4 ms·
He also had a plan to destroy a bunch of Paris to make it car-centered and more "modern". Be open to innovations but beware of modernists.
by cassepipe 5y ago
He also had a plan to destroy a bunch of Paris to make it car-centered and more "modern".
Be open to innovations but beware of modernists.
- gumby 5y agoI agree with you, but to be fair this very practice is what gave us the Paris so many people love. It just wasn’t Le Courbusier but Haussmann.
- keiferski 5y agoThe areas of Paris which are most popular amongst locals today are in the East and Northeast, most of which weren't affected by Hausmann's reforms.
- namdnay 5y agoYes, because the Hausmannian places are too expensive, due to their global popularity :)
- arlort 5y agoNot just Paris, cities are built on the corpses of their past selves. Go back enough in the life of any major building in an historical city and you're likely to find someone who thought it was an abomination that should never have replaced a lovely piece of architecture This is not to say that new is always better, to be clear, but cities are living things, sometimes I'm worried we're trying too hard to preserve everything for the future
- acadapter 5y agoThis type of destruction happened in parts of Stockholm, with the historic Klara neighbourhood being destroyed and replaced by roads and modernist/brutalist architecture. It was apparently very difficult for people to speak up during the forced reloactions and demolishing, but in hindsight it's viewed a destructive act. Too late. It's not like there wasn't any room for architectural experiments. Many suburbs were built at that time on empty land (with both good and bad results).
- rags2riches 5y agoLe Corbusier actually made plans for Stockholm as well. They were even worse. The whole Old Town of Stockholm as well as great parts of Norrmalm and Södermalm would have been lost. The raisinf of the old Klara and the related "modernization" was bad, but it could have been much, much worse if Le Corbusier had had his way.
- nerdponx 5y agoRobert Moses famously did this to New York. The city continues to suffer under his legacy.
- Spooky23 5y agoIt’s fashionable to say that. Yet I think NYC would be worse off had he not been around. Moses was a complex man and he did stuff good and bad. The unique thing about Moses is that he was an incredibly talented individual, both genius and villain. His acquisition, wielding, and addiction to power is fascinating. The other thing is that he attracted the attention of the greatest biographer of the modern era. His legacy is documented in depth while the people who destroyed Baltimore, Cincinnati, Syracuse, etc get the benefit of anonymity. Caro boiled it down to one idea: “Moses loved the public but hated people.”
- nerdponx 5y agoFair about anonymity, and fair about his talent. But I can't forgive him for what he did to the Rockaways, as much as I can't forgive whoever designed the Inner Loop highway in Rochester. The fact that I know one's name and not the other doesn't change my dislike of what they did.