I’d like to hear Leon directly take on Venturi Scott Brown’s “Learning from Las Vegas” and how building of cities went awry in the late 60’s and early 70’s with sign & symbol. Beauty & the Good seems to have become confused in our era.
Regarding the cult of ruins, I once visited a hotel in a historical town in the state of Minas Gerais, Brazil, where a opening was made on a wall for the purpose of decorating a room with the wattle and daub that was used in the construction three centuries ago. I'm sure the people who originally build it would completely hide that mess of mud and wood and pretend it never existed.
I came back to this video a year later and have some further observations. I think that Krier overestimates the universality of beauty and underestimates the unifying power of religion and culture, including language. One thing that he seems to miss is that the great works of architecture, those that remain with us after many centuries and millennia, are usually religious structures. Think Greek and Roman temples, the Hagia Sophia in Constantinople, medieval Romanesque and Gothic cathedrals, let alone the temples of so many other cultures, which are usually the only things that have survived. To commit oneself to such enormous projects demands some higher motive, whether religious or national, than mere beauty. Beauty is subservient to the goal.
This is somewhat true but you also have all of the townhouses, and normal beautiful houses and shops which you find in London and other towns and cities in England. They were built for no special purpose but to house businesses and people, and still have a timeless beauty which architects today ought to take less for granted. The same goes for similarly old buildings across Europe and beyond - buildings in older styles have a really timeless and compelling aesthetic on the whole, and people in general like them a lot more. I guess churches and cathedrals and civic buildings get a lot of attention but that is not to say that there are old buildings for all walks of life which aren’t worth preserving, or even taking strong inspiration from.
Yeah, I think you're right. The point is that I think Krier evades the emphasys on the belief that he is some kind of European supremacist or something like that. Remember all the stuff were said about him because he wrote a book about Albert Speer.
The purpose of the religious building was to create beauty. That's why a temple is not just a box building it had to beautiful. Creating something beautiful was the goal, the power that funded creating such beautiful buildings were religious but the ultimate goal was beauty none the less.
This is true only in a very limited part. Religious buildings have survived more on average because religions themselves have outlasted historical events, or were easily converted to different religions. Civil architecture and often also vernacular architecture, especially in Europe, have countless examples of survival and preservation. Damn the Roman Forums, thermae, theaters, amphitheaters, stadiums, domuses ecc outnumber the temples by far. Cities like Bruges or Venice are 99% like they were in the 18th century. And so on. Of course, some forces decided to raze Europe with 2 world wars (and a third incoming) so this makes it even more sensational.
@@Raul-vo9fs Because if the underlying systems of a city do not function, then it will all fall flat. It is important to value it, but not to the degree that we cannot be aware of being lead astray by aesthetics. These things can be weaponized.
@@Raul-vo9fs We have achieved in the past the most timeless, lively and beautiful cities, where every person dreams to live, and learned to use moldings and proportions to otherworldly effect, but as long as schools do not teach these hard-won methods to young designers and instead have students experiment starting from absolute scratch every project, we will forever remain in this sad purgatory. They say our society has changed and requires a new architecture, as if a perfectly functioning society does not currently live in central Paris or Rome. The greatest cities of the past have been relegated to stock photos and postcards, and we are taught that these things could and should never be emulated because they date from before cars and sheet glass. And sadly, what you teach in schools is what most people go on to produce for the rest of their lives, because it is the most they are taught to expect from themselves. Absolutely ridiculous and sad how we amputate our own abilities and expectations. That is what we get for throwing away hundreds of years of traditional knowledge, refusing to let ourselves stand on the shoulders of the past. One in ten thousand buildings is a masterpiece, and the rest are just pathetic.
"Beauty is what makes life worth living"
Exactly. Nothing to add.
Gracias, muy interesante
Thank you for this channel, it´s one of the only sources for the lectures by Mr. Krier which are important for every architect to hear.
We have a new interview with Duany up on our channel also some articles about Krier from a Jungian perspective on our blog.
I’d like to hear Leon directly take on Venturi Scott Brown’s “Learning from Las Vegas” and how building of cities went awry in the late 60’s and early 70’s with sign & symbol. Beauty & the Good seems to have become confused in our era.
A brave, common sense and defense of beauty against the vulgarity and ugliness that has dominated architectural fashion for decades...
Fun Fact: Even the GDR leader Honecker later stated: destroying the castle was a big mistake.
Regarding the cult of ruins, I once visited a hotel in a historical town in the state of Minas Gerais, Brazil, where a opening was made on a wall for the purpose of decorating a room with the wattle and daub that was used in the construction three centuries ago. I'm sure the people who originally build it would completely hide that mess of mud and wood and pretend it never existed.
Muchas gracias.
Un valiente, modelo a seguir
Wonderful
We have a new Leon Krier and Andres Duany interview on our page.
23:00 painting restoration vs city restoration
I came back to this video a year later and have some further observations. I think that Krier overestimates the universality of beauty and underestimates the unifying power of religion and culture, including language. One thing that he seems to miss is that the great works of architecture, those that remain with us after many centuries and millennia, are usually religious structures. Think Greek and Roman temples, the Hagia Sophia in Constantinople, medieval Romanesque and Gothic cathedrals, let alone the temples of so many other cultures, which are usually the only things that have survived. To commit oneself to such enormous projects demands some higher motive, whether religious or national, than mere beauty. Beauty is subservient to the goal.
This is somewhat true but you also have all of the townhouses, and normal beautiful houses and shops which you find in London and other towns and cities in England. They were built for no special purpose but to house businesses and people, and still have a timeless beauty which architects today ought to take less for granted. The same goes for similarly old buildings across Europe and beyond - buildings in older styles have a really timeless and compelling aesthetic on the whole, and people in general like them a lot more. I guess churches and cathedrals and civic buildings get a lot of attention but that is not to say that there are old buildings for all walks of life which aren’t worth preserving, or even taking strong inspiration from.
Yeah, I think you're right. The point is that I think Krier evades the emphasys on the belief that he is some kind of European supremacist or something like that. Remember all the stuff were said about him because he wrote a book about Albert Speer.
Nothing in our history has been more divisive than religon.
The purpose of the religious building was to create beauty. That's why a temple is not just a box building it had to beautiful. Creating something beautiful was the goal, the power that funded creating such beautiful buildings were religious but the ultimate goal was beauty none the less.
This is true only in a very limited part. Religious buildings have survived more on average because religions themselves have outlasted historical events, or were easily converted to different religions.
Civil architecture and often also vernacular architecture, especially in Europe, have countless examples of survival and preservation. Damn the Roman Forums, thermae, theaters, amphitheaters, stadiums, domuses ecc outnumber the temples by far. Cities like Bruges or Venice are 99% like they were in the 18th century. And so on. Of course, some forces decided to raze Europe with 2 world wars (and a third incoming) so this makes it even more sensational.
Beauty is important, but it must not be made an idol.
why?
@@Raul-vo9fs Because if the underlying systems of a city do not function, then it will all fall flat. It is important to value it, but not to the degree that we cannot be aware of being lead astray by aesthetics. These things can be weaponized.
@@whateverthisisthisis8270 this
@@whateverthisisthisis8270 I agree, but sometimes it seems like architects forget about beauty
@@Raul-vo9fs We have achieved in the past the most timeless, lively and beautiful cities, where every person dreams to live, and learned to use moldings and proportions to otherworldly effect, but as long as schools do not teach these hard-won methods to young designers and instead have students experiment starting from absolute scratch every project, we will forever remain in this sad purgatory. They say our society has changed and requires a new architecture, as if a perfectly functioning society does not currently live in central Paris or Rome. The greatest cities of the past have been relegated to stock photos and postcards, and we are taught that these things could and should never be emulated because they date from before cars and sheet glass. And sadly, what you teach in schools is what most people go on to produce for the rest of their lives, because it is the most they are taught to expect from themselves. Absolutely ridiculous and sad how we amputate our own abilities and expectations. That is what we get for throwing away hundreds of years of traditional knowledge, refusing to let ourselves stand on the shoulders of the past. One in ten thousand buildings is a masterpiece, and the rest are just pathetic.