What's so great about Old Buildings?

[petromax]

There is a presumption that most old stuff is good stuff; that sees either side of 1900 as a golden age (George's Hall, Liver Buildings, Three Graces, Water Street).

Actually this Architecture represents the upper end of a class system that 'suppressed the workers', so what's so great about it?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode...xe_Experience/

[Davec]

Think you could apply that reasoning to just about every worthwhile building anywhere in the world at any time in history.

[Oudeis]

Architecture?

I do not know Liverpool, I have seen here many pictures and movies of Liverpool's past, would I know the place now from these sources?

Within the space of all too few generations much of a people's history is lost and without land-marks the geography of a place can also be lost.

I do despise these country houses for much the same reasons as you have put forward; labour cost etc. And how one is supposed to marvel at the costs envolved in their building WITHOUT being asked to consider the human cost not only of the build but of where the money came from too.

I have worked on a few 'prized' examples of times past and I do admire the effort required in the build. Right angle? Whats that?

We should rejoyce in them if they are put to public use. For they do show the effort and expertise shown by a by-gone age of astizan.

Lastly; What are the time-scales of modern buildings? Perhaps we cannot match the past in their efforts, but we can do much to continue history on into the future using architecture as mile stones. My mother was insured by the Liverpool Victoria (if I remember right) and soo I have long been aware of the Liver Building and if that were to go how could I judge what the Liverpool of today is all about?
What use Liverpool has for it's past is up to you all now. I think that the whole thing hangs on what use the present can find for these efforts of yesteryear.

[lindylou]

[QUOTE=Oudeis;198983]
I do despise these country houses for much the same reasons as you have put forward; labour cost etc. And how one is supposed to marvel at the costs envolved in their building WITHOUT being asked to consider the human cost not only of the build but of where the money came from too.
QUOTE]



My dad was always of that opinion. re stately homes, he says why should we pay to go in and 'view' the affluence and luxury that was built from exploitation of the less well off. It was bad enough that the affluent were greedy with their the vast amounts of land and wealth, and had the poor labouring for them for a pittance .. now they want us to pay again !!
My dad won't pay to go in a stately home

[Oudeis]

Well said lindylou's dad.

He will be one of the too few who have read, The Ragged Trousered Philanthropists.

[GNASHER]

What a load of leftie bull.Tell me,were these buildings built by slaves or by a paid workforce?
Modern architecure is about architects.I put these things up and it's all about 'the look'.If there are any cutbacks to be made because money is getting short it's NEVER on the externals or foyer area as they are the bits that go in the portfolio and win awards.

[lindylou]

Well said lindylou's dad.

He will be one of the too few who have read, The Ragged Trousered Philanthropists.

he has too ! and been to see the grave of Robert Tressell

[Oudeis]

...and the money GNASHER. Where did that come from?

[had the Nazis formed a statue for some foyer out of the gold teeth and spectacles they had to hand, that too would be OK?]

[Waterways]

My dad was always of that opinion. re stately homes, he says why should we pay to go in and 'view' the affluence and luxury that was built from exploitation of the less well off. It was bad enough that the affluent were greedy with their the vast amounts of land and wealth, and had the poor labouring for them for a pittance .. now they want us to pay again !!
My dad won't pay to go in a stately home

He was an astute man Lindy. The preservation of stately homes, which are out of sight of the vast majority of people hidden in the country, was a way of the well connected ruling class to maintain their lifestyles. WE pay for a lot of it. They put about propaganda that these piles of bricks were essential, as a key part of our heritage - although few had ever seen them, never mind been in one. They also put about propaganda that the lifestyle and social structure, of which they were at the top, was essential to our way of life - lots of romatic scenes of happy people working in the fields and walking to to the pub in a chocolate box type of village. Few villages were like this being mainly full of mud and animal mature on the streets with cows and sheep being driven through them. Then the wealthy, privileged ruling class, who made their wealth by taking rent, went for state aid to maintain their lifestyles. It was 100% successful. The governments and people sucked it in.

The finest buildings are, and were, in cities. Ground around buildings make them stand out and more appealing. If the David Lewis' Building was in the country with some Lord living in it, would it have been demolished? Would the Custom House been demolished? I think not.

Stately homes are a reminder in brick of gross exploitation of people. Not one penny of public funds should go towards these stacks of bricks.

[GNASHER]

[QUOTE=Oudeis;198998]...and the money GNASHER. Where did that come from? ]

The Royal Mint .
The same sources as now,loans,investment,grants.A tip,never use your own money.
had the Nazis formed a statue for some foyer out of the gold teeth and spectacles they had to hand, that too would be OK?

WTF has that got to do with it?