child sacrifice architecture on that on
I know they're unoccupied and done up for the tour, but 'sterile' is one word which comes to mind looking at these places. They don't look as though you could ever really live in them or that they're even designed to be lived in. They look made to be empty.
i've read this exact thing about the Trump gold 'n' glitz aestheticOne problem, what you could possibly call these properties' ostentatiousness, is that they often go for uber-legible symbols of wealth, shit that would be appealing to Joe Plumber—a bowling alley, to pair with your six pack! Endless candy dispensers! A grand piano!
i thought this went for most of the new builds in London as well?"investment opportunities" which are never intended to be lived in, just assets to be held on to and then sold at a profit
This is a bit like the caste system in Hinduism, where the priest caste is designated as the head and the kingly/warrior cast is designated as the arms and chest. So the (poor) priest are higher up in the chain than the (rich) Kings and in fact money is considered a pollutant. All that has changed, if you follow this line, is that we've swapped closeness to God for aesthetics.Bourdieu spends an entire book (Distinction) trying to say this, but you've managed to sum it up in a sentence. The structure of fields makes both high taste and high economic earnings a near impossibility.