Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

[notquitethere]

But maybe in another 25 years, people will mourn the loss of the signature architecture of the era?


In other news, bribing doctors might be legalised in Romania.

[scrdest]

But maybe in another 25 years, people will mourn the loss of the signature architecture of the era?

Soviet Era architecture? Mourn?

Granted, there's a lot of blame to be put on architects worldwide, who went nuts over concrete, but combined with its cheapness and the attitude that SOVIET MAN NO NEED CAPITALIST 'QUALITY' (to the point of demolishing a number of Art Noveau buildings in Warsaw, the bastards), more utilitarian buildings look ugly as hell and non-utilitarian ones are political. And possibly ugly too.

[Guardian G.I.]

But maybe in another 25 years, people will mourn the loss of the signature architecture of the era?

Soviet Era architecture? Mourn?

Granted, there's a lot of blame to be put on architects worldwide, who went nuts over concrete, but combined with its cheapness and the attitude that SOVIET MAN NO NEED CAPITALIST 'QUALITY' (to the point of demolishing a number of Art Noveau buildings in Warsaw, the bastards), more utilitarian buildings look ugly as hell and non-utilitarian ones are political. And possibly ugly too.

In many places in Eastern Europe such as Minsk, Belarus, you can't just get rid of Soviet architecture, because otherwise, there'll be nothing left. Then again, judging by historical patterns here, architecture older than 100 years doesn't stay intact for long - sooner or later our Western European neighbours will kickstart urban renewal with the help of heavy artillery and aviation.

[smjjames]

But maybe in another 25 years, people will mourn the loss of the signature architecture of the era?

Soviet Era architecture? Mourn?

Granted, there's a lot of blame to be put on architects worldwide, who went nuts over concrete, but combined with its cheapness and the attitude that SOVIET MAN NO NEED CAPITALIST 'QUALITY' (to the point of demolishing a number of Art Noveau buildings in Warsaw, the bastards), more utilitarian buildings look ugly as hell and non-utilitarian ones are political. And possibly ugly too.

In many places in Eastern Europe such as Minsk, Belarus, you can't just get rid of Soviet architecture, because otherwise, there'll be nothing left. Then again, judging by historical patterns here, architecture older than 100 years doesn't stay intact for long - sooner or later our Western European neighbours will kickstart urban renewal with the help of heavy artillery and aviation.

Or you could replace them over time as buildings get old and building codes change.

[LordSlowpoke]

if a building has been built properly and renovated every so often, there is very little stopping you from living in housing from as far back as the 14th century - or even a fair bit further

thing is whatever such housing existed in the east has been wrecked, and if it hasn't been wrecked the soviets disassembled it for you

and in the west they're illegally demolishing things from the 20th century because of dumbfuck capitalism so i really doubt you'd get away with that

[ChairmanPoo]

Now, I've never been up there, but I've heard that the blocks are ugly but functional, which is not really a bad thing, IMO.

(Now, I admit that in this regard I am heavily influenced by my father, who had to endure some really dysfunctional pretty designs for unrelated reasons, and as a result ended up with a permanent dislike to anything outside brutalist architecture)


By the way, for some reason, as of late, every time I click on this thread title I get the Volga Boatmen song earworming in my head.

(...ay-da, da, ay-da, ay-da, da, ay-da!)

there we go again!

[Sergarr]

Most of Soviet-era architecture does look ugly as hell. I prefer the Imperial one more.

[Helgoland]

(Now, I admit that in this regard I am heavily influenced by my father, who had to endure some really dysfunctional pretty designs for unrelated reasons, and as a result ended up with a permanent dislike to anything outside brutalist architecture)

He doesn't happen to live in Valencia, does he? Because I've heard they have a really famous, but really shitty architect there...

[scrdest]

if a building has been built properly and renovated every so often, there is very little stopping you from living in housing from as far back as the 14th century - or even a fair bit further

thing is whatever such housing existed in the east has been wrecked, and if it hasn't been wrecked the soviets disassembled it for you

and in the west they're illegally demolishing things from the 20th century because of dumbfuck capitalism so i really doubt you'd get away with that

Except a lot of those 'as far back as 14th century' buildings were built to last; sure, they can fall into disrepair, but that's why it's called disrepair - insufficient maintenance.

Whereas Soviet housing projects were pretty much assumed to start falling apart after fourty years or so - cheap pre-fab materials, shoddy workmanship - and even still, they are not exactly the pinnacle of comfortable indoor space design.

That's discounting the fact that, Soviet or not, those are housing projects, in former USSR often in areas which suddenly found out they have massive unemployment and were not exactly rich in the first place, plus all the issues of housing-project tensions even Britbongs found themselves having, all melted into a fine ball of HOW IS IT STILL STANDING?!

[Kot]

start falling apart after fourty years or so

You're pushing it. Those things start to fall apart as soon as they're built. After fourty years they actually stop falling apart, as there is not much to fall off anymore, and what would is secured by duct tape.

[Sergarr]

I dunno, there's a lot of (late-period) Soviet housing around areas where I lived, and they don't seem to be falling apart. Maybe it's because they weren't built by shitty engineers?

[Kot]

I dunno, there's a lot of (late-period) Soviet housing around areas where I lived, and they don't seem to be falling apart. Maybe it's because they weren't built by shitty engineers?

They do fall apart, but it's not apparent from outside. Or inside, if you maintaned it. Or anywhere really, but they still do fall apart, even when they don't.

[Sergarr]

That's not "falling apart", that's "wearing and tearing", if I remember my Western terminology correctly. "Falling apart" implies catastrophic manner of destruction, like floors caving in, roofs sliding off, elevators ejecting out of the elevator chamber, that kind of stuff.

[Ukrainian Ranger]

Lets not forget that Soviet construction workers had a tendency to steal materials. Substituting some % of cement with sand and other tricks like that were very common. Few buildings were built as planned.

[Loud Whispers]

I come back to Europol thred and it's slagging off shitty architecture, you are best politics thread Europol. BEST

REDBRICK THE BEST THE BEST THE BEST
LIMESTONE THE BEST THE BEST THE BEST
GLASSSTEEL SITUATIONAL BUT PROBABLY SHIT
BRUTALIST 2BRUTAL 2BRUTAL BAK 2RUSSIA
And lastly muh trees are sexy