Some of the newer buildings don't even look as if they have always been there since 1960, let alone 1860. Is it really necessary to change the outward appearance of buildings that drastically?
This is where Americans and Europeans have nothing in common. America is so young that we don't value our "old" buildings nearly like the Europeans do. Sure we have the historical register and go pay money to see George Washington's house and all that, but in general, we think nothing of going into an urban area and tearing down whole blocks of old buildings.......buildings that were part of the beginning of a city. Europeans don't do that. I know over there in many places even when a building is demolished and replaced the front facade is saved so it never looks different from the outside. I found this to be true in cities like Venice, Florence, Amsterdam, etc. I never went to London other than Heathrow and Gatwick, but have been in England several times. I fell in love with the small towns and countryside though. The people were wonderful too. Our old building would be new building over there.
America may be "younger" than some nations, but it was still very much alive in the 19th century, wasn't it? To "think nothing of going into an urban area and tearing down whole blocks of old buildings" is hardly the essence of nostalgia befitting a country which proudly proclaims to be born on the Fourth of July, is it? The nostalgic element is actually the most important part of this particular question.
I have always wondered too why they are restored to the natural state. I would rather see that than some fancy new building. Buildings from the mid 1850's to the 1950's have so much character & charm. We have a section of town that is going to go through a renovation project this summer, just hope they don't change much but bring to life the older style it once had.
I think Thrifty pretty much nailed it. We lose so many of our old buildings all the time, it's such a shame.
LOL WUT
Thank you, Lil Princess. :)
I certainly don't want to live in a log cabin.
Read my question again and then maybe you will understand "wut" it is all about. Lol:)
But is it really necessary to lose old buildings even some of the time? I think not.
They demolished my old high school some years ago. I was a classic castle-like building. They did not replace it. Nothing is left but a vacant lot "in da hood".
Did you protest about it when they demolished it?
That reminds me, how do they rehouse people when they've demolished the old houses, before they build the new ones? Do they build temporary log cabins or something?
"1860! No one was alive then!" ... (adult language in video)
Millions and millions of people were alive in 1860, ALF. I think you mean that no-one now living was alive then. Lo:)
Yup ... That's what we've (Eddie & I) been saying, "USA has little history and cares even less about it."
If you can't make money with it, tear it down and build something profitable. :)
I thought it had plenty of history and cared a lot about it. What happened there, ALF?
I suppose ... but we never let it stand in the way of progress.
i know what you mean, where i live theyre destroying a library and a firestation to make a convention, wish they had kept things the way they were
