searching for urban beauty: part 1
I could walk around just looking at cities for hours. I love it, really. Doesn’t matter where I am, or when I go, I’ve got to get out there and see what I can find. It’s free, fun and always different. Back in 2010, Karrie Jacobs wrote this article in Metropolis about a challenge she gave to students of her’s to seek examples of urban beauty in Los Angeles. I remember thinking at the time, well, whenever I come across classically designed buildings (naturally, I’m drawn to buildings given my architect’s bias) I think “that’s beautiful.” And on this point I believe many would agree, particularly those of us who are proponents of historic preservation. I mean who (architects? developers?) doesn’t like classical architecture?
But what about more recently constructed buildings? Can the same be said of them?
I do like the interplay of pattern created by the three below. Although admittedly my enthusiasm probably exists mostly in this sort of abstract juxtaposition. At street level or considered individually each is decidedly less compelling.
Yet I find the embossed panel on the left (below), from a 1960′s era buildings every bit as interesting as the stonework on the right, which is from a pre-1900 building.
To my surprise I’ve begun to find modern architectural beauty in pattern and detail. Looking at the post-WWII city in this way, I find there are aspects of these buildings that I can appreciate. Indeed, some elements I hope to see revisited and explored in new ways. At the top of my list are the panels and screens common to the era.
Generally, the ideal of urban beauty found in architectural forms doesn’t seem to carryover to non-classical styles like “modern” or “international.” My experience is that these styles don’t resonate much with the public, which of course seems to include everyone except for architects, design historians and aficionados. Will the generally negative view change for the better with time? Imagine this – in a few short years, those same buildings from the late 1960′s, “urban renewal” era, arguably the single most effective planned erasure of historic architectural content in urban American history, will be eligible for preservation. One would be challenged to find any urbanist today who believes that era improved American cities at all, much less contributed to their beauty. It is an intriguing question now especially since buildings from as recent as 1962 are now eligible for the National Register of Historic Places, the nation’s official list of properties worthy of preservation. Is the Register a collection of absolute beauty? No, but it’s record of architectural significance is clear.
Who knows, maybe time will bring greater perspective. But that I’ll leave that for another day. Until then, I’ll continue to walk, look and consider. Maybe I’ll notice something else I didn’t see before.
