gral
Well-known member
It looks like something between an igneous rock formation, and a Borg cube.
It looks like a decrepit building.
It looks like something between an igneous rock formation, and a Borg cube.
More like a earth block with some cancerous growths.It looks like something between an igneous rock formation, and a Borg cube.
That's badass.Okay, here's some more "look at the modern architecture":
The New Galleria Store in South Korea Looks Like a Giant Work Of Art
This year the architects at OMA completed an amazing project in a new town called Gwanggyo located south of Seoul, in South Korea. It's the sixth branchwww.homedit.com
It looks like something between an igneous rock formation, and a Borg cube.
Sadly unbreakable topheavy mass of shit?
It's considered a classic of brutalist architecture, actually.Well, it certainly has decorative elements, so it doesn't count as Brutalist.
No, it's ugly, but it's ours. I'm kinda sentimental to it.Sadly unbreakable topheavy mass of shit?
I think you might be onto something. The regime could entrench themselves in that building, waiting for reinforcements, while shooting at the enraged mob trying to hang the leadership. Who's to say the elite didn't learn from the Bastille of Paris?Well, it certainly has decorative elements, so it doesn't count as Brutalist.
Mind you, if one considers all those openings as places people defending the building could poke rifles out of...
Glass ceilings and phallic towers. Mean streets and dark alleys. Road names and statues of men. From the physical to the metaphorical, the city is filled with reminders of masculine power. And yet we rarely talk of the urban landscape as an active participant in gender inequality. A building, no matter how phallic, isn’t actually misogynist, is it? Surely a skyscraper isn’t responsible for sexual harassment, the wage gap, or even the glass ceiling, whether it has a literal one up top or not?
That said, our built environments can still reflect patterns of gender-based discrimination. To imagine the city and its structures as neutral places where complicated human social relations are staged is to ignore the simple fact that people built these places. As the feminist geographer Jane Darke has said: “Our cities are patriarchy written in stone, brick, glass and concrete.” In other words, cities reflect the norms of the societies that build them. And sexism is a deep-rooted norm.
Obviously, city planning needs mor feminism
'Upward-thrusting buildings ejaculating into the sky' – do cities have to be so sexist?
Bricklaying is in dire need of corrective feminization, feminist overseers are neccesary to ensure that toxic masculinity that permates this profession is exorcised.
Bricklaying is in dire need of corrective feminization, feminist overseers are neccesary to ensure that toxic masculinity that permates this profession is exorcised.
Bricks themselves are something patriarchal and hetero-normative. Their precise rectangular shape derives from geometry developed by ancient civilizations that were male-ruled and owned slaves.
Putting up buildings with walls and roofs is an expression of toxic masculinity!
Blue-collar construction worker: Si senorita! I put up building, keep you safe and warm inside!
That woman needs a man to fuck her until she stops being silly.Obviously, city planning needs moar feminism
'Upward-thrusting buildings ejaculating into the sky' – do cities have to be so sexist?
The looney way the world is going at the moment, it's not always obvious if this sort of statement is a joke nowadays.