I could listen to him for hours. The man makes so much sense. Architecture schools, of which I am a product too, need to be totally revamped. Revolutionize the thinking, question everything.
Urbanism and civilization are nearly synonymous, yet it’s a subject that is under appreciated and often completely ignored by the lay person. I’m fascinated by this subject. This gentleman’s lecture is compelling not only because he understands the topic so well but also because he obviously cares deeply about it.
49:04 Talking about the point here, it would be okay if these architects wanted buildings to stand out for the sake of beauty, but the issue is that nowadays most architects want to be famous through crazy and abstract designs OR they want to make an abstract statement through the building design, which nobody else can see or understand. Buildings that are in harmony with each other creates the most beautiful and memorable places. European cities and towns proves this point.
At 49:00 he points out something I've been saying about a lot of architects, in that they want to express art in the form of buildings. But unlike virtually any other type of art (poems, music, paintings), architecture affects everyone around it every day. When you have a god-awful Brutalist building amongst other more traditional buildings, you are *inflicting* your "artistic message" upon everyone there. They don't get to go into a music hall, movie theater, or art gallery and leave if they hate what they're seeing - they're subject to it 24/7.
That's very subjective - I very much like brutalism. A bad building is a bad building regardless of its so-called style. But architecture isn't art since it has a function. It's design. You can very well mix different styles in a city, and e.g. Helsinki is a great example of it. It's a mix of neoclassical, empire, modernist, and postmodern. People very often complain about different-looking things when they are first built but will eventually defend them as part of their urban landscape.
We had an awful chain of Kum and Go’s gas stations pop up around our community. Large lots, ugly buildings, decent interior design but not utilized - no one sits in the cafes. No one used the beer on tap. 🤭😶 Then I visited a local gas station owner with essentially the same interior design but smaller and more nature based - people chatted and sat in the few chairs they had. They sit on the lawn with their pets while out walking in the neighborhood. Same products and service. Less money and resources used. More visually appealing and pleasantly aligns with landscape. Now it all makes sense and I never went to school for any of this. Just got bored and watch the video 😂 Someone had well meaning intentions in the corporate world but failed to look at the exact thing he mentions in the video - local need: How does your day look? Where do you go and what do you do? Mixed use & environmentally anesthetic gas station seemed to be used more and thus make more more money than the large concrete newer store. Very interesting! Gas stations are bad examples but unique in the perspective I observed.
@@edheldude It's interesting that you mentioned Helsinki. Similar to Stockholm, it's a city with remarkable consistency of harmonious architectural landscape. Most buildings are 4-5 story high and similar to adjacent buildings. There are lots of different architectural styles in the city, but they all integrate into their surroundings very well. Individual buildings are not designed to stand out.
I think what you’re saying is absolutely true! And artistic expression has been expressed through architecture throughout history. It’s how we recognize the difference between Spanish buildings and Chinese buildings. As well as buildings from the 1800s vs the 1920s. That artistic expression gives us an idea of what was important during these time frames and to the people in the community.
Read William White 😎 Gotcha. Oscar Neumann Came here out of interest. 🤷🏻♀️ I’m just a homesteader evaluating why I hated the burbs so much. Now I see. Thank you for publishing this for everyone online. I learned a lot and can’t wait to dive more into it.
Same - I was looking for the red dot lol I figured I would just look up the books he mentions. Btw how’s it going - Did you apply this to your career? Just curious.
Very good talk but you’re impacting the hostility between architects and planners. The idea that architects admire the urbanism of Corb is bizarre - I was a student of architecture in the 90’s and his urban ideas were totally defunct then. Maybe some schools in the US are 30/40 years out of date but not in Europe from my experience.
Unfortunately I think many schools/individuals in the US are still 30/40 years out of date, without incentives or passion for change. We have to look at all Urbanist-related fields through the lens of a generalist, there wouldn’t be as much hostility between groups if we all engaged more and broaden our education in other areas.
Isn't the problem of modern architecture that absent a supporting vocabulary and rules (Vitruvius etc.) if the architect fails to be incredibly original the work is mundane.
"Urban woodland, trout streams everywhere, daylighting of streams" and "environmentalists naturalizing the city" WOW THAT SOUNDS LIKE A REAL NIGHTMARE. Seriously, though. You lost me at 4:52.
Yes :) You have to look at the whole picture though. If that is spread throughout the city, then things have to be farther apart. This leads to people not being able to walk to things, which means they have to get a car, and drive there. This means things have to be even farther apart, because you have to park those cars somewhere. So you end up with suburbia, not walkable urbanism. Plus people spread out more and impact more of nature that way. The things you are talking about are terrific things, and we absolutely need them. But they have to be in the right place.
I think that he meant that the urban woodland etc would be a representation of environmentalist's in full control, whereas New Urbanism would represent more of an "environmentalist collaborative" if that makes sense, I could be mistaken
Welcome to Iowa City. Tree City, streams, education and business with mixed use neighborhoods. We have a long way to go but it’s looking good downtown. There are innovations in engineering in place to assist with climate change issues and still have beautiful thriving walkable cities. Unfortunately, we have MASSIVE urban sprawl still so dealing with affordable housing, increased populations and dare I say American ego needs is key.
Andres Duany is an incredible leader and thinker. I’m so glad to be able to learn from him. Thanks for uploading, CNU!
I could listen to him for hours. The man makes so much sense. Architecture schools, of which I am a product too, need to be totally revamped. Revolutionize the thinking, question everything.
Commenting to bump the algorithm. More folks need to understand this. Thanks for the incredible content!
Urbanism and civilization are nearly synonymous, yet it’s a subject that is under appreciated and often completely ignored by the lay person.
I’m fascinated by this subject. This gentleman’s lecture is compelling not only because he understands the topic so well but also because he obviously cares deeply about it.
49:04 Talking about the point here, it would be okay if these architects wanted buildings to stand out for the sake of beauty, but the issue is that nowadays most architects want to be famous through crazy and abstract designs OR they want to make an abstract statement through the building design, which nobody else can see or understand. Buildings that are in harmony with each other creates the most beautiful and memorable places. European cities and towns proves this point.
At 49:00 he points out something I've been saying about a lot of architects, in that they want to express art in the form of buildings. But unlike virtually any other type of art (poems, music, paintings), architecture affects everyone around it every day. When you have a god-awful Brutalist building amongst other more traditional buildings, you are *inflicting* your "artistic message" upon everyone there. They don't get to go into a music hall, movie theater, or art gallery and leave if they hate what they're seeing - they're subject to it 24/7.
That's very subjective - I very much like brutalism. A bad building is a bad building regardless of its so-called style. But architecture isn't art since it has a function. It's design.
You can very well mix different styles in a city, and e.g. Helsinki is a great example of it. It's a mix of neoclassical, empire, modernist, and postmodern.
People very often complain about different-looking things when they are first built but will eventually defend them as part of their urban landscape.
We had an awful chain of Kum and Go’s gas stations pop up around our community. Large lots, ugly buildings, decent interior design but not utilized - no one sits in the cafes. No one used the beer on tap. 🤭😶
Then I visited a local gas station owner with essentially the same interior design but smaller and more nature based - people chatted and sat in the few chairs they had. They sit on the lawn with their pets while out walking in the neighborhood.
Same products and service.
Less money and resources used.
More visually appealing and pleasantly aligns with landscape.
Now it all makes sense and I never went to school for any of this. Just got bored and watch the video 😂 Someone had well meaning intentions in the corporate world but failed to look at the exact thing he mentions in the video - local need:
How does your day look? Where do you go and what do you do?
Mixed use & environmentally anesthetic gas station seemed to be used more and thus make more more money than the large concrete newer store. Very interesting!
Gas stations are bad examples but unique in the perspective I observed.
@@edheldude It's interesting that you mentioned Helsinki. Similar to Stockholm, it's a city with remarkable consistency of harmonious architectural landscape. Most buildings are 4-5 story high and similar to adjacent buildings. There are lots of different architectural styles in the city, but they all integrate into their surroundings very well. Individual buildings are not designed to stand out.
I think what you’re saying is absolutely true! And artistic expression has been expressed through architecture throughout history. It’s how we recognize the difference between Spanish buildings and Chinese buildings. As well as buildings from the 1800s vs the 1920s. That artistic expression gives us an idea of what was important during these time frames and to the people in the community.
Michelangelo considered architecture the highest form of art
Read William White 😎 Gotcha.
Oscar Neumann
Came here out of interest. 🤷🏻♀️ I’m just a homesteader evaluating why I hated the burbs so much. Now I see. Thank you for publishing this for everyone online. I learned a lot and can’t wait to dive more into it.
28:23 The Manhattan example blew my mind!
Interesting thoughts, just wish we could've seen some of the slides that they were referring/laser-pointing to...
Same - I was looking for the red dot lol
I figured I would just look up the books he mentions. Btw how’s it going - Did you apply this to your career? Just curious.
Brilliant guy!
Yeah for New Urbanism!!! #CreatingSpaces #TheFutureIsNow
Why the low volume ?
Audio level is too low☹️
Very good talk but you’re impacting the hostility between architects and planners. The idea that architects admire the urbanism of Corb is bizarre - I was a student of architecture in the 90’s and his urban ideas were totally defunct then. Maybe some schools in the US are 30/40 years out of date but not in Europe from my experience.
Unfortunately I think many schools/individuals in the US are still 30/40 years out of date, without incentives or passion for change. We have to look at all Urbanist-related fields through the lens of a generalist, there wouldn’t be as much hostility between groups if we all engaged more and broaden our education in other areas.
"The power to lower real estate value of a small nuclear plant" literally lmao
Maybe we need more 7-11s to make it possible to have more affordable housing.
❤️❤️
Isn't the problem of modern architecture that absent a supporting vocabulary and rules (Vitruvius etc.) if the architect fails to be incredibly original the work is mundane.
37:07 l wish I could have seen this atrocity 😏
"Urban woodland, trout streams everywhere, daylighting of streams" and "environmentalists naturalizing the city" WOW THAT SOUNDS LIKE A REAL NIGHTMARE. Seriously, though. You lost me at 4:52.
Yes :) You have to look at the whole picture though. If that is spread throughout the city, then things have to be farther apart. This leads to people not being able to walk to things, which means they have to get a car, and drive there. This means things have to be even farther apart, because you have to park those cars somewhere. So you end up with suburbia, not walkable urbanism. Plus people spread out more and impact more of nature that way. The things you are talking about are terrific things, and we absolutely need them. But they have to be in the right place.
I think that he meant that the urban woodland etc would be a representation of environmentalist's in full control, whereas New Urbanism would represent more of an "environmentalist collaborative" if that makes sense, I could be mistaken
Welcome to Iowa City. Tree City, streams, education and business with mixed use neighborhoods. We have a long way to go but it’s looking good downtown. There are innovations in engineering in place to assist with climate change issues and still have beautiful thriving walkable cities.
Unfortunately, we have MASSIVE urban sprawl still so dealing with affordable housing, increased populations and dare I say American ego needs is key.