|
stokebailey, I think he deserves the benefit of doubt.
|
Well, flanneruk, we'll have to part company on who should control an artist's work. I'm sorry Britain has been blowing up those buildings and continues to do so. I'm with Ruskin on that one, who once wrote we have no right to tear old buildings down.
|
It appears from poking around the web that the Polish sculptor of the eagle on the U.S. embassy facade, Theodore Roszac, was a regular collaborator with Saarinen, and it was part of the original design.
|
>>I'm with Ruskin on that one, who once wrote we have no right to tear old buildings down.<<
Did he ever imagine the new buildings of his day would become old? Plenty of old buildings are no longer fit for purpose, and maybe never were; and the ones that are being pulled down now required older (and often better) ones to be pulled down in their day. |
|
I guess Baron Haussmann is damned to hell then.
Architectural preservation in urban settings is a complex issue. The original Waldorf and Astoria hotels were torn down to build the Empire State Building--would New York City have been better off if that had not occurred? |
Thanks for the eagle research, DancingBear.
Possibly Saarinen looked at the facade and thought to himself: "It needs something. Too plain. I know! An immense aluminum eagle!" He could've perched one on top of his St.Louis Arch, another structure that cries out for a little something. http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=...h%20&FORM=BILH |
The Neasden Hindu Temple
|
The thing that yanks can’t get their heads around is that in 1945 Britain’s cities were very badly damaged and we had no money (having given it all to the yanks). So we needed to build housing and office spaces quickly and cheaply and reinforced concrete did the job.
They were never meant to last for ever (most were designed to last 30 years) and were often seen as simple quick fixes. So pulling them down is a part of their planned life-cycle. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:17 PM. |