# Do you think simple buildings are more elegant?



## thryve (Mar 5, 2005)

So...?


----------



## STR (Sep 4, 2004)

Complex question, but generally yes. Buildings with less complex forms are usually the result of an exceptional amount of work and thought. The result is a sublime design.


----------



## thryve (Mar 5, 2005)

I believe that simple buildings age better, and therefore are more sophisticated, though not necessarily more elegant. I do, however, appreciate a mix of architectural styles in our cities, so I am not trying to say that every building should be cleanlined/simple or we would all go crazy, perhaps.


----------



## IshikawajimaHarima (Aug 3, 2005)

yes.. nyc twin towers used to be most elegant I have ever seen...

taipei 101 and shanghai's bldgs are enough in height but don't impress me...


----------



## thryve (Mar 5, 2005)

I actually was talking moreso about low-to-midrise buildings, public complexes, etc., but it's all good


----------



## Zissou (Jul 11, 2005)

I think it really depends. Both styles can be great if the architect knows what he/she is doing. A lot of it has to do with its surroundings as well. This is a real tough question to answer because I personally dont think there is a rule regarding what is best. The building itself and personal taste will dictate your opinion.


----------



## samsonyuen (Sep 23, 2003)

Yes, simple can be very classy.


----------



## TalB (Jun 8, 2005)

IshikawajimaHarima said:


> yes.. nyc twin towers used to be most elegant I have ever seen...
> 
> taipei 101 and shanghai's bldgs are enough in height but don't impress me...


It was Minorou Yamasaki who believed that sometimes the best looking buildings are the most simple.


----------



## londonindyboy (Jul 24, 2005)

hard question depends.


----------



## Zissou (Jul 11, 2005)

TalB said:


> It was Minorou Yamasaki who believed that sometimes the best looking buildings are the most simple.


Thats very interesting. Most of Yamasaki's buildings appear simple from a distance but up close you can see lots of detail and ornamentation. Unfortunately I never had the opportunity to see the WTC but his offices were here in Michigan and I have had the pleasure of seeing many of his buildings.


----------



## STR (Sep 4, 2004)

^I'd have to agree. Yamasaki's designs are far from simple.


----------



## enjoi (May 2, 2005)

i think it's particullary true. most of simple building are nice, but there is a short way to make the simple buildings ugly and scaring people off. anyway, i know few more detailed buildings that are also very nice - for example Chrysler Tower in NY.


----------



## New York Yankee (Mar 18, 2005)

STR said:


> ^I'd have to agree. Yamasaki's designs are far from simple.


do you think the Twin towers were difficulty?


----------



## TalB (Jun 8, 2005)

When they were built, they were considered very advanced in engineering according to the American Society of Civil Engineers when they give it the Ouststanding Civil Engineering Achievement Award, in 1971.


----------



## RafflesCity (Sep 11, 2002)

Simple buildings can be nice...you cant really go wrong with one, although sometimes it can look so simple it fades into the background.


----------



## Erezl8 (Apr 28, 2005)

I think the twins in new york were very elegant, they were elegant beacuse they standed near each other and thats what made the howl complex empresive even more than taipie 101...
jin mao bulding in shanghai is defently not a simple architecture bulding but steel i think that he is very elegant and empresive...


----------



## New York Yankee (Mar 18, 2005)

yeah, allwright, 
it was a very new construction, but it was simple.


----------



## firmanhadi (Aug 3, 2005)

*333 Wacker Drive, Chicago*

An elegant building designed in 1983 by New York City architects Kohn Pedersen Fox.


----------



## micro (Mar 13, 2005)

> _Do you think simple buildings are more elegant?_

Yes, probably. But too much elegance can be bothersome. If big buildings are of simple design they can look too bombastic, like 333 Wacker Drive above or the former WTC in NYC. 

Old buildings, churches, or castles are often elaborately ornamented yet nice to look at, maybe even elegant.


----------



## Valia (Feb 19, 2005)

generally yes, i think so


----------



## [email protected] (Jun 29, 2004)

sometimes yes , sometimes may be , sometimes no


----------

