It’s too depressing to link to the pictures — eleven beautiful train stations that were lost to the wrecking ball (and what replaced them):
Almost like a rite of passage, cities across the country embraced the era of Interstates, Big Macs, and suburban sprawl by tearing down their train depots. (Frequently, they just did the Joni Mitchell thing and put up a parking lot.) But time and experience are showing that train stations are vital organs in a healthy city, and removing them deadens the entire organism …. One lesson of this legacy is that what replaces a well designed and centrally located rail depot can is rarely of equal worth to the city.
It’s heartening to know that I don’t live in the only city that hates its own history and heritage. But it’s still depressing.
You know, even the crappiest, cheapest warehouse from 75 years ago is more appealing than a concrete, metal and glass slab from the past 20. The different is that there’s nothing interesting about new buildings — they’re flat and boring.
Even the “designed” ones tend to be barren of architectural grace notes. I have a theory that it’s because modern buildings are meant to be seen from a distance and perhaps at highway speed — they’re not built for interaction on a human, pedestrian level.
The great early skyscrapers in places like New York City have gargoyles and carvings up so high that no one can ever see them. Eventually, builders stopped doing that, replacing it with flat, bare sides. And now that design ethic has filtered down to street level.
(via BB)
-
the banana
-
Colin Corneau
-
Matt Goerzen
-
Determinator
