Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Downtown
"Data center" is a pipe dream, although Related did look at the property hoping that could work. Remember, this "building" has no interior floors; just catwalks and piping around the boilers. So if you've built a new skeleton and put on a new skin, what exactly have you preserved? The idea of an industrial structure?
|
I suppose part of preservation is exactly that: preserving the idea of something, as represented by the something. The question for me being: Is the present something sufficiently materially similar to the original something? The desired
qualia of the viewer of the structure can be the same if the visual presentation of the contemporary thing is close enough to the original (whatever is sufficient to trigger the contemplation of history, culture, etc.). I don't know what portion of new vs. original material marks the transition out of "close enough" for me (nor do I similarly have a resolution to Theseus' paradox), or what level of quality of ersatz material is convincing enough.
If they were to use modern materials in a paint-by-numbers recreation, to the extent that the building lies in that uncanny valley of resemblance, the experience gets corrupted for me; there's dissonance when the present structure is perceived to be too far removed from what I believe to be its original appearance (hence why I like something like anastylosis best). Which now has me thinking about the value of authenticity in historic preservation: Does something still have value as a historical emblem if it only visually signals or alludes to the thing and isn't the thing itself? Was that what you were touching on in your "... idea of an industrial structure"?
For me, the steam plant is right on the cusp of being worth preserving. I like the visibility it has from many distances, vantage points, modes of transportation... that it can be seen by many, even incidentally. It has solemnity without feeling austere; there's a grounding quality to it. And I love how that feeling foregrounds my perception of the skyline from the SW. If enough people feel that way and could all agree to allocate resources (in the form of tax dollars or whatever) to the maintenance of the structure, then there's a case for preservation. I don't see a case for forcing the hand of a private land-owner.