Architecture fads and future generations

[bchris02]

Today, art deco has become treasured while "bland" 1970s concrete architecture is considered terrible. This got me thinking. Back in the 1970s, when the "modern" architecture that today is considered so characterless and uninspiring (think Chase Tower or the AT&T building) was all the rage, that is the type of architecture that was associated with big, modern, urban cities. Art Deco was out of style and not treasured, hence the reason so much of it was destroyed. I wasn't alive then but I remember many people reading that art deco at that time was a symbol of a more primitive past and urban decay and people cheered its destruction. For those hear alive in the 1970s I would love to hear your take on that. Fast forward to today. There was virtually 40 years between the peak of art deco and modern style, and now we have an entirely new type of 21st century architecture roughly 40 years after the peak of the 1970s modern style. The 1970s style that represented urbanity back then now is cold, uninviting, and suburban, and is generally despised by the younger generation. This is a perfect example of how fads change and how we shouldn't destroy a historic piece of architecture just because it isn't in style today. In 2050, today's architecture could be the bland, cold stuff and the OK County Jail could be a treasure. Thoughts?

[RadicalModerate]

I think this is a great topic and I appreciate your bringing it up.

I was around in the 70's (and for about 20 years before that) and I love Art Deco architecture. Always have. It makes me sick that so much of it was destroyed. I never liked the cold, blocky, East German prison-like style that I think some refer to as "Bauhaus". I remember stepping outside at the Civic Center music hall to grab a smoke during intermission and marveling at some of the wonderful, relatively small, architectural details that I'd never noticed before.

Edited to Add:
I don't think that graduating, in 1970, from a high school built in the 1930s, has anything to do with my preference for Art Deco.
Yet, it might. =)



Here are the architectural details, built into the design, above the entry door, to a High School, back in the '30's.

Jake:


Minnie:


For some reason, rather than Jake and Minnie, they were always referred to as Minnie and Jake.
(I think they are Wrestling With Knowledge or sumpin' . . .)
This all might have some vague connection with why I have an inexplicable attraction to Ayn Rand.
("Atlas Shrugged" was on one required reading list or another. In High School.)

[rezman]

I have had an appreciation for art deco and art nouveau for
as long as I can remember. As a kid growing up in the 60's, i spent a lot of time with reletives in the Chicago area, where there was, and still is many fine example of art deco accross the city and in surrounding suburbs.

I also like mid century modern arcitecture as well. In fact we just recently made an offer on a mid century modern home, but was out bid.

RadMod, your right. When you stop and look those old gems, the detail work is amazing.

[RadicalModerate]

At the risk of being accused of thread-crossing/muddlement, would it be fair to say that this sort of thing* is one of the things that actually WAS better back then?

*architecture

(please do not confuse any of that with my previously stated, personal, opinions regarding the eyesore known as Stage Center and/or the "style" it supposedly represents. thank you.)

Edited to Add:

Here is something that appealed to me on a visceral level when I first read about it in Parade Magazine, back before The Internet was invented.

The article was about The Architect (Fay Jones?). He said that he preferred to do his plans (and those of his staff) on drafting tables using pencils. Something about the "kinesthetic/tactile" reward aspect of drawing plans that way, or something. I was a framer at the time and actually managed to locate his phone number and call him at home (he had just gotten back from the grocery store and had to set down a couple of bags before he could talk to me).

I expressed my admiration for his work. He expressed appreciation for that. It was all good.

It may not be Art Deco, but it's still good. (over there in Arkansas, in the woods outside of Eureka Springs.)





I'm fairly certain that this style will never become a "fad" yet . . .

[dwellsokc]

...a perfect example of how fads change and how we shouldn't destroy a historic piece of architecture just because it isn't in style today. In 2050, today's architecture could be the bland, cold stuff...

Just because a building is old, doesn't make it valuable architecture. Today there are plenty of examples of developer junk, and bad architecture being built... 50 years from now it will still be junky bad architecture. 50-100 years ago there was plenty junky bad architecture being built along with the few gems. The gems should be preserved, but too many history-huggers have only one metric: age.

We have to know how to discriminate between the gems and the junk.

[bchris02]

We have to know how to discriminate between the gems and the junk.

The point is that what is considered gems and what is considered junk changes with the times. Today's gems could be tomorrow's junk and today's junk could be tomorrow's gems.

[dwellsokc]

...we shouldn't destroy a historic piece of architecture just because it isn't in style today...

Likewise, we shouldn't preserve it just because it's old.

[bombermwc]

perfect example of all of this are the cheap homes quickly built post-WW2 all around town. They're over 50 now, but they are far from being gems. The standard office buildings built through the decades fall into that same category. I can appreciate what you're saying and totally agree, but the tough part is who gets to decide what qualifies or not. I feel like the Historic Preservation groups tend to grab more than they should at times, and then leave out actual good things at other times. I may bashed for this, but I don't feel like the round barn is a "gem"...it's a barn. It happens to be round. What historic significance does it have? If I build a round barn next to it, does that make it equally preservable?

[RadicalModerate]

The Round Barn that you see today isn't actually the original Round Barn, per se. It is a reconstruction of the original. So one might say that it is a monument to the determination of one man--Luke Robison, a retired carpenter--(and his helpers) to restore a small, unique, part of Oklahoma's History. I doubt this sort of construction will ever become a fad. And, not to put to fine of a point on it, technically it isn't a barn anymore. It is something else.

[Just the facts]

Great topic. I prefer vernacular architecture. You should be able to look at a building and tell where you are, not when you are. I already know 'when' I am and don't need an architect to tell me that. The problem is that a lot of architects (and the people who hire them) have some Miley Cyrus in them and feel everything they design has to generate buzz in the industry. I think architecture should reflect local building materials, climate, construction techniques, history, and complement the setting it is in (like the church pictured above which was made to look like the forest around it). Even OKC has a local vernacular style and I wish new projects would adopt it (Art Deco for Civic structures and buildings like the Hightower, AutoHotel, and the City office building for others).

[bchris02]

Great topic. I prefer vernacular architecture. You should be able to look at a building and tell where you are, not when you are. I already know 'when' I am and don't need an architect to tell me that. The problem is that a lot of architects (and the people who hire them) have some Miley Cyrus in them and feel everything they design has to generate buzz in the industry. I think architecture should reflect local building materials, climate, construction techniques, history, and complement the setting it is in (like the church pictured above which was made to look like the forest around it). Even OKC has a local vernacular style and I wish new projects would adopt it (Art Deco for Civic structures and buildings like the Hightower, AutoHotel, and the City office building for others).

That is one thing that is admirable about cities in the Southwestern United States. Cities like Phoenix and Albuquerque get bad raps from new urbanists, but most of their architecture is unique in style to the region.

[RadicalModerate]

That is one thing that is admirable about cities in the Southwestern United States. Cities like Phoenix and Albuquerque get bad raps from new urbanists, but most of their architecture is unique in style to the region.

As I said, above, I appreciate the fact that you raised this interesting topic with your initial post.
Here is a summary of why I like this subject partly on account of it reminded me how nice, friendly, patient and non-judgmental this guy was on the phone when I interrupted his daily activities.

Perhaps designing buildings to the human scale depends upon what sort of humans are designing them?
Perhaps this is one reason he preferred pencils and pens to robotics?

It's a long read . . . yet interesting and informative.

http://www.arkansaspreservation.com/...faye_jones.pdf

[CarlessInOKC]

Maybe I'm not your typical example from the younger generation, but I live downtown, and I would like to add that style isn't ever a good or bad thing from an aesthetic perspective as long as one stylistic type doesn't dominate the landscape. I agree very much that we shouldn't demolish buildings because they are out of style. Fads come and go, but it's an additive process, a 4-D architectural expression that gives patterns to our urban fabric, and it's good that tastes change as time goes on. If you isolate any of the buildings downtown, then you're going to get people on either side of a debate of whether it's good architecture, but the variation I see when I look out my window of the Regency is very interesting. Isolated buildings that are not in style, like the OKC County Jail, stick out like sore thumbs because they lack a cohesive context (although it doesn't seem logical to embed a jail with the rest of downtown's highrises) and draw specific criticism.