram makes everything become a trend , like nostril fake hairs. It's marketing applied to architecture , trends don't last , buildings do . He does not get the point Guery's point, Guery says that beauty is universal , human and necessary, that is the strength of it's work : it's meant to be beautiful , not "new".
He was motivated by a need to not be seen walking to the bathroom. He is just justifying the fact that he makes buildings solely around making ways to get to bathrooms where he won't be seen.
There's an easily hidden hand in what he's describing. An investment group can plan a building, plant the images on Facebook, generate lots of Astroturf comments, and voila! Consent has been manufactured. This architect surely knows that very well. Delphi technique. Get people to believe that they came up with the idea that someone else painted in their head. This type of cultural engineering has been around since public relations was born.
Is it just me, or does it seems like there's a lot of negativity towards historical architecture? It makes me sad that we "aren't allowed" to appreciate anything old. I believe that it's completely possible to innovate while still appreciating styles of the past.
I would say, that modernism architecture that he showed is a total crap. It has nothing to do with architecture and of course ancient european buildings look so much better than this. It's not cool at all just because it's ugly 80's. Yeah, it's a part of history (modernism), but it's the worst part
He’s just self righteous just because he was born in this age of technology. Frank lloyd wrights falling water could be considered brutalist and it is one of the most beautiful buildings in the world.
@@e11engineer I feel like totally denying the past is kind of an insult to those who already mastered architecture and paved the way. Good design starts from recognizing the essential in what's existing, and innovate from this already great base. Because if not, you start from zero, and that doesn’t sounds like moving forward to me.
I love that library in Seattle. My university had a library where the walls were made of windows. It let in more natural sunlight. Our human brains work better in natural sunlight. Sunlight wakes us up in the wild. It's why seasonal affective disorder is a real thing and why they try to increase sunlight for those people. So if your library is made out of windows, that is a place where I want to be. You can't even compare an artificially lit room to a room with the sun beaming in. Please tell me I'm not the only one.
well to be fair, sometimes the creative process can take years. I'm working on a story I've been formulating for the last year and I'm less than 40,000 words in.
Sunlight and windows are great, but they're terrible for books. And, I imagine, it would also make it very expensive to cool and to maintain (who's job is it to clean those windows?). Interesting architecture is wonderful, but if it's impractical then it fails.
Kim ! They can have small robots that plug and clean the windows, or they can make windows which doesnt need cleaning because they dont get dusty. Hydrophobic film on top, or sprayed with some spray which doesnt let dust stay on the glass. There are many ways, if there is the will. Also there are windows which can change their shade, from being completely transparent, to go full dark or any color. Windows are not a problem, if the building itself is functional and efficient. The technology is very advanced now for such things.
Tbh, I'd choose the Livingston Library over the Seattle one any day. A library is meant to be a small, warm and a cozy place without crowds. it's supposed to be a personal experience. The Seattle library resembles more an airport or a metro station to me, kinda symbolising a state of hurry and the urge to depart in order to go somewhere else. instead of feeling warm and comfortable, I'd feel exposed, cold and vulnerable.
For you perhaps Rex, but a library is supposed to be a repository of knowledge rather than simply something geared toward sentimentalist nostalgia. We reside within a dynamically fast-moving age, and libraries need to correspond with that world as best they may if they are to survive.
sublimelyh70 +sublimelyh70 "...repository of knowledge rather than simply something geared toward sentimentalist " You don't need a degree in architecture to realize that architecture is an emotional pursuit. Architecture is all about creating sentiments and using imagery to connect the physical aspects of a building to a person's mind to create feelings of trust, comfort, etc. "We reside within a dynamically fast-moving age, and libraries need to correspond with that world as best they may if they are to survive." I don't get it. Do you think that libraries would die out if they don't try to "fit in" the modern age by making themselves look like airports? In that case, I have to disagree. The reason why people visit a library is not for the architecture, but for the books. The reason people STAY in the library for hours is down to the architecture. The only thing that's causing libraries to fade away, if at all, is the rise of ebooks and NOT libraries that have warm and cozy interiors. In a nutshell, libraries don't need to change if they want to stop dying out in the modern age. People will go to the library nonetheless but what causes a person to spend more time in the library reading books is all down to the architecture.
Rex Galilae, and yet many libraries are turning into veritable ghost towns as people like you die off Rex. Your response Rex, only really applies to people like you. Younger generations expect more of their libraries in order for them to remain relevant in today's world. That was what the TED talk was primarily about, not sentiment. =)
"So how is it possible that in the same year, in the same country, two buildins both called libraries look so completly diffrent and the answer is..." ----------> Money
you completely missed the point, money doesn't matter, that project could have been so much better but it stuck to historic values rather than challenge them with some new and innovative like the central library did in Dallas.
Yevo Gozhen exactly, if we'd have that freedom the building could have looked much better without a single cent more to spend and probably even less. After all the design could have been innovative and still cheaper to build since your creativity has no limitations...
John Smith Innovative and outside the norm cost more and take longer, I agree that the Jersey library could have looked better if they had a better architect but something like the one he compared it to probably cost double to triple for the same square footage, glass is crazy expensive like 50+ dollars a square foot of wall area for a normal household window, we would love to design things out of the box (like I have done with every design for my own personal home I'd like to build one day) but it comes down to budget more often then anything and those wild designs involve lots of custom steel work which is quite expensive compared to a typical design that could be done with wood.
I was almost with him when he said it's about visceral emotion. But zoning is super important. When zoning a city, you don't want a 1 purpose building taking up an entire block. You want more walkability. You want people who can walk from point A to point B, with plenty in between. If you want a Walmart or supermarket in the middle of town, they should be on the second floor, while smaller storefronts take up street level. When people have to drive, it creates a disconnect. Now, when it comes to the actual architecture, people don't want wildly unique buildings, but they also don't want bland sameness. They want the buildings to have a degree of uniformity, with subtle yet distinct variations. For example, Amsterdam is full of tall, slim rowhouses. They share a pattern, but are bright, cheerful, and the roof slope and design varies between buildings.
I think this talk inadvertently just made the strongest case for a return to traditional architecture that has ever been made. I cannot think of a worse way to design our streets and city centers than to turn it over the frenetic, fickle, faddish, fever dreams of social media. No city would ever be rooted again. Just constant churn and novelty for the sake of it. What a horror show.
I'm not an architect but I do love the subject....I actually like those concrete 'ugly' buildings of the 70s maybe it is tied in with nostalgia as I was a child in that era but I think that is what architecture is...it means something to you personally just like Art...different people see different things and it is the way you interpret it in your own mind...I like buildings that are not only dynamic on the outside, but how their dimensions fascinate me, how they function, what is inside them, what can they be used for etc. It is a naive view of architecture I know, but I really liked this gentleman's talk. You can see his love for creation and it was intoxicating to me as I feel the same and know exactly what he is talking about!..x
What an amazing TED Talk. Marc couldn't have delivered his message any better! Incredible speaker! And I completely agree with him on the association people have with architectural symbols and their unwillingness to venture outside their comfort zone when it comes to modern architectural designs. Most architects don't get their name on their first building until their late 40s or 50s, having been repressed in their ability to express their individual creativity the entire time leading up to it by: their clients; their projects' financial limitations; their support from the community; and their supervisors and firm partners with a different vision along the way. So by the time they are able get a design brought to fruition their designs have likely been muted and tamed and their likelyhood to venture outside the comfort zone has proven to be a mute point much of the time. Bringing the design to the people of the community it's going to serve prior to showing it to the client allows the community to voice their emotions regarding the design eliminates the fear of the possibility of negative public perception, which is most likely exaggerated, skewed, or otherwise not true to the actual public perception of the design. This process still may not help when dealing with some clients, but there are so many instances I can think of where this process, previously unheard of, can truely tip the scales in the approval process of a design.
Not sure why there are dislikes, the talk was great. He's showing buildings that are computer simulated to be structural sound, ergonomic, multifunctional and look distinct enough to be accepted into the community and have it's own identity. Also that buildings can now be built with better techniques, can be made green and recyclable as well.
Vic Vinegar Well, when this video was first uploaded it had around 20% dislikes, which prompted me to make this post. While dislikes has always been a thing, my own observations have revealed that the usual proportion of likes and dislikes is 100 likes to 1 dislike. Currently this video has 1k likes and 50+ dislikes, meaning it is 500% the usual amount of dislikes. But don't mind me, I just like good videos and statistics.
When he began the talk with his house, my thought was "Whoa. He lives in such an expensive beautiful house.", and then he said that he hated it. Good design comes from personal experience, not brief observation.
I live in north face building with almost no direct sun ..but when they built a metal tall building in front i enjoyed the reflection of sun every evening .. Its really nice and dont hurt my eyes .
I started in the '70s, with graph paper on the kitchen table and now I'm a dedicated SketchUp designer. I've also built a dozen houses, starting as a laborer/carpenter. What I see occasionally now is in-experienced designers creating frivolous, redundant or excessive shapes and volumes because it's easy, not because it's a good idea. One example is when they 'kick out' the hipped roof design to cover a Bow or Bay window in the Exterior wall underneath. There is no advantage to that, simply widening the overhang covers it, and is a good idea anyway. In fact it creates additional elements into the roof right where you don't want them. That area is prone to leaking, and it often is part of a kitchen or dining area, where water supplies and drains, and vents further complicate things. Some software programs draw that automatically from the floor plan and that's the only reason it's there. Another mistake is the way windows and doors are installed by the software. Usually with 0 tolerance, which isn't reflective of the real world, so when the carpenter gets to it, it's never exactly the same as the plans. I use R.0.'s and F.F. sizes. Rough Opening should be a minimum of 1/2" larger than the Finished Frame size all around, but rarely is. Every architect should build a cottage or something to understand what things weigh, how they're handled, what's unnecessary work, etc., but few do.
That old looking library is "practical", and practically empty, compared to the impractical building which a lot of people actually use. Practical is for the military, unimaginative and poor people. It is a home-depot "shed" v.s. a "tiny home". It is a book v.s. a movie. It is a dead leaf v.s. a dragonfly, blowing in the wind v.s. flying.
my guesstimate would be that the livingston library cost $2m and the seattle library cost $400m. I just think it's a stupid and ridiculous comparison to make. it's like comparing the livingston high school football stadium with the seattle marriners stadium. social media definitely will make a difference to architecture but much more important is the money available.
It worked. The reactions he got from the community are real. Media plays a big role in our civilization, admit it or not. It's an observation. He tested and got some results. It's not entirely true, but there are some truth to it. Pick up what you can get and throw the crap out of the window. That's how simple it works.
Some good points but I still was annoyed by a) his way of talking and b) his just complete disregard for the value of traditional architecture and the value it still has in today's building. Modern and contemporary forms aren't automatically superior. Super condescending when he was talking about "historical pastiche" and "we're finally ready for this".
It was really fun and very thought provoking to watch your talk. I wish to work with passionate people as you in the future. Thank you for inspiring me.
the parthenon in greece was build like a 3d puzzle and embeded in the architecture was the "fi" ratio.Ancient greeks found about "fi" by measuring the ratios of relations within the human body the building was not a symbol of power but a symbol of humanity ! Maybe we need to build buildings with more sense and we need to implement nature and human characteristics in the method of building it not only in the finished design.
It takes a while to think properly about a building too mate. I spend countless of hours gaining feedback from anyone who has a slight interest in what I have to say about a project I would be working on. It takes months to properly design and think about all the details. The building part is the easy part especially in today's era. And buildings have always been shaped by the masses. If we only appealed to ourselves, I doubt anyone would consider hiring us. Architecture responds to the environment physically or intangibly (through client needs, wants, programming, target audience, personal values, advertising, globalisation etc.) whether you like it or not. Although I agree that we are now in an age where we are forced to keep up with technology and therefore should embrace it to make the lives of all better in all aspects. Not just aesthetics and form. A responsible architect observes beyond the paycheck and the personal need to mindlessly create and tackles something far more complicated than producing a building that works. That is why I can't respect Frank Ghery who draws inspiration from a piece of rubbish or Zaha with her rigid form finding and lack of programming and people understanding. We should be using our position to educate the public about what a truly good standard of living is, one that is not detrimental to ourselves and the environment. Ethics over aesthetics. A building that follows this can only bring out good emotions and good vibes.
@@randallabracadabra We used greek symbols and elements for mostly all styles that existed until now. It was the only "beautiful" humanity could find in architecture, and the guy said it's the first time we can actually invent a new "beauty" because of social media and people's opinion.
@@user-ly1fk9kk9d If you would look at surveys asking if people prefer modern or traditional buldings, around 80% prefer traditional buildings. Modern architecture is only being pushed by "professionals".
Great talk 👏 We Bharatiya wonder how our Kailashnath temple at Ajanta Ellora caves carved intricately a beautiful Architectural wonder starting from top to bottom ,thousands of years ago ,when rest of the world don't even have a language to communicate ! Matchless indeed & we respect their vision 🙏 🇮🇳
That weird library in Seattle and the Guggenheim in Bilbao look funky from the outside, but they create dead space on the outside - there is very little interaction with the streets and pavements, in the form of doors, shops, cafes, etc. There is also a lot of dead space between the randomly spaced shells and the actual usable space inside.
Zachary Lee, yes and no. Today's museums need to stand-out in order to attract the masses, the culturally bereft alas. When museums cannot; they eventually are forced to be shuttered, their collections dispersed, and another piece of history falls to private hands/private consumption.
I don't know Bilbao but I live in Seattle and that library is alive inside and out. For one there is a couple of restaurants across the street where one can eat a delicious taco and admire the building. It's a great spot to meet tourist and many converge in the front entrance since a natural plaza was build there. Then inside you have fun ways to walk the library not only the elevators even do that option is there. On the back of the library there is a coffee place where one can sit down to read a book. Finally from the top of the library one can see the Puget Sound and the Seattle Skyline in all of it's beauty since the library sits at a higher altitude. I could talk even more about the EMP museum in the Seattle Center or even the Space needle.
shet, i was thinking the dude gonna show us some fancy 3d printed buildings, and i ended up watching how people gonna google for images before they ask architect to come in. sad T_T
I really like how passionately he speaks about this. I feel like he could teach more than this and I feel inspired by his energy in this TED-talk even though I'm normally not in architecture or design.
He just sounds like some annoying salesman full of BS, trying to convice us that stupid random different buildings are better just because they're new. So righteous...
Every decade you hear about how much different the homes of the future will look. This has been going on since the 30's and we're still mostly staying in small cookie cutters.
+Abdullah (A.T.) this is true and it's honestly a scientifical and economic reason but it would be better for everyone if these architects could shape our cities anything but fucking basic square shaped housing
Yep. modern architecture and the flat design movement are essentially more sophisticated versions of the "Bauhaus" school, the style that originated nearly a century ago. Publishing Bauhaus posters or executing a Bauhaus building plan nowadays, and everyone would still think that they were designed by just another studio architect recently.
Wow, I’m 21 and got into a really nice architecture school as a transfer. I’ve been doing more in-depth research these past two months, and I’m thinking of pursuing this career after watching videos like this.
I watched at 1.5 speed until I wanted to see one thing again and dialled it back to 1x. WHOA! Talk about Brutalism! He ... was ... talking ... soooooo ... slow- ....... -ly..... Haha
architecture is supposed to be understood by everyone, if not : it's crap architecture. That's just my point of view . Everyone likes guery : guery =good architecture , everyone hates brutalism exept brutalist architects : bad architecture. Maybe if you have studied , deconstruction, brutalism "less is more" in college , you can get it , but good architecture must be understood by every one , it must be universal, it must talk to humanity, not be some intellectual wanking reserved to a so called elite.
Adele Vermouille A perfect summary of everything I was just about to comment 🙌 E.H. Gombrich made a similar statement about art. The meaning of art is what emotional response it creates for you without further knowledge about it. While art we don’t like is easily ignored, architecture isn’t and it’s impacting the lives of generations. Too often architects seem to overestimate their capacity to understand human nature - they are focussed on the object, the space, the light, the colours, materials, costs, investors most of the time. Their creations rendered in beautiful weather in the most pristine state. Never mind how materials age or building surfaces end up looking like under regular conditions, how their visual style won’t fit the local surroundings because most of the designing architects never actually got to see the site they are working for...
That building in Spain (hay, concrete, cow).. I think it's beautiful! Like it brought tears to my eyes! (and that hardly ever happens!). I love that building! It's not ugly. It's beautiful.
As an architect student this video was useful because showing off building ideas to the community and see what they think can help the architect modify it before it is build though sometimes the community won't know about architecture and judge based on what they know so of course they will go back to the ideas of Greek architecture etc it is all they know which begs the question how much should architect actually care about the communities option after all they will never be satisfied
The Bilbao Museum looks nice, but it melts parts of houses and cars parked near it, Again proving the modern architecture just doesn´t care about its surrounding
The upper part of that museum is not accesible, is just decorative, how funny that one of the most popular modernist architecture work doesnt follow the "form follows function" motto, What is the function of that upper part, besides the decorative purpose? Bring back old architecture pls.
To all those criticizing his talk - Perhaps we can all learn to listen to what he wanted to say rather than what we wanted to hear... He found this interesting for a reason hence he brought it up at TED. We all have our own views and learn different things from an experience. Please just accept and learn.
Great presentation. His style is unique and you don't want to finish it. The examples presented are authentic and the dissertation covers important points about how architecture affects our lives.
The general population is in no position to comment on the value of a building. I suppose if some proper anthropological studies were done of how people react to buildings... then maybe. But Kushner is, as far as this talk goes, making an argument from popularity, which is a well-known fallacy. The real problem with architecture is that, on the whole, it considers itself more of an art than a design discipline. An architect ought to design what people need, not what they want, through the application of rationality. This doesn't exclude incorporating emotional impact, but it does require addressing the interactions that give rise to those emotions clinically and rationally. Instead, too many architects still use highly subjective, unjustifiable, and ultimately irrational ways to come up with their designs.
wow its been a while since I skeptically started watching a video and completely was agreeing 100% with this guys vision of how architecture is formed and why.
MrP86 You mean if only all architects can create buildings like that multipurpose multistorey carpark, and make ergonomic, economically viable, green and recyclable buildings like how architects are doing now.
GuyWithAnAmazingHat Architects only do these sort of things, when somebody comes to them and says "I´ve got 50k to spend, just on the architecture plan" But for normal people, coming to normal architects, they just dig in their files, take some house and offer you two or 3 different designs for the roof tiles and the wood on the side of the house.
So you didn't listen the talk? Generally some of the most hated architecture ever was created by modernism, also known as functionalism. "Form follows function" ever heard? Didn't work out so well after all.
eberbacher007 no. those aren't architects, the job of architecture is that feeling. architecture is made to make life better. it is an art form that serves more as a background than it does as a foreground. it is not noticed unless one actually pays attention. Levittown was designed by a developer not an architect. it is that pendulum that caused most architects to have to conform to those standards. It is the public that mandates this as much as the developers because we all want our white picket fence.
I want buildings that require minimal rudimentary air conditioning, relying mainly on natural air flow to keep a comfortable temperature all day long. Hopefully, a scientist can get together with an architect and an engineer to bring this to reality.
Super! Off- grid tiny, either ensconced halfway into the earth, or on wheels ... What's needed is low cost housing that doesn't depress the spirit. Independence and greater health can be accessed via tiny home gardens, permaculture experiments, etc ... Zoning must be addressed, etc so that this can uplift strengthen and unify communities ...
so what he's saying is basically that to shove his uninspired, unintelligent, narcissistic pseudo-architectural creations down people's throats without them complaining he simply needs to terrorize them with tons of pictures of it first. love this guy.
He's insufferable and can't possibly conceive of someone that simply doesn't enjoy or like his precious contemporary architecture, like most architects.
Makes sense. Architecture was and still is shaped by geological religious and socio - political aspects. Our generation's exposure to technology makes a huge difference, the abrupt change in architecture today may be overwhelming but it makes sense. Our ways of living and our needs now is different from what it was many years ago.
I see this movement potentially becoming another phase in architecture like the ones he referenced in his talk. The truth is every architect throughout time has believed that their present time has equipped them with the tools necessary for the "right" way to do architecture. Denying the significants of historical architecture is denying the significants of today's architecture. I do believe the media has, and will continue to have, a positive impact on architecture. However, embracing the modern world and the benefits of media does not mean we have to build strictly "modern" buildings. As seen in the discussions this form of media has already initiated, many people enjoy historical buildings.
Oh goody. I just can't WAIT for all those thoughtful, insightful and oh,so intelligent experts on social media to tell us what good architecture is. Just like they did with movies, music and politics, they'll make the world wonderful again. : /
I study in a university with brutalist buildings, and the thing it does great is incorporate spaces for you to hang out and stay. the modern buildings don't have that. the main area of the university has the buildings separated by trees and a mini park with a cafeteria and benches for you to sit and then just go to your class that's near it, no separation. the modern building don't have that, it is hallways with the classroms and offices and if you want to hang out you go to other place. i love brutalism not because the buildings look cool as f* and you don't get tired of it, but mainly because one of the objectives of brutalism was to incorporate outside and inside and be an actual place you want to be, not a fancy looking building that actually sucks to stay. so hopefully we go back to that, when i build my house it's going to be brutalist in style.
i agree to his definition of architecture. I believe that architecture depicts a picture of WHO and WHAT kind of people are using them. It portrays the values and conviction of its community. Architecture is more than the arts and design that it displays.. it goes beyond it. Thanks for this episode...
It doesn't seem to me that this speaker is realistic. Big flashy building cost money and architects tend to burn a hole through our pockets. I feel a sense of arrogance in his tone. Something is off with this presentation.
Well im an architect and i think he is realistic. Yeah your right about the cost, but that's why we make sure the building will make it easier for the client to make there money back faster from lower energy cost, recycling, attraction, and able to sale for a reasonable price. It doesn't cost much more for a building to be designed more sustainable, but it increases the value of the property by a lot. People get excited when they see something new and different witch is why the company or housing agency will get twice the business. Rich business owners aren't stupid. They just don't build expensive building just to have the freshest rims on the block. When you got the best car on the block, that lets everyone know what your do and you probably got better deals than everyone else if you have enough to pay for all this so now you have people always asking you if you sale drugs. Some buildings would be renovated 8 times before its destroyed witch is why its important to keep up with the latest designs. In 2030, no one will want a building thats look simple and cheap to start a new company. Would you make more money in a renovated McDonalds from 1960 or in a building that defines gravity. New construction is not for penny pinchers they suck at investing but good at saving money. Save your money and remodel a used building.
This goes for all design. People like familiar, but it's our job to marry form and function to create something unique to the project and show the client how our solutions can exceed their expectations.
So, digital media is the GREATEST REVOLUTION in architecture since the invention of concrete and steel? That is laughable. A building's narrative comes from your experience of using it, often repetitively; not spoon-fed by some digital renderings, often accompanied by beautiful people in swimsuit. The only way to speed up the feed-back system of architecture is to speed up design and construction. And it's always a gamble. Digital rendering helps. But given the budget constraints (big buildings are very costly), once construction starts it's hard to change the design if people don't like the rendering. Also, the fact that people now take photos of buildings with their cell phone does not mean buildings should be "disembodied" from the site (9:58). That is just wrong. Too bad he cannot look beyond the building itself and pay attention to other factors(budget, environment, neighborhood, social and cultural context, etc.) I bet his next big talk will be how VIRTUAL REALITY is the greatest revolution in architecture.
mhtinla yes and like he said in the very beginning (which he doesn’t think is a contradiction apparently) architecture is the sensual experience but not just how it looks, and disembodying it completely took that away from its users. For most people “seeing is believing” and very few would go out of their ways to experience the architecture themselves. If media is what shapes architecture today then we are all screwed and schizophrenic, the designs would be egotistical and fragmented. His view on social media s impact on modern architecture is painfully optimistic.
my thoughts after 1 minute and 44 seconds: Why did you not just put on your clothes in the bathroom after taking a shower like every other person does?
He s happy bc architects get a feedback from social media . What a great progress ....? Good for you , your is getting easier , but he doesn't talk about what s really important : how we should stop building in conflict with our environment.
It would have been better if there wasn't such an overwhelmingly condescending tone. "Architects are no longer these mysterious creatures that use big words, and complicated drawings. And YOU, aren't the hapless public..." Yes, because Architecture is such a complicated science. Your big words are too much for me to comprehend, sir. Anyhow, we don't have "amazing" designs because designing and building something that breaks the mold more often also breaks the bank. I'll take function over form any day, thanks.
Also, he's a little full of BS... 17:16... as an Edmontonian... I can confidently say architects CAN/WILL screw up an entire city in just one decade.
+nidkidwonderboy Clearly name calling was appropriate for my interpretation of his words. It didn't come across at satirical. If it was satire, it was done poorly. It doesn't make me insecure to point out condescending behavior.
Modern architecture sucks. It leaves all traditions behind, and make every country look the same. I personally would be for a mixture of modern AND traditional architecture. After all architecture is one of the things that really defines a country, and I want my country to be special
H20_Sakaia3 You do not really get what I mean do you? Well, I guess I should have been more clear about it. I just hate the way modern architecture has no clear tradition in it. I love traveling and seeing different countries. Maybe if you have been to china once, you will know what a different feeling it has for example to germany. And I just do not have this feeling when seeing modern architecture. To be honest, I would never know where the houses in the video would be, just by looking at their architecture. So I think we should preserv that diversity that makes all our cuntries and cultures different. Otherwise everywhere would be the same... And that just sounds depressing
Modern Architecture should be called Artitecture... And like in every other art form there are always certain style periods. In 50 years every flashy thing of today everybody awed to will be old and disgusting. But for some reason most people still can relay to the ancient Roman and Greek (and all the other ancient cultures) buildings: They're in many ways "classics".
The problem is that we can avoid seeing art which we don't like but buildings are pervasive, intrusive, they're part of our environment and surrounding, these guys since the 40s and 50s are basically forcing society to live with their little self-proclaimed innovative creations, which are in many cases just making us live in some disgusting flashy collage or, in the worst cases, ruining historical environments which btw most of the people prefer.
Mother Nature will be the Chief Architect pretty much from now on. She's been telling us this for a long time, but now we must pay attention, and do as we're told. Practically speaking this means building with what we have, where we are, and using technology sensibly. We have an exploding array of tools now, that we didn't have even a few years ago, to implement responsible designs. I would wager a small group of Roman Architects and Engineers came to similar conclusions almost 2000 years ago. Certainly Life or Death would have been on the table. They passed the test numerous times, but lost the Empire eventually. Perhaps my favorite enclave of buildings in the US, is Frank Wright's Taliesin School of Architecture in the desert, east of Scottsdale/Phoenix. The handful of students that are accepted annually have to design, build and live in structures made mostly from what is lying around, plus things they bring in by hand, I'm not sure of the restrictions. Tuition isn't that high when you consider that it includes the cost of living while at school, you live in your house, I think. The best efforts are intriguing, but the lessons are clear. Even Skyscrapers are tuning in, from what I've been reading/seeing on the Internet. Living towers of inter-connected communities, etcetera!
Just because a building looks like it's drunk af and it looks like it's falling apart doesn't mean that everybody likes it just because it's "cool" or "unique." Btw this dude is really butthurt about older looking buildings.
Older looking buildings are really visually heavy! they cost more and consume more energy to build. As an architecture student I am not a big fan of "deconstructivism" But I really appreciate the new way of thinking spaces. Architects are trying to engage technology and the community in the design process and this is only the beginning. There is always time for development and you ca be a part of it ;)
@@sanaakhasawneh325 idk about You, but recent polls says that people want more traditional buildings, and in top of that, if you search in Wikipedia the most loved buildings in the US , most of them are pre wwii buildings.
@@sanaakhasawneh325 From me, a member of the "community", to you, a striving architect in the making. Everything I've seen of architecture from the 20th century onward is boring, soulless, tedious, frustrating, infuriating, disgusting, insulting, bland, and undesirable. I'm sick of seeing buildings being put up that are so light on ornamentation and sculpture. Post-modernism is barely any better than modernism. I'll take the unimaginative and conservative brick/stone buildings of yore to the sophisticated, avant-garde, and experimental garbage of today, thanks. I realize this is a matter of personal taste, and I can appreciate certain contemporary buildings in _photos,_ but I don't want to be surrounded by them. Remember that a lot of us truly hate everything you do.
@@sanaakhasawneh325 What actually makes modern architecture so great? Just because something is seen as new and hip doesn't mean it's better or that it won't be obsolete in a short time. However some old world designs are timeless and will never be out of style. Also, Those Frank Gary monstrosities aren't exactly good for utilizing space. Most of the buildings look ugly and unrealistic and unworkable for neighborhood homes and businesses. I never understood why a building has to look like a melted toy jack to please ultra modernist totalitarians or how that's considered futuristic anyways. Whose to say what kind of houses people are going to want to live in the future anyway. Me I'll take an early 1900's Craftsman bungalow over any example of a modern house any day.
I still like renovating and reusing instead of building new ugly structures just for the sake of "innovation". Sometimes cherishing the past is the greenest of all options.
Very enjoyable however, I disagree with Mr Kushner's slating of Brutalism. Preston Bus Station (in the presentation) has recently been saved by a long heartfelt campaign by the people of Preston, also Le Corbusier is admired by many non-architects. True, it is a divisive style, but such is art.
Could be. Buying a condo in a building that is taller than 5 floors is basically supporting a non sustainable trend. All tall building need to be demolished at some point. Tall concrete buildings, should stand good for about 70-100 years. Smaller buildings can stand for hundreds if not thousands of years.
Honestly... I get that he's trying to push some emotional buttons here and there, but everything he's saying sounds like someone that hasn't been to a metropolitan area in the last 20 years....
According to Stats Canada, 19% of Canada's population lives in Rural areas. There has to be at least 1% that haven't gone to a major city. I know people who rarely go to the city, maybe a dozen times a year. I actually try to avoid it. I would much rather go to a smaller town that has amenities than deal with the traffic in major cities. I think in 2016 I have gone to the nearest city about 7 times, and most of those were appointments. I can't remember the last time I have gone to a city just to 'hang out'. Link for stats: www.statcan.gc.ca/tables-tableaux/sum-som/l01/cst01/demo62a-eng.htm
I think his audience is to entice people to bring others into the city to see structures and events centered around such architectural designs that he is talking about. Only thing I can think of personally ;)
Or just job security... At least it gives us a challenge. Besides, the more wild and crazy buildings get, the more powerful our engineering software becomes.
As a former architect myself I can say this based on my own reflection and observations over the years: an architect's perspective on what is a "good" architecture can be just as narrow as anyone else's. Sometimes a "good architecture" to an architect is about landing on the cover page of certain magazines - or gathering likes on social media nowadays. The role of architects have been devolving into mostly playing with forms and shapes and often with a severe lack of understanding of the economics and operations of buildings and cities.
I Thank you
So traditional architects did have a clear understanding of economics and operations in cities?
Architect are never former , you stop working or learning but architect inside you never dies.
This approach fosters architecture into becoming a flat image, turning it into a consumerist product. The idea of "inventing" for the shake of innovation and originality is not new in fact. It is the motto of the modern era, which is still present. As a result of that pressure for innovation we have architects, including this guy, that think architectural innovation is the generation of new forms. But architecture is only in part related to form. If I understand correctly the message that he wants to convey is that the media enables people to publicly express their feelings about a building and exchange views. This is fantastic, but the danger in general in this media dominated world and that unbounded democratization of architecture is that common people don't understand the reasoning behind buildings. As a result, the focus can be easily lost and as it is commonly observed oriented towards form. We cannot blame people, but architects should be more responsible when giving public speeches!
+Hey You Art can only be represent in its own form. For music, we need to hear; for food, we need to taste and for architecture we have to occupy. Thumb up for you!
agreed I think he's wrong. He thinks he can make us love ugly buildings, the thing is he can only make them a trend, like instagram makes everything become a trend , like nostril fake hairs. It's marketing applied to architecture , trends don't last , buildings do . He does not get the point Guery's point, Guery says that beauty is universal , human and necessary, that is the strength of it's work : it's meant to be beautiful , not "new".
He was motivated by a need to not be seen walking to the bathroom. He is just justifying the fact that he makes buildings solely around making ways to get to bathrooms where he won't be seen.
There's an easily hidden hand in what he's describing. An investment group can plan a building, plant the images on Facebook, generate lots of Astroturf comments, and voila! Consent has been manufactured. This architect surely knows that very well. Delphi technique. Get people to believe that they came up with the idea that someone else painted in their head. This type of cultural engineering has been around since public relations was born.
@@adelevermouille7057 Gehry also said he was confused as to what was ugly and what was beautiful.
Let me summarize this video after watching all 18 minutes of it
Architecture nowdays gets feedback from social media.
Thank you!
you deserve a monument. Thank you :)
and it was needed for centuries ^
you have saved my 18mins life, thank you
Literally paused at 0:36, thanks!
He's so engaging!! It's hard to speak about architecture and keep an audience of people who haven't neccessarily studied architecture engaged
Is it just me, or does it seems like there's a lot of negativity towards historical architecture? It makes me sad that we "aren't allowed" to appreciate anything old. I believe that it's completely possible to innovate while still appreciating styles of the past.
I would say, that modernism architecture that he showed is a total crap. It has nothing to do with architecture and of course ancient european buildings look so much better than this. It's not cool at all just because it's ugly 80's. Yeah, it's a part of history (modernism), but it's the worst part
He’s just self righteous just because he was born in this age of technology. Frank lloyd wrights falling water could be considered brutalist and it is one of the most beautiful buildings in the world.
it's about moving forward and creating our own symbols, instead of relying on the old ones.
Can we please kill post modernism soon. I am ready for something new.
@@e11engineer I feel like totally denying the past is kind of an insult to those who already mastered architecture and paved the way. Good design starts from recognizing the essential in what's existing, and innovate from this already great base. Because if not, you start from zero, and that doesn’t sounds like moving forward to me.
I love that library in Seattle. My university had a library where the walls were made of windows. It let in more natural sunlight. Our human brains work better in natural sunlight. Sunlight wakes us up in the wild. It's why seasonal affective disorder is a real thing and why they try to increase sunlight for those people. So if your library is made out of windows, that is a place where I want to be. You can't even compare an artificially lit room to a room with the sun beaming in. Please tell me I'm not the only one.
well to be fair, sometimes the creative process can take years. I'm working on a story I've been formulating for the last year and I'm less than 40,000 words in.
Sunlight and windows are great, but they're terrible for books. And, I imagine, it would also make it very expensive to cool and to maintain (who's job is it to clean those windows?). Interesting architecture is wonderful, but if it's impractical then it fails.
Kim ! well... crap... now I feel dumb for even saying anything.
Kim ! They can have small robots that plug and clean the windows, or they can make windows which doesnt need cleaning because they dont get dusty. Hydrophobic film on top, or sprayed with some spray which doesnt let dust stay on the glass.
There are many ways, if there is the will.
Also there are windows which can change their shade, from being completely transparent, to go full dark or any color.
Windows are not a problem, if the building itself is functional and efficient.
The technology is very advanced now for such things.
Vagelis 4VP fui
Tbh, I'd choose the Livingston Library over the Seattle one any day. A library is meant to be a small, warm and a cozy place without crowds. it's supposed to be a personal experience.
The Seattle library resembles more an airport or a metro station to me, kinda symbolising a state of hurry and the urge to depart in order to go somewhere else.
instead of feeling warm and comfortable, I'd feel exposed, cold and vulnerable.
For you perhaps Rex, but a library is supposed to be a repository of knowledge rather than simply something geared toward sentimentalist nostalgia. We reside within a dynamically fast-moving age, and libraries need to correspond with that world as best they may if they are to survive.
sublimelyh70 +sublimelyh70
"...repository of knowledge rather than simply something geared toward sentimentalist "
You don't need a degree in architecture to realize that architecture is an emotional pursuit. Architecture is all about creating sentiments and using imagery to connect the physical aspects of a building to a person's mind to create feelings of trust, comfort, etc.
"We reside within a dynamically fast-moving age, and libraries need to correspond with that world as best they may if they are to survive."
I don't get it.
Do you think that libraries would die out if they don't try to "fit in" the modern age by making themselves look like airports? In that case, I have to disagree.
The reason why people visit a library is not for the architecture, but for the books. The reason people STAY in the library for hours is down to the architecture.
The only thing that's causing libraries to fade away, if at all, is the rise of ebooks and NOT libraries that have warm and cozy interiors.
In a nutshell, libraries don't need to change if they want to stop dying out in the modern age. People will go to the library nonetheless but what causes a person to spend more time in the library reading books is all down to the architecture.
Rex Galilae, and yet many libraries are turning into veritable ghost towns as people like you die off Rex. Your response Rex, only really applies to people like you. Younger generations expect more of their libraries in order for them to remain relevant in today's world. That was what the TED talk was primarily about, not sentiment. =)
Rex I totally agree. It's not a place you feel like being in. No warmth.
sublimelyh70
"So how is it possible that in the same year, in the same country, two buildins both called libraries look so completly diffrent and the answer is..." ----------> Money
Lets ignore that _unimportant_ detail as well as many others and indulge ourselves in chosen architect's wet dream.
you completely missed the point, money doesn't matter, that project could have been so much better but it stuck to historic values rather than challenge them with some new and innovative like the central library did in Dallas.
Yevo Gozhen exactly, if we'd have that freedom the building could have looked much better without a single cent more to spend and probably even less. After all the design could have been innovative and still cheaper to build since your creativity has no limitations...
John Smith
Innovative and outside the norm cost more and take longer, I agree that the Jersey library could have looked better if they had a better architect but something like the one he compared it to probably cost double to triple for the same square footage, glass is crazy expensive like 50+ dollars a square foot of wall area for a normal household window, we would love to design things out of the box (like I have done with every design for my own personal home I'd like to build one day) but it comes down to budget more often then anything and those wild designs involve lots of custom steel work which is quite expensive compared to a typical design that could be done with wood.
DanielRichards644 i agree
I was almost with him when he said it's about visceral emotion. But zoning is super important. When zoning a city, you don't want a 1 purpose building taking up an entire block. You want more walkability. You want people who can walk from point A to point B, with plenty in between. If you want a Walmart or supermarket in the middle of town, they should be on the second floor, while smaller storefronts take up street level. When people have to drive, it creates a disconnect. Now, when it comes to the actual architecture, people don't want wildly unique buildings, but they also don't want bland sameness. They want the buildings to have a degree of uniformity, with subtle yet distinct variations. For example, Amsterdam is full of tall, slim rowhouses. They share a pattern, but are bright, cheerful, and the roof slope and design varies between buildings.
I think this talk inadvertently just made the strongest case for a return to traditional architecture that has ever been made. I cannot think of a worse way to design our streets and city centers than to turn it over the frenetic, fickle, faddish, fever dreams of social media. No city would ever be rooted again. Just constant churn and novelty for the sake of it.
What a horror show.
Lol so true
I'm not an architect but I do love the subject....I actually like those concrete 'ugly' buildings of the 70s maybe it is tied in with nostalgia as I was a child in that era but I think that is what architecture is...it means something to you personally just like Art...different people see different things and it is the way you interpret it in your own mind...I like buildings that are not only dynamic on the outside, but how their dimensions fascinate me, how they function, what is inside them, what can they be used for etc. It is a naive view of architecture I know, but I really liked this gentleman's talk. You can see his love for creation and it was intoxicating to me as I feel the same and know exactly what he is talking about!..x
What an amazing TED Talk. Marc couldn't have delivered his message any better! Incredible speaker! And I completely agree with him on the association people have with architectural symbols and their unwillingness to venture outside their comfort zone when it comes to modern architectural designs. Most architects don't get their name on their first building until their late 40s or 50s, having been repressed in their ability to express their individual creativity the entire time leading up to it by: their clients; their projects' financial limitations; their support from the community; and their supervisors and firm partners with a different vision along the way. So by the time they are able get a design brought to fruition their designs have likely been muted and tamed and their likelyhood to venture outside the comfort zone has proven to be a mute point much of the time. Bringing the design to the people of the community it's going to serve prior to showing it to the client allows the community to voice their emotions regarding the design eliminates the fear of the possibility of negative public perception, which is most likely exaggerated, skewed, or otherwise not true to the actual public perception of the design. This process still may not help when dealing with some clients, but there are so many instances I can think of where this process, previously unheard of, can truely tip the scales in the approval process of a design.
I'm a simple Cambodian. I see Angkor Wat, I upvote.
I felt like i watched a talk by Ted Mosby
YES!
Lol!!!!
Lmao 😂😂
well it's a ted talk
😂😂
Not sure why there are dislikes, the talk was great.
He's showing buildings that are computer simulated to be structural sound, ergonomic, multifunctional and look distinct enough to be accepted into the community and have it's own identity.
Also that buildings can now be built with better techniques, can be made green and recyclable as well.
I like cookies
Temezky Me too.
my friend. There's always dislikes. These dislikes aren't significantly more than most videos.
Vic Vinegar Well, when this video was first uploaded it had around 20% dislikes, which prompted me to make this post.
While dislikes has always been a thing, my own observations have revealed that the usual proportion of likes and dislikes is 100 likes to 1 dislike.
Currently this video has 1k likes and 50+ dislikes, meaning it is 500% the usual amount of dislikes.
But don't mind me, I just like good videos and statistics.
GuyWithAnAmazingHat ah, then this post is alright in my book
When he began the talk with his house, my thought was "Whoa. He lives in such an expensive beautiful house.", and then he said that he hated it. Good design comes from personal experience, not brief observation.
This was a good talk, but did anyone else think that the building the speaker's firm designed was kinda ugly?
Yes, it looked like a barn.
The wood needed to be a little darker.
As with the vast majority of other contemporary buildings it looks like someone sat on a rubix cube
No "feedback-loop" at all...
it needed more shine like in the rendering, in my opinion
When the sunlight structs the Bilbao building it hurts the eyes of the people living within the area
Tough. That's why tinted glass and plantation shutters were made.
There's a building that was made as a concave form; it literally melts cars that are parked on the other side of the street...
Is that true? Because no way the reflections can be that bright when it's literally a metal building.
they changed the outter material later, architecture is an ever evolving process.
I live in north face building with almost no direct sun ..but when they built a metal tall building in front i enjoyed the reflection of sun every evening .. Its really nice and dont hurt my eyes .
One of the better TED talks I've seen in a while.
I started in the '70s, with graph paper on the kitchen table and now I'm a dedicated SketchUp designer. I've also built a dozen houses, starting as a laborer/carpenter. What I see occasionally now is in-experienced designers creating frivolous, redundant or excessive shapes and volumes because it's easy, not because it's a good idea.
One example is when they 'kick out' the hipped roof design to cover a Bow or Bay window in the Exterior wall underneath. There is no advantage to that, simply widening the overhang covers it, and is a good idea anyway. In fact it creates additional elements into the roof right where you don't want them. That area is prone to leaking, and it often is part of a kitchen or dining area, where water supplies and drains, and vents further complicate things.
Some software programs draw that automatically from the floor plan and that's the only reason it's there.
Another mistake is the way windows and doors are installed by the software. Usually with 0 tolerance, which isn't reflective of the real world, so when the carpenter gets to it, it's never exactly the same as the plans. I use R.0.'s and F.F. sizes. Rough Opening should be a minimum of 1/2" larger than the Finished Frame size all around, but rarely is.
Every architect should build a cottage or something to understand what things weigh, how they're handled, what's unnecessary work, etc., but few do.
Some of these buildings look very hard to clean....
So many buildings that are "bold" or "innovative" or whatever are totally impractical
The accumulated dirt is just part of the "installation". Iff you're you're doing it right, that is.
I guess you need some... KITCHEN GUN
I never saw anyone clean a building... easily... unless it was all glass.
That old looking library is "practical", and practically empty, compared to the impractical building which a lot of people actually use. Practical is for the military, unimaginative and poor people. It is a home-depot "shed" v.s. a "tiny home". It is a book v.s. a movie. It is a dead leaf v.s. a dragonfly, blowing in the wind v.s. flying.
TED learned how to clickbait.....
it's a clickbait and not at the same time.
what's the cost difference between those two libraries?
which library is more visited?
Absolutely. What cities are those two library's all different variables.
my guesstimate would be that the livingston library cost $2m and the seattle library cost $400m. I just think it's a stupid and ridiculous comparison to make. it's like comparing the livingston high school football stadium with the seattle marriners stadium. social media definitely will make a difference to architecture but much more important is the money available.
The old fashioned one is obsolete and totally not artistic. It may likely even be more expensive than the modern one.
Nicki LovesDogs The Livingston library cost $8.9m, whereas the Seattle library cost close to $200m.
It worked. The reactions he got from the community are real. Media plays a big role in our civilization, admit it or not. It's an observation. He tested and got some results. It's not entirely true, but there are some truth to it. Pick up what you can get and throw the crap out of the window. That's how simple it works.
Some good points but I still was annoyed by a) his way of talking and b) his just complete disregard for the value of traditional architecture and the value it still has in today's building. Modern and contemporary forms aren't automatically superior. Super condescending when he was talking about "historical pastiche" and "we're finally ready for this".
What is traditional architecture?
I could not agree more. Something about his emphasis on completely random words was triggering the fuc out of me
It was really fun and very thought provoking to watch your talk. I wish to work with passionate people as you in the future. Thank you for inspiring me.
the parthenon in greece was build like a 3d puzzle and embeded in the architecture was the "fi" ratio.Ancient greeks found about "fi" by measuring the ratios of relations within the human body the building was not a symbol of power but a symbol of humanity ! Maybe we need to build buildings with more sense and we need to implement nature and human characteristics in the method of building it not only in the finished design.
It takes a while to think properly about a building too mate. I spend countless of hours gaining feedback from anyone who has a slight interest in what I have to say about a project I would be working on. It takes months to properly design and think about all the details. The building part is the easy part especially in today's era. And buildings have always been shaped by the masses. If we only appealed to ourselves, I doubt anyone would consider hiring us. Architecture responds to the environment physically or intangibly (through client needs, wants, programming, target audience, personal values, advertising, globalisation etc.) whether you like it or not.
Although I agree that we are now in an age where we are forced to keep up with technology and therefore should embrace it to make the lives of all better in all aspects. Not just aesthetics and form. A responsible architect observes beyond the paycheck and the personal need to mindlessly create and tackles something far more complicated than producing a building that works. That is why I can't respect Frank Ghery who draws inspiration from a piece of rubbish or Zaha with her rigid form finding and lack of programming and people understanding. We should be using our position to educate the public about what a truly good standard of living is, one that is not detrimental to ourselves and the environment. Ethics over aesthetics. A building that follows this can only bring out good emotions and good vibes.
they're so happy about all these buildings and how "we love them" but they all look so bad _so so _*_so bad_*
That's what people wanted. The majority doesn't have the same opinion with you.
@@user-ly1fk9kk9d I highly doubt that's what people wanted. Seems like the majority thought they were ugly af.
@@randallabracadabra We used greek symbols and elements for mostly all styles that existed until now.
It was the only "beautiful" humanity could find in architecture, and the guy said it's the first time we can actually invent a new "beauty" because of social media and people's opinion.
Not to me! Wonderful, the whole lot of them, minus the horrible red brick library.
@@user-ly1fk9kk9d If you would look at surveys asking if people prefer modern or traditional buldings, around 80% prefer traditional buildings. Modern architecture is only being pushed by "professionals".
Great talk 👏 We Bharatiya wonder how our Kailashnath temple at Ajanta Ellora caves carved intricately a beautiful Architectural wonder starting from top to bottom ,thousands of years ago ,when rest of the world don't even have a language to communicate ! Matchless indeed & we respect their vision 🙏 🇮🇳
That weird library in Seattle and the Guggenheim in Bilbao look funky from the outside, but they create dead space on the outside - there is very little interaction with the streets and pavements, in the form of doors, shops, cafes, etc. There is also a lot of dead space between the randomly spaced shells and the actual usable space inside.
Museums aren't meant to interact with the outside world around them Zachary Lee. They are a world within. Inclusive and set apart.
Zachary Lee, yes and no. Today's museums need to stand-out in order to attract the masses, the culturally bereft alas. When museums cannot; they eventually are forced to be shuttered, their collections dispersed, and another piece of history falls to private hands/private consumption.
I don't know Bilbao but I live in Seattle and that library is alive inside and out. For one there is a couple of restaurants across the street where one can eat a delicious taco and admire the building. It's a great spot to meet tourist and many converge in the front entrance since a natural plaza was build there. Then inside you have fun ways to walk the library not only the elevators even do that option is there. On the back of the library there is a coffee place where one can sit down to read a book. Finally from the top of the library one can see the Puget Sound and the Seattle Skyline in all of it's beauty since the library sits at a higher altitude. I could talk even more about the EMP museum in the Seattle Center or even the Space needle.
I got tears in my eyes at the Spanish place spontaneously. So raw. So beautiful😞.
shet, i was thinking the dude gonna show us some fancy 3d printed buildings, and i ended up watching how people gonna google for images before they ask architect to come in. sad T_T
One of those rare few ted talks that are really, really worth listening and watching... Again and again.
He's a very good public speaker, and shows a lot of passion about what he does.
I really like how passionately he speaks about this. I feel like he could teach more than this and I feel inspired by his energy in this TED-talk even though I'm normally not in architecture or design.
He just sounds like some annoying salesman full of BS, trying to convice us that stupid random different buildings are better just because they're new. So righteous...
did you know we spend 99% of our lives in the solarsystem? no wonder we are shaped by the distance from the sun to jupiter
Where do we spend the other 1%? O_o
Huey Freeman sometimes our conciousness drigts off to the epicenter of the universe during our sleep.
my university is brutalistic... makes me cry every time i have to look at it...
POV: Your teacher gave you a architecture project and this is the video you have to watch :)
Perfect presentation of what 21st century Architecture is all about
Every decade you hear about how much different the homes of the future will look. This has been going on since the 30's and we're still mostly staying in small cookie cutters.
LOOL i immediately thought of the fountainhead for some reason.
+Abdullah (A.T.) this is true and it's honestly a scientifical and economic reason but it would be better for everyone if these architects could shape our cities anything but fucking basic square shaped housing
yay to homogeneity!
Yep. modern architecture and the flat design movement are essentially more sophisticated versions of the "Bauhaus" school, the style that originated nearly a century ago.
Publishing Bauhaus posters or executing a Bauhaus building plan nowadays, and everyone would still think that they were designed by just another studio architect recently.
Wow, I’m 21 and got into a really nice architecture school as a transfer. I’ve been doing more in-depth research these past two months, and I’m thinking of pursuing this career after watching videos like this.
This talk was very interesting but damn, it felt like it was 40+ minutes long.
I watched at 1.5 speed until I wanted to see one thing again and dialled it back to 1x. WHOA! Talk about Brutalism! He ... was ... talking ... soooooo ... slow- ....... -ly..... Haha
2x is somewhat listenable. It still feels long. Fawk.
WE wrote "YOUR" story, this is "YOUR" building. It is part of "YOUR" culture now, love it or hate it. WE'RE BUILDING IT.
lmao I love how everyone is the comments section pretends to understand architecture
Well I've been the CAD draftsman for an architect for like 10 years now, so I'd say I have a pretty decent concept of it.
+TheEnigmaticHermit Well, as a kid I used to play with legos so that makes me qualified professional.
+DanielRichards644 No, No you don't.
architecture is supposed to be understood by everyone, if not : it's crap architecture. That's just my point of view . Everyone likes guery : guery =good architecture , everyone hates brutalism exept brutalist architects : bad architecture. Maybe if you have studied , deconstruction, brutalism "less is more" in college , you can get it , but good architecture must be understood by every one , it must be universal, it must talk to humanity, not be some intellectual wanking reserved to a so called elite.
Adele Vermouille A perfect summary of everything I was just about to comment 🙌 E.H. Gombrich made a similar statement about art. The meaning of art is what emotional response it creates for you without further knowledge about it. While art we don’t like is easily ignored, architecture isn’t and it’s impacting the lives of generations. Too often architects seem to overestimate their capacity to understand human nature - they are focussed on the object, the space, the light, the colours, materials, costs, investors most of the time. Their creations rendered in beautiful weather in the most pristine state. Never mind how materials age or building surfaces end up looking like under regular conditions, how their visual style won’t fit the local surroundings because most of the designing architects never actually got to see the site they are working for...
That building in Spain (hay, concrete, cow).. I think it's beautiful! Like it brought tears to my eyes! (and that hardly ever happens!). I love that building! It's not ugly. It's beautiful.
Go to therapy.
Amazing talk. Accessible, funny and insightful. Loved it!
As an architect student this video was useful because showing off building ideas to the community and see what they think can help the architect modify it before it is build though sometimes the community won't know about architecture and judge based on what they know so of course they will go back to the ideas of Greek architecture etc it is all they know which begs the question how much should architect actually care about the communities option after all they will never be satisfied
The Bilbao Museum looks nice, but it melts parts of houses and cars parked near it,
Again proving the modern architecture just doesn´t care about its surrounding
So you think that they knew about that beforehand, and did the cost-benefit analysis? Might Google "emergent."
The upper part of that museum is not accesible, is just decorative, how funny that one of the most popular modernist architecture work doesnt follow the "form follows function" motto, What is the function of that upper part, besides the decorative purpose? Bring back old architecture pls.
One of the Best Architectural Talk I have ever heard/seen.
This guy sounds like a South Park character.
They have a gay atheist roller-blading Jew South Park character?
Single-handedly one of the most important presentations about architecture of the first half of the 21st Century.
1:47 Holy crap, America, go play outside!
You're not my mom!
What is "outside"?
We would if we were paid enough to be able to survive...
*yOu nEvEr UnDeRsTaNd mE! YoU nEvEr WiLl!*
To all those criticizing his talk - Perhaps we can all learn to listen to what he wanted to say rather than what we wanted to hear... He found this interesting for a reason hence he brought it up at TED.
We all have our own views and learn different things from an experience. Please just accept and learn.
It's also about damn money not innovation.
Great presentation. His style is unique and you don't want to finish it. The examples presented are authentic and the dissertation covers important points about how architecture affects our lives.
The general population is in no position to comment on the value of a building. I suppose if some proper anthropological studies were done of how people react to buildings... then maybe. But Kushner is, as far as this talk goes, making an argument from popularity, which is a well-known fallacy.
The real problem with architecture is that, on the whole, it considers itself more of an art than a design discipline. An architect ought to design what people need, not what they want, through the application of rationality. This doesn't exclude incorporating emotional impact, but it does require addressing the interactions that give rise to those emotions clinically and rationally. Instead, too many architects still use highly subjective, unjustifiable, and ultimately irrational ways to come up with their designs.
Nice talk. I kept waiting for the segue onto an in-depth discussion of the tiny house movement. But alas, it was not to be.
Filippo Salustri I plus your comment at the beginning, not the talk.
wow its been a while since I skeptically started watching a video and completely was agreeing 100% with this guys vision of how architecture is formed and why.
perhaps people wouldn't hate architects so much if they considered function in their design
MrP86 You mean if only all architects can create buildings like that multipurpose multistorey carpark, and make ergonomic, economically viable, green and recyclable buildings like how architects are doing now.
GuyWithAnAmazingHat
or not in a lot of cases
GuyWithAnAmazingHat
Architects only do these sort of things, when somebody comes to them and says "I´ve got 50k to spend, just on the architecture plan"
But for normal people, coming to normal architects, they just dig in their files, take some house and offer you two or 3 different designs for the roof tiles and the wood on the side of the house.
So you didn't listen the talk? Generally some of the most hated architecture ever was created by modernism, also known as functionalism. "Form follows function" ever heard? Didn't work out so well after all.
eberbacher007 no. those aren't architects, the job of architecture is that feeling. architecture is made to make life better. it is an art form that serves more as a background than it does as a foreground. it is not noticed unless one actually pays attention. Levittown was designed by a developer not an architect. it is that pendulum that caused most architects to have to conform to those standards. It is the public that mandates this as much as the developers because we all want our white picket fence.
Key element. A feedback loop. What an outstanding presentation. Genius.
I want buildings that require minimal rudimentary air conditioning, relying mainly on natural air flow to keep a comfortable temperature all day long. Hopefully, a scientist can get together with an architect and an engineer to bring this to reality.
excellent representation of an optimistic world of today's architecture. loved it!!
A picture is shown to an engineer. "What do you see?"
"A dead architect."
Another picture: "An architect about o die."
etc.
Engineer to architect: "Some part of the building actually HAS to touch the ground."
Super!
Off- grid tiny, either ensconced halfway into the earth, or on wheels ...
What's needed is low cost housing that doesn't depress the spirit.
Independence and greater health can be accessed via tiny home gardens, permaculture experiments, etc ...
Zoning must be addressed, etc so that this can uplift strengthen and unify communities ...
so what he's saying is basically that to shove his uninspired, unintelligent, narcissistic pseudo-architectural creations down people's throats without them complaining he simply needs to terrorize them with tons of pictures of it first. love this guy.
He's insufferable and can't possibly conceive of someone that simply doesn't enjoy or like his precious contemporary architecture, like most architects.
Best Ted Talk I've seen in quite a long time.
i wonder if i should share this with my mom and my older sister... they are both studying arcitecture
Do...
how does that work
lol
Are they the same person?
dont he is talking bullshit
Makes sense. Architecture was and still is shaped by geological religious and socio - political aspects. Our generation's exposure to technology makes a huge difference, the abrupt change in architecture today may be overwhelming but it makes sense. Our ways of living and our needs now is different from what it was many years ago.
I see this movement potentially becoming another phase in architecture like the ones he referenced in his talk. The truth is every architect throughout time has believed that their present time has equipped them with the tools necessary for the "right" way to do architecture. Denying the significants of historical architecture is denying the significants of today's architecture. I do believe the media has, and will continue to have, a positive impact on architecture. However, embracing the modern world and the benefits of media does not mean we have to build strictly "modern" buildings. As seen in the discussions this form of media has already initiated, many people enjoy historical buildings.
One of my best Tedtalks.
Brilliant talk
Oh goody. I just can't WAIT for all those thoughtful, insightful and oh,so intelligent experts on social media to tell us what good architecture is. Just like they did with movies, music and politics, they'll make the world wonderful again. : /
That was a really cool presentation.
I didn't know this channel ( i'm in Italy...) until a few days ago. (i'm in Italy)
It is really interesting and pleasant to follow.
👍👍👍
I study in a university with brutalist buildings, and the thing it does great is incorporate spaces for you to hang out and stay.
the modern buildings don't have that.
the main area of the university has the buildings separated by trees and a mini park with a cafeteria and benches for you to sit and then just go to your class that's near it, no separation.
the modern building don't have that, it is hallways with the classroms and offices and if you want to hang out you go to other place.
i love brutalism not because the buildings look cool as f* and you don't get tired of it, but mainly because one of the objectives of brutalism was to incorporate outside and inside and be an actual place you want to be, not a fancy looking building that actually sucks to stay.
so hopefully we go back to that, when i build my house it's going to be brutalist in style.
i agree to his definition of architecture. I believe that architecture depicts a picture of WHO and WHAT kind of people are using them. It portrays the values and conviction of its community. Architecture is more than the arts and design that it displays.. it goes beyond it. Thanks for this episode...
It doesn't seem to me that this speaker is realistic. Big flashy building cost money and architects tend to burn a hole through our pockets. I feel a sense of arrogance in his tone. Something is off with this presentation.
It feels strange because it's not targetted to you
Well im an architect and i think he is realistic. Yeah your right about the cost, but that's why we make sure the building will make it easier for the client to make there money back faster from lower energy cost, recycling, attraction, and able to sale for a reasonable price. It doesn't cost much more for a building to be designed more sustainable, but it increases the value of the property by a lot. People get excited when they see something new and different witch is why the company or housing agency will get twice the business. Rich business owners aren't stupid. They just don't build expensive building just to have the freshest rims on the block. When you got the best car on the block, that lets everyone know what your do and you probably got better deals than everyone else if you have enough to pay for all this so now you have people always asking you if you sale drugs. Some buildings would be renovated 8 times before its destroyed witch is why its important to keep up with the latest designs. In 2030, no one will want a building thats look simple and cheap to start a new company. Would you make more money in a renovated McDonalds from 1960 or in a building that defines gravity. New construction is not for penny pinchers they suck at investing but good at saving money. Save your money and remodel a used building.
This goes for all design. People like familiar, but it's our job to marry form and function to create something unique to the project and show the client how our solutions can exceed their expectations.
So, digital media is the GREATEST REVOLUTION in architecture since the invention of concrete and steel? That is laughable. A building's narrative comes from your experience of using it, often repetitively; not spoon-fed by some digital renderings, often accompanied by beautiful people in swimsuit. The only way to speed up the feed-back system of architecture is to speed up design and construction. And it's always a gamble. Digital rendering helps. But given the budget constraints (big buildings are very costly), once construction starts it's hard to change the design if people don't like the rendering.
Also, the fact that people now take photos of buildings with their cell phone does not mean buildings should be "disembodied" from the site (9:58). That is just wrong. Too bad he cannot look beyond the building itself and pay attention to other factors(budget, environment, neighborhood, social and cultural context, etc.) I bet his next big talk will be how VIRTUAL REALITY is the greatest revolution in architecture.
mhtinla yes and like he said in the very beginning (which he doesn’t think is a contradiction apparently) architecture is the sensual experience but not just how it looks, and disembodying it completely took that away from its users. For most people “seeing is believing” and very few would go out of their ways to experience the architecture themselves. If media is what shapes architecture today then we are all screwed and schizophrenic, the designs would be egotistical and fragmented. His view on social media s impact on modern architecture is painfully optimistic.
I completely agree. The look and design of a building GREATLY affects my mood and feelings.
Very well composed! A great story telling !
I think the “No one client anymore” point made at 16:00 is huge. That in itself is also industry changing.
my thoughts after 1 minute and 44 seconds:
Why did you not just put on your clothes in the bathroom after taking a shower like every other person does?
He s happy bc architects get a feedback from social media . What a great progress ....? Good for you , your is getting easier , but he doesn't talk about what s really important : how we should stop building in conflict with our environment.
It would have been better if there wasn't such an overwhelmingly condescending tone.
"Architects are no longer these mysterious creatures that use big words, and complicated drawings. And YOU, aren't the hapless public..."
Yes, because Architecture is such a complicated science. Your big words are too much for me to comprehend, sir.
Anyhow, we don't have "amazing" designs because designing and building something that breaks the mold more often also breaks the bank. I'll take function over form any day, thanks.
Kurtis Heslop Its one of my biggest issues with architecture. Me no dum dum mr archie.
Also, he's a little full of BS... 17:16... as an Edmontonian... I can confidently say architects CAN/WILL screw up an entire city in just one decade.
+nidkidwonderboy Clearly name calling was appropriate for my interpretation of his words. It didn't come across at satirical. If it was satire, it was done poorly. It doesn't make me insecure to point out condescending behavior.
So you'd rather live in austere lifeless buildings that all look the same? I'm glad your not in a position of power.
To be honest, this is the way we should be taught in school.
Modern architecture sucks. It leaves all traditions behind, and make every country look the same. I personally would be for a mixture of modern AND traditional architecture. After all architecture is one of the things that really defines a country, and I want my country to be special
H20_Sakaia3 You do not really get what I mean do you? Well, I guess I should have been more clear about it.
I just hate the way modern architecture has no clear tradition in it. I love traveling and seeing different countries. Maybe if you have been to china once, you will know what a different feeling it has for example to germany. And I just do not have this feeling when seeing modern architecture. To be honest, I would never know where the houses in the video would be, just by looking at their architecture.
So I think we should preserv that diversity that makes all our cuntries and cultures different. Otherwise everywhere would be the same... And that just sounds depressing
Then become an architect?
I'm still focused on how confident he was as a speaker!
Sales clown
Modern Architecture should be called Artitecture... And like in every other art form there are always certain style periods. In 50 years every flashy thing of today everybody awed to will be old and disgusting. But for some reason most people still can relay to the ancient Roman and Greek (and all the other ancient cultures) buildings: They're in many ways "classics".
The problem is that we can avoid seeing art which we don't like but buildings are pervasive, intrusive, they're part of our environment and surrounding, these guys since the 40s and 50s are basically forcing society to live with their little self-proclaimed innovative creations, which are in many cases just making us live in some disgusting flashy collage or, in the worst cases, ruining historical environments which btw most of the people prefer.
Mother Nature will be the Chief Architect pretty much from now on. She's been telling us this for a long time, but now we must pay attention, and do as we're told.
Practically speaking this means building with what we have, where we are, and using technology sensibly. We have an exploding array of tools now, that we didn't have even a few years ago, to implement responsible designs. I would wager a small group of Roman Architects and Engineers came to similar conclusions almost 2000 years ago. Certainly Life or Death would have been on the table. They passed the test numerous times, but lost the Empire eventually.
Perhaps my favorite enclave of buildings in the US, is Frank Wright's Taliesin School of Architecture in the desert, east of Scottsdale/Phoenix. The handful of students that are accepted annually have to design, build and live in structures made mostly from what is lying around, plus things they bring in by hand, I'm not sure of the restrictions.
Tuition isn't that high when you consider that it includes the cost of living while at school, you live in your house, I think. The best efforts are intriguing, but the lessons are clear.
Even Skyscrapers are tuning in, from what I've been reading/seeing on the Internet. Living towers of inter-connected communities, etcetera!
Just because a building looks like it's drunk af and it looks like it's falling apart doesn't mean that everybody likes it just because it's "cool" or "unique." Btw this dude is really butthurt about older looking buildings.
Older looking buildings are really visually heavy! they cost more and consume more energy to build. As an architecture student I am not a big fan of "deconstructivism" But I really appreciate the new way of thinking spaces. Architects are trying to engage technology and the community in the design process and this is only the beginning. There is always time for development and you ca be a part of it ;)
@@sanaakhasawneh325 idk about You, but recent polls says that people want more traditional buildings, and in top of that, if you search in Wikipedia the most loved buildings in the US , most of them are pre wwii buildings.
@@sanaakhasawneh325 From me, a member of the "community", to you, a striving architect in the making. Everything I've seen of architecture from the 20th century onward is boring, soulless, tedious, frustrating, infuriating, disgusting, insulting, bland, and undesirable. I'm sick of seeing buildings being put up that are so light on ornamentation and sculpture. Post-modernism is barely any better than modernism. I'll take the unimaginative and conservative brick/stone buildings of yore to the sophisticated, avant-garde, and experimental garbage of today, thanks. I realize this is a matter of personal taste, and I can appreciate certain contemporary buildings in _photos,_ but I don't want to be surrounded by them. Remember that a lot of us truly hate everything you do.
@@sanaakhasawneh325 What actually makes modern architecture so great? Just because something is seen as new and hip doesn't mean it's better or that it won't be obsolete in a short time. However some old world designs are timeless and will never be out of style. Also, Those Frank Gary monstrosities aren't exactly good for utilizing space. Most of the buildings look ugly and unrealistic and unworkable for neighborhood homes and businesses. I never understood why a building has to look like a melted toy jack to please ultra modernist totalitarians or how that's considered futuristic anyways. Whose to say what kind of houses people are going to want to live in the future anyway. Me I'll take an early 1900's Craftsman bungalow over any example of a modern house any day.
Only gays like that buildings
I still like renovating and reusing instead of building new ugly structures just for the sake of "innovation". Sometimes cherishing the past is the greenest of all options.
Very enjoyable however, I disagree with Mr Kushner's slating of Brutalism. Preston Bus Station (in the presentation) has recently been saved by a long heartfelt campaign by the people of Preston, also Le Corbusier is admired by many non-architects. True, it is a divisive style, but such is art.
It's the most informative and interesting TED Talk I've ever watched
the buildings of the future will be made from mud and straw
Cockroaches will start building their own dirt skyscrapers by the time Trump is out of office.
At least my home would be
Could be. Buying a condo in a building that is taller than 5 floors is basically supporting a non sustainable trend.
All tall building need to be demolished at some point. Tall concrete buildings, should stand good for about 70-100 years. Smaller buildings can stand for hundreds if not thousands of years.
That architect means the future of the city.A modern city needs more such art building.
Honestly... I get that he's trying to push some emotional buttons here and there, but everything he's saying sounds like someone that hasn't been to a metropolitan area in the last 20 years....
Shelby S I've never been to one. What's it like?
According to Stats Canada, 19% of Canada's population lives in Rural areas. There has to be at least 1% that haven't gone to a major city. I know people who rarely go to the city, maybe a dozen times a year. I actually try to avoid it. I would much rather go to a smaller town that has amenities than deal with the traffic in major cities. I think in 2016 I have gone to the nearest city about 7 times, and most of those were appointments.
I can't remember the last time I have gone to a city just to 'hang out'.
Link for stats: www.statcan.gc.ca/tables-tableaux/sum-som/l01/cst01/demo62a-eng.htm
Kardall Makes sense, city life isn't for everyone. But then the question is, who's his intended audience? The 1% that have never been to a major city?
I think his audience is to entice people to bring others into the city to see structures and events centered around such architectural designs that he is talking about.
Only thing I can think of personally ;)
I agree....this is not one of the best talks I have seen. Probably the second worst.
a video which every client should watch
every structural engineer's nightmare/headache.
Or just job security... At least it gives us a challenge. Besides, the more wild and crazy buildings get, the more powerful our engineering software becomes.
better for us, more money
I agree with him greatly. I grew up in probably the dullest city in the whole world. we need to get more creative about what we are surrounded by.