Emojis are like modern-day gargoyles to this Dutch architect


Originally published at: http://boingboing.net/2017/06/29/emojis-are-like-modern-day-gar.html




$HERSELF suggests actual gargoyles in the form of angry birds.


Sean should get over himself. He’s acting like this building, and probably all buildings, are meant to be high art for the ages. Sometimes a building is just a building, and there’s nothing wrong with a little levity in architecture. If it doesn’t age well, it can be renovated or replaced. It’s not a big deal.

Personally, I like the emojis; they’re fun.


I think that’s his point. If it needs to be replaced, it uses up more resources than it should.:sob:

A bit killjoy :slightly_frowning_face: I agree but a valid point of view. :thinking:

But why would anyone want to replace these emojis? :confounded:

Things of joy and beauty forever surely? :rofl:


Grotesque. They don’t work as spouts to direct rainwater away from the building.


If everything is a joke; reduced to this disposable ‘I like it in the moment’ fad, that’s a dangerous attitude to have.”

Please. The post-modern architecture trend of the 1980s took the same fundamental approach and the world didn’t come crashing down. They were being ironic and playful about the past, and this guy is just getting a head start by using current themes.

If this fuddy duddy is concerned about disposable fads and dangerous attitudes, he might more productively focus his energies on the issues surrounding Grenfell Tower.


There’s only one appropriate emoji for that.

(Where’s the puke emoji, BoingBoing? :disappointed:)


Most gargoyles that I have seen are also water spouts/drains


Eh, I like it!
Emojis aside, ist a nice looking building.


:nauseated_face: "nauseated_face"
Looks like that’s as far as it goes here…you’ll just have to hold it in!

(Who does the emoji shopping :shopping_cart: around here? Maybe we could start a list :memo:. Hmm…:thinking:…I could go for a slice of :pie::wink:)

[:thinking: Is there an emoji that means “emoji”?? Apparently not, in my search so far on the interwebs…]


In contrast:


All gargoyles have waterspouts/drains - that’s part of the definition.

I don’t know what you’d call these things. Chimeras or Grotesques, maybe? Do they count as figures? “Decorative elements” or “architectural ornaments” seems safe.

They seem more like these:


I am pretty sure they just count as relief sculpting ornamentation. As much as I dislike emojis replacing emoticons, as relief carvings they look kinda nice. One building can have them, two buildings would be two too many.


I think you mean one too many, unless I can’t math anymore.


No no, I meant what I said and I said what I meant. Two is too many one hundred percent.


That will look pretty dated pretty soon, but the overall building looks good enough to make it through the bad decades. Then I can really see the retro appeal working. It’ll be like living in the hula hoop building.

closed #18

This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.

opened #19


They’re part of the entablature above the pilasters. Metopes? Triglyphs?