> but rather that ugly architecture is ugly I think it’s also worth nothing that things that are new are often hailed as ugly. A number of pieces of what we’d

> but rather that ugly architecture is ugly I think it’s also worth nothing that things that are new are often hailed as ugly. A number of pieces of what we’d identify today as beloved classic architecture were called outrageously offensive to good taste when they were first constructed. For example, from a letter signed by 300 artists and architects published by Le Temps on 14 February 1887: > We, writers, painters, sculptors, architects and passionate devotees of the hitherto untouched beauty of Paris, protest with all our strength, with all our indignation in the name of slighted French taste, against the erection ... of this useless and monstrous Eiffel Tower ... To bring our arguments home, imagine for a moment a giddy, ridiculous tower dominating Paris like a gigantic black smokestack, crushing under its barbaric bulk Notre Dame, the Tour Saint-Jacques, the Louvre, the Dome of les Invalides, the Arc de Triomphe, all of our humiliated monuments will disappear in this ghastly dream. And for twenty years ... we shall see stretching like a blot of ink the hateful shadow of the hateful column of bolted sheet metal. If even “great” modern architecture is met with scorn, middling modern architecture is sure to attract so much more hate!