Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ghost of WWII: 1940's meticulously overlaid on modern day

mymodernmet.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 91 posts

Re: Ghost of WWII: 1940's meticulously overlaid on modern day

#21

Post by jacquesm »

ugh wrote: post #20
jacquesm wrote: post #18

The Euro-centric view is that Europe is the battlefield of the world, and that Poland is the battlefield of Europe, and during World War II that was more true than ever before or since. The cities of Rotterdam ('the city without a heart') and Dresden still tell a pretty grim tale today if your eyes are open to it, and Warsaw and Poznan have plenty of places where the repair still hasn't caught up with the damage. The…

What Europe can be quite proud of is how not only war was avoided during the last decades but also that war was made less likely over the decades. Suggesting that there could be war between Germany and France would be crazy today but certainly wasn’t always. That’s not just some flimsy anti-war sentiment which can change as new generations take over, that actually has something to do with lasting change initiated by…

Agreed, it's less likely. But idiots like Wilders are pushing the exact same buttons that a certain Austrian guy did and there is a real risk of him or someone like him rising to power.

There are more and louder voices for the break-up of the EU in the last 3 years than I've ever heard in my lifetime.

Re: Ghost of WWII: 1940's meticulously overlaid on modern day

#23

Post by palish »

brc wrote: post #12
palish wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lamenting the lack of architectural appreciation remains worthwhile. Why? Humans conform nature to our needs. If we need a better building, why shouldn't we tear down an old one? All of the previous building's history will remain documented in, say, Wikipedia. This is probably just the worldview of an inexperienced kid though. (This is an honest question, not a statement of opinion.)

Everything in the world has a U-shaped value curve. Most valuable when it is new, at some point it loses value, may even become worthless. Down the track, it will become priceless and irreplaceable. Note 'value' here isn't strictly monetary, it can be cultural as well. Dropping buildings in the midst of the U never gives things the chance to recover and move past fashion. Most buildings discarded are due to the desig…

Thank you both (brc and nos) for the insightful and thoughtful comments.

Re: Ghost of WWII: 1940's meticulously overlaid on modern day

#24

Post by arethuza »

palish wrote: post #11
projectileboy wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree, but what's considered valuable and what isn't is just fashion more often than not. And once the building is torn down, it's too late to reconsider.

That's a good point. I'm just wondering why an old building should be preserved at all. (Honestly, why?)

For me old and ancient buildings provide the soul of our cities - providing a tangible connection with the many generations of our ancestors.

Of course, it helps that I live in a beautiful and old city (though hardly ancient compared to some) - as I write this I can look up at a castle perched on the plug of an extinct volcano, parts nearly a thousand years old, and think that this is really rather a nice place to live and work.

I suggest you walk the streets of Rome or Istanbul, sit in the center of an Egyptian pyramid or wonder at the stone houses of Skara Brae and then consider what the value of "old buildings" are.

Re: Ghost of WWII: 1940's meticulously overlaid on modern day

#25

Post by Amnon »

brc wrote: post #12
palish wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lamenting the lack of architectural appreciation remains worthwhile. Why? Humans conform nature to our needs. If we need a better building, why shouldn't we tear down an old one? All of the previous building's history will remain documented in, say, Wikipedia. This is probably just the worldview of an inexperienced kid though. (This is an honest question, not a statement of opinion.)

Everything in the world has a U-shaped value curve. Most valuable when it is new, at some point it loses value, may even become worthless. Down the track, it will become priceless and irreplaceable. Note 'value' here isn't strictly monetary, it can be cultural as well. Dropping buildings in the midst of the U never gives things the chance to recover and move past fashion. Most buildings discarded are due to the desig…

> Everything in the world has a U-shaped value curve.

On this point, a good thing to do is to keep some of the ubiquitous everyday things when you want to throw them away. Especially outdated technology like, say, old mobile phones. In 50 years they will become a rarity.

Re: Ghost of WWII: 1940's meticulously overlaid on modern day

#26

Post by palish »

arethuza wrote: post #24
palish wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a good point. I'm just wondering why an old building should be preserved at all. (Honestly, why?)

For me old and ancient buildings provide the soul of our cities - providing a tangible connection with the many generations of our ancestors. Of course, it helps that I live in a beautiful and old city (though hardly ancient compared to some) - as I write this I can look up at a castle perched on the plug of an extinct volcano, parts nearly a thousand years old, and think that this is really rather a nice place to li…

That's really cool. A city with a castle on a volcano? Which city is that?

Re: Ghost of WWII: 1940's meticulously overlaid on modern day

#27

Post by davidw »

JacobAldridge wrote: post #4
jonursenbach wrote: post #3

Kind of depressing that most of the US will never have something as cool as this due to this countries lack of appreciation for dated architecture.

That, and the fact that the last war to be fought on US soil pre-dates the invention of film. (US Civil War ended in 1865; film was invented by George Eastman in 1884) Lamenting the lack of architectural appreciation remains worthwhile.

A tiny bit of WWII was fought on US soil:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aleutian_Islands_Campaign

You're correct though, for all intents and purposes.

Re: Ghost of WWII: 1940's meticulously overlaid on modern day

#28

Post by ido »

nostrademons wrote: post #17
brc wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everything in the world has a U-shaped value curve. Most valuable when it is new, at some point it loses value, may even become worthless. Down the track, it will become priceless and irreplaceable. Note 'value' here isn't strictly monetary, it can be cultural as well. Dropping buildings in the midst of the U never gives things the chance to recover and move past fashion. Most buildings discarded are due to the desig…

Much of the Northeast has this flavor. I dunno if you've ever been to the Boston area, but many of the buildings have this same sense of history to them. In the leather district, you've got former tanning factories which became porn studios which became software offices and yuppie lofts. In Maynard, you have old textile mills from the industrial revolution, which became DEC in the 50s and 60s, which became Monster.co…

Philadelphia & Boston are probably the most "old-world" looking major cities in the US.

Montreal in Canada is also worth taking a look at.

Re: Ghost of WWII: 1940's meticulously overlaid on modern day

#29

Post by jacquesm »

palish wrote: post #6
JacobAldridge wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That, and the fact that the last war to be fought on US soil pre-dates the invention of film. (US Civil War ended in 1865; film was invented by George Eastman in 1884) Lamenting the lack of architectural appreciation remains worthwhile.

Lamenting the lack of architectural appreciation remains worthwhile. Why? Humans conform nature to our needs. If we need a better building, why shouldn't we tear down an old one? All of the previous building's history will remain documented in, say, Wikipedia. This is probably just the worldview of an inexperienced kid though. (This is an honest question, not a statement of opinion.)

The one thing I always hear Americans say when they visit this side of the Atlantic is that there 'is so much history here'. And with space at a premium in a large part of the cities here the urge to tear down and rebuild is just as large or larger than it is in the US.

But I think that it goes deeper than that. Some of the buildings are so old that they should have fallen down long ago, it's just that there is always somebody that thinks that to repair it is the better course than to throw it down. Having a lot of historical buildings around you and near you sets the stage and it would feel unnatural to remove one of them and replace it with some modern house. When an old farmhouse burns down it usually gets rebuilt.

A big part of this is that all over europe there are heritage commissions that have a keen eye for what is and what is not of historical value and a relatively large amount of money is pumped in to maintaining those buildings that are deemed valuable. It isn't rare at all to see a 16th century building where I live (nl) and I know a couple (churches, mostly) that are older than 800 years.

For me the main reason not to tear it down is that destruction is easy, creation is not. By respecting that which was created by those that came before you get a deeper appreciation for you place in the world. Rather than document what the Sistine Chapel looks like and tearing it down (extreme example, ok), we have the original to look at, which gives a completely different sense of perspective on history. There is a reason why millions of tourists flock here to see these things with their own eyes, an image of a thing is not a replacement for the thing.

That goes for buildings, but it also goes for other works of art.

Re: Ghost of WWII: 1940's meticulously overlaid on modern day

#30

Post by Vivtek »

jonursenbach wrote: post #3

Kind of depressing that most of the US will never have something as cool as this due to this countries lack of appreciation for dated architecture.

My house, in 1905 and last year: http://big-old-house.blogspot.com/2009/09/then-1905-and-now-...
Post reply on HN