As we approach America’s 250th birthday, reflecting upon our history and especially our cultural resources, it is impossible not to notice what is either being done or left undone with our historic buildings, landmarks and sites, whether on a case-by-case basis, or in consideration of the historic downtown or neighborhood.
Historic properties are found everywhere, not just in districts legally recognized as such. Some historic properties have been treated more successfully than others. But others languish, eventually becoming such eyesores that municipalities have no other recourse (seemingly) than to condemn the structure and demolish it. This is almost always a tragedy, as the loss of these invaluable physical records of history also diminish American memory.
Presently, there seems to be a crisis in America regarding the cause of preserving our cultural resources – our cultural memory. Why?
There are many contributing reasons, but it’s also good to remember that this has been happening ever since the founding of our nation. Even in the past, the reasons for dismantling a building were not far from today’s. The pattern for founding new towns and cities in America was almost always to build the first buildings out of wood, and then, 25-50 years later, as more wealth accumulated, demolish most of the wood versions in favor of new structures in brick or stone.
Today, however, Modernism, or “progressive architecture,” if you prefer, is the principal killer of architectural precedent. Its partner-in-crime is Development. “Out with the old, in with the new” is the unchanging mantra for both. Old buildings are seen as blemishes which must be removed from the face of the built-environment, standing in the way of progress.
Development is not wrong, but the best kind of development is “Smart Development,” which is sensitive towards both cultural and environmental issues. Thankfully, there are many who practice this excellent preservation ethic.
Still, the problem is much deeper than all of this. Historic preservation begins with a love of history, and presently, love of history and ancient landmarks seems to be at an all-time low.
The maxim for historic preservation is that “preservation is done on the local level.” This is true in most cases, with exceptions, of course. The average citizen will always recognize and appreciate a successful preservation project, but it seems that fewer citizens understand what is involved in the undertaking of such a project, nor do they understand the principles of preservation as applied to historic properties.
The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties for Preservation, Rehabilitation, Restoration, and Reconstruction are the finest documents ever crafted for guiding a preservation initiative to a successful conclusion. Indeed, the entire art and science of historic preservation is a fascinating field, led by incredible, highly-specialized people who possess a diverse skill-set as historians, poets, artists, curators, economists, planners, archeologists, engineers, architects and more. But what makes their work difficult is dealing with those in government and the professional fields of architecture, engineering, code-enforcement and construction who do not have a preservation ethic. Those who do possess this quality are the champions of preservation, but they’re few in number and hard to find. A structural engineer who can (and will) assess the true structural integrity of a building is worth his weight in gold, just as a mayor, code official, city council member, architect, or builder who gets historic preservation, would be.
The problems facing historic preservation are very complex, and, like a knotted fishing cord, are not easily untangled in one easy setting. A great first step, however, is to begin teaching our children about historic preservation in the home, as well as teaching it in our schools, colleges and universities, especially in colleges of business and economic development.
Nor should it end there. It should be a required part of professional testing, based entirely on the Interior secretary’s standards, for licensing in architecture, engineering, code-enforcement and construction. Additionally, any municipal boards or commissions for architectural review, code-enforcement, planning, land-use, or economic development should require that a candidate pass a substantial examination involving historic preservation before being seated on the board.
The result and benefit of such an educational initiative? Without doubt, there would be a significant increase in the number of historic buildings, landmarks, places and sites saved sensitively with the most appropriate treatments for future generations to behold, enjoy, use and learn from for the next 250 years of our nation’s history. One of the greatest minds on architecture and it’s relationship to a nation’s culture, John Ruskin, said something similar in his classic work, “The Seven Lamps of Architecture”:
Therefore, when we build, let us think that we build forever. Let it not be for present delight, nor for present use alone; let it be such work as our descendants will thank us for, and let us think, as we lay stone on stone, that a time is to come when those stones will be held sacred because our hands have touched them, and that men will say as they look upon the labor and wrought substance of them, ’See! this our fathers did for us.’ For, indeed, the greatest glory of a building is not in its stones, or in its gold. Its glory is in its Age, and in that deep sense of voicefulness, of stern watching, of mysterious sympathy, nay, even of approval or condemnation, which we feel in walls that have long been washed by the passing waves of humanity.
If we want to see the next generation mature into successful, capable adults, then one of the most basic things we can do is teach them about past generations. And what better physical way can we do that than by teaching them to appreciate the architectural styles of the past?
Thomas Kaufmann writes from Montgomery, and may be contacted at [email protected].
The republication of this culture article was made possible by The Fred & Rheta Skelton Center for Cultural Renewal, a project of 1819 News. To comment on this article, please email [email protected].
The views and opinions expressed here are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the policy or position of 1819 News.
Don't miss out! Subscribe to our newsletter and get our top stories every weekday morning.
