5 ms·
Instead of being outraged, I suggest you read the comments again. No one said it is ugly or that it isn't beautiful, just that it's not typically thought of as
by keiferski 4y ago
Instead of being outraged, I suggest you read the comments again. No one said it is ugly or that it isn't beautiful, just that it's not typically thought of as an example of "a beautiful thing." People think of it as a symbol of Paris, not an exemplar of beauty. Especially people that live in Paris and see it everyday.
- rrreese 4y agoA comment made two hours before yours literally calls it a monstrosity
- mcphage 4y agoOne of the best passages in Foucault's Pendulum is when the main character wanders Paris and describes the tour as a "foul metal spider", "Lone suppository, hollow obelisk, Magnificat of wire, apotheosis of the battery, aerial altar of an idolatrous cult, bee in the heart of the rose of the winds, piteous ruin, hideous night-colored colossus, misshapen emblem of useless strength...". It goes on for quite a while. Mind you, the character is half insane and entirely paranoid at that point. It's quite a fun monologue.
- cdrini 4y agoI'm not outraged, just surprised at how confidently people will say statements that are near impossible to justify. Eg the Eiffel Tower "is not typically thought of as an example of 'a beautiful thing'". ... What?? Citation needed? Did you conduct a survey? Why do you think you know what most people think? And to state it just as a fact. When, opposite that discussion is the fact that it's one of the most internationally recognized buildings _ever_ -- to confidently say that none of those people see it as "a beautiful thing" and only as a symbol of Paris?? I'm perplexed :P I don't even a little bit follow your logic.