Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | BP - "Infarct a Laptop Daily" |
Date: | Thu, 17 Feb 2000 11:53:03 -0500 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
John Callen wrote:
"I have recently been forced into contact and conversations with the
generation of preservationists before me and the generation after me
within a week. The good news is that those Old Farts may have been
making it up as they went along, but the got the big stuff right and
they taught us the right priorities. The better news is that the next
generation has less to make up, more to build on and is better
prepared.
The weird part is that at least in architecture, they seem to be
disproportionately female. How did that happen? And what does it
mean? Is it typical of your gender to be motivated by what the built
record will say about us, and mine that I am first drawn to the
problem solving, the dirt, the danger and the beer? And does it
matter?"
It seems to me that while the young preservation people are VERY
disproportionally female, the old guys are much more likely to be
guys. Of course the old generation for me is probably a lot older
than it is for John! It seems like in the sixties, there were a lot
more male movers and shakers at the National Trust and in the
government, though I don't know about the architects and/or craftsmen.
My vague impression is that most of the people carrying placards,
tying themselves to trees, and lying down in front of bulldozers were
women, but I'm not sure about that. I think a lot of academic
preservation programs are almost entirely female now.
I have always wondered why that should be true.
Marilyn
|
|
|