Dunno about anyone else, but there are maybe only one or two buildings on this list that I think look okay, and some are outright hideous.

Even the ones that look okay (the first one in particular) could be easily imagined to look better if they used more lively materials.

It’s definitely a case of beauty in the eye of the beholder. I looked at this list and wished more architecture was similar.

> beauty in the eye of the beholder

Yeah, I can acknowledge that. Though surveys do show that most people tend to favor classical architecture.

There's also the matter of what you're comparing it to. Some brutalism may not be beautiful, or as beautiful as something classical in form, but the best examples are just interesting in a way that a generic 5-over-2 building isn't.

I think maintenance of materials matters a lot as well. Concrete's aesthetic really depends on it being clean and crack-free.

> > beauty in the eye of the beholder

> Concrete's aesthetic really depends on it being clean and crack-free.

... unless you're into the aesthetic of crumbling urban decay? I mean I should know better than to pick pointless fights on the internet, but you kinda teed it up

it's a different kind of 'beauty' :)

In some strange way it reminds me of Koyaanisqatsi, now 40 years old (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35764584)

I saw it in a movie theater a long time ago, the images where exiting, the music unlike anything I had every heard... It was stimulating and at the same time uncomfortable, I remember I was glad to finally see the credits after 1.5 hours of a bombardment of sound.

Still it made a big impression on me and made me discover a whole new genre of music and composers.