Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I really like European cities that have large portions consisting of buildings built in the 1880s through 1910s. The style is often "Neo-Renaissance": elegant-looking buildings, often in white or beige stone, with all sorts of decorations around the windows and often exterior walls chiseled to look as though huge square stones were used to construct them. Central Vienna, Prague and Budapest, large portions of Paris, and even large parts of the West End of London, and Whitehall, have this look. For some photos: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renais...l_architecture
Question: Since this style of architecture is so timeless, and since such large portions of so many European cities still consist of it, why isn't it still used more? Yes, there are buildings here and there that are built in the style, even in NYC, but why isn't it still one of the main styles of architecture?
Are there any large-scale uses of it in today's architecture, other than a building here and there?
I really like European cities that have large portions consisting of buildings built in the 1880s through 1910s. The style is often "Neo-Renaissance": elegant-looking buildings, often in white or beige stone, with all sorts of decorations around the windows and often exterior walls chiseled to look as though huge square stones were used to construct them. Central Vienna, Prague and Budapest, large portions of Paris, and even large parts of the West End of London, and Whitehall, have this look. For some photos: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renais...l_architecture
Question: Since this style of architecture is so timeless, and since such large portions of so many European cities still consist of it, why isn't it still used more? Yes, there are buildings here and there that are built in the style, even in NYC, but why isn't it still one of the main styles of architecture?
Are there any large-scale uses of it in today's architecture, other than a building here and there?
Thanks.
This should probably be posted in the architecture subforum, not the urban planning subforum.
Anyway, the answer is in large part that architects are indoctrinated with the idea that buildings should reflect the time and place in which they were constructed, and that revivalism is sort of tacky. I always find this attitude kind of strange, because it doesn't exist in other art forms. Electronic music didn't negate folk music. Modern art didn't negate more strictly representational forms. But the majority of architects will basically tell you it's wrong to try and make a modern building look like a historic one - at least in the U.S.
To add to this, historic styles such as this are not cheap. Modern versions wouldn't be built in the same way of course - more likely concrete shells with a facing of stone and other materials. But overall the cost would be much higher than for the generic metal-sided box, making them a poor choice for things like spec office buildings or apartments.
Thank you both. You're both right, and thanks for the Baroque Revival link- stunning!
I'm not an architect so my views on architecture should be taken with a grain of salt. I'd love it if buildings today were built with exteriors looking exactly as they were in 1890, though. Some of the "revival" old-style buildings done today clearly look as though they were built in 2019, but with features designed to mimic older styles. Good, but for me the ideal would be for it to be impossible to tell if something was built in 1890 or 2019.
I'm not an architect so my views on architecture should be taken with a grain of salt. I'd love it if buildings today were built with exteriors looking exactly as they were in 1890, though. Some of the "revival" old-style buildings done today clearly look as though they were built in 2019, but with features designed to mimic older styles. Good, but for me the ideal would be for it to be impossible to tell if something was built in 1890 or 2019.
I mean, it can be done. Some historic districts (such as the one covering the core of Savannah) actually mandate that new-construction infill blend in seamlessly with historic building stock. And some developers demand matchy-matchy buildings. Architects just hate it, unless they're part of the relatively small neo-traditional/historical subfield.
My personal wish is that Art Nouveau architecture wasn't strangled by modernism in 1910. That stuff looks like nothing else which was ever done. A combination of traditional ornateness, living organisms, and something out of a fantasy novel.
I mean, it can be done. Some historic districts (such as the one covering the core of Savannah) actually mandate that new-construction infill blend in seamlessly with historic building stock. And some developers demand matchy-matchy buildings. Architects just hate it, unless they're part of the relatively small neo-traditional/historical subfield.
My personal wish is that Art Nouveau architecture wasn't strangled by modernism in 1910. That stuff looks like nothing else which was ever done. A combination of traditional ornateness, living organisms, and something out of a fantasy novel.
Definately see your point from your photos. Like living organisms. You almost expect them to begin to move and of a fantasy.
Question: Since this style of architecture is so timeless, and since such large portions of so many European cities still consist of it, why isn't it still used more? Yes, there are buildings here and there that are built in the style, even in NYC, but why isn't it still one of the main styles of architecture?
There are two answers to this question:
1.) Cost
2.) Availability of local craftsmen
Ornate architecture is very time consuming and labor intensive. In the past when most of the buildings shown above were built. Materials were expensive and labor was very cheap. Now its the opposite, material is cheap but labor is very expensive. While many of these buildings look nice we need not forget that they only exist as a byproduct of massive wealth inequality.
Another thing to be mentioned. All buildings require a skilled and knowledgeable local cottage industry to support it. Lets say you design a building in a Baroque style. Which would require extensive and ornate plasterwork. If there is no company or craftsman who knows how to do that level of plasterwork, the building cannot be built as such. You essentially have to design within the limits of the local workforce. Since we have departed away from many of these styles of architecture for so long, not many people are left who know how to build it to the same degree of quality.
Brilliant! That looks straight out of a Twilight Zone episode. And I thought the Disney/Epcot Center vibe I got from the Second Empire styling of the Paris Casino in Las Vegas was creepy. Though the Venetian does pull off the Neo-Renaissance Italianate style OK, but not to the degree of the Bellagio and its Palazzo splendor. But again, those are one-off developments, with a definite eye to Brand marketing. I’ve seen some crossover of these styles into Postmodern skyscrapers, but more of a tip of the historical hat than anything else, and with a purely vernacular exterior styling compared to the high style of the OPs Hapsburg reference cities.
As to Art Nouveau, it sure is easy on my eyes.
Here in the States, I’ve seen mostly (rare) one-off developments. In my city, the wealthiest of the wealthy in the 1880s mimicked the Italianate and French Second Empire Neo-Renaissance styles in their grand mansions. Instead of stone, brick was often used, as the clay soil made it the go-to exterior source. Few survive to this day, lost to “Progress” and the chaos of personal fortune, and the ones that do survive are usually now on an Historical Register. Many are no longer residences, but high end restaurants, professional offices, or home to large nonprofits.
These days, some one-off developments seek to mimic the style. Here’s one from the last decade. All the examples I can think of are usually higher end condos. I often find even the best executed to be a bit out of both time and place. But, to each their taste. Still love the brickwork.
Sagrada Familia looks like some shut down amusement park with a “Coming Soon!” sign that has almost rotted and rusted away. Like a sad Gothic clown, waiting patiently for Gadot.
Roemerplatz and central Frankfurt made quite the Wiederaufgebau after 1945, with a bit of seeming Disney magic as well:
But no where near the magnificent comeback that is Dresden...
This takes historical preservation to a dramatically reconstructive degree. A bit different in the U.S., where most of such immediately disruptive activity was 80 years prior, on a much greener (yet still as red) field. Interesting to anticipate what the next true “architectural revival” will be in various locations on the globe. Fingers crossed for Art Nouveau...I’m ready for another Chat Noir Tournee.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
