Quote:
Originally Posted by JSsocal
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/02/the-death-of-a-skyscraper.html
A good obituary on the building. The last paragraph seems worth repeating:
"And so the destruction of 270 Park Avenue will act out a ruthless architectural Darwinism, which treats buildings as mere financial tools, to be discarded when they become a burden or a constraint. Modernist architects helped formulate that philosophy. Their style can have little claim to reverence, when it cleansed away so much history without sentimentality or nostalgia, and when it fetishized the use of technology that was more easily discarded than repaired. And yet a great building is more than just an envoy from a particular architectural past; it’s a statement that aspiration is worthwhile, that quality has value, that urban life is not just a matter of metrics. If New York can’t distinguish standouts from knockoffs, it doesn’t deserve the next generation of architecture. And then it becomes a disposable city."
|
Laughable.
Quote:
|
And so the destruction of 270 Park Avenue will act out a ruthless architectural Darwinism, which treats buildings as mere financial tools, to be discarded when they become a burden or a constraint.
|
Yes, I care less about some building that I care about the health of the City itself. To let you people have your way, the city will evolve naturally into a living museum to whatever era you decide should be frozen in time. Would any of you have stood in the way of the demolition of the building that stood before this one?
And yes, like it or not, buildings are financial tools, as is the land they stand on. They're not just there to look pretty. It's why they get built in the first place.
Threaded Mode