Chicagoist: Extra, Extra

Spav1

Thu, 24 Apr 2008 13:17:02 -0600

I'd rather be called stupid than a Bitch.... It is a conscious choice, such as.

Tower18

Thu, 24 Apr 2008 12:55:28 -0600

Did anyone else notice that, like, Spav1 recently started writing really, like, teen girl-ish lately, like or something?

Pinko

Thu, 24 Apr 2008 10:31:23 -0600

I like to think of architecture as a road map to our past. Should it all be preserved? Of course not. But I do think we need to preserve a healthy mix of the old and the new... When I stroll around my neighborhood, it's the charming Queen Annes ("Painted Ladies") and the bungalows I wistfully wish I could afford--not the McMansions and ubiquitous cinder block boxes. It's even sadder when these buildings are prematurely torn down because of some developer's greed. The preservation of these structures is important because you'll never see them built like this on a mass scale again. When they're gone, they're gone... Could one even imagine the allure of traveling to Europe without their attention to architectural preservation?

Spav1

Thu, 24 Apr 2008 10:15:35 -0600

I mean, half serious. I think that like, Lincoln's home is the shit, and should be preserved, but like, just random buildings that people like because they like, used to smoke cigarettes on the steps or whatever (I know NOTHING about this particular building) and actually has no historical value and you are just upset because it reminds you that like, others have more power and resources than you and it will always be that way...is really why you're upset? And not actually over the BUILDING. Let's just call a spade a spade.

matilda

Thu, 24 Apr 2008 10:11:54 -0600

I will assume Spav is being serious: A rich connected fuck pulled some strings to build an oversized house in the neighborhood where it wasn't wanted, judging from the outcry and following election. Next thing you know, the rich connected fuck pulls out, leaving behind an overpriced empty building. Fuck the neighorhood, I guess. Is that simple enough for you?

matty

Thu, 24 Apr 2008 10:07:53 -0600

Are you really this stupid or are you being purposely contrary?

Spav1

Thu, 24 Apr 2008 09:58:25 -0600

I get really like "I don't get it" about old buildings and why people get so upset when they are torn down. It is like, if you want a building to not be town down, build it better or more iconic or something. Like, no one is ever going to tear down the Kremlin. I don't know. That old building didn't look so special to me. Unless it was part of the Underground Railroad (c) or whatever.

matty

Wed, 23 Apr 2008 21:52:43 -0600

It won't sell. Not for years anyway. Why? Property taxes and depreciation. It's a white elephant that would have been more profitable in its old incarnation as a commercial space with rental on the top - at least nowdays.

matilda

Wed, 23 Apr 2008 20:05:05 -0600

So, rich people with connections knock down a beloved old building/business. Then, rich people, deciding they don't like their house anymore, move, leaving behind an overpriced monstrosity that longtime residents must live with. Who knows when it will sell. Were I to believe in a hell, I would hope they and that puke of an alderman were forcibly settled in the circle reserved for anti-social assholes who could not care less about the larger community. Fucking rich people.

Prescott Carlson

Wed, 23 Apr 2008 19:55:01 -0600

But matty, you're not appreciating the clean, modern, and Barrington-esque qualities of its replacement! I mean, really, you expect someone to take ornate Queen Anne architecture and make it attractive? Talk about romanticism!

matty

Wed, 23 Apr 2008 19:44:18 -0600

The knocking down of the artful dodger was one of the biggest architectual crimes in bucktown. I hope the people who did it go to hell.