Did status signaling ruin architecture?

There are basically no ugly buildings from before 1930. There are definitely none from before 1830. Why? Is it survivorship bias? Have we demolished all the ugly old buildings and only kept the most beautiful and prestigious buildings? Is it just a matter of taste? Perhaps we haven't come round to liking modern buildings yet but we will. Is it because ornament is too expensive to reproduce now labor costs are too high? Is it because ornament is too cheap because of mass manufacturing and elites want to signal distinction from poor people who can now afford to cover their buildings with ornament too? Samuel, Ben and Aria discuss the merits of these different theories and what actually makes some architecture beautiful.
If you enjoyed this episode, you'll enjoy Samuels many essays on beauty in architecture.
Cheap ornament and status games: worksinprogress.co/issue/cheap-ornament-and-st…
The beauty of concrete: worksinprogress.co/issue/the-beauty-of-concrete
Making architecture easy: worksinprogress.co/issue/making-architecture-e…
Against the survival of the prettiest: worksinprogress.co/issue/against-the-survival-…