Видео

I live in Leipzig and most newly-built apartment blocks are typically grey. They all look like prisons and institutes compared to their classically-designed neighbours and yet people will pay exorbitant amounts to live in these drab and bland monstrosities (ooh ... modern amenities!). Anyone who would tell you they find these structures attractive is lying. My counter: by that rationale, you must prefer visiting Mannheim (industrial) to Heidelberg (beautiful)? Cognitive dissonances turns too many people into blabbering apologists for the crass legacy of Bauhaus and that defacer of the good, Le Corbusier. Much of the 20th century was a time or rampant artistic egos in both the arts and architecture. And they are still building soulless boxes. Awful... You are preaching to the choir with this video.

Great points

It’s stupid to present excuses fir the fact that that totalitarian regimes built in an classical style It’s the art deco style that was en vogue everywhere at that time The Beetle is not nazi though it was designed during the nazi time !

Looks like the windows/doors had to be compromised, maybe due to availability or security reasons. I bet there aren't many options if you want the highest possible security.

How about the architectures in Asia, Asia Minor, and other parts of the world?

@Sebastian, Have you ever heard of Christopher Alexander? (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Alexander) You might enjoy his books like "Notes on the Synthesis of Form", "A Pattern Language", and "The Timeless Way of Building". Those books address many of the issues you raise in this video.

So.. you don't like anything built after the 1915's ?.....

going back is a great story ! it's ideology in my opinion when people say we can't go back, we can do what we want, we are supposed to be "sustainable" old buildings can last hundreds of years that is sustainable! and people prefer to look at old buildings so it's social, as you mention it does not have to have a lot of ornaments, that said there were modernists architect's and designers who believed we have to look back in history to create something new timeless and functional like the Danish architect Kaare Klint he was "the father of Scandinavian design" his father P.V Jensen Klint build Grundtvigs church in Copenhagen and he finished it after his father died it's a mix of old and modernism , Kaare Klint also designed the Bethlehem Church also in Copenhagen , he thought almost all the Danish modern designers and architects but not all of them listened to his advice and were more inspired by Bauhaus , i find the one who listened the best was Hans Wegner the furniture designer that's why his chairs and other furniture function in all interior styles because it's a mix of modern and traditional it's timeless

Why do you think golden proportions are not widely used today?

If we really want to become one with ourselfes in architecture, we just need to be honest with ourselfes. And logic is not a good adviser for that. When logic rules an architects mind, we end up with comiblocks. The places where we find our perfect buildings? These places are to find in fantasy movies. - In places where we dare to be free from reality! Just look at the city of the elfes in 'The lord of the rings' ...Honestly? I feel sorry for myself that I live in times where I have to see uglyness every single day of my life only because some soulless guys descided so after the horrors of WWI.

Absolutely amazing ❤

Hello, Professor! I have posted this comment under another one of your videos a couple of weeks ago, but I'm guessing it might have gotten lost in your notifications inbox, so I am leaving it under this video as well. I'm returning to this video (originally ruclips.net/video/JHClCthMK-g/видео.htmlsi=lp1G5jQ2b7PFDrte ) with a few questions that came to mind after letting the information settle and discussing the topic of architecture with a couple of friends. I'm very curious to know if you can explain why, in Gothic cathedrals specifically, we see the walls becoming thinner and gaining support from the outside. I understand the purpose of these supports is to hold up the walls and add to the structural integrity of the building, but what was the reason for making the walls thinner? Was it perhaps to save on materials, which allowed the cathedrals to become significantly larger and more intricate in their fine details? Additionally, I'm very curious if you can explain the difference between Art Nouveau and the Secessionist Style. I've noticed several differences myself, such as Art Nouveau having a much smoother "flow," so to speak, in the overall shape of structures built with that design, as well as being adorned with more organic ornaments, such as an abundance of flowers, leaves, and sculptures of faces integrated into columns, walls, and architraves. In contrast, the Secessionist Style, especially the one often seen in Hungary and the western part of Romania, seems far bulkier, more geometric, and more sparing with ornamentation on the facades. I believe both styles aimed to create something new and to break away from traditional proportions and the classical orders for columns. While they have stark differences, they also share certain common points. I wonder if you could expand more on the differences and similarities between these two styles. I often find myself guessing whether a building is in one style or the other, only to later realize I was mistaken after looking it up online. One last question: Is the reason the Romanesque style is often seen as a "failed" attempt to emulate the classical Roman style due to the setbacks caused by the Dark Ages, resulting in the loss of knowledge required to build in that particular style? I hope these aren't too many questions at once or that they're overwhelming to take in and respond to. Please take your time answering if you see this and intend to! Thank you so much in advance.

Great video; and in fact, one could maybe say that the integration of form and function is so thorough that form IS function, which would mean that beauty is in service of both aesthetic and practical ends.

I had a little cold when I recorded it. I apologize for my voice.. !

Interesting! Would you also teach Baroque Architecture or more Classicism?

Aristocrat style. How to design classical architecture for middle-class people?

Great video - I especially agree that modern architecture is awful, soul crushing and drab. It really points out how great and beautiful the architecture in the past was. I have a question/request - I'm curious how all of those amazing buildings were built specifically in the Americas. The history seems to point out that all of these brand new settlements in the late 1800s were able to build massive, beautiful buildings in roughly a year's timespan. I imagine one of two things could have made this possible: The records are incomplete - and only mention the completion date - these works of art would take years or decades to produce from skilled craftsmen - or there was a huge industry in the Early Americas that allowed for rapid installation of these great works of art. What happened to those industries? Where did the massive stone / cast iron / statue-carving industries go? A lot of these towns say that they had a population of less than 15,000 at the time the buildings were completed, and they list completion in a year. Do we have any better records of actual construction? Thanks for your video and your time!

Google "KTH School of Architecture Stockholm's ugliest building".

This transates to Music too.: which music has more transcendence and timeess duration, Mozart/Beethoven or Schoenberg/Messiaen ?

you keep saying that Le Corbusier was a great and remarkable architect.. but why? despite the fact he was good in selling his work you didn't really pointed out any bright sides of his work as an architect.. and I honestly can't see them yeah there are a few ideas in the monestry i might also call remarkable though definitly not asthetic or beautiful! I think this why I can not get the point. Houses are made for humans. Le corbusiers buildings are representing big ego without touching my heart in the aspect of beauty..

Hello, Professor! I'm returning to this video with a few questions that came to mind after letting the information settle and discussing the topic of architecture with a couple of friends. I'm very curious to know if you can explain why, in Gothic cathedrals specifically, we see the walls becoming thinner and gaining support from the outside. I understand the purpose of these supports is to hold up the walls and add to the structural integrity of the building, but what was the reason for making the walls thinner? Was it perhaps to save on materials, which allowed the cathedrals to become significantly larger and more intricate in their fine details? Additionally, I'm very curious if you can explain the difference between Art Nouveau and the Secessionist Style. I've noticed several differences myself, such as Art Nouveau having a much smoother "flow," so to speak, in the overall shape of structures built with that design, as well as being adorned with more organic ornaments, such as an abundance of flowers, leaves, and sculptures of faces integrated into columns, walls, and architraves. In contrast, the Secessionist Style, especially the one often seen in Hungary and the western part of Romania, seems far bulkier, more geometric, and more sparing with ornamentation on the facades. I believe both styles aimed to create something new and to break away from traditional proportions and the classical orders for columns. While they have stark differences, they also share certain common points. I wonder if you could expand more on the differences and similarities between these two styles. I often find myself guessing whether a building is in one style or the other, only to later realize I was mistaken after looking it up online. One last question: Is the reason the Romanesque style is often seen as a "failed" attempt to emulate the classical Roman style due to the setbacks caused by the Dark Ages, resulting in the loss of knowledge required to build in that particular style? I hope these aren't too many questions at once or that they're overwhelming to take in and respond to. Please take your time answering if you see this and intend to! Thank you so much in advance.

I'm an architect, and I think we should carefully study why classical buildings were pleasing for human beings. We can and should use the scale, proportions, rhythm, massing, and the spacing of the classical style for buildings of public importance since the ideas behind these systems of design were human based and intrinsically known to be pleasing for humans. We should use an architectural system or systems that already works (have been tested and proven to be effective), without getting into all the nitty gritty of the details.

This is so cool! We really need to get this kind of architecture back! We need more beauty in this world. I was considering studying architecture but im not into 3d art nor am I good at working with computers, are those necessary?

Very interesting details. Some ideas reveal to be weird and absurd only when seen from the future.

Very nice

Fantastischer Vortrag! Ich bin bestimmt nicht der einzige, der sich über Quellen und andere Verweise freuen würde. Danke für ihre Arbeit

Wonderful video. Thank you. Sorry if it was mentioned in the video and I missed it, but did you talk about neoclassicism or was it omitted? How come it didn’t have a separate category? Is there nothing much to talk about?

Hello professor, thank you for sharing all of your knowledge with us! I'm a 21 year old student in psychology, but all forms of art have always piqued my interested, and recently I've taken a very big liking to better understanding architecture, its styles, the motifs, how different styles emerged and so on and so forth. I am now watching your courses in which you go in depth in explaining them, such as the Classical architecture course, the Greek course and the 50 minute long one in which you briefly cover all the main styles. Your manner of explaining things is very nice, easy to understand, and I am very happy to be learning about these things. Sending lots of love and appreciation from Romania!

Really good dissection of the topic with great case studies provided as photos plus explanations along the way. Will look into your further videos! Thanks!

This is definitely an underrated channel. Modernism is an ideology and a way of thinking and of life, just beyond some certain forms of deconstruction in architecture. If you really think in a modernism way you'll see how justified it is to unite classical beauty and order with modern designs. Also, the durability of classic buildings is so ignored in many ways. BTW I love your design! It reminds me of some architecture works in China( "Capital Theatre Beijing" for example). Please share more of your ideas!

could you also comment on their floor plans and sections so we can better understand their functionality? as an aspiring new modern architect i often think our hardest challenge isn't necessarily applying the classical orders and principals to the façades, but rather making the interiors and modern construction techniques work within the classical language

thanks a lot!

Thank you for sharing these. Wonderful! How about colors, since now we understand how colorful Classical art and architecture were? An architect I know did his house with Roman style features. The main room had great columns and a high coffered ceiling. I especially remember how he painted the florets in each vault with many colors, and all parts of the house interior had distinctive colors, perhaps far subtler than the Romans would have done.

Thank u so much!!!! I just started watching. But the images are difficult to read. Do you have a link to the slides or images, or can you send me pleeease?

Was er hinterlassen hat, sind katastrophale städtebauliche Ideen, sind Gebäude, die zu großen Teilen nicht bewohnbar waren, weil er die Menschen zwingen wollte sich seinen Ideen unterzuordnen. Er war Faschist im Herzen und im Handeln. Er hat Gebäude entwickelt, nur um sich abzuheben von anderen Architekten und zu zelebrieren, was technisch möglich war. Das ganze hat er mit Schriften untermauert, die keiner kritischen Betrachtung standhalten. Ein Architekt mit Allmachtsphantasien, ein begnadeter Selbstdarsteller und cleverer Selbstvermarkter. Die Folgen seiner Visionen machen einen Großteil der gebauten Dystopie aus in der wir heute leben. Corbusier war kein guter Architekt.

jean Etienne who ? please, i don't found the family name of this architecte

Allreddy cavemen 10s of thousants of years ago made walldrawings to embellish their caves , they needed beauty . But ofcourse , we modern men know better ........😮

As a Dutchman I am verry proud you showed Berlage and de Amsterdam School with Michel de Klerk .....oh and also Dudok !

I think the "weird" and "crazy" buildings still add something to cities, other than the always same bleak, grey boxes. See websites like "Ugly Belgian Houses" or Turit Fröbe's "teardown calendars" for architectural sins. These buildings may be ugly and misfits, but they offer something for the eye, instead of just being eyesores. There just shouldn't be too much of these. For an ordinary family home, tenement or office building, it is mostly better to fit in.

Wow!! you are using Archicad! I recently made a project with an eclectic facade (that was my contract ). The Archicad isn't a popular BIM software in EEUU. Congratulations on the video!! The proportion is a very important subject in architecture!

A few linguistic things. 1) It's not *innovative, it's "innovatory" (stressed on the first syllable). 2) The plural of "axis" is not *axises, but "axes". 3) A building is not "from" Schinkel, Hansen or Palladio but "by" Schinkel, Hansen or Palladio (the preposition expressing authorship is always "by" in English - not "von" as in German). 4) Zunfthaus is "guild house". 5) The adjective "harmonic" does exist in the English language as a technical term in music and physics, but in the sense in which you've used it (~well-proportioned) the correct word is "harmonious".

The classical architecture is amazing. But your country doesn't see it being built anymore, right?

Hi Sebastian! Im glad to have found your channel as it deals with similar topics that I do. I would be interested in hearing your thoughts on my video about how AI will change architectural thinking!

Students should focus on finding messages and texts that they connect with viscerally (see also the previous video "How Modern Architecture makes you SICK"), and use those to help construct an architectural identity. Such a formation -- based on beauty, love, and emotion -- should protect you from the deliberate brainwashing during 4-5 years in Architecture School. Otherwise your mind becomes disconnected from reality.

Hi, I love watching your videos. Next September, I'm starting architecture at the university, and I'm very excited. Thanks to this video, I now have two books to read this summer. I look forward to future content of yours because I found it very educational. Would you recommend any other book for a new student of architecture?

This is a very informative talķ, thank you very much! I would like to suggest one thing about presentation: It would be easier to listen if you followed one thought to the end before introducing a new one instead of interrupting your own thoughts midway with ever new aspects.

Commenting because RUclips likes comments 😜 I like traditional architecture 😁

Hi Sebastian, I'm very new to your channel and am thoroughly enjoying it while studying for my exam about different periods in architecture. I haven't gone through all your videos to check if you've made one on this topic, but it would be interesting to hear if there's any sort of new architecture that follows this logic of natural evolution, and perhaps evolves to embellish buildings with detail and ornaments in a new way, rather than seeking to replicate the ornamentation of pre-modern or classical styles. I suppose critical regionalism somewhat tries to stay in coherence with where the architecture is built, but it's not like it's necessarily going back to the details and ornamental designs of the pre-modern era.

Goth, baroque, rococo are beautiful, now we only have boxes.

To the creator of this video, WHY do you allow Iranian and Russian bots to spam your video with hate filled anti semitic comments denying basic human history and attempting to Muslim-wash history or the PRE ISLAMIC Middle East