Exposing the "Copying the Past" Nonsense - with Marjo Uotila 

Progress should be defined as the culmination of all good ideas from the past. "Reinventing the wheel" is not progress.

Finally I see more and more people being fed up with all this ugliness and start demanding to be surrounded by beauty. For me it's a matter of human dignity.

I'm glad people are finally waking up to the plague of modern architecture.

It is not copying, it is perserving the good in witnessing our own time, it is owning ourselves in it

The majority of architecture from the renaissance to the beginning of the dominance of cars could easily be called "copying the past". Many styles were even blatantly called something like neoclassical, or romanesque.

"Make ugly Brutalist boxes or copy the past" is a false dichotomy. All it takes is to apply creativity toward the creation of beautiful buildings rather than Lovecraftian abominations (looking at you, Frank Gehry). And of course, there is always the option of copying _nature,_ if one must copy. We're not limited to a choice between sterile concrete and imitation Greek buildings.

I would change so much if I could, sadly I can't, just some german student ...

real architecture always _learnt_ from the past, got _inspired_ by it and created new styles that would fit, add and enhance the artistic heritage of the previous generations. And above all of it, the real beautiful architecture, like the real beautiful art, was always inspired by the beauty of nature. And it would add and enhance the natural beauty. Buildings of Palladio _adorn_ the landscapes of Italy, not pollute them. People who spout "copy past" have no clue what they are talking about.

Other than the rather loud music, i like the snippet of the interview

I love highly ornamented buildings, but I truly want our generation to have our own style, like how Art-Deco represents the 1920's and 1930's.

I find it interesting that we're forbidden from using the aesthetics from historical buildings that we like in new construction, even though one of the most frequently uttered phrases I hear in academia is "there is nothing new under the sun". Totally ignoring or even demonizing the past makes for a poorly founded future that is based on nothing and will lead to nowhere.

Build beautiful again

How about an architecture of its place, rather than of its time?

Modern architecture is also the copy paste of past's prisons, suitcases

Tradition is about preserving culture to give to future generations. Our traditional architecture is a gift from our ancestors to us, to teach us how to build properly.

the sturdiest, and best looking buildings imo are the ones from like 200 years ago in random parts of europe, better than modern stuff on every level

Yeah who the fuck decides which buildings reflect their own time

I dislike how modernist zealots in architecture always talk about the past with a certain disdain when it comes to buildings. Everything has gotta be futuristic, full of glass, metal, and glossy white exteriors. Feels like a hospital to me. I want buildings that speak history, show beauty, and tell a story, like a european castle would.

You can't just dictate the zeitgeist. Current year fallacy: pretending something to be objectively appropriate just because you called it "modern". By the time you call it that, it's already in the past.

Expensive and Unfunctional: Vitrages, Gargoyles, Ornaments, Shutters, Railings, Marble, etc.

i HATE brutalism Tetris Architecture. And i hate it even more when people are always using the excuse "But it's MODERN. That's just the flow of time." No it's not!! It SUCKS, it is ugly and it doesn't feel like places for humans but for THINGS. People use the same kind of excuses for effortless "Modern Art".

The whole “buildings shouldn’t copy the past” literally got us where we are today. With the ugliest architecture we could build.

Because we're not coping good solutions, we are making them with concrete, lack of details, so we are not coping, we are making traversty of the past...

How could i help or join this community? I am an artist and an architecture student

"Don't copy the past." *counts all the neo-xyz architecture styles "Mmm hmmm..."

Great points she makes

I always like to read the ideas of MVRDV and other architecture studies, but when I see the buildings I always wonder if people using those buildings are happy because most of the time it seems not.

Antoni Gaudi is the answer to that debate. He created a new thing taking the best of the past and showing us how could a beautiful sustainable future look... Antoni Gaudi was an absolute genius.

I have never heard someone say "buildings should not copy the past". Most architects and engineers copy ideas and techniques. She literally contradicts herself

The golden section.

why the music & why so loud?

Modern building just make people more depressed

I love this

I think the common misconception in this debate is that most people are actually complaining about modern city planning and not architecture. A city that is walkable, rich in culture, and provides plenty of opportunity for all classes of people does not care if its buildings are made of bricks or of glass and neither should you. Asthetics have their place in our perception of a city but should never be regulated. To regulate architecture to an asthetic and spatial extent is to regulate art. Period.

yes, old buildings were so beautiful!

Let’s say it’s not copying, it’s reviving a beautiful era!

It’s a good point that I’m pondering also but so far the idea that’s in my head is to compare other things of our time vs the past. Do you have a pocket watch or a smart watch? Do you wear a peak cap or a top hat? Does your car bear any resemblance to a stage-coach? Does it make you depressed that these things have changed? The problem with historicism is that skill sets have changed. All the historical referenced buildings I’ve seen would have been viewed as poor examples had they been built in the time they’re referencing and it’s because things have changed. So what can we do? Well the a start to the answer may be found in a few examples of Zaha Hadid’s architecture. They use maths in a more rigorous way than was ever used in the calculation of proportion- even more than Palladio or anyone. Also their details are very varied, fine and controlled rather than random or monotonous. Their buildings do no blend in with their context in the traditional sense but rather adopt the strategy of Charles Garnier, they are the gem in the context. The good examples are (and there are a few that are not good): Heydar Aliyev Centre, Salerno Martime Terminal, Xi’an International Football Centre, National Built Heritage Centre, BEEAH Headquarters, Guangzhou Opera House Auditorium (the external is perhaps questionable but the auditorium is beautiful). But what about the buildings that need to be subservient and contextual? Adam Caruso speaks very poetically about this subject. While I don’t believe all his buildings reflect the speech as well as others Bremer Landesbank Headquarters is an excellent example of what this could be like. Architects are awakening to the need for character in their buildings and the need for historical continuity. Continuity is the keyword, not stagnation which is actually equivalent to exclusion because not everyone was part of that history.

100 percent agree. In germany we have very good examples We should copy this medivial style barrok and stuff

Good clip!

I hate all new builds, but would give my right kidney to live in a Haussmann style building, even if it was finished last week.

VERY well said.

This discussion seems to be plagued by ignorance and lack of vocabulary. Mimicking is the problem, not copying. When we say that architecture always has copied its past doesn't mean a literal copy. It seems that many here agree that there is a problem with contemporary architecture, but without much understanding of what´s wrong. The problem is lack of complexity, human scale, harmony, and even quality in the contemporary buildings. The solution is not to just return to a "glorious past".

Make buildings future-proof, not futuristic!

We should not copy anything but use them as inspiration and then try to improve the concept. But i guess many architects got a big ego and think they can make something better from zero. If they succeed then it's fine, otherwise they're just feeding their own ego and not the society. I can still appreciate a building aesthetically even tho it's not a better solution than something before and probably even live inside it comfortably. Buildings should at least try to blend into the area if it's surrounded by beautiful classic architecture. If it's a new area with contemporary architecture then you can be bolder with the design without pissing people off

I'm going to need that BGM.

Where is the whole interview? Thank you

well said.... indeed

Thank you

that is a very good point

They never give arguments against traditional architecture as they know those arguments would be hated outside of their cabal.

Thank goodness we have people thinking about this. Architecture has gotten so ugly and depressing of late

Their designs appear to be driven more by vanity than a sense of duty towards the people who work and live in their buildings. Instead of recognizing the responsibility they hold, they seem to prioritize stroking their egos above creating spaces that genuinely serve the needs and enhance the lives of others.

The modernist city centre of Stockholm, which was gutted in the 1960s, has already had to be demolished and rebuilt because it was so poorly thought through that it couldn't last five full decades. Shockingly wasteful.

Is she saying we CAN copy modernist and brutalist buildings?

Do copy historic solutions, but dont make them look like historic building. Otherwise the heritage will not get respect and attention.

Nice video, but please don't put those music of hero. Thats the modern way to do so, and that's what those motivations videos does. I personally hate that kind of market philosophy so please don't do that to your videos.

What the hell is wrong with copying? We have people here who think it's some kinda crime for heaven's sake. SMH

No offense... but some of the examples shown are not just subjective but highly functional for a growing population. high rise apartments service a lot of families and are vital to providing housing. Not everyone can live in the 3 study building designed on some medieval street. What solutions do you have for that?

The overbearing background music completely obliterates what otherwise could have been an enjoyable video with a pertinent message

can't hear the woman because of the noise music. who edits this silliness?

Amen

Would be great to Germany to be rebuilt in such way

Why should we copy the wheel?

The opinions presented here are Obviously subjective which is fine but I still think we are better off today,postmodernists like Robert Venturi talked about critical regionalism which was in opposition to internationalism (not truly international) .He included elements from past and used modern material and construction techniques.Many architects did so.After that Deconstructivism,Parametricism many styles followed ,some fit the context some don’t.But all of it is important,just because you had some failed examples doesn’t mean architects are wasting their time.I find these classical Victorian Architecture very rigid today which it is .Modernism was need of the time,we are past that .Don’t settle with past ,it is funny when people says just copy it since it worked .Copying is not bad but there has been no beautiful,perfect architectural solution ,good architecture will inherently be flawed.our needs are different from our predecessor,yes you can have a beautiful facade (subjective) I find villa Savoye beautiful it stays true to the material not pretending to fit some beauty standards set by people in past.We have lot more good buildings then they had,just the sheer variety is exciting.I respect Mies,Corbusier,Walter Gropius,F.L Wright,Moshie Safdie,I M Pei,B V Doshi,Charles Correa,AntoniobGaudi,Frei Otto,Santiago Calatrava,Frank Gehry,Raj Rewal,Kengo Kuma,Taadao Ando,and many more..Sure they have few unimpressive structures,but their commitment is fabulous .They all did things differently,thought differently,some were egoistic but that is fine,but their commitment to a better future never wavered

These arguments abund in common sense and truth, thats exactly why I am afraid the movement will be banned in the end!

One looks at brutalism architecture and thinks that person is either depressed or not humane. Look at the dead soulless debt prison condos going up in major cities they do nothing to inspire but to make you feel dead inside.

The Roman system of grid streets it's THE ultimate model. She it's right, inefficiency has been copy and needs to fundamentally change.

Try Macedonia. The city has structures found in many countries' landmarks.

Same with smartphones

Buildings today are more functional and well though out than their past versions, but they are ugly AF... That's it just make them look beautiful, either based on a new aesthetic or an old one

Copying the recent past for them is ok but the distant past not so much.

You guys should use even more epic music

It reflects the person or functioning of the building. It emits messages, history purpose, grandeur. The only purpose modern building have is isolation. Nobody wants to live in modern buildings, everyone always meet up the medieval part of town

Neoclassical, Gothic revival, Baroque revival, Tudor revival, Renaissance revival, need I go on?

return classical architecture

I have to say I do appreciate Brutalist architecture probably because I grew up in Portugal, a country full of old buildings from 17th, 18th, 19th century that always felt old, dated, too elaborate, etc. to me. This made me appreciate Brutalist and Neo-classicist architecture.

Because there is a thing called unity, if you want to copy the solutions of the past you have to build as in the past... first of all you can't afford it and second, technically in the 21st century it's not a good solution. Remember, you don't like historical buildings, you like historical buildings where rich people used to lived.

It reflects the culture you have, what kind of persons the builders are. When you live in non creative boxes with nothing in it, it tells your creativity, which is nothing, it tells your history which is nothing, you are as bland and simple as all the other buildings which reflects your emptyness, your way of telling us that you are replaceable by anything else, that the person inside had no value and anyone else can replace you as it wouldnt make any impact or differentiation. I believe your own self makes change to the surroundings, when you make the environment beautiful it tells us about you, who you are, what you can do, and your skills and wealth. Someone who litter the place with garbage is a impersonation of garbage himself, for the cause of the garbage in the surroundings is of him, himself is the embodiment of backwards progression, of lack of manners, lack of rules, lack of responsibillities.

what story you gonna tell when building a castle in modern days ? maybe “i ignore the invention of modern material and technology and fire prevention regulations to built the building with structure with the brick and adhesive that used in the past that scientists still trying to figure out the ingredients”. I don’t deny all the beautiful building from the past but architecture is more complex than just about the beauty and which period of time you think we should recreate, why not the Egypt pharaoh pyramids time 😂 Architecture reflects the time bro. and it’s very dangerous if you make a whole revolution to recreate something in the past that you’re not good at, it could bring the opposite effect or bad impression to the style. look at all the town in china and other asian city when they trying to copy european old building 😂

how could we copy our own culture? the grey boring buildings are american culture, because america is so young and modernized

Read about postmodernism. Read about critical theory in architecture. It tells you all you need to know.

To simplify architecture in how the exterior looks, is to deny the modern advance of how we think about space we only think of beautiful Romanesque facades and how that is superior, but selectively we forget the composition of the space and who had access to those buildings in the past, architecture goes beyond how it looks, Many contemporary works fail, but that does not mean that the past was better, thanks to modernism the democratization and quality of space was thought of as the basis of design and the false belief of mannerism was broken

It seems this channel really dislikes MVRDV

Human bodies are the same as 500 or 1000 years ago etc. Our genes copy the past !!

We MUST copy past!! 🇮🇹

Umm have you ever heard of design inspiration? Every building built today is INSPIRED by what came before it, not copied. Do you really think a 400 year old looking building is fit for 2023? In the age of Internet? Social diversity? Fast-paced changr?? These neo-classical buildings represent NOTHING but nostalgia. And it's funny you think these are "good" solutions. What are they exactly?? How is an overly ornamented facade a good solution for 2023?? These buildings were built with very old technologies, we can build MUCH more cheaply, efficiently AND beautifully without just copying their appearance. And yes, we shouldn't copy ugly modernist buildings, you know why?? Because they're ALSO old!! Modernism emerged more than 100 years ago! Blank concrete buildings do NOT represent our current needs, and neither do classical buildings! Have you ever heard of contemporary architecture?? You probably didn't.

how can you say which one is ugly or beautiful 😂

Modern buildings are not only ugly, but very unfunctional. Simple example: old stone courtrooms could carry your voice quite far. Now with modern courtrooms with all their paint and carpet, a lawyer has to almost shout to make his case.

In America, we have old buildings that are shaped like ducks, tea pots, and Popeye; newer copies would spruce up the landscape! 😉 🦆

Women ☕...