posted on Apr, 30 2005 @ 04:02 PM
you have a point. the last buildings that i know of takeing many years to compleate are the cathedrals. i guess castles would also take that long to
build, though they were "added on to" rather than takeing so long to compleate. my understanding is that some cathedrals took over 50 years to
compleate. that type of "long term" building would be considdered insane by todays standards. the very fact that we are so "right now" oriented
would stop us from this type of project.
just look at the "wonders of the world", most if not all of these projects would have been built over years if not generations. look at michael
angelo's painting of the sisteen chaple. it took much of his life to finnish. the great wall of china would have taken much time as well. also worth
note is that many of these long term projects also tend to last, unless detroyed by people. our more "modern" works are inferior construction when
compared to these "wonders", and yet we have much more capability for building things things today.
todays society wants things "now". if it takes too long or costs too much, it is not "Worthwhile". we are very "cost" conservitiove today. we
will build to the minimum requirement whereas older projects built before there was as much knowlage or capability weas desgned in such a way as to
last. it makes for an interesting comparison between capability and desire. today we have knowlage but build for power or instant gratification, where
before things were built to "glorify" a deyity or king. these were works of adoration not just greed. many who worked on these "great wonders" had
no way to know if they would even be alive to see it's compleation. today if it takes more than a couple of years to build it would not even be
sure these "old" thing were not very practical space usage wise, or even building time wise. but they DO INSPIRE, unlike todays glass and concreat
monalithes that are built in record times. we have lost much of our "artistic" drive when building. wonders were build "by hand" with painstakeing
artistry, that produced buildings that had style and grace. today. we "slap" a building together, with little regaurd for how it looks. we have more
capability to create but seem to have lost much of the beauty in our buildings. sure we have some that are beautiful to look at, but many more that
are just there.
the local art collage down town needed to be expanded. we now have what many call the "floating shoebox" it is one of the ugliest things i have ever
seen. the old part of the building was plain to begin with. they decided to add "on top" of the existing structure.basicaly it is a boxsupported by
multi-coloured pillers about 4 stories above the building, weth a shaft for an elivator and a straight stairwell conecting it. the addition is a black
and white "checkerboard" pattern with a few seemingly random coloured sqaures placed in it. a friend attended the meetings in which the desighn was
accepted. she said most people there complained about the ugliness of the design. the architecht basicaly said something like "i am an award winnind
designer. i know what is good, you do not". even though no one seemed to want it built and would have liked something with a little bit of style,
this monstrosity was built instead. i am sure that there are ppictures of this monstrosity. it is the ontario collage of art and design i believe. it
is located just north of queen on mc caul in toronto. the home of one of the ugliest buildings arround.
perhapse if we cared more for beauty than speed and cost. we too could be building things that will last and be regaurded as "wonders" by future