The broken building that must not be destroyed 

rather fascinating

You should go gliding again, Bruce Duncan still instructs for the Edinburgh uni at portmoak airfield near loch leven. Good at this time of year too

Week old comment on 5 minute old video? The laws of physics have been broken!

Sorry, but what's actually historic about this building? Seems to me like this is the perfect example of bureaucracy at its absolute worst.

@@TwilightExplorer Maybe it's been posted on private to test it out or something. Then it got removed and reposted on public I dont know

4:35 for anyone interested

I just noticed, ty

Aw no, blurred away! Haha

Cant argue with facts

Welcome to scotland 😂

I agree - from looking through the comments, it's clear that a lot of people don't understand *what* makes it special enough to be protected, and that is a failing on the video's part.

but the reality is thats not what it looks like now though.

was ugly then, is ugly now. just that now its an ugly building in a bad state as opposed to being an ugly building in a good state.

@@andrewyoung749 actually i think all buildings should be brutalist :] itd be fun

@@Carmenifold I think the beauty of architecture is that it changes. There are tons of ugly 60s-80s buildings being torn down, but I hope that some of the good ones will remain. Just like in the 80s they tore down the then-considered ugly and obsolete 40s-50s brick buildings, which are now considered heritage...

We had the same, tutors who designed god awful buildings that were badly designed and should be torn down ……. 🤔🤣

Good riddance. Not very talented artistically. And this building shows it. This is why classical revival architects should be professors and not ditzy socialists :P

Good to hear they were demolished

Your professor was about as cr@p as they get. A proud destroyer of the human soul.

well, to be fair even without the graffiti, this place looked quite ugly

building's*

@@encycl07pedia- buildings*

@@nerowolf1234 building’s

@@batkittii buildings

Buildi'ngs*

The priests have to do something to pass the time

I mean Cardross is kinda an outlier, it’s surrounded by urban sprawl on both sides of the Carman hill

If RedBull were to build it ..an extreme sports park community...they would come..and I'd be with them 🌊

@@ibanezlaney Yes; aside from the highland areas that are miles away from the nearest village and hundreds of miles away from the nearest large town, which compromise most of Scotland.

If you're going to spray graffiti on a building, a building in the woods is the best place, because nobody will see you do it.

Garrett K what is drone racing?

@@Stadtpark90 The racing of drones?

Mabybe Paintball aswell

@@islaymassive1530 having owned a paintball track i can tell you that is going to be a nightmare m8.

exactly what i was thinking :p

There are a couple of old films up on the Internet Archive if you want to see what it was like when in use - lots of nice wood to mix with all of the Brutalist concrete.

That’s the beauty in Brutalist architecture, it looks the same before and after ruination😂

@@cyberGEK lmao funny because it's true 🤣 It ages HORRIBLY, in like 5 years it looks like it's been there for 55 years haha.

@@the-based-jew6872 they need to powerwash em, only excuse is laziness,

Glasgow Airport has the same concrete arches, although they are covered up now.

Praying, more like paying, for education... right lads?

He's not a priest but a layperson, a Director of Communications - just saying!

@@Cmdrrnvr1 so are all priests. Priests don't have horns, they are lay men as well.

"Deus ex machina?"

“It’s unrealistic to expect some sort of deus ex machina...” -a Catholic church official

Yes.

I'm confused explain pls

@@slickm7 The Life Changing Magic of Tidying Up by Marie Kondo.

the moment i heard the word 'spark joy' it reminded me of marie LMAO

I'm sure it can be folded up nicely and compactly.

“Your house is a deadly laser” It really does sound like a Wurtz thing though

Yep, this place is a monument to both government overreach AND irrationality.

The government is a joke.

well

The best thing the Scottish government could do is de list the old dump then bring in a demolition team and demolish the old dump stop wasting money on these old dumps that most people don't care about anymore.

In reality, it was just such a lair. The ruins should be left to fester as a reminder of the evil, self-righteous hypocrites that used it. It is a perfect symbol of the rot and dysfunction that pervades religious minds.

lazy movie locations for 100 Alex. Why do we accept lazy film writers showing us a dystopian future by using buildings that were clearly crapholes in the present. Seriously, world comes to an end but spray paint still seems to be easily obtainable so all the crumbling buildings are covered in decades worth of graffiti? You're one of a handful of survivors. The world as we know it is over. Only a few thousand humans survive world wide. You have you choice of literally EVERYWHERE. Hey, lets go hang out at the old cement plant they closed 50 years ago.. OR, hey, I know where there's a nice, intact log cabin mansion away from all the decaying chemical plants...

​@@citetez Hoo boy, talk about hyprocritic self-righteousness! Have you looked in a mirror? No one would make such baseless and sweeping denounciations with that level of utter vitriol if they weren't a little self-righteous themselves, my friend.

location can only be ignored when appealing to eccentric artists and the like

I think the building being an ugly, shoddy piece of crap that nobody wants is a bigger issue.

Is that programme popular outside of Britain?

@@jic1 that's the joke. Location is often used by slimy sellers to pawn off awful properties at exorbitant prices. Not to mention the price of a building has more to do with where it is than the actual quality of the building.

@@anjoliebarrios8906 I don't think that's the joke. The location is awful, too. Literally the only feasible use for this building and location was "remote seminary".

Happy ending.

Classic description of the problem with these buildings.

Glad someone else caught that one

"the church couldnt afford it" - They're worth upwards of 50 BILLION dollars. Yes they could, they're just too busy taking money from the needy to care.

@@nuck- You're saying the Archdiocese of Glasgow is worth upwards of 50 billion dollars? And what do you mean by worth? If 98% of that is tied up in real estate and historic churches, then that hardly seems like it should count, since those things can't be reasonably sold for what they're valued at, and they can't be transferred to the "needy" for any benefit. Also, how does not maintaining this specific building constitute "taking money from the needy?" Are you suggesting that the government should force them to pay for upkeep because they can afford it, and that that upkeep constitutes taking care of the needy?

@@AlindBack its linked to the catholic church directly. They take money from the poor even though they're FILTHY rich. Just how religion works, take from the poor and keep it.

@@dalkap The government is paying for this, not the church. The church quote "cant afford it". They're on track to be worth over 100 billion dollars by 2030. But they cant afford it.

@@AlindBack I'm sorry, I'm going to need a piece of your foundation your excellence. I need it to provide stability to my family. You're holiness, I require a few pounds of your chapels great dirt, I'm under rough times and providing my children with food is becoming harder to do. FATHER! PLEASE! I need you're help with a matter of great importance! My son is dieing because we haven't had water for days! Can I have you're holy water?!

I'm sure it was, but so are forests. Only without the industrial exterior.

That's what architecture is all about, when it's done right.

Just shoot it and put it out of its misery, just like a sick elephant.

@@CallieMasters5000 I assume you mean the owner, 'cause the elephant is not in misery.

@@CallieMasters5000 You can't. That's the whole point. If you get rid of the elephant, the pharaoh kills you. If you keep the elephant, you go into debt.

@@adamyoung6797 Yep, damned if you do, damned if you don't

This gives me a great idea! They could give the land to someone they don't like as a present, and just forget to mention the unusable structure they have to pay £60,000 to maintain. Then again, the church might say it's immoral...

Count me in

Same

or a rave

Bet LCC would love it.

@@dylandarnell3657 what is LCC?

That's what it sounds like to me too. They should just pressure the government to de-list it and let them tear it down. I'm sure nobody would refuse to sign that petition. What an eyesore.

More like liberal political influence decided that seminarians could no longer be trained in remote places. Stupid decision, and a waste of resources.

@@72Yonatan I mean the building itself is a liberal paradise. Frankly, I am inclined to think this is God expressing his vast disapproval of the modernist heresy.

@@72Yonatan that's certainly an unusual idea. I'd love to see you try to support it with factual evidence

Hmm....not many people know the system. A grudge against the Catholic church on the other hand......

Soup

Sand

Ship

Song

Stuff

I was expecting an SCP analysis channel, since I watch a lot of that stuff. I'm not disappointed, just didn't meet my expectations.

@@JimJamTheAdmin "Didn't meet my expectations" is the definition of disappointed, but I get what you mean.

it might be one, but foundation would not let us know the truth, it's probably object class safe, so they do not bother to keep it as if it does not exist

ClickPause reminds me of the school with infinite rooms

Infinite ikea

Did you ever realize the bulletproof glas cabin on the papamobile? Go figure... :D

@@A.Lifecraft, what's the problem there?

@@A.Lifecraft papamobile hahaha

@@hannibalburgers477 That´s really the name of the Pope´s car dude

@@seriouscat2231 If someone shoots the pope then isn't that his god's will? why need the protection?

The same communism that your church was suffering under in the East was being openly promoted and disseminating by the churches here in the West.

@@TomorrowWeLive the church wasn't really suffering under communism, not in Poland at least. In Poland, in 40 years of communist goverment, catholic church builded more churches and chapels than in any other point in history.

Québec was religious enough in the 50s and 60s to have a couple of brutalist churches. (And we abandonned religion in the 70s ans 80s)

@@TomorrowWeLive I don't remember any western churches promoting or disseminating communism.

@@phil1687 “Tomorrow” is one of those right wingers who redefine the word “communism” to mean “anything that goes against our idea of capitalism.” Like the teachings of Jesus.

Zombie apocalypse here we come.

I can hear the headlines: "Pandemic patients sent to the middle of nowhere never to be seen again."

Middle of nowhere is a bad thing, people like their views, bad Wi-Fi speed, etc etc

Or a high security prison? Would certainly be a punishment being sent there.

And with great ventilation!

Why not both? KGB was crafty

Opus Dei? 🤔

Who would Kids be safer near?

@@LOFIGSD not priest.

@@chadwells7562 l thought it was a Russian building too

Great for freestyle and is probably one of the only good abandoned buildings in the area

Drone Quidditch! Think of the irony for the Church which persecuted witches to hold Quidditch matches!

Not sure about in Scotland, but in Germany and France the Church tried to stop witch burnings because doctrine of the time declared witchcraft was impossible.

I don't think the problem is lack of ideas, is lack of one that allows enough cash flow to keep the place in one piece. As they point out taking over brings a lot of responsibilities, eventually involving stopping the damn thing from collapsing which won't be cheap. Knowing city councils they would probably won't gove a license for such event since it is an historic building and a drone might hit a wall and scratch the historic filth and ruin out of it

That is the best idea....you should submit it. International competition at the site! The tourist and advertisement revenue, wow!

Buckle up Jimmy, grab your Tomas the tank engine colouring book, we're off to the illegal techno rave!

devilman crybaby IRL

Except for it being in the middle of nowhere in Scotland.

@@tommihommi1 now we're talking

That's basically what the Art Project did. Light shows combined with music and middle class 30 somethings dancing away trying to relive their past as teenage rebels.

Done for spite. The church must continue to pay for its upkeep.

@@robotbjorn4952 good ha! But they have failed a on the upkeep. Especially considering the Catholic church is filthy rich. Letting it turn to ruin was a choice

Magiktcup You are aware the Catholic Church has nothing to do with this right

@@milsy9635 Apart from owning it and having been responsible for having it built, you mean?

It's mentioned in passing that it is a landmark example of brutalism (the architecture style). Look it up. Indeed as burtalist religious building go there are no others like this. Brutalism is not always pleasing to the eye today, but its architeture history now and some of its finer examples are certainly worth preserving and to be remembered.

Especially saying it's unrealistic to expect it haha

omfg bro I started cracking up the moment I heard him say that XD

when the clergy says you can't wait for a miracle you know they're desperate ^^

I just posted this before reading. I'm so glad I wasn't the only one to see that irony :D

I don't see how it's ironic

Do you expect a priest to think God will fix a building for him?

@@blablabubles I don't think we'd expect him to believe that God will turn up in person with a team of divine builders. But he's supposed to at least believe that God will provide the opportunity to find a solution, divine inspiration, that sort of thing. I make no criticism of his faith, just his choice of words.

@@zacmumblethunder7466 Deus ex Machina implies a sudden and complete solution. Somebody stepping forward with interest and developing plans to take ownership and restore it after a period of negotiation doesn't fall under "Deus ex Machina", it's just a regular old solution. The choice of words is fine.

Unexpected salvation

It's just not realistic.

That would actually be one of the most hilarious episodes ever. I’m just worried about hamster (being his injury-prone self) getting seriously hurt while building.

Then they get sued by Nintendo

@@tyfon4429 The point is it doesn't need to be ANYTHING. It's not up to you or the government to decide, just let them tear it down, or sell it off or whatever is the best decision.

@@tyfon4429 We have no SEAL or SWAT teams in the UK, also the UK has more than sufficient military training facilities in Wales

Maybe you should make it the National Monument of Brexit. It would fit in many metaphorical ways and in this way maybe it could generate tourism.

the authority has taken away any power you might've had to oppose them

Because people are idiots

They could afford it.

No, the only thing you know in that case is that they don't feel like paying for it anymore

The Catholic church could afford it, they just don't want to spend the wonga.

@@DavidKnowles0 so?

I thought that was just Sunday.

I was thinking something similar. The government seems to be the problem here. If they would just let the owners, the Catholic Church, do what they want with the building that they made themselves then they could find some solution.

Listing generally has to be applied for in Scotland unless a building is exceptionally old (with some exceptions) - most likely the Catholic Church or one of the groups looking to take over the building applied for it at some point, so they could get access to certain grants and or tax reliefs, and it's backfired after the process fell through.

Worth noting that often people apply for heritage listing, rather than the government applying it. This happened in a town near me where a literal 1960's carpark / bus station was recently listed despite being one of the most hideous buildings I've ever seen (I disagree with Tom, these buildings are horrid ;p ). Yet it was listed because the local council wanted to knock it down and build a modern one and a few locals didn't want them too, so they applied to have it listed. So the town is stuck having a horrible looking building right in its centre that has to be there. At least the building above is out of the way. (all subjective of course :p ) Not sure if this was the case with the above building.

+Rob Shearer In general, I support grade-listing. I worked in a planning department for a bit and I can tell you, the things developers sometimes want to do to old buildings... It's not only a matter of aesthetics or history, it's also that the traditional character of a place often contributes to property values - sticking a lump of brutalist architecture in the middle of a village full of thatched cottages is going to diminish the value of everyone else's property. Plus, I've not seen any stats on this, but I doubt grade listing generally diminishes property values? Grade listing is widely recognised in the UK and is generally good marketing as a sign of authenticity and historical value. That said, in this case it's a bit absurd. Unlike most listed buildings, this building just doesn't have that much economic potential. Normally, grade-listing a building isn't so bad because the building can still be used. Plus, you aren't dealing with the original owners - if you buy an 18th century cottage, you know what you are getting into. But in this case? It's just penalising the Church for being architecturally risky decades ago.

If the owner of the building applied then that was a massive tactical mistake. And I understand the bureaucratic nightmare of trying to get de-listed. I'm a bit surprised that an application could be made for a building and a listing secured without the owner's agreement - though in the case of centuries-old structures, I guess I can see how that might happen. Worst thing you can ever hear, "I'm from the government, and I'm here to help you."

Casual you either dont understand the joke or im just stupid

Cactusz - of course, there’s no reason it can’t be both

Unexpected salvation

Deus ex Machina implies a sudden and complete solution. Somebody stepping forward with interest and developing plans to take ownership and restore it after a period of negotiation doesn't fall under "Deus ex Machina", it's just a regular old solution. The choice of words is fine.

@@jonc8561 I think he's talking about the guy believing in a god

1. Appoint a terminally ill bishop to archbishop. 2. Make him demolish the building. 3. "Oh no, they're going to put our archbishop in jail- aaand he's dead." 4. Move on.

That's messed up that the Vatican can condemn some place to be stuck with a church forever and continue to pay for it.

I was going to say gift it to the nation. Which amounts to the same thing.

​@@damientonkin If this building was some pristine work of historical ingenuity (Colosseum, St.Pauls Cathedral, etc) then the government would GLADLY accept it as a gift because they could turn it into a tourist attraction and build up the local economy + generate more tax revenue. But because it's garbage they have no interest in it. They're 100% trolling the church.

But it's not free.

The Catholic Church is perfectlly capable of maintaining it and not letting it turn into a ruin

@Bruce Wayne What the heck? I'm seeing comments from a different video. RU-vid machine broke.

*thick

His accent was fairly tame....

Thicc layers

r0bw00d ur lame

THECC

This would probably be the best idea to monetize it. The problem is I don't think the Catholic Church would approve turning an old seminary with a chapel into a battle arena.

Or drone race maybe?

@@zatherz2498 just calling crusader training and they'll sign up.

large parts of it look like it might be close to falling down. Which means opening it for paintball would mean even more millions in repair work.

@@zatherz2498 the priest basically said they'll give it away for free to anyone who will have it. I don't think they have any strong opinions about it.

nor should they be. could you imagine if building owners could just drop A listing because it is "inconvenient" or expensive? though in this case, I would say it warrants the dropping.

I live in a listed building. Due to being listed, they're not allowed to install double glazed windows. Seems stupid to me. Yes it gets rather cold in the winter. Lets a fair amount of noise in too. And the current windows obviously aren't the original ones so I don't see what they're trying to achieve.

@@PiousMoltar I don't get that either. We are preserving these buildings for the future so they can enjoy them like we enjoy historic building. However, a very interesting part of the history of these buildings is how they have changed throughout their time and why they were changed. So really if we do things like adding double glazing then that's just us contributing to that history. Or is that somehow flawed?

@@PiousMoltar Sounds like you have a unsympathetic planning department.

@@profwaldone "nor should they be. could you imagine if [the suckers stuck with the bill] could just drop A listing because it is 'inconvenient' or expensive?" This is the phenomenon of "other people's money."

If Scottish law regarding protected buildings is like similar laws, the justice system will go to great lengths to make sure someone pays for that "oopsie" in order to restore the building to the state it was in before the accident, especially if intent can be proven.

@@Lttlemoi cost isn't an issue. At least the job would be done.

@@lmaoroflcopter That's the point, it would get the job done and then you'll have to pay someone to put it back in the original state.

@@Lttlemoi naaaah it would be irreparable.

@@lmaoroflcopter Then you would have to pay for an entirely new building. Likely from jail which you would be spending a long time in after your little oopsie. Don't think others have not tried similar antics before, they usually regret it.

I would say that it would make it less serious. They just are admiting that their whole life is a lie in a way that might be looked at as nothing but just saing.

@@HidekiShinichi Yes! I remember that Bible verse! "Thou shalt receive sudden and unexpected monetary gain every time you need it for expensive renovations for a large building that shouldn't have been built to begin with." But really, just because a Catholic priest says that they shouldn't expect a miracle for a particular building, that doesn't mean they are admitting "their life is a lie." Don't twist people's words or the meaning behind them.

When a priest says that, you should realize you should not have taken them seriously at all to begin with.

@Hideki Shinichi Priests precisely don't believe in deus EX MACHINA (which is the part you appear to be ignoring).

Only charlatans will sell you a belief that magically solve your problems. Not all religious people are charlatans.

It always looked like that. Brutalist architecture is bare concrete in harsh shapes, built to be out of proportion with human beings, needs, or sensibilities.

Alex Flockhart The building has obviously been stripped completely. In the state shown here, there no doors, windows, flooring or stair treads. Only the structure is left. Perhaps it’s the result of asbestos removal?

On the outside, yes. The interiors mixed the concrete with timber and glass.

Google?

@@LePaulLalonde The interiors were already vandalised well beyond repair by the time they were stripped out.

@tR02 ?

@tR02 no I do not

I was just thinking about this, but sadly people say architecture is too shite to actually use it for anything. Personally I blame the architect. And as always, modern architecture.

@@hannibalburgers477 I'd say it's quite old by architectures standards, but of course there's always the case to be made as far as "if it ain't broken, then don't try to fix it" design philiosphy.

same thought "sick skate park!"

I could see this being the location of a yearly music festival much like Coachella but have at least a portion of the profits used for restoring and maintaining the property maybe clear out some of the nearby trees to build band stands and have the main building be a place for concessions or even as a main concert hall for the biggest bands

S T O N K S

Perfect plan

Reuben Schneider Bulletproof idea

Leave it to the Scottish government, the SNP hate when the English take their resources.

@Oskar winters Lmao UK taxes would go up by 0.09 cents a person on average to pay for this

Leaving something to a person, organization, or government does not require that the person, organization, or government accept it.

it'll be because of the unique architecture, like many 1960s/70s buildings

BHB2476 what a complete joke

It's classed as grade A because it has shitty architecture.

@@Mottflyer shitty architecture? It looks good, unique.

@@ballscrusher4 beauty is opinion I guess. I think it has character. I love buildings like these.

Right? There's nothing beneficial left, and putting the burden on the Catholic church to maintain it instead of knocking it down seems to be an unfair and unrealistic burden.

@@christopherrto The Catholic Church is one of the wealthiest institutions in the world , one has only to take the Vatican tour to see that . This is a drop in the ocean to them . It would be best converted for their own use into a sabbatical retreat where priests from all over the world could come to spend some time in peace and solitude , in that sense it would not be so far from its original purpose and the chapel could even be used for its designed purpose .

@@derekheeps1244 I encourage you to earmark your offerings to the Church to support this effort, and to encourage your fellow worshipers to do likewise. If you're not a member of the Catholic Church, perhaps you should consider joining so that you could have some legitimate basis by which you tell them how to spend their money.

If you are a bureaucrat on a committee or a public salaried job, they do not see the problem they cause.

@@govsquid why would I donate to an institution that is known to hide criminal rapists from the law?

What's the building called?

Now that sounds more noteworthy, unlike the dump in the video.

@@shugaku2461 Great Barr Hall, also known as Nether House

And it was declared to be one when it was only about 20 years old.

It's because of the building itself - it is one of the foremost examples of the modernist architectural movement in Scotland that took place in the 1960's. There really is no other building quite like it. It's a shame that it has deteriorated to this point, if it was in better shape its importance might be more obvious. But! In July 2020 it was transferred to an educational trust who have plans to use it for some sort of educational purpose. Hopefully that means it will be getting restored in the near future.

Simply because THE CHURCH build it. If it has to do with religion, almost everything becomes holy and historical. Even some dudes foreskim is said to be held in some church 🤦🏻‍♀️🤦🏻‍♀️🤦🏻‍♀️🤦🏻‍♀️🤦🏻‍♀️🤦🏻‍♀️🤦🏻‍♀️🤦🏻‍♀️

@@oOSchmuseEngelOo Well, no. In this case, the building is not a holy place nor of any specific merit to the church. If it was, they'd have been taking better care of it. I have plenty criticisms of the Catholic church, including how they get their money, but as an entity with a lot of money they have been known to fund culturally impactful works from time to time. The building is preserved because it is a historically significant example of an important art movement (modernist architectural design). Think of it this way - we preserve the works of historical painters in museums because we agree their art is important and modern artists can still learn from them. The Seminary is the same. The only difference is you can move the Mona Lisa, but a building must remain where it was built.

The Berlin Wall is from the 60s too, but I don't see anyone complaining about that being considered historic.

Someone would probably try to cut out that part of the wall.

And two years down the road it'll shred itself..problem solved.

The scottish government can barely afford the roads in Glasgow

Dirty Mop The Scottish government have other... far more important priorities.

@@userPrehistoricman aye Edinburgh and a second indy ref instead of getting shite done

Yes I think it should just have the protections removed and be bulldozed. It looks awful and its only from the 60s its newer then alot of people's houses.

That's not a nice way to talk about Glasgow

Apparently the Church has managed to give it away to a non-profit who are planning on using it as a school once they renovate it.

@@nick012000 seriously? as a teacher (not in Scotland though), that is a terrible, terrible idea. I mean, I thought my school was the worst in terms of architecture (freezing in winter, boiling in summer, stairs out of Escher) but this is something else.

Good urbex spot tho

How many FPS go to rural Scotland?

Another option is to get someone very, very old and frail with no heirs to buy it for £1. When they pass on it's not the church's problem.

@@kjj26k Hitman can always do with another brutalist industrial-punk nightclub level.

In my opinion, it's not Brutalism, it's Bauhaus.

It would be perfect for Phasmophobia.

Hearing that come from a member of the clergy is wierd.

I was immediately struck by the irony of The Church saying they can't expect a miracle.

They should call the BOSS to repair his own building. Why should taxpayers pay for omnipotent beings' properties?

To be fair, the Bible says in multiple places to not bet on any sort of miracle or divine intervention; just because God is keeping an eye out doesn't mean you don't have to put the effort in.

@@@Menosh The Lord helps those who help themselves. Inshallah is an abandonment or responsibility.

My dad actually works for historic Scotland and usually buildings that are put in class A are put there because they were significant in the story of a place or time in history or the architecture is particularly good for the time and type

Hell im all for protecting buildings but its a modern building that looks like crap now that its in disrepair and is about as culturally significant as any public school

brutalism is cool as hell don’t you dare

@@Man-ej6uv brutalism is garbage and so is this building. The church should be embarrassed to have built such a modernist monstrosity for forming priests.

brutalism is garbage and so is this building. The church should be embarrassed to have built such a modernist monstrosity for forming priests. Is horrifying. It's why they don't have priests. Who would willingly choose to be there, even Tom Scott admits he wouldn't want to be there, and he foolishly says he "likes?" this modern "art". What does it mean to like it if you wouldn't want to be there? Modern art, especially brutalism is garbage.

You wanna Parthenon it?

Personally I think it would be a great place to TEST unstable explosives. Problem solved.

I doubt the people of Cardross would agree- the village is less than the mile Tom mentioned from the place.

@@Dave_Sisson that's what he's implying, "unstable explosives"

Good place to practice for sure. Could even just gift it to the military, I bet they'd love playing around inside an abandoned structure like that hurling grenades left and right.

I think it would work better in a movie like inception and this is like the deepest crack of somebody's mind

Agreed.

Some kind of post-apocalyptic place - would have been a good set for something in The Hunger Games.

Ouch! :P

I was scrolling through to see if there was anyone else who appreciated his prose

Well in fairness, your husband's vows weren't a Scottish priest training center.

Now that's brutal!

Wololo.

@@jliller You can't convert wonders unless it is king of the hill.

brutalism isnt much of a wonder

VMOS burocracy...it was enlisted and now it cant go un-listed thus forcing the hand of its rightful ownerss

Agreed, just because someone puts it on a list of significant buildings doesn‘t mean that it really is..not everything is worth saving and especially brutalism-designs from the post war era in my point of view just don‘t make the cut...they are just too ugly and show no affection

just knocck it down

@@rronaldreagan They can unlist it, they just don't want to because they got the church paying for it. If the state had to pay, it would be gone yesterday.

@VMOS it's "important" because a government busy body and their aesthetics imperialist friends, say so. Know your place plebe!

Most listed buildings at least look nice. This ones a concrete eyesore.

@@elerimurray6170 Do not forget that St Pancras Station was a out dated eyesore on the verge of demolition in the 1960s. Tastes change.

@@elerimurray6170 Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and all that. As for using it for something else; what? It's in the middle of nowhere. Other than a barn what might be needed there? And even if there was a need, it would probably be far cheaper to build in a completely empty field next door than knock it down and rebuild. Maybe just let it crumble as a modern ruin. That somehow has its own beauty.

Why not take pictures, demolish and pump 60,000 a year into making Glasgow a place people would visit!

It’s actually in the middle of nowhere, it borders woodlands and fields. I visited 10 years ago and it’s an incredible space.

German resident here. I work in a building that's been listed under Germany's own heritage protection act. (Well, at least I did until covid made us all able to work from home.) While the building has been kept up, there are very tight restrictions on how much we can modernise, so things like amenities for the disabled are almost non-existant. From the outside it looks like a 1950's concrete slab. I've never seen a historical plaque or anything telling why it's so special. In many ways, heritage protection in Germany has been both a blessing and a curse, if you ask me.

This one was earmarked for preservation because it was a major innovation in architecture for the time period

All my homies hate Marie Kondo.

I don't think this thing _ever_ sparked joy.

Emotions don't make sense, and emotions are what make people go "This is important".

well, they legally can't do anything to it other than its intended purpose, even if they sold it to a new person. It's going to always have to be a church.

w2gMk *seminary. It has a chapel (small, dedicated church) in it but it's far more than just a church

Its actually not THAT inaccessible, many many people visit it all the time however there is no way to make revenue from that since legally those people aren't supposed to be there because the building is dangerous.

Thing is there is nothing else there. It borders fields and woodland. What would you do, allow the forest to take over? I visited 10 years ago and it’s and incredible space.

Probably not praying hard enough!

Also "this is bigger than us, this if for the goverment, something for the nation" and yet representing the catholic church :D

He’s right tho

@@SRNikoSR 🤣🤣🤣 Most honest priest ever.

That comedy gold.

richb313 Historic Registration preserves culture and heritage in a million ways more effectively than state ownership of significant buildings and without placing an extreme burden on the taxpayer. It works fantastically well.

@@cjeam9199 Except when it doesn't as this example proves. What it does is put a huge financial burden on the owner without any way to relieve that burden. Rarely are such buildings really preserved more often than not they are just maintained to very minimum standards if at all but only if that building still generates any revenue. If it does not then it is difficult to next to impossible to find a buyer due to restrictions on restoration, use, or modification if lucky. In most U.S. States you can transfer to state by not paying property taxes but even then due to Historic Registration you might still owe retroactively money to deal with building after state takes over. Historic Registration is not the problem but the administration and heavy restrictions are. Welcome to the real world where unintended consequences are the rule not the exception.

@Darth Wheezius Careful, your bigotry is showing. What about School Teachers, Dentists, Doctors all of these groups have abused their positions and all of them have been covered up and just transferred.

@Darth Wheezius And then it happens to you. Persecute the kiddie diddlers for being kiddie diddlers, DON'T make your own prison.

I'm not sure you'd even be allowed to buy it to use as a venue as the building's cannot really be changed. They might make an exception for something like a hotel but for raves there will likely be a complaint.

They’d have to take some time out from their daily slaughter of foreign civilians.

@@EarlSquirrelsonn You're edgier than the building...

Knight Lautrec even the graffiti is old. It hasn't been vandalized in awhile.

@@squamespeach7258 Cannae trust a hun, Squames Peach...

@@adamrodgers9175 lmao

Knight Lautrec value is the price someone would actually pay not what they’d hyperthetically one day pay, if it’s worth £200,000 to a property person, that’s all it’s worth to anyone

@@splat668 Then it's currently worthless because no one in their right mind will take it even for free.

Or better still, just buy it off the Church. They clearly don't want it.

Why? It's not as if the church is short of cash. It could maintain it. It doesn't want to.

@@ptonpc it's not about the church, that should go for every national historical landmark

Who?

2:30 'spark joy' marie kondo wrote a book called The Life Changing Magic Of Tidying Up

I think you mean shoutout, callout has a negative connotation haha

@@joshg11 You're totally right. Thanks!

Was looking for this comment.

That's because its preservation can't really be justified, except perhaps as a warning to others.

The message: Don't build this way, This is what happens.

@@jic1 Why? Historic site must be able to example there history to the world. Because we preserve them so they can tell there history.

@@tipperzack It was designed and built poorly, it was barely used, it's now crumbling. That's the full extent of its history.

jic1 “i don’t like that part of history, erase it” It’s a pity there are people that think this way

It's not even that old. We tear down other garbage like this that was designed in the 60s because it's ugly and dysfunctional.

GENIUS.

A very apt comparison. The Barbican with its associated flats is in the right place and serves a continuing purpose, so it stays alive and well-kept. If St Peter's Seminary were in the Barbican's location it would probably be renovated (very expensively) and turned into apartments. Hopefully they could fix the key design flaws in the process.

That's what I'm thinking. Why is it even listed? It makes sense for something like a site that was used for centuries, or is so well built that it still stands after centuries. But this thing is only sity-ish years old and was abandoned so long ago that it has already fallen to ruin. Bulldoze it and good riddance.

or let just let it crumble, nature will take its course

@@johnladuke6475 Look at Murray Grigor's film "space and light" and you will see why it is listed. It was Scotland's best building.

Thanks for sharing!

@@iTzWeeDFTW That sounds like utter nonsense. Scotland's best building? Evidently, the filmmaker had never heard of Edinburgh Castle, Glasgow Cathedral or Linlithgow Palace.

Even then, if it was your building, now you cannot use it as you want. It's just a form of usurpation of the decision of what to do with someone else's property.

@@trinidad17 Well, I wouldn't say it's _just_ that. But that is a problem too.

iits to protect old important buildings that where semantically being destroyed in the 60s in town centers and other places for modern architecture that known is lees favored than before. this is an example of a terrible application but generally works as the listing has different levels and is the local county official rather than a state official that reviews application changes. so its quicker, additional the building have been listed a while so often people buy them knowing what there in form and in a lto of cases it adds value and it shows a level of renegotiation of importants.

@@LordChesalot If the governent decides a building must be preserved, they should expropriate it at market value. No forcing the original owners to upkeep it forever. People should be able to rent a concession from the government to employ such buildings for approved uses, but that ought to be voluntary.

@@Poldovicothey dont , you can sell the building , you dont have to upkeep it forever and why should the government shoulder the cost of private interest.

With tax money from people who'd rather get better healthcare and schools for all that money.

@@Trezker thing is if governments knew they'd be financially responsible for the buildings they designate they'd be much more selective. I highly doubt this pile of rubble would get a designation under those circumstances.

@@Trezker We should be able to argue that buildings that are eye sores shouldn't be listed so that they aren't wasting money.

@@TheSadButMadLad this building looks dangerous. I do not see the architectural significance. It's weirdly built and dangerous. Whoever perpetuates this fetish is low IQ and out of touch with both art and reality.

Governments don't pay for anything. You pay for it. So the real answer is tear this thing down and let nature have the land.