It doesn’t take a genius to see this article is a joke.
Obviously not written by a Belgian.
We have great classical architecture and some interesting modern architecture (but just as much if not more bad modern architecture), but everything else is, ehm…, how to describe it, a cacophony?
It should be obvious: we’re awesome!
> “Of all European countries, Belgium is least to be excused for not contributing more to contemporary architecture,” he wrote. “Having a thoroughly literate and capable population and an extremely high living standard, the mediocrity of its architecture can be explained only by the indifference of its officials, the inadequacy of its educational system, and a flabby materialism.”
Fully agree, and – certainly in Brussels – our ~~bouw~~beton-meeesters didn’t fix that.
Probably the most interesting takeaway from this was the approach: They are looking for a natural fit first rather than the coolest looking design.
While it’s not a guarantee for success, it is one of the key elements that the one commissioning the work and the one implementing it are on the same page and that there is a level of trust between them.
Apart from the first picture, there is nothing phenomenal or genius about those buildings.
Is this really how low the bar is set for architects?
The mix of both is just awful. Just look at Stadshal Gent or Gerechtsgebouw Hasselt.
I can’t believe they are actually praising those awful buildings. Some of the ugliest options out there.
10 comments
It doesn’t take a genius to see this article is a joke.
Obviously not written by a Belgian.
We have great classical architecture and some interesting modern architecture (but just as much if not more bad modern architecture), but everything else is, ehm…, how to describe it, a cacophony?
It should be obvious: we’re awesome!
> “Of all European countries, Belgium is least to be excused for not contributing more to contemporary architecture,” he wrote. “Having a thoroughly literate and capable population and an extremely high living standard, the mediocrity of its architecture can be explained only by the indifference of its officials, the inadequacy of its educational system, and a flabby materialism.”
Fully agree, and – certainly in Brussels – our ~~bouw~~beton-meeesters didn’t fix that.
Probably the most interesting takeaway from this was the approach: They are looking for a natural fit first rather than the coolest looking design.
While it’s not a guarantee for success, it is one of the key elements that the one commissioning the work and the one implementing it are on the same page and that there is a level of trust between them.
Apart from the first picture, there is nothing phenomenal or genius about those buildings.
Is this really how low the bar is set for architects?
The mix of both is just awful. Just look at Stadshal Gent or Gerechtsgebouw Hasselt.
I can’t believe they are actually praising those awful buildings. Some of the ugliest options out there.
Or the other way around…
https://imgur.com/a/JNK60kN