daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > World Forums > Architecture > European Classic Architecture and Landscapes

European Classic Architecture and Landscapes All related to historical buildings and landscapes of the old world.



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old November 17th, 2011, 02:15 PM   #221
Suburbanist
on the road
 
Suburbanist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: the rain capital of Europe
Posts: 27,457
Likes (Received): 21141

Quote:
Originally Posted by gdlrar View Post
I hate when people says "oh.. looks like disneyland.." i just don't understand...
Between 1860-1915 (circa), new construction techniques made it cheaper to build excessively adorned, large buildings that drew on elements of older architectural styles and replicated them to the point of nausea (like that building in Melbourne).

This had been achieved with things like pre-defined pattern covers that could be manufactured at ground level and attached to plain walls, buildings using formula books (which gave many cities and neighborhoods a feel of uniformity), and other techniques that didn't require a sculptor hanging on 15m above ground to entail something in the ceiling, for instance.

So columns, emblems, all kinds of recycled rococo excesses became fashionable (kitsch-able?). But those are not monumental Renascence buildings built with ideals of precise and delicate symmetry and balance. They were just dumpsters for as much details as the could fit. "Plain" walls had been considered to be "cheap", typical of poor buildings.

In this sense, they are predecessors of the "Disneyland" philosophy, to say so. Gosh, even whole fake castles like Neuschawstein were built in the late 1800s. If not by the economic value of tourism, I'd raze that castle in a minute, as it was fake from conception and consciously built as so.

The result? Completely cluttered buildings that carry too much "information" and that were a good riddance to be demolished.
__________________
YIMBY - Yes, in my backyard!
Suburbanist está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old November 17th, 2011, 10:23 PM   #222
Chadoh25
Registered User
 
Chadoh25's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Tacoma, Washington
Posts: 8,018
Likes (Received): 805

Can you please go troll somewhere else. You're really getting annoying at this point!
Chadoh25 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 17th, 2011, 11:00 PM   #223
Karasek
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Lusatia Superior
Posts: 1,811
Likes (Received): 804

Düsseldorf, Germany

Alte Kunsthalle (1880), destroyed in WW2.



Neue Kunsthalle:




Apollo-Theater (1899), survived WW2, in use until 1966, when it was destroyed:




Apollo-Hochhaus (in the foreground), the replacement:

Karasek no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 18th, 2011, 04:04 AM   #224
gdlrar
Registered User
 
gdlrar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Fire Nation
Posts: 2,696
Likes (Received): 1403

Quote:
Originally Posted by Suburbanist View Post
Between 1860-1915 (circa), new construction techniques made it cheaper to build excessively adorned, large buildings that drew on elements of older architectural styles and replicated them to the point of nausea (like that building in Melbourne).

This had been achieved with things like pre-defined pattern covers that could be manufactured at ground level and attached to plain walls, buildings using formula books (which gave many cities and neighborhoods a feel of uniformity), and other techniques that didn't require a sculptor hanging on 15m above ground to entail something in the ceiling, for instance.

So columns, emblems, all kinds of recycled rococo excesses became fashionable (kitsch-able?). But those are not monumental Renascence buildings built with ideals of precise and delicate symmetry and balance. They were just dumpsters for as much details as the could fit. "Plain" walls had been considered to be "cheap", typical of poor buildings.

In this sense, they are predecessors of the "Disneyland" philosophy, to say so. Gosh, even whole fake castles like Neuschawstein were built in the late 1800s. If not by the economic value of tourism, I'd raze that castle in a minute, as it was fake from conception and consciously built as so.

The result? Completely cluttered buildings that carry too much "information" and that were a good riddance to be demolished.
Thanks for the explanation, i appreciate. =)

and right, some of that buildings looks like cheap, and tacky
gdlrar no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 18th, 2011, 04:43 AM   #225
Ribarca
Registered User
 
Ribarca's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 6,612
Likes (Received): 3274

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chadoh25 View Post
Can you please go troll somewhere else. You're really getting annoying at this point!
I think his contributions are full of insight and very well articulated.
__________________
Drive away these people
Who are so conceited and so contemptuous


Hong Kong by Xavibarca, www.xavibarca.com
Ribarca no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 18th, 2011, 10:50 AM   #226
Kaufmann
Moderator
 
Kaufmann's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: DORTMUND
Posts: 3,476
Likes (Received): 5779

Dortmund Saalbau Fredenbaum (1895), destroyed in WW2.





and now Museum of biologie



[IMG]http://www.******************/bilder_1/pool/__projektseiten/museen_1/naturkundemuseum/Museum_fuer_Naturkunde_Aussenansicht_lb.jpg[/IMG]
Quelle: Stadt Dortmund
__________________

Highcliff liked this post
Kaufmann no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 18th, 2011, 11:29 AM   #227
peterform66
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1
Likes (Received): 0

Classics

Very classic building and beautiful many place.
peterform66 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 18th, 2011, 11:45 AM   #228
Karasek
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Lusatia Superior
Posts: 1,811
Likes (Received): 804

Dresden, Germany

The exhibition building from 1894



was destroyed in WW2. A new exhibition building was built in the 1960s



which was demolished in the 1990s to make room for VWs Transparent Factory

Karasek no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 18th, 2011, 04:15 PM   #229
Marbur66
Registered User
 
Marbur66's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 2,253
Likes (Received): 10023

Quote:
Originally Posted by Karasek View Post
Norddeutscher Lloyd building in Bremen/Germany. Built 1907, partly destroyed 1944, ruins removed 1969:



Today... a shopping mall:

image hosted on flickr
Oh man, what a crying shame. That building was outstanding.
__________________

Highcliff liked this post
Marbur66 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 18th, 2011, 04:24 PM   #230
helpless child
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: zagreb
Posts: 7
Likes (Received): 2

Quote:
Originally Posted by Norkey View Post
The worst replacement ever?

Historical royal town of Pons/Brüx/Most, North Bohemia (1238-1982)
before:





after:


This is tragic, absolutely tragic. Having no idea what happened to the place, I had to invstigate further... From Wikipedia:
"After 1964 the process of "moving" the city began. During the 1960s, Most's historic centre was completely destroyed to make room for the expanding lignite mines, a process that lasted until 1970. This process involved the destruction of many historic monuments"
It wasn't the war, it wasn't the bombs... they basically erased the entire town and centuries of its history to make room for ******* mines!!
__________________

Highcliff liked this post
helpless child no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 18th, 2011, 04:53 PM   #231
helpless child
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: zagreb
Posts: 7
Likes (Received): 2

Quote:
Originally Posted by Suburbanist View Post
The above one is a good example. The old building was crap. One can tell by the dirt in the walls, the low-quality of windows, the rotting wood used to make the attic on the background building.
This guy is a troll, right? I'll reply anyway, can't let this BS go unchalleged: The old building is (was...) beautiful - modest, charming, completely unique, a testament to the regional heritage and history (yes, there is such a thing as history worth preserving, go build your endless generic slabs of glass/concrete/whatever on an empty field in the suburbs, not in place of beautiful buidings that have stood there for centuries, housed generations of local communities and survived through wars... ) And we all know that the only way of solving such formidable problems as "Dirt in the walls, low quality of windows and the rotting wood" is tearing the bulding down, right?? seriously, stop trolling.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Suburbanist View Post
It was probably not a rich place, or one with many artsy details inside. Just a regular building. Good riddance, then.
So, only RICH places are worth preserving? Places with "artsy details inside" ? And the homes of the working classes - entire streets, neighborhoods, communities - can all be erased to make space for shiny shopping malls, garages, banks and office towers... right? This is exactly the kind of thinking that turned a significant number of cities in the West, post WWII, into a (by now widely acknowledged) urbanist nightmare...

Last edited by helpless child; November 18th, 2011 at 05:22 PM.
helpless child no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 18th, 2011, 05:19 PM   #232
helpless child
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: zagreb
Posts: 7
Likes (Received): 2

By the way, from a purely aesthtetic point of view, I think a lot of humble old working class dwellings are way more beautiful than sometimes ridiculously ornamental, over the top palaces/theatres - like that Melbourne bulding (not to say I'm happy to see that brutalist crap standing in its place). Here's an example from my city (Zagreb) - old, poor little houses/cottages turned into a vibrant pedestrian street with bars/cafes :


A couple of hundred meters further down the street we have something more to Suburbanist's tastes:

This disgusting soul-sucking monstrosity, built on the former (if I remember correctly) field/grass that could have been used as a public park, playground, square, whatever, is not only hideously and brutally ugly, it is also empty. all the time. people don't go there. It's a violent intrusion and a complete ******* waste of space. And the tiny poor little cottages are bursting with life. They were about to collapse / rot not that long ago, but were revitalised instead of torn down, which is, without doubt, what Suburbanist would do, and build lifeless monstrous malls instead...
__________________

Highcliff liked this post
helpless child no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 18th, 2011, 05:55 PM   #233
Kaufmann
Moderator
 
Kaufmann's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: DORTMUND
Posts: 3,476
Likes (Received): 5779

Quote:
Originally Posted by Karasek View Post
Norddeutscher Lloyd building in Bremen/Germany. Built 1907, partly destroyed 1944, ruins removed 1969:



Today... a shopping mall:

image hosted on flickr
Arggg it is always the same shit with Karstadt, Kaufhof or Saturn : Bash:
The same shit in every german city

stuff like that...

Dortmund, Westenhellweg


and now

__________________

Highcliff liked this post
Kaufmann no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 19th, 2011, 01:39 AM   #234
Amrafel
Bratislava YIMBY
 
Amrafel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Bratislava, Slovakia/Prague, Czech Republic
Posts: 7,752
Likes (Received): 5022

Quote:
Originally Posted by helpless child View Post
This is tragic, absolutely tragic. Having no idea what happened to the place, I had to invstigate further... From Wikipedia:
"After 1964 the process of "moving" the city began. During the 1960s, Most's historic centre was completely destroyed to make room for the expanding lignite mines, a process that lasted until 1970. This process involved the destruction of many historic monuments"
It wasn't the war, it wasn't the bombs... they basically erased the entire town and centuries of its history to make room for ******* mines!!
Destruction of Most was the worst cultural barbarism in Czechoslovak history. And the destruction of Bratislava ghetto and Schlossgrund the second one...
__________________
FRESH UPDATES AND INFORMATION ABOUT BRATISLAVA DEVELOPMENT ON

BRATISLAVA YIMBY.
Amrafel no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 19th, 2011, 10:25 AM   #235
spiralout
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,943
Likes (Received): 150

[QUOTE=Suburbanist;85746650 And the interior is tacky, with the faux-gold-plated details.

[/QUOTE]

i don't think its meant to look like gold. I believe its Bronze. That building was built at the peak of Melbourne's successive land booms and the victorian gold rush (when Melbourne was reputedly the richest city in the world). I doubt Melbourne would need to use faux gold in its buildings back then
__________________
Melbourne ahead of Sydney. Why was that?:ohno -shabangabang
spiralout no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 19th, 2011, 10:33 AM   #236
Dimethyltryptamine
Registered User
 
Dimethyltryptamine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 12,881
Likes (Received): 6446

oh suburbanist you do my ******* head in.
Dimethyltryptamine no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 19th, 2011, 03:13 PM   #237
spiralout
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,943
Likes (Received): 150

yea if they wanted to be tight assed and have faux gold plating why not just use brass?? Much cheaper than using bronze not to mention it looks much more like gold!
__________________
Melbourne ahead of Sydney. Why was that?:ohno -shabangabang
spiralout no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 19th, 2011, 03:54 PM   #238
Dimethyltryptamine
Registered User
 
Dimethyltryptamine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 12,881
Likes (Received): 6446

exactly, and as you said, if they wanted to use gold - i don't think that would have been much a problem.

Melbourne in that day and age was a city of grandeur. It doesn't have the history of London or Paris, but Victorian Era buildings it did well. A 10 minute walk down a single city street would prove that. It certainly held its own, a part of the skyscraper race and all.
Dimethyltryptamine no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 19th, 2011, 04:01 PM   #239
Suburbanist
on the road
 
Suburbanist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: the rain capital of Europe
Posts: 27,457
Likes (Received): 21141

Quote:
Originally Posted by helpless child View Post
So, only RICH places are worth preserving? Places with "artsy details inside" ? And the homes of the working classes - entire streets, neighborhoods, communities - can all be erased to make space for shiny shopping malls, garages, banks and office towers... right?
Yes. Not because of any classism, but because, with very few exceptions, only the rich have had historically the means to build the best specimens of each architectural style over time, whilst the poor built what they could to get shelter . There are exceptions, but they are few.

You will (almost) never find a famous sculpture, or expensive entailing in a working class building. Just because the never had money, time or cultural knowledge do put such expensive details in their homes.
__________________
YIMBY - Yes, in my backyard!
Suburbanist está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old November 19th, 2011, 04:05 PM   #240
Suburbanist
on the road
 
Suburbanist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: the rain capital of Europe
Posts: 27,457
Likes (Received): 21141

Quote:
Originally Posted by helpless child View Post
This disgusting soul-sucking monstrosity, built on the former (if I remember correctly) field/grass that could have been used as a public park, playground, square, whatever, is not only hideously and brutally ugly, it is also empty. all the time. people don't go there. It's a violent intrusion and a complete ******* waste of space. And the tiny poor little cottages are bursting with life. They were about to collapse / rot not that long ago, but were revitalised instead of torn down, which is, without doubt, what Suburbanist would do, and build lifeless monstrous malls instead...
Anyway: aesthetics are a matter of personal taste. One might find something ugly, other might find same thing beautiful. Markets and developers, which consider tastes of investors, buyers and renters, should filter aesthetics preferences in regard of buildings, not public authorities. A place that is "ugly" enough nobody likes will see no renter, buyer or investor coming in, and will be a financial failure. So real estate markets operating freely are the best way to decide whether a restoration or replacement is the best alternative
__________________
YIMBY - Yes, in my backyard!

Last edited by Suburbanist; November 19th, 2011 at 04:11 PM.
Suburbanist está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote


Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 09:50 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

Hosted by Blacksun, dedicated to this site too!
Forum server management by DaiTengu