rduwtf.com

1 Response to “New antique replacing old modern, again”

1. 1 JZ Feb 29th, 2008 at 7:47 pm

   I saw this on George Smart’s listserve and i died just a little bit more that day. Its not so much that I have such a love with a particular era, per se, but that there is a rush to judgement as to how determine what stays and what goes.

   Our economic model here in the U.S. is very unique. Unique in the sense that the amount invested is in proportion to a) the estimated value of the property upon sale and/or b) the ammortization of the capital over a 25 year lifespan. Europe has always operated on a different model, underpinned by the ideology that a building is such an extreme investment of time, energy and resources that what gets is built should last as long as possible, if not, indefinitely. This ideology assumes the adaptive reuse and the regular maintenance of a building over long arcs of time under many owners. It also assumes a first cost greater than a typical American investment in order to assure the passage of a good building to the next owner in line. Over the long haul, this is actually the most fiscally conservative and environmentally responsible model. Given that all of Europe had decimated its timber resources by the late Middle Ages/Renaissance, they learned this lesson not so much by choice but by necessity.

   Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it and this what I’ve observed in the frivolty of the Real Estate Market over the last ten years. Of course, its this frivolty that has offered tremendous growth and prosperity to the region, so I best be careful that I do not bite the hand that feeds. But I do see that its time to slow down a bit, consider our actions and set up a system of checks and balances. When the market goes haywire, we no longer allow for a 1929-type crash, we simply shut it down, ask everyone to cool their jets and come back in the morning.

   So what will it be to get everyone’s attention that we’re being irreponsible and that we’re destroying the quality of life we’ve come to enjoy? Its just a house, right? Why get my panties in a wad? Well, I suppose I’m more concerned with the mentality that leads to conclusions such as this than the actual ends. It reflects a sensibility that is self-referential, divorced from understanding the life-cycle of all the materials that go towards the making of a beautiful building. Its also divorced from the appreciation of the quality of certain materials because, more often than not, the older structures are composed of wood, stone and metals too expensive or rare to be utilized today as liberally. It also reflects a mentality that turns its back on the neighbors, proclaiming that one’s duty is to one’s economic investment rather than one’s community. Perhaps that is the most disturbing of all.

Leave a Reply