Here's my theory about modern architectural design. Let's say you've got two students that have to do a final design: (a) chooses a rococo or neoVictorian (humanist design); and, (b) chooses a spare modern design. Both of them are required to draft facades, elevations, etc. The modern design is literally easier to draft — literally less time. That means any school of architecture that both rewards "good grades" and "project completion under pressure" will naturally select for students who like "modern" (brutalist?). Those students then become professors, and the whole system reinforces.
Regression to the mean, then? It’s not that those other architectural styles aren’t appreciated, but when it comes down to a project being completed on time + on budget, unless one is building for a king with time and money to spare, it seems like of course you’d inevitably end up with the sparer more utilitarian approach. I guess that could be a bit bleak of an outlook. We definitely shouldn’t need rich patrons funding personal passion / vanity projects in order to continue to explore neovictorianism or whatever.
Less "regression to the mean", and more evolutionary architecture. Selection of the fittest applied to schools of architecture, with grades being the selection pressure.
thechao · · focus · HN ↗
mock-possum · · focus · HN ↗
Windchaser · · focus · HN ↗