There’s an interesting debate in the New York Times about when/if it’s okay to demolish buildings that may have aesthetic or historic significance. The debate was sparked by a controversy over whether or not a government building with numerous structural flaws (at left) in New York state could/should be torn down. Those who argue to take it down point out the cost of maintaining and repairing it, and also note that it’s “ugly”. Those who disagree argue that it’s a strong example of Brutalist architecture, by Paul Rudolph, and therefore of architectural significance. The debate includes several voices of interest.
architecture archives ARTstor California contemporary cooliris copyright education exhibitions film flickr fun galleries getty google image organization image viewing IRC-MDID Islamic LACMA landscape and gardens lectures libraries maps museums painting panoramas photography publishing sculpture technology tools universities video
Posts by Category
Posts by month
© The Red Dot, 2009. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to The Red Dot with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.