Would you like a lost gem to be rebuilt?

[Wapper]

Originally Posted by CNB30

Completely rebuilding it would be ridiculousness. As beautiful as the structure was, It would be better to be able to rise above and build something greater, rather than just yearning for the original.

I know that may sound Ironic on this thread, but I just find reconstructions to just be a fake "masking" the original.

I'm also not really sure what I should think of the idea. Of course, I deeply regret that so many stunning buildings were torn down or destroyed, but I fear that I could see the reconstructed building only as kitsch.

Maybe it all depend on the circumstances. If the original materials are used after a building has been destroyed, I don't have so many problems with it. A good example is the Belgian town of Ieper (Ypres) that had been reduced to dust during WW1. After the war, people had the choice to build something new or to rebuilt some of the old medieval buidlings. The chose the second option and I think that the result is absolutely fanatastic and very faithful to the original.

Before the war

[IMG]http://i45.************/30szv9f.jpg[/IMG]

During the war

image hosted on flickr

"Ypres, looking Northeast. A ruined city." (circa 1919) by DickinsonLibrary, on Flickr

image hosted on flickr

Ypres Ruines des Halles en 1919 by Nick J Stone, on Flickr

image hosted on flickr

Ypres 1919 Halles cote nord by Nick J Stone, on Flickr

image hosted on flickr

Ypres 1919 Halles et Cathedral St Martin cote est by Nick J Stone, on Flickr

image hosted on flickr

Ypres 8 - Cloth Hall & Cathedral by pepandtim, on Flickr

After reconstruction

image hosted on flickr

Ieper by annelie woltjer, on Flickr

image hosted on flickr

DSC_4697 2 Lakenhal, ijsbaan. by Ton van der Weerden, on Flickr

image hosted on flickr

Lakenhal Ieper by Holland Massed Pipes and Drums, on Flickr

This is an exceptional situation though. Reconstruction took several decades and it was completely paid by German war compensations.
I don't like the idea that a building is first deliberaltelly destroyed and rebuilt a few decades later though. We should just be more careful with our heritage.

[Fenlander]

London:

The Carlton Hotel (Erected: 1896, Demolished: 1957)



Replaced with...

[zaanii]

It looks like a small part of the building is still there

[ThatOneGuy]

I'm a modernism fan, but that's just awful.

[cameronpaul]

Originally Posted by zaanii

It looks like a small part of the building is still there

The "small part" of the building you can see in that photo is not actually as small as it appears in that perspective, it is Her Majesty's Theatre and occupies roughly 1/3rd of the original site. The New Zealand House building that replaces the old hotel is totally out of place in that location, in both scale and materials. It has long been disliked by most Londoners who care about their city and due to it's 60's era construction could well be in line for demolition in the coming years but for the moment that's just wishful thinking

[HenriGermain]

Originally Posted by socrates#1fan

There are 3 buildings I wish were still standing in Indianapolis.

The first and most tragic being the old courthouse.

Oh my God!! I don't even... For a front yard of a box??

Originally Posted by gabrielbabb

Sure ... T_T

Tenochtitlan
Besides being a ceremonial and political center of fundamental importance, Tenochtitlan was also a busy commercial point. As described in the Charter of Relationship, the main market was in Tlatelolco, where there were about 25,000 merchants selling food , textiles, footwear, puma and jaguar skins, stone tools, obsidian and copper, ceramics, snuff, carved wood and other crafts, jewelry of gold and jade.

Now this is a great example I love the Native American urbanism and although I prefer the Mississippian culture(they were less mean) I would totally love to see an international student workshop building a Tenochtitlan look-alike with original materials, gaining experience with earth made walls... And than donating it all to me.


Anyways, I have a recent example of town degradation here where I live;
this is "Cvjetni trg(=Flower market)" in Zagreb Croatia on an old postcard:



As you can see the buildings on the left side were not in a good ratio, and the square itself needed some new meaning so what does the profession offer?



Very creative! As if the socialist block on the left wasn't enough damage... But of course, here is the super/whimsy/glossy model for the "in life" presentation(because we all have tilt-shift filters in our eyes):



When you actually end up with this:



Wow... Another H&M...

So I'm in for the reviving of the historic centers and I don't think we should hold on to buildings as relics but if this is what modern architecture has to offer I'd rather see those lame neo blocks back on place.
(not to mention that a few months ago the glass on the penthouse cracked and cost thousands to be replaced or the big protests before the building began which obviously had no effect...)

[ThatOneGuy]

That is not what modern architecture has to offer, that building must be one of the worst.

[Chapelo]

The Fox Theatre in San Francisco. Originally opened in 1929, it was demolished 1963 for offices/apartments. Such a goddamn travesty.







There's also the Chicago Federal Building. Constructed 1898-1905, it was torn down in 1965 for the modernist Kluczynski Federal Building by Mies van der Rohe. I'm a fan of Mies' work, but this could have been built elsewhere.



and the building that replaced it

image hosted on flickr

Kluczynski Federal Building, Chicago by running for asthma, on Flickr

[the spliff fairy]

Originally Posted by cameronpaul

The "small part" of the building you can see in that photo is not actually as small as it appears in that perspective, it is Her Majesty's Theatre and occupies roughly 1/3rd of the original site. The New Zealand House building that replaces the old hotel is totally out of place in that location, in both scale and materials. It has long been disliked by most Londoners who care about their city and due to it's 60's era construction could well be in line for demolition in the coming years but for the moment that's just wishful thinking

It won't be demolished. It's been listed now

[Highcliff]

nice pics.....

[Gistok]

[QUOTE=Chapelo;97079585]The Fox Theatre in San Francisco. Originally opened in 1929, it was demolished 1963 for offices/apartments. Such a goddamn travesty.




Sadly the San Francisco Fox Theatre was the largest theatre on the west coast (4,651 seats). It was
considered the most beautiful American theatre in the "Palace Style".

Of William Fox's 5 grand theatres built from 1928-29, 3 survived. The 4,088 Brooklyn Fox was razed as
well, but the 5,174 seat Detroit Fox, the 4,500 seat St. Louis Fox and the 3,978 seat Atlanta Fox
theatres are all still here and fully restored.

Another heartbreaking loss is all of the greatest movie palaces on Broadway are all gone... the 5,800
seat Roxy, the 5,200 seat Capitol, the 3,400 seat Broadway Paramount, and the 3,300 seat Loew's
State... all pounded to rubble in the 1960s.

The biggest miracle is that all 5 of the Loew's Wonder Theatre's are all still intact in the outlying
boroughs of NYC... the Loew's 175 St. (upper Manhattan) the Loew's Valencia (Queens), Loew's
Paradise (Bronx), Loew's Jersey (Jersey City) all have been restored... and the last the Loew's Kings
(Brooklyn) is now awaiting a $70 million restoration. Ironically these 5 theatres are all grander than
any that survived in the Broadway Theatre district.

The largest of the surviving 1920s movie palaces... a rare survivor... with the largest "original" theatre
organ in the world (a 4/36 Wurlitzer).... the legendary 5,174 seat Detroit Fox... it has a main floor
with 45,000 sq. ft. (compared to 46,000 sq. ft. of Radio City Music Hall). Built in 1928 as the
ultimate "Temple Style" theatre, it has a mix of eastern styles known as "Siamese Byzantine". One
theatre patron labeled it an "architectural orgasm"

image hosted on flickr

[No1_Saint]

Originally Posted by Fenlander

London:

The Carlton Hotel (Erected: 1896, Demolished: 1957)



Replaced with...

Horrible New Zealand House, I am so ashamed of it...am a NZer. They need to demolish that now.

[rd77]

Many sad, sad losses to be seen here, especially the losses of the Imperial Hotel in London and the Federal Coffee Palace in Melbourne (must be the most outrageous 19th century pile I've ever seen!) make me cry.

In my own country (Netherlands) many beautiful 19th century buildings were destroyed in the 60s and 70s. They were badly maintained, were completely out of fashion back then and considered as "kitsch" or somehow lacking in taste. Take for example these houses in The Hague (my father-in-law grew up in the one on the right). Demolished in the 70s for some concrete monstrosity. Seen here already boarded up awaiting their fate, circa 1977:

http://haagsebeeldbank.nl/afbeelding...c-f9944b0422dd

[rd77]

Besides the many lost 19th-century gems in the Netherlands, quite a few early Modernist beauties already fell victim to the wrecking ball as well. This is in my opinion possibly the worst loss in that category: the Bijenkorf department store in Rotterdam. Survived WW2 (albeit partly damaged), only to be demolished in the 60s: