I never ment to imply that all modern architecture is a fad, just certain design elements that are popular then look tacky now(to me anyway). For example: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/51/Ronchamp.jpg/800px-Ronchamp.jpg[IMG]
I can look at the architecture and appreciate it for what it is, but I would never commission anyone to build something like this for me, even though this is a church, just my personal taste. Many times you can identify what time period the building was built just by it design features. That being said the ones that you can't identify are the ones that have achieved a great and classic design. But like many have said, all through the eye of the beholder, its what you like not what other like.
Anyone here from the Bay Area must be familiar to the "star wars" house right off north bound I-280, just before the Junipero Serra statue while crossing the bridge. It is a interesting house.[/QUOTE]
That's like saying a Gothic Church, or the Great Pyramid isn't great or timeless :p
To each his own. Le Corbusier's NotreDame is one of my fav's. That's a freaking church, thats so cool.
I'm not a Frank Lloyd Wright fan completely. His 'Falling Water' isnt all it's [b]cracked[/b] up to be. Structurally it's fallling apart. He was a very stubborn guy, and not in the good way at times. Wright wanted to use little to no steel support in the foundation of Falling Water. The engineers argued what they thought he needed, and he refused.... builders secretly doubled his steel support in it, and it's still barely standing. Overall it's a pretty cool place and concept. Just not structurally sound.
It's good everyone has diffrent taste!!! :D more variety, and makes whatever you like that much rarer. Sorta like an NSX :P
You guys got good taste. I can't think of anything I'd want to change in that estate!
to each his own. 
