Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | BP - "The Cracked Monitor" |
Date: | Tue, 21 Sep 1999 10:41:05 EDT |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
In a message , [log in to unmask] writes (about what kind of modernist
Landmarks we will have to preserve):
> What if a bunch of the really ho hum to bad examples survive to become
> "historic"?
But I note that we already have a bunch of 'ho hum to bad" Landmarks, and not
from the 1950's. How about Cass Gilbert's Federal Courthouse in Foley Square
(1920's limestone skyscraper - a real yawn), the Beaux-Arts style Dorilton
apartment house on 71st and Broadway (an astoundingly bad building; so bad
it's good), Riverside Park (an absolutely ho-hum park design erroneously
branded as "Olmsted"), and the New-York Historical Society (perhaps the worst
monumental neo-Classic building in New York). There are plenty of "pretty
awful" Landmarks, at least in New York. (What have you got in Ar-Kansas?)
As I have watched them here, preservation battles rarely involve the quality
of the architecture - indeed, the buildings themselves are rarely looked at.
Rather, they involve memory, sentiment and not-in-my-backyard.
Christopher Gray
|
|
|