- New Classical Architecture - - Page 5

Hed Kandi · #81 Posted **Dec 28, 2009, 11:18 PM**

Sameba Holy Trinity Cathederal - Tbilisi, Georgia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tbilisi_Sameba_Cathedral

http://www.flickr.com/photos/fatboyke/2521589577/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/m_rubov/1231906461/

Hed Kandi · #82 Posted **Dec 28, 2009, 11:36 PM**

2140 N. Kenmore - Chicago, USA
http://www.melrosepartners.com/

Hed Kandi · #83 Posted **Dec 29, 2009, 2:18 AM**

Stone Cottage - Cumberland, USA
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stone_Cottage

Hed Kandi · #84 Posted **Dec 29, 2009, 3:06 AM**

.

trueviking · #85 Posted **Dec 29, 2009, 4:30 AM**

im not sure what point is trying to be made in this thread....im assuming it is that new buildings can be modern and progressive even if they are historic pastiche....

i somehow dont think that religious architecture in third world countries is helping to pursuade me of the validity of the hypothesis.

btw....gaudi would roll over in his grave if he knew someone was lumping in sagrada familia in with the rest of these kitsch buildings....obviously whoever posted that has never seen it in person...its ideas are completley modern and forward thinking...it is a progressive and innovative building in every way...it is a landmark in the evolution of modern architecture that helped move architectural thinking away from the nostalgia of the past and into the creative age......every inch of it was created with a unique idea.....all these others are pure decorative replication...there isnt a single unique idea in any one of them.....it is blasphemous to consider them in any way equal.

gaudi rejected everything that you are celebtrating in this thread.

slide_rule · #86 Posted **Dec 29, 2009, 5:15 AM**

^you mean celebration florida isn't the architectural holy land, and robert a.m. stern isn't its messiah?

you're gonna get flamed for this...

sure you can make a building with the aesthetics of previous eras, but it'll cost you. just like those grandiose religious buildings and the midtown manhattan houses for wall st. robber barons. or we could build things that actually make sense.

CGII · #87 Posted **Dec 29, 2009, 6:15 AM**

it's been long established that this is not a place for coherent, well rounded architectural theory, but rather as a place to post buildings that ascribe to a certain, arbitrary personal taste regarding decoration regardless of craft, construction, or value of ideas.

urbanlife · #88 Posted **Dec 29, 2009, 7:35 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by slide_rule

^you mean celebration florida isn't the architectural holy land, and robert a.m. stern isn't its messiah?

Hed Kandi · #89 Posted **Dec 29, 2009, 8:07 PM**

edit

CGII · #90 Posted **Dec 29, 2009, 8:21 PM**

Please explain to me one aspect of that building that is 'traditional' and why it bears mentioning here.

trueviking · #91 Posted **Dec 30, 2009, 2:10 AM**

la.la.la.i.like.mosques.la.la.la.i.cant.hear.you.

nouveau_Mauvilla · #92 Posted **Dec 30, 2009, 6:44 AM**

The OP actually just wants all things ornate. Regardless of style, correctness, scale, function, cost, setting, how they work with people, etc.

A building doesn't have to have ridiculous, over the top decoration to be a beautiful building. Plus, decoration shouldn't be the priority- which it obviously is to you, Hed Kandi.

Why is it that you find contemporary buildings true to their style simply horrendous?

RLS_rls · #93 Posted **Dec 31, 2009, 10:10 AM**

^I think he's on a strictly "don't answer" policy.

Nowhereman1280 · #94 Posted **Dec 31, 2009, 10:46 PM**

I'm so tempted to post a picture of 860-880 LSD in here an be like "look! Traditional American architecture!" since we are now in the post-modern era, post-modern buildings are actually contemporary which Modern buildings would technically be a traditional style. For example, if someone built a Misean black box today, people would think it looks old and dated from the 60's or something.

Hed Kandi · #95 Posted **Dec 31, 2009, 11:23 PM**

Sarasawati Mandir - Pilani, India

hammersklavier · #96 Posted **Jan 1, 2010, 12:40 AM**

This is as "traditional" as they come--it also literally took a century to build, just like the buildings it's based on.

Washington, D.C.'s National Cathedral:

[source]

Cornerstone was laid in 1907 and the last finial was finished in 1990.

It also strikes me that churches, temples, and mosques keep turning up in this thread because they are the consummate examples of traditional principles (or well-executed
variations thereon). And yes, a well-designed church or mosque or temple can do exactly what it was designed to do--inspire awe.