‘That’s It, I’m Architecture Shaming’: 40 Architecture Examples That Look So Bad, People Just Had To Shame Them

The Sweden-based urban planning expert explained to Bored Panda that while public spaces must meet safety and accessibility standards, aesthetic standards can be much more fluid for buildings. The expert spoke to Bored Panda on the condition that she remain anonymous. (Remember, just because you're an expert in something and want to be helpful doesn't mean that you always like the limelight... unlike quirky architecture which just begs you to look at it!)

“Most of the time, the elements of the built environment should be in harmony amidst each other and with the surroundings. However, sometimes, something bolder and out-of-the-box might form an engaging contrast,” she said. However, the urban planning expert shared with Bored Panda that, in her personal opinion, our built environments have to engage us, as well as stimulate our minds and senses. In fact, she believes that architecture’s ability to make us think is one of its most powerful aspects.

“There are circumstances where the architecture should create a sense of calmness and safety, yet there are instances in which it is not bad if the architecture provokes us and makes us think, ‘Why don't I like the look of this building?’”

The urban planner said that we should give people the freedom to express themselves as they wish when it comes to designing their private property. As long as they have the means, nearly everything is allowed, in her opinion.

“Quirky architecture comes from our innate desire to demonstrate our uniqueness. However, not everyone who has the means has an average taste for aesthetics. Yet, as long as it is for the people who inhabit or use their private space, I mean why not?” she told Bored Panda that as long as you’re not actively harming anyone else with how bad your designs are, you should be able to be as unique as you want. Even if it falls short of objective aesthetic standards.

However, the expert acknowledged that others in the industry might not see things the way that she does. Others, she said, believe that private property must be in harmony with the surroundings.

“But, I think that we should not cross that thin line where architecture becomes reserved for only the wealthy and for those with ‘good taste’ (whoever decides that). I’m only talking about private property here, though. When it comes to public space, there should be a consensus between the public and the professional about the design,” she said that the rules for the private and public spheres are very different.

The urban planning expert also had some advice when it comes to design. “Firstly, even though I often advocate for unconventionally looking buildings, I do not encourage purposefully provocative architecture. The building should be designed with the intention to accommodate and protect society. It should create a sense of safety but not be boring,” she told Bored Panda that we ought to strike a balance between uniqueness and service, expression and community.

What’s more, the expert from Sweden pointed out that accessibility, inclusiveness, and empowerment should also be key features of any architectural project. “Also, I prefer somewhat complex but systemic designs. Minimalistic and box like floor plans are good in some cases where easy access is necessary (for example, hospitals) yet they can be completely mind-numbing while more complex floor plan designs are more mind-stimulating (for example, good for schools, in my opinion).”

At the time of writing, the ‘That’s It, I’m Architecture Shaming’ community had 64.1k members. However, it’s growing so rapidly, that by the time you’re reading this, dear Pandas, that number could be much, much higher. Just in the last week alone, the group grew by over 7.3k members. And they’ve made upwards of a thousand posts in the last month.

Because of this fast growth and the issues that came with it, the administrator of the ‘Architecture Shaming’ group, Oregon-based Matthew Brühn, addressed the community and the changes that took place in April. In short, the rules are much more structured now.

Matthew pointed out that the admins have been getting tired of the “massive influx of negativity” that came with more and more members joining the community. While the admin expressed his admiration for how wonderful many members are, he also noted that the group will start filtering out overly-aggressive posts.

“Don’t take it personally; we’re just trying to create an atmosphere where we can all have fun and be kind. There’s now the equivalent of a small city of us all here now, so that will be more difficult,” Matthew pointed out. He added that mentions of politics and religion will be deleted while all potential new members have to answer some questions before they get in. Which, at the end of the day, leads to a friendlier and happier community that, we're sure, plenty of you Pandas will want to join.