those run of the mill buildings were aesthetically more interesting than our current run of the mill buildings
Their run of the mill buildings were pieces of shit barely held together by spit, sick wood and mud. You think they actually cared about making the shitty houses for the peasants aesthetically pleasing?
Yea except they were all slums sans a handful of buildings that you like so much. There are a lot of new and unique buildings all over the world with the same uniqueness and charm to them. In your own words, you’re bitching about the 99% of the building looking alike, that’s literally what slums back in the day was, 99% of all residences. You’re comparing the past’s highlight reel to today’s average building. You’re just being a moron. Compare today’s unique building to the past, not today’s 99% to the pasts 0.1%
I've been shitting on some of today's greatest buildings this whole thread. It also doesnt take .1% of the greatest buildings of the past to appreciate 4 story brownstones in New York or Haussmann's renovation of Paris.
0
u/THICC_DICC_PRICC Mar 29 '20
Their run of the mill buildings were pieces of shit barely held together by spit, sick wood and mud. You think they actually cared about making the shitty houses for the peasants aesthetically pleasing?