TEDxMarrakesh - David Chipperfield - Why does everyone hate modern architecture?

As a student of architecture and a member of a user group on the other side of the "dialog" with a team of modern architects I have to say I left the experience far from satisfied. We were heard, yes. Heard but basically ignored. Time and time again we tried to tell the architects that they were exposing too much concrete, that we wanted a softer gentler building, a more intimate and less imposing space, yet it still ended up everything we feared it would be. They would conscientiously gather our feedback, and then the next set of plans would have all the same problems as previously. No matter how hard we tried, we were only able to get a few details of the plans altered. We weren't able to get them to change the look or feel of the building at all, despite our repeated protests as to its dysfunctionality.

Everyone hates modern architecture because no one bothers to check how do their designs impact the people psychologically, culturally and interactively. When the design is detached from the person, it becomes antithetical to it... Hence why, they'd reject it... For it does not answer their needs, wants and feels. And complaining that the people just don't know what's good for them, is failing to actually study what the people actually need, rather than assume based on corporate interest and theories what they'll want. Connect with people, learn society, and invest a good amount of time studying people... Architecture is a part of the design world. Design is 100% focused upon making something for humans. Don't neglect the human part of making something for these very humans.

i think modern arquitecture is very distant from nature wich is the main visual space in peoples minds in our times today. arquitecture should be practical and beautiful. i think the beautifull part of todays buildings miss the "mixing with nature" part. Elitism is also a big problem with arquitects too

People are attracted to older architecture because their complexity is far greater. You also have complexity set into system. Humans like things that are set into system. In addition to this most buildings today are also abstract, which is not a form that humans are used to. Most modern buildings today are also being build using artificial material like metal, plastic, glass etc. Anything you don't find in nature normally. Because of this they don't blend well together with their surroundings. At last , like previously mentioned in the comment section, architects don't have much artsy freedom when creating a building. Money is what governs most architecture today, like with most things. Both when it comes to the form of the building and especially with placement. There are of course exceptions though. From Oslo, Norway and I think the opera house that has been build here is quite nice. It is placed at the fjord of Oslo and is supposed to resemble an iceberg. Here you have good placement and its white color , which makes it a contrast to grey Oslo makes it also very symbolic. One of the innovations of the building is that you're supposed to be able to walk on the roof, like being able to walk on an iceberg. I think it's a good idea. There's also a lot of abstractness they could have eased down with though, like the box which is on top of the building. But the material though is of white marble and other types of white stone, which makes it blend well together with nature.

Because it is soulless, boring, cold and simplistic.

Because there's too much more of less. Less (simplicity) is beautiful if surrounded by more (complexity), look around you, more of less, more of less, more of less, you got your answer!

really good lecture! much appreciated! Chipperfield really needs to make a youtube channel!

Mr. Chipperfield pointed out some very important issues of practicing architecture today. However, based on the comments, I think the talk was quite misunderstood. The point here is that architects, just like everybody else, are a mere servant of the system... It hardly matters if you are an exceptional architect - when the brief of the client demands huge areas built as quickly and as affordably as possible +having to obey an almost endless list of regulations, the solutions are simply reduced to bad, worse or the worst. Contemporary (as modern actually refers to a 20th-century movement) architecture is therefore very much a reflection of our society at large. What he calls for urgently is a dialogue. A society where architecture would be a part of public debate and people could express their approval or disapproval and actually make an impact (like Berliners had in the case of Neues Museum). The prerequisite is an interest in your surroundings and education about what actually is good architecture and what is not (again - it is far too simple to blame architects). Do your surroundings matter to you? Do you notice things that could be better? And most importantly, are you willing to take some time to become involved in the debate about space and willing to learn something new?

Architecture is bad because art in general is dominated by something called "contemporary" which is a euphemism for cheapness.

On the Berlin museum. He certainly saved some money on the grand hall staircase and put it into the pockets of the planners.

The reason the majority of people hate modern architecture is because it isn't beautiful- cool, innovative, or inventive are the terms we hear and usually we tire of "cool" and "innovative". The classical idea of beauty is no longer desired by modern architects and artists. A modern artist can vomit in a bucket and declare it art and say it is beauty because the artist says so while the masses walk away shaking their heads never understanding the idiocy of it (Duchamp's "Urinal" paradigm). A modern architect can twist our minds in the most unnatural ways that is unsettling and unappealing or force our human experience in the bowels of a "machine" and wonder why people hate it because it is unnatural experience. People enjoy nature and never get sick of it~ they return to nature and glory in its beauty. Classical and traditional architecture is beautiful and still demands respect because it is patterned after nature. There is a symbiotic relationship with nature. It shares the same proportions and geometries as nature and the human body- and the unconscious harmony resonates with people. Traditional architecture is successful because it never abandoned these principles. It respected the place in which it was created so your experiences with architecture in Marrakech, Paris, or Charleston spoke about the climate, culture, and geography. Each are different and held special because of its uniqueness. Modern architecture creates an architecture of nothing or no place and our experiences become no different in modern Hong Kong as in modern Los Angeles. They feel no different from each other. A Classical revival is the answer for a glorious past, a modern present and a better tomorrow. No more living in an eternal future. See www.classicist.org for how we are doing it.

As a portuguese, born in Lisbon, I have a very good example of how bad or how good can modern architecture to be.  In 1998, a new area was built in my city (World Exposition of 1998): The Parque das Nações. I consider this area is absolutly beautiful, impressive, really amazing. I love this kind of architecture! Otherwise, recently, it was constructed a new museum - The National coach museum (to replace the old one) - and I hate, oh yes, I hate this new building! But why?! It is also modern architecture! A pritzker one!!!!!  What I want to say is: modern architecture has two faces. It can be loved or hated.

I believe the blame should mostly go to the selfish architects who are greedy and don’t look to find a solution but only think of their pockets. Like they don’t even intend to collaborate and treat the young ones as dumbs, like their ideas are nothing. And off course can’t close our eyes on the builders who just want to make money and care nothing about people who live in those lifeless buildings which in fact should be the homes of millions of people. Instead they just exist there, no sense of home or community.

People hate modern architecture simply because it completely discards any heritage, sympathy for its surroundings and all tried-and-true lessons civilisation has been developing for the past 5,000 years in the name of that which is "innovative". Architects used to be artists. Today, to become a practicing architect, one must receive a license. To receive a license, one must maintain a very high standard of academic achievement. The same skill set and natural talents to achieve academic excellence are not necessarily those that also make a great artist. In some cases, they may even be completely at odds with one another. To compound matters, architects are elitist, egotistical jerks. They spend their careers cultivating a distinctive, personal style that becomes their signature "essence" to garner praise from other architects. They don't care how their personal vanity project will adversely effect the local fabric. They only care about spewing their signature "essence" all over the face of the community. Fortunately, these monstrosities typically are built cheaply and the most offensive of which will either rot away or will actively be removed within fifty years.

Architects today no longer build homes, nowadays they often just build boxes of living space. The home was once something a builder could take pride in, now it’s just a wood- plastic box that’s designed by the same guy who designed the homes of each of the 6 neighbouring properties. Modernism was cool at first, and in moderation still is today. However, people just do it wrong now, which is making our cities less unique, and less interesting. Consumer and mass production culture has poisoned our architecture and it’s absolutely appalling to witness.

Its not the fault of the good architects who understands the value and potential of architecture in our lives and in the city, its the bad architects who are to blame wherein they reduce architecture to these artifacts of self gratification and as a means for others to recognize them for fame and or money, and the more meaningful aspects are set aside.

@Fantageous I truly agree. I understand why some people like modern architecture but it definitely does not sit with me. I love the older styles, especially Victorian which I know can be extreme in itself. Modern architecture just seems to lack interest: I am sorry but a cement, glass, and metal building is just boring and cheap looking to me.

The concept remembers me the Alte Pinakothek in Munich of Hans Döllgast.

Corbusier and Mies Van De Rohe, and also mentioned John Soane who was around in the 18th century

It's ugly people hopefully will forget it or be scared for life while when you look at neo classical buildings like the capitol building and the white house everyone remembers cause of their beauty.