Hacker News Reader

Comment by yosito | Hacker News Reader

This was an interesting read, but it was written mostly as if cities were just surrendered to the forces of nature. In many or most cases, I would assume that when a building starts to succumb to the forces of nature, the city would either reinforce it or demolish it, and the city itself will continue to evolve. In some cases, I supposed cities may be abandoned, but in most cases, it will probably be a slow, evolving change barring some dramatic catastrophe.

View on HN

Buildings are alive like flames. They are living manifestations of a culture.

The Cathedrals stand because they have been maintained by each generation -- and each generation has added something: a chapel, a statue, a ceiling boss. To this day you will often find them surrounded by scaffolding. It detracts from the view but it's as much a part of the process as the stone.

Angkor Wat is no older, yet it has crumbled. Its maintenance ceased for generations. The difference is stark.

(Angkor is now seeing something of a revival. Restoration work has occurred over the last two or three generations, and more will happen now as the Khmer people become wealthier again.)

These buildings are a reminder that there are long-term dynamics of birth and death and reproduction that outlive the individual.

> one of the things that's wrong with North Americans

Why do you have to make this about something being wrong with a group of people?

You're right. The post is better without that final tag. I've removed it.

But for honesty's sake, I will note here that, originally, I ended the parent post:

> Maybe the absence of these reminders is one of the things that's wrong with North Americans.

I do think there's a problem to do with being historically adrift, but I won't belabor it here.

Countries fixate their national pride on what they have.

If they don't have the dynamism, economy, or youth of other countries, they fixate on what they do have — buildings which are faded memories of the cultures which built them.

There is also a more positive side. Angkor is a symbol of pride for a (demographically) young, growing, and optimistic nation.

Depends on how it comes about.

In some places - Detroit is an example - people start leaving, the tax base dwindles, and by the time they realize the need to demolish things, the funds aren't there. In some cases, the city pulls in its borders and declares the former-city areas someone else's problem.

Here's a Detroit residential neighborhood suffering it now: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/eerie-images-of-detroits-m...

I think the poor quality of the U.S. housing stock reflects the long-term shabbiness of our mandatory nomadic character. We move for the jobs, we set up shacks by the gold mines, but we never develop roots and, for the most part, we never get to build real wealth.

Why do you think US houses are of poor quality? Just because they don't last forever with no maintenance? I don't think there's any point in over-building.

It's also a strange statement because US housing is highly regional; there are no bungalow courts in New York as there are no brownstones in LA.

I don't think that's a totally unfair statement depending on the region though. At least in Seattle a fair amount of homes are Craftsman homes which haven't aged well since they were ordered directly from a Sears catalog without considering the very wet local climate of the Northwest. (And yes, that Sears and that Craftsman.)

> And yes, that Sears and that Craftsman.

I'm aware of Sears catalog homes but not of any link between the Sears owned Craftsman tool brand and the craftsman style of home, which is connected to the Arts and Crafts design movement. Can you provide a reference?

I think I got my marbles mixed up. Unfortunately it’s well past the time to make a correction.

Happens to us all ;)

I do wonder if the tool name (apparently a brand purchased from a small Chicago toolmaker by Sears in 1927) was inspired in part by the architectural movement, which was the product of a specific designer (Gustav Stickley) in the early 1900s.

I couldn't find any references to such a connection though.

I think it's plausible that we could see entire cities abandoned in our lifetime due to climate catastrophe.

Some cities, yes. Jakarta comes to mind as a likely example. But if you look at photos of the areas of Jakarta that are submerged in water, it's clear that they weren't wealthy areas to begin with. I think wealthier cities like Shanghai or Miami will take a very different route.

IIRC Miami's issue is that a good deal of Florida is built on porous limestone, so water will just go under traditional flood barriers.

Especially coastal cities.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com