And sometimes, it’s not about knowledge, it’s about practicality and what’s in service of the larger community… Just because some an expert thinks something, doesn’t necessarily mean that they are right in every case. 
Which is basically what I said in my next paragraph. I work in urban planning, and this weighing of interests is basically what urban planning is all about. Sometimes things that are worth preserving can’t be preserved.
An example from my workplace:
For instance in my municipality there was an old empty “Folkets hus” ( a type of community hall built all over sweden by the workers movement) from the 1920’s that was in a bad condition in one of our smaller towns (or larger villages depending on how you define it). A local small business wanted to buy the property, tear the old building down and build a small building for his artisanal manufacturing company. The building was clearly worth preserving both because of its historical and architectural value. The building was allowed to be torn down after the museum documented it in a report with photographs, drawings etc.
The socio-economic circumstances in this small town/village combined with the condition of the building didn’t really make it a hard decision. The people working with historical preservation at the museum agreed with it the whole way even if everyone agreed that it was a shame that it had torn down.
The assessment based on wheter the building in it self is worth preserving is based on knowledge, not on taste or anything else if done by proffessionals.Whether it can be preserved in the end or there are other needs that are more important is another question. Which I tried to explain in my example above (with my maybe unnuanced command of English).
11 Likes
You do realize that this is exactly what people working with historical preservation do? And that the argument for preserving the building in question is just location and significance besides architectural quality?
4 Likes
Thanks, this is a good example.
We have a lot of similar stuff where I live in Maine, USA. There are all these old Grange Halls, which used to be vibrant social centers in the late 1800s/early-to-mid 1900s, but have since fallen out of use.
They’re built out of the good lumber, and were such a part of the social fabric of the towns/villages that there’s a lot of nostalgia around them.
Your example of honoring the history even if it does end up needing to be torn down is so important. Documenting is good. And dismantling versus demolishing is HUGE. Giving people an opportunity to make something new from that old lumber has proven really healing and special to the communities.
As in most things, I think if people would just take the time to be a little more thoughtful about stuff, it wouldn’t end up being so controversial.
8 Likes
I think the interior has potential. Hard to tell with everything stripped down like that but when it is well done I think it can be a really warm and beautiful interior aesthetic.
The outside though:
Like if someone assigned me a paper that required a cogent defense of the choices in historical context I could come up with one that would at least rival an AI. But look at it imposing its hubris. I’m the kind of artist that respects the sublime.
5 Likes
I remember that house, have even been in it. It has all the charm of a house made of shipping containers. Not at all energy efficient or comfortable to live in.
It was a nice upscale MCM interior with a killer view.
1 Like
of a castle.
2 Likes
Yep. That’s why we can’t have nice things, from historic landmarks to functioning websites to natural ecosystems. It doesn’t ever matter what we think of them, everything only lasts until some rich dude gets his hands on it and decides he has other plans.
It’s kind of a shame though?
7 Likes
Yes … The good feature of White Gates is the view of the mountain. The view from the castle down the mountain is spectacular.
1 Like
How crazy are prices there if someone’s willing to pay that much for a plot of land to build on!?
2 Likes
I just had similar thing done, but in my case it’s done with an engineer, and a reputable builder, and they ran a steel beam across where the wall was and tied it into other structural pieces. It’s entirely possible to do, it just isn’t anything approaching cheap.
5 Likes
This is my viewpoint as well. That said, I’m curious what the rest of the neighborhood looks like. I could see the argument in keeping this house intact if it’s how the rest of the homes are styled.
1 Like
I don’t understand that argument, but indeed street view shows the houses around there are in the modern or post modern style.
https://www.google.com/maps/@33.5127114,-111.9739244,3a,75y,91.01t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sRkinPrsPQF-PzRcKi_etVg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu
1 Like
It is because it isn’t similar to others that it is considered worth preserving. As the architect’s own family home it is presumably an expression of what he thought was ideal (at that particular moment, because he went on to build several other family homes).
2 Likes
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
