Schueckler – Week 6 Question

Place is more than physical and it’s intangible aspects can be quite fragile. Does the creative making of a place mean the erasure of any that were pre-existing? After all, if you’ve made a new place, creative or not, where does the old place go? New can certainly incorporate aspects of older places, but what if only the physical aspects, being the most resilient to change? For instance, an aggressively preserved landmark, no longer the place it one was, has necessarily become somewhere new. Many aspects may be preserved, tangible and intangible, but the place is still changed. Such is the cost of intervention and interpretation. Should greater pressure for interpretation be put on creative places as they are being made and are changing anyway?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s