Quote:
Originally Posted by the urban politician
^ I've never felt that outstanding architecture makes up great cityscapes. It is collections of regular buildings, punctuated by greatly designed buildings of importance, that make great places.
I tend to subscribe to that kind of thinking.
There are some forumers around here who believe that every single building must resemble an ant humping a beetle, or else it is a blight on the cityscape. I think that kind of thinking is way misguided, and has been damaging to cities.
|
Really? I don't wish to argue with you--I kind of agree with you--but this is an unusual sentiment. Maybe it has to do with what you mean by "normal."
When I'm discovering an impressive environment for the first time--whether it's Pilsen or Bronzeville, Printer's Row or Hyde Park, London or Barcelona; I'm usually impressed by the uniform quality of the streetscape--that the average building is above average and they come together to make something great. I don't think every townhouse needs to be designed by I.M. Pei, but when a whole neighborhood is tied together by quality I like it a lot better than when I see mediocre construction but with a beautifully preserved cathedral at the end of the block.