Quote:
Originally Posted by Dorian Gray
turtle2472, I'm not sure why you're opposed to the preservation of architecturally and culturally valuable buildings. These are the buildings that make our cities interesting and offer great enjoyment to both casual visitors and specialists in history and architecture. Imagine what the world would be like if we just bulldozed everything to put up new shopping malls. Here in London there are a great many very interesting buildings (Somerset House on the Strand is one I particularly like, with its perfect proportions), but there are also vast swaths of land covered in unspeakably ugly 1970's architecture and many more recent structures such as Marks Barfield's London Eye which should never have been granted planning permission.
I for one am very grateful that some people take it upon themselves to fight for the preservation of significant buildings that would otherwise be demolished to reuse the land (invariably for something ghastly and profit-driven). |
Word!
Just look at
Vilnius where I currently live. The old town is a UNESCO World Heritage site, but the suburbs are soviet concrete. The commies had *very* little understanding for preserving the old stuff and were very keen on building their own vision of architecture. Argh! Anyone who actually think the commies knew what they where doing should just go to
Minsk. That particular city was flattened during WWII and rebuilt entirely in stalinistic style. It simply has no soul.