The Original Gay Porn Community - Free Gay Movies and Photos, Gay Porn Site Reviews and Adult Gay Forums

  • Welcome To Just Us Boys - The World's Largest Gay Message Board Community

    In order to comply with recent US Supreme Court rulings regarding adult content, we will be making changes in the future to require that you log into your account to view adult content on the site.
    If you do not have an account, please register.
    REGISTER HERE - 100% FREE / We Will Never Sell Your Info

    PLEASE READ: To register, turn off your VPN (iPhone users- disable iCloud); you can re-enable the VPN after registration. You must maintain an active email address on your account: disposable email addresses cannot be used to register.

  • Hi Guest - Did you know?
    Hot Topics is a Safe for Work (SFW) forum.

Anyone here good with artist movements and styles?

desmond

desmond

dreamer
Joined
Jul 10, 2009
Posts
2,340
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Location
Oregon
Do a Google image search on Norman architecture, the top of the building made me think of that.
 
Here's the deal.

There's lots of info out there.

It is your essay.

From where I sit, it is just an ugly late 20th century modernist building, an example of bankrupt imagination. the fact that someone perched a little 'Hollywood' deco penthouse on the top only shows how sad the rest of the building is.

There is nothing that really gives it a real stylistic affinity with Norman, gothic, futurist or art deco movements. It really is just a set piece borrowed out of the movies, or at least the top is.

I would suggest finding another example of a real art deco building; like the Chrysler building for instance, and discussing why the law courts are an epic fail when it comes to expressing the tenets of any particular style.

With all the incredible buildings in the world, why choose this piece of shit?
 
We're not going to do your school work :cool:
 
I have to admit to hours of lurking on 42nd Street checking out the Chrysler Building, I want to take it home with me. That view at night across from Grand Central...
 
I actually liked it, mainly because it's so eerie looking, it's like no building I've seen before, it's an Australian building too, well, building in Australia, so [STRIKE]bare [/STRIKE]bear with me, the art world in the medium of architecture in Australia is pretty shit, ie, mostly knock offs (of) Italian [STRIKE]resonance[/STRIKE] renaissance (buildings). Also have to do one in Brisbane.
Click to expand...

I can't imagine why any teacher would limit the area of study.

The building in question is a derivative of the work of Mies van der Rohe more than anyone else, founded in the Bauhaus movement as a modernist reaction against the decorated styles. It lacks the willful clarity and structural expressionism of a proper Mies building, though.

And yes, as you note, someone dumped their idea of a deco mechanical penthouse on the top of it.

Deco is the industrialized descendant of the Art Nouveau movement as seen through a quasi-cubist lens.
Some examples also have a strong relationship to the work of the Italian Futurists.

The penthouse in this case probably has as much to do with the Viennese seccessionist school and Charles Rennie MacIntosh as with Art Deco. Probably more to do with some movie the architect saw.

And for goodness sake, make sure you do a careful spellcheck on your essay.

If you hand it in with the same egregious mis-use of and/or lack of grammar and atrocious spelling as your post, you will fail as badly as the building you're profiling.

Don't be lazy. This is the opportunity for you to actually learn something.
 
pornaddicted said:
I actually liked it, mainly because it's so eerie looking, it's like no building I've seen before, it's an Australian building too, well, building in Australia, so bare with me, the art world in the medium of architecture in Australia is pretty shit knock offs Italian resonance. Also have to do one in Brisbane.
Click to expand...
Do the clashing styles resonate with the legal history of your country? Oh goodnight.
 
Bauhaus, though the worse. Some misunderstood classic architecture at the bottom and the worse top ever. Total mismatch.
 
There is nothing even remotely gothic or even neo-gothic about this building and I'd fail anyone who suggested it. Not even collegiate neo-gothic from what I can see.

And it doesn't matter what you like, this is an academic paper, not an examination of your personal likes or dislikes.

And noooooooooooo...... You did not use bare correctly. Bare means to de-nude as a verb.

Bear means to forbear, or to demonstrate patience.

Also:

too [STRIKE]reduction[/STRIKE] reductivist and clinical for my taste
Click to expand...

More time needed with the Oxford dictionary, less with twitter and texting.
 
As far as "movement," that building is typically Postmodern: a plain glass block with something "different" tacked on, usually aiming for irony rather than elegance. Most postmodernist buildings of note have Neoclassical touches (probably because it's cheaper) rather than Deco, and I've never seen one with that particular style on it.

I would characterize that style as "Machine Age Deco"... it's reminiscent of the film Metropolis, which was in turn a major style reference for the Batman comics. It's really a branch of Moderne rather than Art Deco, I think, but I'm not an expert. In your place, I would hunt down discussions of Metropolis and see what influences were at work there.
 
Dear Pornaddicted: I recently read a book, "From Scythia to Camelot" which traces the origins of the Arthurian legends....interestingly, there is a reference in there to the art deco period and the author makes the point that art deco is an ancient style and that it originated in the Steppes of Central Asia....Might be a fact of some interest to you...
 
As far as "movement," that building is typically Postmodern: a plain glass block with something "different" tacked on, usually aiming for irony rather than elegance.
Click to expand...

The problem as I see it is that it isn't mannerist enough to be POMO...there is no apparent sense of irony here. It looks like one of those unfortunate attempts by either a student or burnt out hack who never bothered with architectural history studies and got caught out by a committee who decided that the building had to have a 'top' and a clock tower in order to make a statement in the skyline.

If we think of Graves or Johnson or Tigerman, the real POMO approach demands a kind of relentless mannered historicism that is totally missing from the building in question. Unless......mindless developer curtain wall big box modernism itself was the ironic bit.

It looks so third world or airport strip corporate; how terribly unfortunate to have such an incredibly ugly and dreary civic building.
 
I agree, this doesn't look neo-Gothic at all. It almost does look Arts and Crafts-ish from afar, but the lines seem to strict to me. I would go with a stripped down version of Art Deco on the top. And combined with the bottom, I would say it's a manifestation of Postmodernism, although as mentioned before, I don't thinks it's the best example. But I tend to be biased anyways!
 
There's nothing Gothic about that building. It's just another late 70s, modernist structure with a failed attempt at Art Deco perched atop.
 
:croynan:OK, I'm feeling a bit obsessed now, but seriously you don't think it resembles a Norman tower? *obsession dies*

Tried to post a link to St. Edmund's from a google image search of Norman towers. Must go find some chips with gravy now.
 
No. It isn't a Norman tower.

Norman architecture is all mass with punched windows and rounded arches.

This is just a dumb glass box with another bit stuck on top.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top