> really I had no idea this would bring me to negative points. Would love someone explaining what I’m missing in these downvotes.I downvoted you and I'll give some insight as to why.
- "I’m hard pressed not to find anything modern that’s less impressive than the Colosseum". Yeah, if we judge the colosseum by today's standards, it's not impressive. What's impressive is that it is 2000 years old.
- "I’m interested in what you find so special about the bunch of rubble that warrants lack of intervention?" It isn't a pile of rubble. It's a full standing building in reasonable shape. There are plenty of piles of rubble that are 2000 years old and they simply don't get much attention, because they are piles of rubble.
- When you go to the colosseum, you get a sense of what life was like 2000 years ago in one of the greatest empires the world has ever known, and the one upon which Western Civilization is built. The historical value is probably more remarkable than the technical achievement.
- There are very few structures of this scale that are this old and in reasonable shape.
- I've been to the colosseum and it isn't even my favorite ancient building in Rome. That honor goes to the Pantheon, which I think is a far more impressive technical achievement. I've also been to Petra, the Pyramids, Hagia Sophia and the temples at Luxor and I personally like all of those better. But that doesn't make the colosseum bad or meaningless.
- The 15 floor office building in your neighborhood is unlikely to last 2000 years without much maintenance. It is certainly not a huge achievement for it's day. It probably has little cultural value compared to other buildings in your city.