Home
Creators
Search Recent Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Register Favorites Keys Review DMs Logout
Community
Telegram ThePornDude
Home Creators Posts Import Register Favorites Logout

new article (Patreon)

Published:
2018-10-19 17:16:51
Imported:
2026-06
Tags:
haven't archived this post yet. have a subscription? use the importer!

Content

I wrote about preservation, Late Capitalism™ and flickr for The Baffler! (warning: some light politics)

Files

Previews only

The Archivists of Extinction | Kate Wagner

We like to think of buildings as being permanent, unchanging. They feel permanent; after all, it is part of a building's basic purpose, reliably sheltering us from the elements. But the unfortunate truth is that most buildings do not last long. It might shock you to learn that a 2001 U.S.

Comments

Anonymous

It's interesting how poverty is often the best force for preservation there is. Towns that lose their primary industry or political significance tend to sit more or less unchanged, except by the inevitable processes of decay that they no longer have the money to combat.

Anonymous

Kate, one thing you don't talk about is cost. That's a key reason why so many older buildings don't survive. Older buildings cost a lot more to maintain than newer ones. We live in an 1850s home, and we need to hire specialists in historic buildings to handle its roofs, electric system, heating, air conditioning, floor refinishing, and wall replastering. Not to mention a structural engineer to shore up basement crossbeams eaten by powderpost beetles decades ago. We've spent far more than we'll ever get back when we sell. For people with limited incomes, these costs are unaffordable. So they may make changes that alter the home's original architecture--like adding non-authentic storm doors and windows--or neglect key components until the home becomes unsalvagable, becoming a "tear down."