I think we missed posting this last weekend...but it is priceless: Tom Wolfe gets ample page real estate in the New York Times Opinion section to chastise the NYC Preservation Commission and beat down developers. Why does the Commission have no power? And then again, should it? Read The (Naked) City and the Undead | If the NY Times removes it from the free section, find it also here.
5 Comments
I saw this but I haven't read through it yet...thanks for doing the due diligence.
I appreciate Tom Wolfe's impassioned defense of New York and his style is unique. I can't disagree with his view of planners in bed with NYC mayors, but his vision of preservation coming through here is nothing but elitist. I figure I would have liked to see the Ed Durell Stone building live on and of course the Commission is in the mayor's pocket. He himself argues that in the past, the Commission was composed of high brow, culture capital-packin' elites. So I am not sure if what he presents is a choice between bad and worse.
...or not exactly "planners in bed" but developers...
fascinating piece, every bit as sensationalistic as you'd expect from wolfe. and ready-made for a sure-to-be-upcoming book of essays?
while it DOES seem like the ny preservation body's claws have been removed, in the case of columbus circle, i've consistently felt that it would be better for that building to be remembered fondly (and with rancor for those who messed it up!) than actually saved.
i expect cloepfil's modifications to be fully redeeming and a lot of the heartburn to fade.
I enjoy Tom Wolfe's points, but not his writing style.
I like Cloepfil's work, but when will something so incredibly goofy come along in the upcoming decades? I'm not totally against the renovation, but it makes me feel a little wistful. And the politics behind it all are sickening.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.