You can blame this guy: Adolf Loos, at least in part.
Major influence behind Modernism. He was mainly reacting against Art Nouveau which he was a staunch critic of.
“The evolution of culture marches with the elimination of ornament from useful objects” is the core theme of his essay “Ornamentation and Crime” .
Basically,
ornamentation causes buildings and useful objects to go out of style.
Things that go out of style require materials and manpower to update.
It is the moral imperative of the designer to make useful things, things that need to be redone are less useful and are wasteful.
Therefore it is the moral imperative of the designer to remove all ornamentation from design.
He saw ornamentation as “degenerate” and equated ornamentlessnes with moral and intellectual development. He also made it a race thing. He used the example of people from Papua New Guinea having tattoos. Paraphrasing: “these primitive savages ornament themselves with tattoos, we enlightened europeans don’t. We smart, they dumb. Therefore ornament = dumb bad, no ornament = good smart. See?”
He was a major inspiration behind the modernist movement. It helped that unadorned buildings are cheaper and easier to construct - especially with the advent of cheap glass and steel construction. So you end up with this sort of soulless architecture that gives no sense of time or place - that tells you nothing about its purpose or the people who built/use it.
I know it was fairly cheap ornamentation, but the damage his philosophy did to buildings in Germany is profound. They straight up tore the ornamentation off a lot of buildings.
We can pretend he’s the main influence, whilst ignoring the fact that most people prefer square even walls for aesthetic, functional, and - most of all - cost purposes.
I do agree we could do better w.r.t to colour, and millenial grey needs to go. But don’t knock the rectangle. Rectangle is good. Rectangle is steady. You can plan on rectangle.
Rectangle good, sure. But rectangle that gives no sense of time or place sad, I think.
I really like some architecture inspired by modernism. Huge FLW fan - fallingwater is my favorite building. But the good modernist or modernist-derived buildings incorporate and emphasize their surroundings and give a sense of time and place by incorporating traditional stylistic elements, local materials, etc.
Also, no pretending needed - this guy was a major progenitor of the style. The style can be a very good fit for the needs of people who commission buildings to be built, and it can look cool in its own right, but regardless of any of that Loos was a pioneering force in the Modernist movement
Unpopular opinion: I never saw the appeal of Frank Lloyd Wright, honestly. I don’t know how anybody can look at Falling Water and not see a bunch of cardboard boxes somebody left at the creek.
I don’t know how anybody can look at Falling Water and not see a bunch of cardboard boxes somebody left at the creek.
I don’t have a strong opinion about this, but I find it funny that even your unflattering critique acknowledges that it does convey a sense of time and place.
I think an aspect of the problem is the modern high expectations of functionality for things like climate control and ingress protection against pests and water. It’s much easier to not make a mistake on those if you aren’t adding any “frills”. Balancing those needs with ornamentation and cost is such a difficult juggling act, most people just don’t.
It’s also a question of cost. You can probably take the layout off the modern house and have the facade look like the housing of old. But building houses is expensive so costs need to be cut where it can, thus very minimalist facades. If you live in your own house would you pay 50k or 100k just to have your house look a certain way from the outside? I know I wouldn’t. I could barely afford the house.
You can blame this guy: Adolf Loos, at least in part.
Major influence behind Modernism. He was mainly reacting against Art Nouveau which he was a staunch critic of.
“The evolution of culture marches with the elimination of ornament from useful objects” is the core theme of his essay “Ornamentation and Crime” .
Basically,
ornamentation causes buildings and useful objects to go out of style.
Things that go out of style require materials and manpower to update.
It is the moral imperative of the designer to make useful things, things that need to be redone are less useful and are wasteful.
Therefore it is the moral imperative of the designer to remove all ornamentation from design.
He saw ornamentation as “degenerate” and equated ornamentlessnes with moral and intellectual development. He also made it a race thing. He used the example of people from Papua New Guinea having tattoos. Paraphrasing: “these primitive savages ornament themselves with tattoos, we enlightened europeans don’t. We smart, they dumb. Therefore ornament = dumb bad, no ornament = good smart. See?”
He was a major inspiration behind the modernist movement. It helped that unadorned buildings are cheaper and easier to construct - especially with the advent of cheap glass and steel construction. So you end up with this sort of soulless architecture that gives no sense of time or place - that tells you nothing about its purpose or the people who built/use it.
“I think that thing is ugly, so I’m gonna make something even uglier!”
I know it was fairly cheap ornamentation, but the damage his philosophy did to buildings in Germany is profound. They straight up tore the ornamentation off a lot of buildings.
We can pretend he’s the main influence, whilst ignoring the fact that most people prefer square even walls for aesthetic, functional, and - most of all - cost purposes.
I do agree we could do better w.r.t to colour, and millenial grey needs to go. But don’t knock the rectangle. Rectangle is good. Rectangle is steady. You can plan on rectangle.
But consider this:
Hexagons - bestagons
Relevant YouTube video: how did the world get so ugly?
Rectangle good, sure. But rectangle that gives no sense of time or place sad, I think.
I really like some architecture inspired by modernism. Huge FLW fan - fallingwater is my favorite building. But the good modernist or modernist-derived buildings incorporate and emphasize their surroundings and give a sense of time and place by incorporating traditional stylistic elements, local materials, etc.
Also, no pretending needed - this guy was a major progenitor of the style. The style can be a very good fit for the needs of people who commission buildings to be built, and it can look cool in its own right, but regardless of any of that Loos was a pioneering force in the Modernist movement
Unpopular opinion: I never saw the appeal of Frank Lloyd Wright, honestly. I don’t know how anybody can look at Falling Water and not see a bunch of cardboard boxes somebody left at the creek.
I don’t have a strong opinion about this, but I find it funny that even your unflattering critique acknowledges that it does convey a sense of time and place.
Yeah, that’s unpopular alright. How do I look at it without seeing cardboard boxes? With my functional eyes
Rectangle looks like shit and is monotone
No like really, I can see it making sense for older times where it was harder to build shit but cmon we are in 2026…
I think an aspect of the problem is the modern high expectations of functionality for things like climate control and ingress protection against pests and water. It’s much easier to not make a mistake on those if you aren’t adding any “frills”. Balancing those needs with ornamentation and cost is such a difficult juggling act, most people just don’t.
It’s also a question of cost. You can probably take the layout off the modern house and have the facade look like the housing of old. But building houses is expensive so costs need to be cut where it can, thus very minimalist facades. If you live in your own house would you pay 50k or 100k just to have your house look a certain way from the outside? I know I wouldn’t. I could barely afford the house.
Tell me you’ve never read Buckminster Fuller without telling me
Hmm, tricky but I’ll try.
*Mimes: Five words*:
LMFAO
Like… everything he wrote?
Man, I really don’t care for this Adolf character…
Just normal Adolf things. Y’know, like white supremacy
Ayn Rand also writes about this in The Fountainhead
Goddamn she found a way to be as wrong as possible about every single topic.