Jump to content

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, workswithseed said:

@Ghost of LL what do you think of the architecture mandate that Trump put out?

I know you're a man who loves it, and I myself am very okay that buildings will be classical looking.

fuck that. why must we always look backward?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, 4th&Five said:

If the president does it it's not a crime and if America does it it's not wrong.

We're exceptional. The rules that apply to everyone else don't apply to us. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

wth is he even doing talking about building with classical appearances anyway? If he is draining the swamp and gutting the Deep State then there's plenty of space. Stupid Nazi worshiping Miller et al probably think this is wonderful. Stop wasting time with this, and get back to taping up documents so that we have a record of this abysmal administration.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, tx 3 putt said:

He’s going to pardon/commute the sentence Of Roger Stone 

Of course he is.  He's going to pardon all his cronies.  And himself.  It is known.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, workswithseed said:

@Ghost of LL what do you think of the architecture mandate that Trump put out?

I know you're a man who loves it, and I myself am very okay that buildings will be classical looking.

The man who would purport to limit allowable architectural design for Federal buildings is the man whose Manhattan penthouse features this interior:

Arch2O-Trump-house-021.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, HenryJames said:

 

I’m confused.  Is he saying that Mike is a bad golfer and we should only vote for good golfers for President since that is a key skill to running this country?  I guess I would rather have John Daly as president over Trump so maybe this makes sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, workswithseed said:

@Ghost of LL what do you think of the architecture mandate that Trump put out?

I know you're a man who loves it, and I myself am very okay that buildings will be classical looking.

It's intensely stupid and indicative of a man who eats his steak well-done with ketchup.

They singled out the federal courthouse in Austin as particularly lacking in aesthetic appeal.  For those of you who are unfamiliar with it, here it is:

spacer.png

 

I practice there routinely, and really like it.  A few observations:

1) The parcel of land on which it sits would be too small for an impressive neoclassical structure that still met all of the security restrictions imposed on new federal courthouses after the bombing of the Murrah Federal Building.  It would just look ridiculous.

2) The courthouse uses the cut limestone that is common in Austin architecture, and it fits very nicely with the surrounding buildings and the Balcones Escarpment beyond.  A giant marble edifice would look out-of-place and alien.  And frankly, I think that sends the wrong architectural message--our federal government shouldn't sit in an alien structure.

3) It might surprise people to know this, but lawyers and judges like sunlight, too.  And this provides more sunlight than just about any courthouse I've been in.  It has beautiful floor-to-ceiling windows that still comply with the security guidelines.

4) For those concerned with the majesty of the law, the courtrooms are very impressive.  They're double-height, so each floor alternates in floorplan to accommodate the courtrooms from the floor below.  And, as noted, they allow for plenty of natural light.

spacer.png

Honestly--there are some real architectural triumphs over the last thirty years in federal building construction, here and right around the world.  

The Moakley Federal Building on Boston Harbor does an exquisite job of blending into the harbor while, at the same time, providing great views from inside and sending an architectural message of transparency:

spacer.png

The new federal courthouse in Los Angeles works perfectly with its surroundings, and in particular provides a striking contrast to the Gehry design just a couple blocks away.

spacer.png

 

The embassy in Berlin is also part of this program.  It sits on Pariser Platz, next to the Brandenburg Gate where the embassy was located before World War II.  During the Cold War, the site was in no-man's land.  Now it has a building that is modern but still reflective of its surroundings:

spacer.png

 

800px-Embassy_usa_berlin_westside.JPG

 

So yeah--this directive is stupid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Ghost of LL said:

It's intensely stupid and indicative of a man who eats his steak well-done with ketchup.

They singled out the federal courthouse in Austin as particularly lacking in aesthetic appeal.  For those of you who are unfamiliar with it, here it is:

spacer.png

 

I practice there routinely, and really like it.  A few observations:

1) The parcel of land on which it sits would be too small for an impressive neoclassical structure that still met all of the security restrictions imposed on new federal courthouses after the bombing of the Murrah Federal Building.  It would just look ridiculous.

2) The courthouse uses the cut limestone that is common in Austin architecture, and it fits very nicely with the surrounding buildings and the Balcones Escarpment beyond.  A giant marble edifice would look out-of-place and alien.  And frankly, I think that sends the wrong architectural message--our federal government shouldn't sit in an alien structure.

3) It might surprise people to know this, but lawyers and judges like sunlight, too.  And this provides more sunlight than just about any courthouse I've been in.  It has beautiful floor-to-ceiling windows that still comply with the security guidelines.

4) For those concerned with the majesty of the law, the courtrooms are very impressive.  They're double-height, so each floor alternates in floorplan to accommodate the courtrooms from the floor below.  And, as noted, they allow for plenty of natural light.

spacer.png

Honestly--there are some real architectural triumphs over the last thirty years in federal building construction, here and right around the world.  

The Moakley Federal Building on Boston Harbor does an exquisite job of blending into the harbor while, at the same time, providing great views from inside and sending an architectural message of transparency:

 

The new federal courthouse in Los Angeles works perfectly with its surroundings, and in particular provides a striking contrast to the Gehry design just a couple blocks away.

 

 

The embassy in Berlin is also part of this program.  It sits on Pariser Platz, next to the Brandenburg Gate where the embassy was located before World War II.  During the Cold War, the site was in no-man's land.  Now it has a building that is modern but still reflective of its surroundings:

 

 

So yeah--this directive is stupid.

i sat in that courtroom for jury duty for a federal jury selection and impaneling once. it's impressive. they did not pick me for the jury.

and i 100% agree - the idea of a mandate for classical architecture is beyond stupid

Edited by hayden_horn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An archtecture mandate is fiddling while Rome burns.

Besides, Trump's taste in architecture, especially interior, is that of a grimy little pimp.

Edited by TwiceHorn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

An archtecture mandate is fiddling while Rome burns.

This.  Just a few posts above, there's a shining example of a dictator bending the Justice system to protect his cronies -  and we're discussing whether the crematoria should be  Greco-Roman or modernist.  

Edited by Chad Fuck

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Chad Fuck said:

This.  Just a few posts above, there's a shining example of a dictator bending the Justice system to protect his cronies -  and we're discussing whether the crematoria should be  Greco-Roman or modernist.  

i vote brutalist. might as well go all the way

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

i vote brutalist. might as well go all the way

Pink-Floyd-Animals-Columbia-Album-Photo.

Not brutalist, but it'll do.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Chad Fuck said:

Not brutalist, but it'll do.  

I took a bus from Gatwick into London one time, and when we drove by that factory I about shat myself.  I never knew it actually existed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The architectural directive is fucking asinine. Under this rule, the Washington fucking Monument would not be built since it's modeled after Egyptian obelisks.

Quote

p. 2 "Classical and traditional architectural styles have proven their ability to inspire such respect for our system of self-government. Their use should be encouraged.

p. 3 "In the National Capital Region and for all Federal courthouses, the classical architectural style shall be the preferred and default style absent special extenuating factors necessitating another style."

p. 4 ""Classical architectural style" means the architectural style derived from the forms and principles of classical Greek and Roman architecture, as later employed by yada yada yada..."

pp. 4-5 ""Traditional architectural style" means classical architectural styles, and historic humanistic styles as the Gothic style, the Romanesque style, and the Spanish colonial style and other Mediterranean styles generally found in Florida  and the American Southwest."

https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/19700169/Draft_of_Trump_White_House_Executive_Order_on_Federal_Buildings.pdf

 

How fucking convenient. Under his new rules, this monstrous melange of mediocrity would be considered a preferred style.

gallery-1469476258-gettyimages-97212033-master.jpg?resize=768:*

He's going to turn Mar-a-Lago into a federal building, isn't he?

Edited by bolverk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good, we can turn into a federal prison compound.  Two birds, and such...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, LL. I figured you probably had more insight than I on the subject.

My thought was that the classical look would be a nice return to the US Congress Building and the like. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, bolverk said:

The architectural directive is fucking asinine. Under this rule, the Washington fucking Monument would not be built since it's modeled after Egyptian obelisks.

How fucking convenient. Under his new rules, this monstrous melange of mediocrity would be considered a preferred style.

gallery-1469476258-gettyimages-97212033-master.jpg?resize=768:*

He's going to turn Mar-a-Lago into a federal building, isn't he?

Gross.  It was also gross as-built but is far worse now.

Weird thing, Marjorie Post, who built it, willed it to the government in 1973 as a winter White House.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, workswithseed said:

Thanks, LL. I figured you probably had more insight than I on the subject.

My thought was that the classical look would be a nice return to the US Congress Building and the like. 

You know what would be real nice? We should build something like a people's hall. It could look like this:

yw1x4kn183i11.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jimmyjazz said:

I took a bus from Gatwick into London one time, and when we drove by that factory I about shat myself.  I never knew it actually existed.

Battersea Power Station.  It's one of the largest brick buildings in the world.  It's going through a long process of being converted to apartments and office space.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ghost of LL said:

It's intensely stupid and indicative of a man who eats his steak well-done with ketchup.

They singled out the federal courthouse in Austin as particularly lacking in aesthetic appeal.  For those of you who are unfamiliar with it, here it is:

spacer.png

 

I practice there routinely, and really like it.  A few observations:

1) The parcel of land on which it sits would be too small for an impressive neoclassical structure that still met all of the security restrictions imposed on new federal courthouses after the bombing of the Murrah Federal Building.  It would just look ridiculous.

2) The courthouse uses the cut limestone that is common in Austin architecture, and it fits very nicely with the surrounding buildings and the Balcones Escarpment beyond.  A giant marble edifice would look out-of-place and alien.  And frankly, I think that sends the wrong architectural message--our federal government shouldn't sit in an alien structure.

3) It might surprise people to know this, but lawyers and judges like sunlight, too.  And this provides more sunlight than just about any courthouse I've been in.  It has beautiful floor-to-ceiling windows that still comply with the security guidelines.

4) For those concerned with the majesty of the law, the courtrooms are very impressive.  They're double-height, so each floor alternates in floorplan to accommodate the courtrooms from the floor below.  And, as noted, they allow for plenty of natural light.

spacer.png

Honestly--there are some real architectural triumphs over the last thirty years in federal building construction, here and right around the world.  

The Moakley Federal Building on Boston Harbor does an exquisite job of blending into the harbor while, at the same time, providing great views from inside and sending an architectural message of transparency:

spacer.png

The new federal courthouse in Los Angeles works perfectly with its surroundings, and in particular provides a striking contrast to the Gehry design just a couple blocks away.

spacer.png

 

The embassy in Berlin is also part of this program.  It sits on Pariser Platz, next to the Brandenburg Gate where the embassy was located before World War II.  During the Cold War, the site was in no-man's land.  Now it has a building that is modern but still reflective of its surroundings:

spacer.png

 

800px-Embassy_usa_berlin_westside.JPG

 

So yeah--this directive is stupid.

I both like the new federal courthouse in Austin and dislike like it.

I like it for basically all the reasons that you mentioned. 
 

I dislike it for the fortress like projection it exudes, especially in comparison to the previous 1930s era old Art Deco federal courthouse, but that’s really more a reflection of the times than the architecture of it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is, hands-down, the worst federal courthouse in the nation.  The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit:

federal-circuit-building-winter-a-copy.j

Especially considering its importance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

You know what would be real nice? We should build something like a people's hall. It could look like this:

yw1x4kn183i11.jpg

Not fascist in the slightest.

But. in all fairness, a lot of our federal courthouses are built in tight urban spaces. So unless they bulldoze nine square blocks around them, we'll need to go with Roman skyscrapers instead. Fortunately, we do have one good model:

Spoiler


800px-The_Leaning_Tower_of_Pisa_SB.jpeg


 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, kevwun said:

Battersea Power Station.  It's one of the largest brick buildings in the world.  It's going through a long process of being converted to apartments and office space.

Yes, that's it.  I didn't realize it was a power station.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

This is, hands-down, the worst federal courthouse in the nation.  The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit:

Especially considering its importance.

That looks like a bad take on a Brooklyn row house.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Yes, that's it.  I didn't realize it was a power station.

I remember reading that the inflatable pig broke loose during that photo shoot, and drifted into the Heathrow fligh path disrupting air traffic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

That looks like a bad take on a Brooklyn row house.

Well, to be completely fair, there are historic buildings on either side of it that were originally to be demolished.  It was designed to kind of fit in with them.

It also was originally the courthouse for the US Court of Claims, the US Court of Customs, and the successor Court of Customs and Patent Appeals.  None of these were Article III courts on equal footing with the US District Courts and other regional Courts of Appeal.

Now, though, it is, and it has never moved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jimmyjazz said:

Yes, that's it.  I didn't realize it was a power station.

Pretty sure it's Pink Floyd.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, workswithseed said:

Thanks, LL. I figured you probably had more insight than I on the subject.

My thought was that the classical look would be a nice return to the US Congress Building and the like. 

The architecture of government buildings sends a message.  What do we want that message to be?

In the early years of the Republic, we wanted to link our theory of government through the Enlightenment back to the Roman Republic and the Athenian democracy.  Hence, you had neoclassical buildings.

Seeking to evoke more of Rome's imperial age, Napoleon added the neoclassical front to the Palais Bourbon, which was then the seat of the revolution-era Council of Five Hundred.  It is now the chamber for the National Assembly.

1280px-Fa%C3%A7ade_Assembl%C3%A9e_Nation

A few years later, after the Palace of Westminster burned, the British Government under Sir Robert Peel had a number of options for how to rebuild the seat of parliament.  Citing the reconstruction of St. Paul's Cathedral, a number of architects favored a neoclassical style.  Some suggested incorporating the Elgin Marbles into the facade.

But that was only 20 years after the Napoleonic Wars.  Anything that hinted at republicanism was out of vogue.  Instead, the Peel Government opted for neogothic--a style that invoked pre-revolutionary Europe and the reassertion of the old order:

1280px-Statue_of_Oliver_Cromwell_outside

So here's the question: what message do we want to send?

We're not a young republic anymore.  We don't need to assert any lineage from the Roman Republic.  We now have our own history.

What message would we send by continuing to ape the architectural style of a republic that fell into civil war more than 2,000 years ago?  Do we send a message of self-confidence?  Or a message of extreme self-doubt?

We're still the most powerful country on earth--economically, militarily, politically, and culturally.  This country has produced dozens of world-renowned architects.  Maybe we're at the end of the Pax Americana, but we're still enjoying the pax.  Why would we not adopt the architecture of the era?  

And what does it say about it us that we don't?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think you're wrong, and that's why I asked you how you felt on the issue. I don't want to send a message of weakness, but we just don't know what we are as a country.

I'd say that it could send that we should look back what made us. A back to the roots type of deal. You can kinda see that thinking with MAGA. I think we have had a lot of self doubt as of late, and what we were kinda lost in stars, as the foundation is crumbling and needs to be repaired. 

I'm not saying that Trump thought of this message when mandating it, but just seems to be in the same vein.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, workswithseed said:

I'd say that it could send that we should look back what made us. A back to the roots type of deal. You can kinda see that thinking with MAGA. I think we have had a lot of self doubt as of late, and what we were kinda lost in stars, as the foundation is crumbling and needs to be repaired. 

I thought the self doubt was caused by darkies/mexicans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, Mark, you're probably not going to get the explanation you'd like to hear.....

We said it was a mistake to confirm Barr and boy howdy was it. Mitch McConnell and Co. ripped up the Constitution and ground it under their heels.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, tantric superman said:

I thought the self doubt was caused by darkies/mexicans.

Technology is so scary that you have to hire Trump as your leader.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, workswithseed said:

@Ghost of LL what do you think of the architecture mandate that Trump put out?

I know you're a man who loves it, and I myself am very okay that buildings will be classical looking.

The good news is Trump’s hatred of modern art and architecture is totally novel and finds no troubling parallel in the stated beliefs of fascist dictators of the past.  

Oh wait...

 

Edited by BrickHorn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean, many of your voters would look at that venue on TV and realize, "that looks like where we go watch hockey or basketball."  Says it holds 12,000 tops.  So I guess that means everybody we see on TV is sitting on top of three other people in each and every seat.  One of you dipshits of his explain why he would do this.  Nothing wrong with exaggerating a little bit, he's a politician.  Say 20,000 and nobody would have batted an eye.  Nobody is gonna bother to look that up because yeah, it's 2020 and there's probably something in the little state of NH that holds 20,000 people.  But you start bragging about 50,000 and any two-bit journalist is gonna fucking look that up you fucking idiot.  There's only two cities in New Hampshire that even have that many people.  Why do you do this shit?  You've set geography lessons in this country back 50 years you hunk of carbonated bile.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He lies because, to the members of his cult, truth is subjective.  He merely utters whatever he wishes the truth to be, and the brainless automatons that support him accept it.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Lobo said:

I mean, many of your voters would look at that venue on TV and realize, "that looks like where we go watch hockey or basketball."  Says it holds 12,000 tops.  So I guess that means everybody we see on TV is sitting on top of three other people in each and every seat.  One of you dipshits of his explain why he would do this.  Nothing wrong with exaggerating a little bit, he's a politician.  Say 20,000 and nobody would have batted an eye.  Nobody is gonna bother to look that up because yeah, it's 2020 and there's probably something in the little state of NH that holds 20,000 people.  But you start bragging about 50,000 and any two-bit journalist is gonna fucking look that up you fucking idiot.  There's only two cities in New Hampshire that even have that many people.  Why do you do this shit?  You've set geography lessons in this country back 50 years you hunk of carbonated bile.  

Because at this point, it's a game.  It's about the intoxicating power.  He could say that there were a million people here, and they were all black, because black people love Trump!.....and his cult would eat it up and treat it like gospel.

Seriously, that's how this type of sociopathic behavior works.  It's intoxicating to be able to absolutely control millions of people, and have them do whatever you want.  And you get to enjoy flexing your muscles and getting them to believe things that are more and more absurd, because that just shows how powerful you are.  The bigger the lie that you can tell and have it believed, the more powerful you are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I won't suggest there's a coherent grand plan to Trump's lying, but let's be honest, the more he gets his base to buy into the lies, the bigger the lies can get and the more he can accomplish off book.  Eventually, he wants to be able to say "all people of Mexican descent are here as part of an invasion force, and it is up to us to take them out", and some will accept that as a directive with no questioning whatsoever.  Dictator 101.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

mpu


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Recruiting ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Help ... For Sale ... Politics ... Board Discussion
×
×
  • Create New...