____twoism

What's not to like?

Absolutely, Modernism has the sincerity Postmodernity lacks, and something infinitely more attractive about it, probably its utopian and radical impulse which has subsequently been lost. Two very interesting related items on this, which I think you might like, if you haven't seen them already:

All That is Solid Melts into Air: The Experience of Modernity by Marshall Berman

http://www.amazon.co.uk/All-That-Solid- ... s+into+air

This BBC doc on Brutalism was fantastic too, it's in two parts. Fully recommend:

I remember you recommending that book before, looks right up my street, will definitely get a copy.
The future used to be so exciting (excepting cold war doom). It must have had an effect on my mind growing up. Contrast that with growing up now, where everything good supposedly happened decades ago in a comfy 'Heartbeat'- style combo of Cotswold stone cottages and early Beatles. What happened to looking forward, particularly in politics?
This was my favourite book as a kid -

http://www.murrayewing.co.uk/mewsings/2 ... he-future/

Good thread, will return soon.

Fujee: I remember catching that doc and was disappointed with his choice of language. The way he talks about the subject is what puts so many people off it. Needs to tone down the linguistic gymnastics lol. And let's not even go into the tone, and weird annoying video editing and angles. Yes, the show is about modernism. We get it.

This is of course coming from the perspective of someone who didn't know who he was beforehand.

The image on that video is Preston Bus Station. I feel very proud right now.

Ah there's some BoC 43 minutes into it. I'm really enjoying this, thanks for posting.

Aerial Boundaries wrote:Good thread, will return soon.

Fujee: I remember catching that doc and was disappointed with his choice of language. The way he talks about the subject is what puts so many people off it. Needs to tone down the linguistic gymnastics lol. And let's not even go into the tone, and weird annoying video editing and angles. Yes, the show is about modernism. We get it.

This is of course coming from the perspective of someone who didn't know who he was beforehand.

That's Jonathan Meades all over, I'm afraid! The language, tone and editing are like that in all his documentaries, it might come across as pretentious, but he definitely doesn't take himself too seriously. I love his stuff, but I'm sensing you mightn't become a fan....here's another one on a similar subject, if you want to give him another go -

Yeah I really like Meades delivery, whilst it might be overtly hammering home the fact that it is a documentary on Modernism, it seems only fitting that the content makes you slightly unsettled. The BBC seem to have a company wide penchant for fast changing camera angles/editing - their music coverage is the biggest offender for that - but it doesn't ruin the documentary for me, because it's really interesting and well put together in its own right. This is what the BBC should be all about, striving for quality on par with their greatest works, like Civilization and The Ascent of Man. By the way, the first part should be on vimeo as well, probably makes sense to view it in order.

I will need to catch that documentary.

I love this stuff.

http://www.historic-scotland.gov.uk/glasgowpostwar.pdf

Techboy wrote:I will need to catch that documentary.

I love this stuff.

http://www.historic-scotland.gov.uk/glasgowpostwar.pdf

I love the church in Castlemilk, same architects as St Peter's Seminary in Cardross -



I love that there's plans not to redevelop it, but stabilise it as a permanent ruin.

Unfortunately here in Belfast there's not a huge amount of Brutalist or other Modernist buildings to celebrate, but these two are pretty good -

The magnificent Ulster Museum, where they stuck a huge brutalist extension on to the neo-classical original. Would never, ever happen now, which says something about us today.



and the Soviet-style former Transport and General Workers Union -

I love the Soviet one, though it wouldn't be my vision of architecture in a socialist world. Actually none of this would be, but I still enjoy it.

Nice to see Reich making an appearance. Have you heard the recording by Ensemble Signal? My favourite version without a doubt.

Not sure how this ties in with most thinking on the nature of modernism, but I came to the conclusion recently that the reason I like the era of late 50s to early 70s modernist design is because it seems like the last time that cutting edge design and technology was democratised for the good of the general public.
Obviously not all modernist design had this purpose, but it seems like this era was a kind of golden age when we collectively looked to the future and saw that it should be better for everyone.
Clearly it would be naive to believe that this was some sort of utopia, but it seemed like the brightest minds wanted to work for the public good, rather than the situation we have now where the cleverest are employed to produce trading algorithms, luxury goods for the rich or utterly inane phone apps.
The very idea of the public good, encapsulated for example by the BBC or NHS, its attacked and ridiculed daily now by the neoliberal status quo. Would, for example, the National Film Board of Canada be launched these days? I doubt it.

Certainly modernist styled social housing projects like the Heygate estate had some implied utopian impluses/collective good in mind. Clearly they didn't work out but the vision was there, that's the significant difference between now and then. Those ideas can probably be boiled down to some lingering welfare state residue left over in the nations consciousness from the second world war, especially when considering most of London and the UK was still in an absolute state. I imagine any social housing that would be built now would have some subtle defensive architecture involved to ensure the 'undesirables' are contained in the event of a problem. Exclusion through inclusion.

I do agree with everything you have said, though I think in equal measure a lot of the 'modernist project was explicitly subversive in nature. Whether or not that ties in with an understanding of the 'collective good' is entirely down to political persuasion.

It's been covered in terms of music and art in books like 'Retromania', but when I think about it and look at so many aspects of life, I can't help but think that these days the predominant mood is one of navel-gazing, self-obsession, individualism, nostalgia for the purposes of comfort and retreat from fear.
This seems to me in huge contrast to the 'modernist' period, where it seemed we were bold and looked forward and outward and were inspired and interested in the possibilities of the future - slum clearing, motorway building, space exploration, huge social progression. The new was better than the old, the opposite of what we think today and art and culture reflected that.
For me, even as a child growing up in the 80s, I drew futuristic cars and rockets (not necessarily ones I would own), wanted to be an astronaut, learning was exciting because the future was bright.
Fast forward to today and yes, it's a cliche and a generalisation, but kids seem to want a quick path to celebrity, riches, gadgets and clothes and a big (old) house.

Philip Glass is very modern.

jcnporter wrote: For me, even as a child growing up in the 80s, I drew futuristic cars and rockets (not necessarily ones I would own), wanted to be an astronaut, learning was exciting because the future was bright.
Fast forward to today and yes, it's a cliche and a generalisation, but kids seem to want a quick path to celebrity, riches, gadgets and clothes and a big (old) house.

So you're comparing your view of the world as a child with your view of the world as an adult, and you think it's the world that changed? That's weird.

FernieCanto wrote:

jcnporter wrote: For me, even as a child growing up in the 80s, I drew futuristic cars and rockets (not necessarily ones I would own), wanted to be an astronaut, learning was exciting because the future was bright.
Fast forward to today and yes, it's a cliche and a generalisation, but kids seem to want a quick path to celebrity, riches, gadgets and clothes and a big (old) house.

So you're comparing your view of the world as a child with your view of the world as an adult, and you think it's the world that changed? That's weird.

No, the comparison was between the interests and dreams of a child (using myself as an example) in the 70s/80s and what seems to interest children these days, the point being that as a child, we soak up influences from wider society.

Meant to post this in my previous post -

http://www.mirror.co.uk/lifestyle/famil ... en-4642243

Of course I realise this sounds like grumpy old man moaning - I don't want to dwell on negatives, there's plenty to be positive about these days, but in the context of what went before and after, the 50s to the 70s/early 80s seems like a unique period to me.