why the black floor with beige walls? its so dimly lit and it has a bulkhead for some reason.
so empty and why are there 2 windows at the back wall for no purpose? brown in the moulding too? ew.
I just hate the moulding too much. Why its there a bulkhead tho???? looks like a basement almost.
at this angle its ok other then that moulding again. It could be forgiven with a LOT of upgrades.
master washroom has no light like the rest of the house
what did they need from a balcony, looking onto flat plains too?
This mainly focuses on DC.
But honestly, brutalism (which is what many federal building in DC and elsewhere are) is ugly as sin. For those that don’t know, brutalism is usually characterized by geometric shapes and exposed structural materials. In short, concrete cubes.
Classical (neoclassical) looks beautiful, looks like it will stand for a millennium, and seems like something we should use instead of brutalism. For those that don’t know, think Greek and Roman architecture or our captors building or Supreme Court.
Do you think, as a modern tradition, we should follow the standards set by greek and roman culture regarding the architecture and standards of temples or do you think that's irrelevant and anything that has beauty and dedication is enough to please the Gods?
Would a hellenistic temple made of wood or a gothic-style temple be acceptable for our modern religion?
I'm actually a software engineer, but would like to get into designing classical architecture as a hobby. I was always fascinated by classical architecture and always wondered how people back in the day actually designed and constructed those complex and beautiful buildings. Are there any online courses or books targeted to people who aren't pros? I feel like this is exactly the type of hobby or profession that combines left-brain systematical thinking with right-brain creative thinking. The former is something I already have, the latter is something I want to develop. Or is this pursuit unrealistic for someone who hasn't studied this in a university?
Numerous structures that surround us daily have features, details and foundations of classical architecture. Classical architecture is deliberately derived from the principles of Greek and Roman architecture of classical antiquity, unambiguously from the works of Vitruvius.
This list has a lot of examples https://www.architecturaldigest.com/gallery/beautiful-examples-historic-modern-architecture-come-together
Most of the modern skyscrapers are just hunks of glass and metal. Like they all stylistically look similar. Compared to the grandeur design of classical buildings, it doesn't hold up in terms of design and popularity.
It's like when you go into cities, that few or one remaining classical building becomes a really popular attraction amongst a sea of other similar looking glass facades.
It's probably very impractical or expensive, but frankly I wished it was more popular. Hell, they could have a classical skyscraper, maybe that could be interesting.
I went to the West of the country and I thought it was Austrian influence but they seemed like really weird mixes of architectures and were manors. Is there a reason they all build their buildings like that?
https://preview.redd.it/6silda8a5nt71.jpg?width=2576&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=12bc074389fd37622f15480c42549bc6458a05d1
I have had this quote from The Fountainhead in the back of my mind for quite some time:
>"Look," said Roark. "The famous flutings on the famous columns--what are they there for? To hide the joints in wood – when columns were made of wood, only these aren't, they're marble. The triglyphs, what are they? Wood. Wooden beams, the way they had to be laid when people began to build wooden shacks. Your Greeks took marble and they made copies of their wooden structures out of it, because others had done it that way. Then your masters of the Renaissance came along and made copies in plaster of copies in marble of copies in wood.
- [NOTE: Just trying to focus on the specific passage here, and steer clear of any of the other political or ideological elements of the book...]
is any truth to this, that the forms we see in "classical" Greco-Roman architecture - in the famous marble/limestone buildings - is really just a derivation from the more archaic wood structures (which are almost entirely absent from our modern consciousness because they obviously did not survive) and it was only in these wood structures that all of these architectural tropes were actually structurally necessary/functional, and by the time they became masonary they were just copied because of stylistic convention (like this)?
And, if so, is there any good archaeological/historical evidence or sources that can shed light on this process?
(edit: link fixed)
I really wish to read books that go into the symbolisms and Origins of art and architecture of the classical world
Can somebody suggest books which would not be very difficult to find?
We all know what the grand marble buildings and monuments look like. But average people's homes are never going to look like that. So what are the vernacular architectural styles that complement those grand marble buildings?
I know that there are depictions of Atlantis as having it's own architectural styles, but why do many portrayals of it in art and media depict it as having classical Greek/Roman architecture or is based on classical architecture? I have seen depictions where it's opretty much just Rome pr Athens on steroids.
As a fan of classical architecture here. One thing in particular, is architecture when applied to places of industry. factories, powerplants, steam halls, water pumps. Turn of century, they were positively amazing looking. Case in point. One reason people fear nuclear is it's imposing nature, the facilities are huge, the design brutal and overall look of a prison.
https://preview.redd.it/5qy23erlz1j71.png?width=1802&format=png&auto=webp&s=fd556c870a7b1d23eb5561bb8985cdd4e46cb01e
Top: Nuclear plant in Abu dubai, UAE. Ugly, boring, bland.
Bottom: (Burrowed image) classical inspiring, revivalist, inviting. Worthy of what's there.
