Forward thinking: readers reacted with cynicism to Li Edelkoort's optimistic predictions for a post-coronavirus future. In an interview with Dezeen, Edelkoort described how the virus is causing a "quarantine of consumption" and how the disruption will lead people to grow used to living with fewer possessions and travelling less.
Rd was quick to voice doubts: "How many times has history shown that's not how this works? Things will just go back to normal and change will happen slowly over time."
Others found the article comforting. "I take a lot of solace in what Li Edelkoort is saying," said Gerard McGuickin. "In a way, the Coronavirus is perhaps a reckoning for things that have gone before."
Sheelah Fraser was also tentatively hopeful: "Yes this article does seem slightly idealistic, but there will be some truth in this, maybe unfortunately not to the degree she hopes for."
"Crime, corruption and greed may rise as people lose confidence in their governments," stated Erik Trumpsholm, offering an alternative prediction. "One can also see a dystopian future especially with an exploding global population where the majority lives in poverty."
"More than the economy what scares me is the reaction of people," Jacopo added. "I always thought in times of crisis people would shine and it would bring out the good from their hearts. So far all I've seen is pointing-finger xenophobia and 'each one for himself' as overlying tendencies."
Another reader was feeling optimistic:
Will Edelkoort's predictions come true? Join the discussion ›
Twisted perspective: new photos of Frank Gehry's nearly-complete Luma Arles tower caused some of our commenters to reach for their thesauruses.
"A fraudulent and cacophonic piece of junk," summarised HeywoodFloyd.
"If the whole tower were formally uniform, it would be one thing," Jon added. "But the contrast of the material and geometry make it appear less monolithic and more like a voxellated, metallic blob is consuming its way up a traditional tower."
To which Benny responded: "Jon, thank you for introducing me to the word 'voxel'."
"The kids are designing better things in Minecraft," agreed JZ.
Jay C. White Cloud withheld judgement: "As 'art' I find it thought provoking and interesting. As architecture, I would have to see it in person, the inside, and what the local society feels about its presence in their community to make any valid observation."
But the twisting tower is not entirely without fans.
"This is new and exciting architecture," said Georgios. "Escher-esque, and post-post modern. Perhaps a tad too dominant but really fresh stuff."
"People love this," announced Arthur. "I mean the general public. They love it. And just for that, I love it too."
This commenter had practical concerns:
What do you think of Gehry's Luma Arles tower? Join the discussion ›
She's electric: Hyundai has unveiled its latest electric vehicle concept, but readers feel the new car has similarities to those that have come before it.
"The roots of the outside seem to be the legendary Audi 80 with LED lamps," began Christian Tabakoff.
Danno disagreed: "The exterior looks like a 911 Sedan to me, very nice proportions and curves, to my eye."
"Exterior is hybrid Porsche (front and back) with the silhouette of an early '00s Mercedes CLS," stated Doc Pixel.
"Recalls a bit the old Lotus Elan, but this is even more of a minimalist beauty," Duckusucker declared.
While generally commenters gave the car's exteriors the thumbs-up, some felt the interiors were out-of-sync.
Broman explained: "The interior seems to not communicate the same language as the exterior. Probably the product of different internal design teams."
Apsco radiales agreed: "Two designers – one did the exterior, the other interior. Too bad they didn't talk to each other."
"The interior? Las Vegas, baby!" exclaimed Duckusucker. "Clashes with the zen-like (the stone analogy was referencing it) quality of the exterior."
This reader would like Hyundai to focus its design efforts elsewhere:
What does the all-black Prophecy remind you of? Join the discussion ›
Grenfell: the lead architect on the refurbishment of Grenfell Tower has revealed that he was not aware of all the fire safety advice for tall buildings, sparking debate among Dezeen readers.
"Studio E simply drew the short straw – the residential high rise they were responsible for cladding caught fire and over 70 people were killed," pointed out Geofbob. "But there are hundreds of other residential high rises in the UK with cladding similar to, or as dangerous as, Grenfell's."
Amanda Roberts was less forgiving: "After reading this I am horrified. The architect should have read up on the fires in Dubai, the previous fire in London and known the temperature aluminium burnt at."
"An architect not understanding the fire risk of different insulation types on a multifamily structure is criminal negligence," agreed evilp. "It is the reason of being an architecture license holder."
"It falls into the manufacturer's realm to prove that their own products pass certain regulations," responded Kieran.
that it's manufacturers who have responsibility for building materials: "Architects are ill equipped to determine what the fire risks or qualities are of different materials. That's why there are various laboratories that test the materials, and give them ratings." agreed
One commenter had a suggestion:
Should architects have more responsibility for fire safety? Join the discussion ›