When I was an architecture student in 1980s Southern Ontario, Canada, I was taught that the “good” architects were the ones traveling the guest-lecture circuit at that time –Zaha Hadid and Rem Koolhaas, for example– and the “bad” architects were the ones designing pomo commercial schlock: cheesy malls, tacky suburban houses, and glitzy office buildings (of which there was no shortage). I have come to realize, however, that there’s another kind of architect who is much worse: the one who is a student of Zaha’s work and applies similar formal gymnastics to the design of lavish private homes that are the size and appearance of tourist resorts. Pseudo-vanguard monster homes are just as bad as pseudo-traditional monster homes, so why are only the latter ridiculed? Do we not dare to also ridicule work that is inspired by —but falls far short of— the work of “good” architects?
Instagram is chock full of pseudo-vanguard monster homes. Most of these designs are presented exclusively as renderings (probably generated by so-called artificial intelligence). The designs make absolutely no sense from the perspective of site, structure, or practicality, but that doesn’t matter; it is only their wowish appearance that counts.
Some of you might be asking at this point: what’s wrong with a bit of architectural fantasy? I’ll tell you: the more-money-than-brains set loves things that “look” absurdly expensive, and they are likely to actually commission pseudo-vanguardism that arrogantly expresses their absurd wealth. We all know that as the rich get richer, they also become dumb and dumber (Why is that? I’ve often asked myself: is it too much wealth that turns naturally born nice people into arrogant assholes, or are natural born assholes more likely to become rich?). The most nauseating thing about pseudo-vanguardism is precisely that it is a kind of advertisement designed to appeal especially to professional athletes, tech bros, crypto speculators or drug kingpins.
At least “bad” commercial buildings are a genuine reflection of the society that builds them, whereas pseudo-vanguard monster homes are private, anti-social resorts for the 1% (who don’t “socialize” after all; they merely “network”); the kind of architecture that isolates the super-rich from the rest of society. It is isolation-in-luxury that breeds arrogance, ignorance, and stupidity. And since the rich can’t think for themselves and must always imitate what other rich people are doing (have you ever noticed how they are constantly looking over their shoulder?), there is the added danger that pseudo-vanguard architecture could become fashionable among these losers (of intellect).
The last thing this topsy-turvy world needs is more places that isolate and pamper the super-rich. It’s high time to ridicule pseudo-vanguardism.
Criticalista 