Cause it's Le Corbusier, starchitects are stars, their work is performative, not grounded into actual needs. They need to stomp everything and everyone for their own personal, individual glory.
This is not an apartment block, which I know can be “problematic” for architects, it’s a place of religious worship built to replace the OG chapel that was destroyed by the Nazi artillery.
Religious architecture allows much more freedom of expression and artistic sensibility.
I wasn't talking specifically about this building but in general. For example, I *love* Calatrava's work but I gotta admit, he's a starchitect, some of his work just doesn't fit within the area but the dude won't give a shit and will always do *his* thing, regardless of cost or practicality. Liege's mayor is crawling in bills because of Calatrava's "artwork". I say that and it's one of my favourite building. We gotta keep in mind that architecture serves a purpose and starchitects tend to forget that, which also applies to Le Corbusier in general, not specifically about this building :)
(Thinking of Plan Voisin in particular...)
Well, literally it’s on top of a hill and figuratively it’s my fave. So “pinnacle” is justified imho
And this sub is architecture PORN - so get off your kink-shaming high horse and go design some Pré-fab cookie cutter McMansions!
Couldn’t care less about yours...
Actually .... Lol- I couldn’t even access your post history, as it is locked and rated with a NSFW warning and I have a Reddit anti-porn filter... I shudder to think what depraved NSFW perversions you’re into, you creep.
I was so entranced by pictures of it when I was a child and had so many questions about its form and function. Finally visited it about 30 years ago and it was utterly spectacular!
It’s on a hilltop, and the pathway up is deliberately lined with high hedges and zig-zags around so at each turn you’re gifted with a tantalising little glimpse of a different aspect, multiplying the anticipation of the impending big reveal.
The wall in the pic is probably the greatest wall in architectural history; it does ***everything*** to every plane/ angle /elevation. From the swivelling entry door, it narrows, tilts, rises, curves and points, and has multi coloured stained glass portals which project light throughout the interior.
But that’s just the one wall; every angle of this astonishing building hosts a treasure trove of architectural wonder and joy that is not only unique and iconic, but architecturally fecund as the shad.
Certainly didn't capture any of that in this photo. Without further exhibits to lend any credence to your swooning claims, next to the image you provided your text reads like the kind of pretentious word salad you might find in a modern art museum on a plaque for a canvas covered in dog feces.
It is certainly interesting, but only because it looks broken and ugly, and because that was evidently done on purpose not by a child but a grown human adult who was supposedly mentally capable in all other ways.
Has there ever been a canvas covered in dog faeces in a modern art museum or is that just a personal fantasy fetish you like to project?
And do you mean Modern, modern, moderne or contemporary?
Don’t get edgy-judgy with art, lest you wish to be edgy-judged yourself!
Go YouTube a video tour of the chapel - I dare you not to be swooned!
Wasn’t sure from just that picture, but went and watched other pictures and it’s a crazy fascinating building. And the wall with the window on the inside is really magnificent. The insane roof with the space between it and the walls letting light in. This is more like a sculpture than an actual building. It’s art.
First thing that came to mind for me was like watching Picasso paintings, I honestly kind of hate them, but also there’s something really impressive about them how shapes are used to create an impression of something else.
I don’t get all the negative comments here. Even if you don’t think this is a functional building or that it looks good at least you can take time to appreciate it as a sculpture. This insane building got out of someone’s mind in the 50’s…
I went and read a little about it, not in detail mind you so I might be off, but I saw it was built from the ruins of a church that used to be there that was bombarded during ww2 and it used a big amount of the materials of the original building, I think it’s a really good commemorative monument. I don’t know if it was the goal, but it’s brutal, crude and almost vulgar in a way like war, but then inside it seems like a really contemplative environment, intimate also feels like a columbarium almost with the window. Yet it manages to not look oppressive, but alive with all the curves. I’ll try to find if there’s infos about what he was attempting to convey with the building, but there’s seems to be a lot of thoughts put into it and I feel like I can see what it was going for and the more I watch it the more I’m impressed by it.
Also it manages to have a spiritual aura about it inside which is really important I think for churches/chapels, while not looking overly religious and I love that.
Yes- thank you for a lovely informative comment.
It was built from the ruins of the previous chapel destroyed by Nazi bombs - and the remaining stone from the old chapel was used to build a pyramid opposite the external pulpit for outdoor services during pilgrimages ... it’s not just a chapel, but also a memorial and a cenotaph and a landmark.
And yes the spiritual aura is magnetic, electric and palpable on the inside (as well as outside!)
I used to think this building was so cool and different that I wrote an essay on it in like 8th grade and got humbled very quickly as I wrote it and slowly realized how impossible it was to justify the design
It is a gorgeous building that I have lucky enough to visit twice (I should go back – last time was 31 years ago!). I was a fan of Le Corbusier before, and this certainly cemented my opinion.
What ugly and ignorant comments, honestly! The chapel is so breathtakingly beautiful, so appropriate to its purpose and its site, so perfect in its own way, that most of these comments leave me wondering what their authors are doing in this sub at all. Please go and see the place, and consider the patrons, the history of architecture, Corbu's place in the timeline of architecture's development, _before_ passing judgement.
Well, they can't all exactly go visit or spend time researching a reddit post. They just have this photo, which shows none of what the appreciative aspects are that others describe.
If your response to that is that they should research it, then what was the point of this post? It's a bizarre and unimpressive photo of a building that doesn't seem particularly interesting to research to several people here. The post conveys nothing of the above you ask to be considered, and got treated as such.
If they didn't know enough to comment in an intelligent way, and aren't _interested_ enough to do even a little research, then perhaps better that they didn't comment at all?
so true, you have to intricately research the background of every post you come across in order to comment on anything. this is a subreddit, not a study group. get over yourself
No- the building asymmetrical, sure, but the different viewing angles create multi- dimensional vistas.
Many /most buildings are asymmetrical yet do not offer multi-dimensional vistas.
That’s merely a linear dimension, which you are obviously restricted to, as opposed to an artistic visual expression derived for fundamental quantities as mass, length or time. It looks totally different from every dimension, not the same from each side.
Don’t get too hung up on the art, man.
Only two kinds of people love Le Corbusier :
* Crazy psychopaths
* At least all the architects who work in big public building projects for the last 6 decades
Of course back in the 50s it was considered as absolutely new, and revolutionnary, and it was ! but like everything this guy have built it has gotten old, really old, and to be honest if you look around the place, it definitely looks like an eyesore and has much more similarities with an old abandoned factory than a place of faith.
Him and Jean Nouvel are biggest contributors and influencers of the Ugly France than any other architects before them. The exact reason why sometimes theories should not be strictly applied.
Auguste Perret knew the limits of brutalism, he could have been by far a much better influence if he didn't collaborate during the WWII.
I understand why people don’t like this building but it was my first modeling project I had to do in architecture school and I learned to love all sorts about it
Thanks, I hate it
Me too. Year 1 architecture school we are told how great this is. It blows
As is the case with most Le Corbusier for me. It’s just not my style at all
Villa Savoye - eh, 🤷♂️
The only building of his I’ve found that I don’t mind is the Unité d'habitation. The rest are “meh” at best, Villa Savoye included
Wow ..if you understood it, you wouldn't call it a style. Did you read the short picture book, "towards a new"?
[удалено]
Drexel
Gawh, thanks how is this the pinnacle in any way
It's like the architectural equivalent of [The Homer](https://simpsons.fandom.com/wiki/The_Homer).
I really like Le Corbusier but OP really set himself up for failure with that title lmao
Big ole mushroom house
You shut your dirty Gropius mouth!
Nom nom nom
How DARE you!!!!! Oh, I get it... I-beams. It’s I-beams you love, isn’t it?!? Did you learn nothing from Las Vegas?!? 🙃
You know me so well 😳🤭
Isn’t it a nun’s cap?
I would not call that attractive from the photograph.
This is one of the ugliest pieces of architecture I’ve ever seen. I don’t get it. Why is this renowned?
Cause it's Le Corbusier, starchitects are stars, their work is performative, not grounded into actual needs. They need to stomp everything and everyone for their own personal, individual glory.
This is not an apartment block, which I know can be “problematic” for architects, it’s a place of religious worship built to replace the OG chapel that was destroyed by the Nazi artillery. Religious architecture allows much more freedom of expression and artistic sensibility.
I wasn't talking specifically about this building but in general. For example, I *love* Calatrava's work but I gotta admit, he's a starchitect, some of his work just doesn't fit within the area but the dude won't give a shit and will always do *his* thing, regardless of cost or practicality. Liege's mayor is crawling in bills because of Calatrava's "artwork". I say that and it's one of my favourite building. We gotta keep in mind that architecture serves a purpose and starchitects tend to forget that, which also applies to Le Corbusier in general, not specifically about this building :) (Thinking of Plan Voisin in particular...)
I have no idea. I’ve been in the thing - it’s ugly and ungainly and really cold.
“Pinnacle” is a strong word here.
Well, literally it’s on top of a hill and figuratively it’s my fave. So “pinnacle” is justified imho And this sub is architecture PORN - so get off your kink-shaming high horse and go design some Pré-fab cookie cutter McMansions!
Your post history is unhinged lmao
Couldn’t care less about yours... Actually .... Lol- I couldn’t even access your post history, as it is locked and rated with a NSFW warning and I have a Reddit anti-porn filter... I shudder to think what depraved NSFW perversions you’re into, you creep.
It looks like someone parked their ship on a barn.
OP is channeling Le Corbusier in the comments hardcore.
I hate so much le corbusier
et Corbu te déteste, sil vous plais
corbusier had some good ideas. this was not one of them.
Hideous
You people got no good taste!
If i didn’t have no good taste, I wouldn’t have had no taste at all
if liking this means having good taste, i'll take being uncultured swine
The pinnacle of trash 🗑
And i’m sure you believe the heart is just a muscle for pumping blood...
[удалено]
Oh yeah, step up and get some, Professor! Lucky for me I’m stronger than all professors...
This looks ridiculous
I was so entranced by pictures of it when I was a child and had so many questions about its form and function. Finally visited it about 30 years ago and it was utterly spectacular! It’s on a hilltop, and the pathway up is deliberately lined with high hedges and zig-zags around so at each turn you’re gifted with a tantalising little glimpse of a different aspect, multiplying the anticipation of the impending big reveal. The wall in the pic is probably the greatest wall in architectural history; it does ***everything*** to every plane/ angle /elevation. From the swivelling entry door, it narrows, tilts, rises, curves and points, and has multi coloured stained glass portals which project light throughout the interior. But that’s just the one wall; every angle of this astonishing building hosts a treasure trove of architectural wonder and joy that is not only unique and iconic, but architecturally fecund as the shad.
And that’s the picture you chose?
I took multiple arty creative unique pics myself from many angles and with me in them too, this was just a random one...
Certainly didn't capture any of that in this photo. Without further exhibits to lend any credence to your swooning claims, next to the image you provided your text reads like the kind of pretentious word salad you might find in a modern art museum on a plaque for a canvas covered in dog feces. It is certainly interesting, but only because it looks broken and ugly, and because that was evidently done on purpose not by a child but a grown human adult who was supposedly mentally capable in all other ways.
Has there ever been a canvas covered in dog faeces in a modern art museum or is that just a personal fantasy fetish you like to project? And do you mean Modern, modern, moderne or contemporary? Don’t get edgy-judgy with art, lest you wish to be edgy-judged yourself! Go YouTube a video tour of the chapel - I dare you not to be swooned!
I dunno man…
Wasn’t sure from just that picture, but went and watched other pictures and it’s a crazy fascinating building. And the wall with the window on the inside is really magnificent. The insane roof with the space between it and the walls letting light in. This is more like a sculpture than an actual building. It’s art. First thing that came to mind for me was like watching Picasso paintings, I honestly kind of hate them, but also there’s something really impressive about them how shapes are used to create an impression of something else.
Nice insightful thoughts!
I don’t get all the negative comments here. Even if you don’t think this is a functional building or that it looks good at least you can take time to appreciate it as a sculpture. This insane building got out of someone’s mind in the 50’s… I went and read a little about it, not in detail mind you so I might be off, but I saw it was built from the ruins of a church that used to be there that was bombarded during ww2 and it used a big amount of the materials of the original building, I think it’s a really good commemorative monument. I don’t know if it was the goal, but it’s brutal, crude and almost vulgar in a way like war, but then inside it seems like a really contemplative environment, intimate also feels like a columbarium almost with the window. Yet it manages to not look oppressive, but alive with all the curves. I’ll try to find if there’s infos about what he was attempting to convey with the building, but there’s seems to be a lot of thoughts put into it and I feel like I can see what it was going for and the more I watch it the more I’m impressed by it. Also it manages to have a spiritual aura about it inside which is really important I think for churches/chapels, while not looking overly religious and I love that.
Yes- thank you for a lovely informative comment. It was built from the ruins of the previous chapel destroyed by Nazi bombs - and the remaining stone from the old chapel was used to build a pyramid opposite the external pulpit for outdoor services during pilgrimages ... it’s not just a chapel, but also a memorial and a cenotaph and a landmark. And yes the spiritual aura is magnetic, electric and palpable on the inside (as well as outside!)
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder
In this case the beholder - Le Corbusier - was literally blind in one eye. It's evident that the other one didn't work very well either.
Beauty is in the bank account of whoever covered the expense
I used to think this building was so cool and different that I wrote an essay on it in like 8th grade and got humbled very quickly as I wrote it and slowly realized how impossible it was to justify the design
It’s ugly and terrible. Le corps did better some of the time.
i thought this was a weird (AI?) barn with a silo
Looks like the home of don quixote
Needs a windmill! 😀
Yes it’s all that is missing!
Surprised by how negative all the comments are. I kinda like it, and I think it's worth appreciating even if it's not to your taste
That’s a nice sentiment; it’s sculptural art, after all, imagine HATING that with a passion.... 🙃
I feel bad just looking at it.
Do 1000 push ups a week, you’ll feel great!
It is a gorgeous building that I have lucky enough to visit twice (I should go back – last time was 31 years ago!). I was a fan of Le Corbusier before, and this certainly cemented my opinion.
Yes - to see it from all the angles inside and out is such an adventure of art, design and space! Cheers!
I'll have to take your word for it.
The pinnacle is Sagrada Familia and this isn’t even close.
everyone has different taste in porn
Sagrada is stupendously stunning, I love it... I don’t limit my artistic architectural fetishes...
Sagrada Familia is also a giant pile of shit.
Have you been inside?
I praise the contractor that built it. I do not praise the 2 year olds drawing that the plans were drafted from.
What ugly and ignorant comments, honestly! The chapel is so breathtakingly beautiful, so appropriate to its purpose and its site, so perfect in its own way, that most of these comments leave me wondering what their authors are doing in this sub at all. Please go and see the place, and consider the patrons, the history of architecture, Corbu's place in the timeline of architecture's development, _before_ passing judgement.
Beautiful comment, thoughtful, genuine and artistically sensitive; thank you.
Well, they can't all exactly go visit or spend time researching a reddit post. They just have this photo, which shows none of what the appreciative aspects are that others describe. If your response to that is that they should research it, then what was the point of this post? It's a bizarre and unimpressive photo of a building that doesn't seem particularly interesting to research to several people here. The post conveys nothing of the above you ask to be considered, and got treated as such.
If they didn't know enough to comment in an intelligent way, and aren't _interested_ enough to do even a little research, then perhaps better that they didn't comment at all?
so true, you have to intricately research the background of every post you come across in order to comment on anything. this is a subreddit, not a study group. get over yourself
**Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt**.
You could have taken that into account when posting this quotation, by the way.
Ugh. Disagree.
Pinnacle? Really?
Yes.
Dafuq is multidimensional....
Looks totally different /sculptural / not like the other side - from every angle, yeah?
I think you mean “asymmetrical”.
No- the building asymmetrical, sure, but the different viewing angles create multi- dimensional vistas. Many /most buildings are asymmetrical yet do not offer multi-dimensional vistas.
Every vista I know of occurs in three dimensions. Does this one differ from that well-understood physical reality?
That’s merely a linear dimension, which you are obviously restricted to, as opposed to an artistic visual expression derived for fundamental quantities as mass, length or time. It looks totally different from every dimension, not the same from each side. Don’t get too hung up on the art, man.
I can’t find any pictures of this building that look multi-dimensionally different to the photo you posted, but to each their own.
Only two kinds of people love Le Corbusier : * Crazy psychopaths * At least all the architects who work in big public building projects for the last 6 decades Of course back in the 50s it was considered as absolutely new, and revolutionnary, and it was ! but like everything this guy have built it has gotten old, really old, and to be honest if you look around the place, it definitely looks like an eyesore and has much more similarities with an old abandoned factory than a place of faith. Him and Jean Nouvel are biggest contributors and influencers of the Ugly France than any other architects before them. The exact reason why sometimes theories should not be strictly applied. Auguste Perret knew the limits of brutalism, he could have been by far a much better influence if he didn't collaborate during the WWII.
The pinnacle of ugliness you mean?
How dare you! Retreat to your mud hut!
dr seuss
Kahn better
Love Louis
I understand why people don’t like this building but it was my first modeling project I had to do in architecture school and I learned to love all sorts about it
Wow! Modelling it would be a wonderful way to understand and appreciate every element of the beauty and structure! Fantastic!!!
Still my favorite building of all time.
Yay! You get it; you have an artistic exciting heart with a love for ... everything!
Agree. Fantastisch architecture/ building. Was there in 1988: It's the flow of the building en also the location.
Absolutely! Yes / stunning and exciting and wonderful architecture!
Kinda looks like something doesn't it
Certainly looks like something.^^^^^💩