site banner
PaperclipPerfector  9mo ago (text post)   31393 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of July 24, 2023

This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.

Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.

We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:

  • Shaming.

  • Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.

  • Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.

  • Recruiting for a cause.

  • Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.

In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:

  • Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.

  • Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.

  • Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.

  • Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.

On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.

13
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

What's the difference? Are there some sort of Brutalism Police that we need to watch out for here?

And if there are, do they work for wikipedia? Because wikipedia has the following photos in their article on brutalism:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/16/The_History_Faculty%2C_Cambridge_%282354442890%29.jpg/1920px-The_History_Faculty%2C_Cambridge_%282354442890%29.jpg

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1a/Norfolk_Terrace.JPG/1024px-Norfolk_Terrace.JPG

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6d/Habitat_67%2C_southwest_view.jpg/1920px-Habitat_67%2C_southwest_view.jpg

What's the difference? Are there some sort of Brutalism Police that we need to watch out for here? Dude, I am agreeing with you: That particular building looks Brutalist to me, but of course I could be mistaken. But nevertheless, if one out of 20 or 30 is brutalist, then the original claim that "Apparently brutalism is the only acceptable architectural form these days" is not correct.

I'm not sure you are -- compare that French architectural school (2021 prizewinner) with my third link, and explain to me how the one is Brutalist enough to be included in an article about Brutalism, while the other is non-Brutalist enough for you to say that it's not Brutalist at all, and therefore it getting a prize from some committee of architects two years ago is not evidence of Brutalism still being en vogue with architects.

Again, the point is that, even if there is that one exception, that hardly shows that Brutalism is in fashion. All the cool kids are clearly doing other stuff, and have been for years. Because the initial claim was the opposite; that all the cool kids are doing Brutalism.

If you acknowledge that 2021 is also Brutalist in nature, that is two prizewinners in the last four years -- which seems like a lot for something that hasn't been en vogue for forty years.

(Honestly 2023 would also qualify if you ask me, but I didn't want to get into it about whether non-square angular forms are brutalist or not -- the outside of the building is of course not brutalist, probably because it was built 150 years ago -- but anything that the renovation architect seemed to have touched looks a bit more than brutalesqe to my eye.)

2021 is not remotely Brutalist. Not with those walls of windows. Nor is 2023; those simple and clean lines are, if anything, the opposite of Brutalism. Nor does 2023 use unfinished material.

Seriously, do those look anything like these?

Edit: Re your previous comment, comparing the 2021 winner with your third link, I honestly don't understand how you see them as similar at all.

Sorry, I meant link #2; this one: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1a/Norfolk_Terrace.JPG/1024px-Norfolk_Terrace.JPG

It has many large windows -- wherever did you get the idea that Brutalist buildings can't have windows? Look at 3, 13, 21 and 30 on your list.

Nor does 2023 use unfinished material.

I suppose we could argue about whether grinding the giant concrete monoliths makes them "finished", but did you notice the giant unfinished brick walls?

simple and clean lines are, if anything, the opposite of Brutalism

I really don't know what to say about this; you could see "Brutalism 101" in Architectural Digest I guess:

https://www.architecturaldigest.com/story/brutalist-architecture-101

If aiming to identify a brutalist building, look for the following elements:

Large geometric forms, often in unusual shapes

Simple, clean lines

Rough and raw surfaces

Exposed concrete and other construction materials

Monochromatic palettes

Modular elements

Sorry, I meant link #2; this one: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1a/Norfolk_Terrace.JPG/1024px-Norfolk_Terrace.JPG. It has many large windows -- wherever did you get the idea that Brutalist buildings can't have windows? Look at 3, 13, 21 and 30 on your list.

Again, I don't think #2 is particularly similar at all. And, of course brutalist buildings can have windows. But the expanse of unbroken glass forming an entire exterior wall is not at all characteristic of Brutalist buildings. And see here, which says, "Brutalism is generally associated with rough, unfinished surfaces, unusual shapes, heavy-looking materials, straight lines, and small windows."

but did you notice the giant unfinished brick walls? But, the walls are from the original building.

Simple, clean lines

Well, they must mean something different than I do. I don't see the clunkiness that is typical of Brutalism be be clean at all. Maybe a better word is graceful lines.

Anyhow, this is all a bit far afield. The original claim that Brutalism is the dominant architectural form is clearly incorrect. See here. There is one brutalist bldg, but it is an exception. And note that the OP has since clarified that he actually just meant "concrete boxes" and only in reference to his local govt buildings.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats