Quote:
Originally Posted by 1487
who isn't on these boards? Its pretty incredible that so many are in near total agreement with everything she's ever typed.
|
No one is in near total agreement with everything she's ever typed. The anti-Inga faction can get so irrational that it is positively mystifying. She's been accused of the goofiest stuff - of being anti-Philadelphia, of being anti-development, of being anti-height, of being anti-density. The truth is she's the opposite of all that. She's clearly pro-Philadelphia, clearly pro-development, clearly unafraid of height, and as pro-density as anyone else out there.
I'm not sure what some of you want in your architecture critic. Some of you seem to want someone who only talks up development in the city, who unfailingly praises every project or building. In other words, a cheerleader, not a critic. Others seem to want someone who writes long-form criticism for obscure architectural journals, i.e. for architects rather than your average reader of a daily city paper with an interest in architecture and development.
I don't always agree with Inga, but I absolutely respect what she's doing, which is elevating the level of discourse about development and architecture in this city. Her basic mission is to advocate for dense urban sophisticated architecture built with quality materials that makes the city a better place to live, work, & play. Who can disagree with that?