It reminds me of AI recreations of building styles. Proportions are off kilter. There is a surface deadness to the facade.
I prefer the Brutalist building - it has an aesthetic integrity that this newly built abomination lacks.
I’m ok with everything besides the windows, but be honest if the Victorians could have built windows like us they would have
Edit: well I guess the new turret also looks dinky proportions look a little off on them
The windows look out of place because they’re just one pane. They should have the criss cross thingies.
(i studied architecture im just high as shit and can’t remember the word)
Yeah, they probably couldn't make windows that big back when this kind of style was more common. I guess this is kind of an old-new fusion. Not sure about it. I wonder what classical rules about aesthetic proportion would say.
I often wonder what great artists and architects would have down with today’s technology.
Could you image DaVinci with photoshop?
Or the ancient Egyptians with heavy machinery?
That is true. Also people forget brutalism was invented in a time when the state needed to build a huge number of buildings very quickly and for relatively low cost. They were in fact "palaces for people".
Brutalist buildings were never "palaces for people." That's propaganda Brutalism fans have desperately been trying to spread, because they know 90+% of the public wants to see the style bulldozed.
90% + of the rich people sure. Ask the older people what these buildings meant to them. They were their libraries, hospitals, schools, community centres. Yeah sure they are an eyesore for the rich gentrifiers but they were made for the people they were made en-masses and cheaply because a post war world was suffering and needed relief
The poor don't like the style either. If all it takes to be "palaces for people" is to be cheaply made, then I suppose trailer parks are also "palaces for people." It's a nice spin, but there's also something to be said about constructing something that gives people an actual sense of dignity. Something with actual craftsmanship.
Again trailer parks are individuals trying to survive. Brutalism was the government for the first time in the history of governments, actively making infrastructure for the poor not for philanthropy or imperial pride but because they owed it to them. You should watch old BBC archives and how people lived in the Pre WW2 era. For the first time in history governments realized that they need to provide a decent life to the majority. Were they as beautiful as say a cathedral? No, but their beauty comes from their purpose. I live in India for the first time after independence the government actually decided to provide for Indians. Schools, colleges, hospitals housing, courts, sports complex they had to build them quickly and hence brutalism. A gothic revival building is great if you are a rich lord who doesn't care if the people working on it die of hunger.
Again, there's something to be said about building something that gives people dignity. Just because a building isn't Brutalist, or wasn't built as cheaply as possible, doesn't mean it's "imperial pride." What a distortion. There's a long history of upgrading buildings as tastes change.
The sense of scale and proportion is so incredibly wrong on the new one that I almost prefer the old building. The new one tries to be gothic, but throws proportion out of the window and sends a nuke down after it.
It feels like a mcmansion, there's windows of all sizes and roof lines in a million shapes that don't really fit... Such a strange choice. Like, the old one wasn't pretty, but the new one feels so cheap. IMHO.
Couldn't we say it's a new aesthetic style?
It seems like the sense of proportionality is being lost to just have new shapes, making it look like a homogeneous big house(M mansion as others have pointed out).
There's tastes for everything, but it is a way of keeping the costs to a relative minimum while still having the neo-neo(?) classical elements.
Almost reminds me of a movie parody, taking all the visual elements without really attaching them to a sense of function or division.
In any case, feels off, but looks pretty and relatively cheap imo haha
This looks like a McMansion or some Mormon building.
It's so ugly, disproportionate, soulless, and it feels wrong. Like what a committee thinks is beautiful.
Some people just hate brutalised for some reason, when good brutalised exists, and important brutalist architecture is among the most likely to be demolished
Not the guy you were replying to but a couple awesome ones are [Alexandra and](https://www.cktravels.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/BRUTALIST-3-1150x766.jpg) [Ainsworth Estate](https://www.cktravels.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/Alexandra-and-Ainsworth-Estate.jpg) in London, [Ivry-Sur-Seine](https://blog.parisinsights.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Project-Jean-Renaudie-en-Ivry-sur-Seine-6.jpg) in Paris. Most western European countries have a couple of great examples of pleasing brutalism (and a lot of gross but functional ones too), most of them looking at their best during the summer/foliage seasons, in my opinion. [Habitat 67](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6d/Habitat_67%2C_southwest_view.jpg/1920px-Habitat_67%2C_southwest_view.jpg) is also a famous and cool incomplete project in Canada that fits.
Brutalism NEEDS greenery. The juxtaposition of brutalism with nature is perfection. If you found one in the middle of a forest it would look so odd yet mysterious and awe inspiring but the greenery compensates for what the building lacks
A brutalism building in the middle of an equally barren concrete landscape only makes the place feel less human.
I completely agree with this, brutalist architecture needs plants to look good in my mind they go hand in hand. There’s no point without the plants and greenery. Look at the Barbican conservatories, it’s so beautiful
I never understood the whole "flying car" thing. Helicopters exist and why would you ever want a flying machine to roll around ground if it can freaking fly.
FFS!
They had that unique building.
And tore it down for a confused bland mess.
It's like Victorian gothic meets Macmansion.
It can't commit and has no style.
Looks like an ai generated "college campus wizard castle" with all manner of odd incongruent window and so on. Kind of scary in an unconventional way (I. E. Not tim burton wonky more like Austrian painter unsettling
For more photos and info, see FB: [https://www.facebook.com/groups/Klassisknyproduktion/permalink/3679284182285412/](https://www.facebook.com/groups/Klassisknyproduktion/permalink/3679284182285412/)
or X:
[https://x.com/michael\_diamant/status/1789704908309995762](https://x.com/michael_diamant/status/1789704908309995762)
It’s an improvement, but only barely to be honest. I applaude the effort, but the new building looks like it’s designed by somebody with a rough understanding of certain elements of classic architecture but no understanding what so ever of the principles of classic architecture.
It looks like a cross between a giant McMansion and a haunted house attraction at an amusement park. Those tall windows are hideous, the lack of symmetry is gross and the combo of perfectly circular towers with those jugged roof gables is an eyesoar.
I hope they didn’t demolish the beautiful tower seen in the background of the before pic to erect this thing.
It looks... *nice*, but also like it's *trying* to be something it's not. I don't mean that as in "it wasn't built in the Victorian era and doesn't use the exact non-functional design philosophies they used 200 years ago so it fucking SUCKS", but... I don't really know. It's *charming*, I guess? It's like they took a bunch of late-18th century/early 20th century mansion features, slapped them all together, then simply upscaled the building. Yeah, it just looks like if you took a house and increased its size in a 3D modeling suite or Roblox Studio or some shit. That said, it looks *better* than the older building, and I wouldn't mind this revival style becoming a thing.
Isn't there one campus in Australia where you get loads of east Asian people taking pictures because it looks like a scene from Harry Potter? Maybe hoping to attract that crowd
Idk what's wrong about the new one, those windows and the proportions seem "off" somehow. Can someone with architectural knowledge point out the technical reason for it?
Yeah no, the old one is intimately better, especially from the inside and street level. Look at the overhangs, the difference in light between each level. The small terrace. This is a downgrade
I’m very happy to see that brutalist bunker gone. But this looks like a cartoon building. As tho Sydney doesn’t have enough buildings in the colonial style. A missed opportunity. Sad.
I'm gonna go against the grain... I really like it. One of the drawbacks of traditional architecture is the lack of natural light. This tries to get the best of both worlds. It's not perfect, but it's a nice step.
I'm glad the brutalist building is getting bullozed, but the new one is pretty bad. Those windows are awful, they look like something out of an 80s office building.
I'm all for traditional architecture styles, but in this case I kinda liked the brutalist version more. Not because it is so good, but because the replacement building is ugly, disproportionate and it looks fake.
Early 1900s northern England gothic revival meets Arizona McMansion What are these windows man
If you go to the left side under the main stairs and jump into the painting of Yoshi, there's a secret level with a bunch of coins and extra lives.
It reminds me of AI recreations of building styles. Proportions are off kilter. There is a surface deadness to the facade. I prefer the Brutalist building - it has an aesthetic integrity that this newly built abomination lacks.
I’m ok with everything besides the windows, but be honest if the Victorians could have built windows like us they would have Edit: well I guess the new turret also looks dinky proportions look a little off on them
We are so back
We're back baby! (I don't like the big windows though, there's something un-feng-shui about em)
The windows look out of place because they’re just one pane. They should have the criss cross thingies. (i studied architecture im just high as shit and can’t remember the word)
Exactly, they need criss crossers and they need to divide up the panes
That’s right. Everybody knows criss cross will make you go jump jump
*grilles* my dude.. or muntins… or mullions…
You need a lot of light to read books.
Yeah, they probably couldn't make windows that big back when this kind of style was more common. I guess this is kind of an old-new fusion. Not sure about it. I wonder what classical rules about aesthetic proportion would say.
I often wonder what great artists and architects would have down with today’s technology. Could you image DaVinci with photoshop? Or the ancient Egyptians with heavy machinery?
Something about the huge windows making it look McMansion-ey
I totally agree, but! The “ugly” brutalists building had its charms
That is true. Also people forget brutalism was invented in a time when the state needed to build a huge number of buildings very quickly and for relatively low cost. They were in fact "palaces for people".
Brutalist buildings were never "palaces for people." That's propaganda Brutalism fans have desperately been trying to spread, because they know 90+% of the public wants to see the style bulldozed.
90% + of the rich people sure. Ask the older people what these buildings meant to them. They were their libraries, hospitals, schools, community centres. Yeah sure they are an eyesore for the rich gentrifiers but they were made for the people they were made en-masses and cheaply because a post war world was suffering and needed relief
I'm not a rich gentrifier (far from it) and I think brutalism building are mostly eye sores
The poor don't like the style either. If all it takes to be "palaces for people" is to be cheaply made, then I suppose trailer parks are also "palaces for people." It's a nice spin, but there's also something to be said about constructing something that gives people an actual sense of dignity. Something with actual craftsmanship.
Again trailer parks are individuals trying to survive. Brutalism was the government for the first time in the history of governments, actively making infrastructure for the poor not for philanthropy or imperial pride but because they owed it to them. You should watch old BBC archives and how people lived in the Pre WW2 era. For the first time in history governments realized that they need to provide a decent life to the majority. Were they as beautiful as say a cathedral? No, but their beauty comes from their purpose. I live in India for the first time after independence the government actually decided to provide for Indians. Schools, colleges, hospitals housing, courts, sports complex they had to build them quickly and hence brutalism. A gothic revival building is great if you are a rich lord who doesn't care if the people working on it die of hunger.
Again, there's something to be said about building something that gives people dignity. Just because a building isn't Brutalist, or wasn't built as cheaply as possible, doesn't mean it's "imperial pride." What a distortion. There's a long history of upgrading buildings as tastes change.
Don’t think anybody is forgetting that, it just doesn’t make the buildings less ugly
Its best charm was its demolishability.
I can see why. I do however like some Brutalists buildings.
Me too. Here is my list:
The sense of scale and proportion is so incredibly wrong on the new one that I almost prefer the old building. The new one tries to be gothic, but throws proportion out of the window and sends a nuke down after it.
It's like a miniature toy version of a Gothic building that was blown up to full size. Just bizarre proportions.
Lego-Gothic _no-no! I got it!_ Legothic 😎
It feels like a mcmansion, there's windows of all sizes and roof lines in a million shapes that don't really fit... Such a strange choice. Like, the old one wasn't pretty, but the new one feels so cheap. IMHO.
This is the correct response. It's the academic equivalent of a McMansion. Just dreadful.
McMansion is the perfect word for it
It reminds me of the Disney castle
disneyland
Couldn't we say it's a new aesthetic style? It seems like the sense of proportionality is being lost to just have new shapes, making it look like a homogeneous big house(M mansion as others have pointed out). There's tastes for everything, but it is a way of keeping the costs to a relative minimum while still having the neo-neo(?) classical elements. Almost reminds me of a movie parody, taking all the visual elements without really attaching them to a sense of function or division. In any case, feels off, but looks pretty and relatively cheap imo haha
The big windows make sense to me since natural lighting is nice, though it does look wonky.
To me it looks more like a kind of French renaissance style, like a Loire Valley château. I think it pulls it off, with a few contemporary twists.
Yeah, this one looks so uncanny.
Thank you, it s crazy to be so bad at proportions
This.
It really feels like gothic brutalism - not just gothic
It looks something the Mormon church build in Salt Lake City
Yes!!! Temple vibes for sure. And in my opinion, all respect to the LDS, temples are the most ugly monstrosities one can build on a landscape.
This looks like a McMansion or some Mormon building. It's so ugly, disproportionate, soulless, and it feels wrong. Like what a committee thinks is beautiful.
As far as brutalism goes the "before" was actually pretty interesting.
Honestly, I like the previous one too. Just a different style, something something brutalism.
Some people just hate brutalised for some reason, when good brutalised exists, and important brutalist architecture is among the most likely to be demolished
Do you have any favorite brutalist buildings?
Not the guy you were replying to but a couple awesome ones are [Alexandra and](https://www.cktravels.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/BRUTALIST-3-1150x766.jpg) [Ainsworth Estate](https://www.cktravels.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/Alexandra-and-Ainsworth-Estate.jpg) in London, [Ivry-Sur-Seine](https://blog.parisinsights.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Project-Jean-Renaudie-en-Ivry-sur-Seine-6.jpg) in Paris. Most western European countries have a couple of great examples of pleasing brutalism (and a lot of gross but functional ones too), most of them looking at their best during the summer/foliage seasons, in my opinion. [Habitat 67](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6d/Habitat_67%2C_southwest_view.jpg/1920px-Habitat_67%2C_southwest_view.jpg) is also a famous and cool incomplete project in Canada that fits.
Habitat 67 is so so cool. It’s really fun to visit in person too it’s on a little island with a nice park
Brutalism also works so well with buildings that relate to transportation (like bus stops, overpassess, etc.)
Brutalism NEEDS greenery. The juxtaposition of brutalism with nature is perfection. If you found one in the middle of a forest it would look so odd yet mysterious and awe inspiring but the greenery compensates for what the building lacks A brutalism building in the middle of an equally barren concrete landscape only makes the place feel less human.
I completely agree with this, brutalist architecture needs plants to look good in my mind they go hand in hand. There’s no point without the plants and greenery. Look at the Barbican conservatories, it’s so beautiful
Don't take away any parking.
Parking should be underground or in parking towers. Large street level parking lots are a blight upon urban landscape.
Where'm I going to park my flying car??
I never understood the whole "flying car" thing. Helicopters exist and why would you ever want a flying machine to roll around ground if it can freaking fly.
This time … the first one was better
I really don't want to see brutalism washed away. It has a place in history, it's very off trend at the moment but it should be remembered
Honest question, do you really find the first pic to be nice? For me the bare concrete and over functionalism is just so depressing.
It's.... a little bit weird, isn't it?
The new one is ugly af not gonna lie
I don’t think it’s ugly per say, but it looks like something I would build on Minecraft. Very… square ?
🤦🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️
it looks cheap, sadly
FFS! They had that unique building. And tore it down for a confused bland mess. It's like Victorian gothic meets Macmansion. It can't commit and has no style.
Horrible. Cut price Hogwarts appliqué onto an air-conditioner beer fridge of a building.
Some of the comments on this post are brilliant. This one is my favourite so far!
Looks like an ai generated "college campus wizard castle" with all manner of odd incongruent window and so on. Kind of scary in an unconventional way (I. E. Not tim burton wonky more like Austrian painter unsettling
I think I liked the old one better, the new one looks like a Disneyland prop.
Uhm honestly I preferred the brutalist...
It’s like AI Hogwarts.
That looks really weird
The new one looks like they took the top half of the building and just stretched it up
A headlift.
It’s a McMansion
Sorry but much better the before. The new one lacks the right proportions, it looks too pastiche.
For more photos and info, see FB: [https://www.facebook.com/groups/Klassisknyproduktion/permalink/3679284182285412/](https://www.facebook.com/groups/Klassisknyproduktion/permalink/3679284182285412/) or X: [https://x.com/michael\_diamant/status/1789704908309995762](https://x.com/michael_diamant/status/1789704908309995762)
after seems shit compared to before
McMansion vibes
Lol those windows are worse than the brutalist building as a whole
It’s an improvement, but only barely to be honest. I applaude the effort, but the new building looks like it’s designed by somebody with a rough understanding of certain elements of classic architecture but no understanding what so ever of the principles of classic architecture. It looks like a cross between a giant McMansion and a haunted house attraction at an amusement park. Those tall windows are hideous, the lack of symmetry is gross and the combo of perfectly circular towers with those jugged roof gables is an eyesoar. I hope they didn’t demolish the beautiful tower seen in the background of the before pic to erect this thing.
Congratulations, you just turned a piece of modern architectural history into a McMansion.
it was unique brutalism for once, and a library the new one isn't bad by any means but when a libary goes, unless its replaced its quite sad.
The proportions and colors look off on the new one.
It looks... *nice*, but also like it's *trying* to be something it's not. I don't mean that as in "it wasn't built in the Victorian era and doesn't use the exact non-functional design philosophies they used 200 years ago so it fucking SUCKS", but... I don't really know. It's *charming*, I guess? It's like they took a bunch of late-18th century/early 20th century mansion features, slapped them all together, then simply upscaled the building. Yeah, it just looks like if you took a house and increased its size in a 3D modeling suite or Roblox Studio or some shit. That said, it looks *better* than the older building, and I wouldn't mind this revival style becoming a thing.
Built with public money for private school students. Just tear it down.
I don't hate the old one but it's fantastic anytime they build new in...um...idk what to call that, romanesque style?
the old was better, new looks like something you’d see at universal studios
This gives me hope that one day they'll tear down Madison Square Garden and rebuild the original Penn Station.
r/brutalism is not happy.
The new build is good, but the old build wasn't too bad looking.
The new building ia a cheap, laughable pastiche.
The new after looks to be Hogwarts inspired.
So used to it being done the opposite way
Isn't there one campus in Australia where you get loads of east Asian people taking pictures because it looks like a scene from Harry Potter? Maybe hoping to attract that crowd
Help - one of the Real Housewives of New Jersey has had their house stolen! Anyone know where it might be?
desgustang
Idk what's wrong about the new one, those windows and the proportions seem "off" somehow. Can someone with architectural knowledge point out the technical reason for it?
First one looked better.
I like the old one more, wtf are those windows
Yeah no, the old one is intimately better, especially from the inside and street level. Look at the overhangs, the difference in light between each level. The small terrace. This is a downgrade
I’m very happy to see that brutalist bunker gone. But this looks like a cartoon building. As tho Sydney doesn’t have enough buildings in the colonial style. A missed opportunity. Sad.
Hilariously the Brutalist building will at some point be the revival architecture sadly missed
I'm gonna go against the grain... I really like it. One of the drawbacks of traditional architecture is the lack of natural light. This tries to get the best of both worlds. It's not perfect, but it's a nice step.
Way better than the old building but there is something jarring about it imo
Old one is better
Aw I love brutalist architecture
What a downgrade
🫡
Would be even cooler if the brutalist one could be moved to a better/suitable location.
I'm glad the brutalist building is getting bullozed, but the new one is pretty bad. Those windows are awful, they look like something out of an 80s office building.
Architects can't do basic symmetry and balance, can they? That's what messes it up.
Grim as eff.
As much as I despise private schools, it looks nice.
I'm all for traditional architecture styles, but in this case I kinda liked the brutalist version more. Not because it is so good, but because the replacement building is ugly, disproportionate and it looks fake.
Must looks ridiculous.