Nothing really new to report here: Buildings get old, they fall apart, people want to tear them down, other people don’t want to tear them down, drama ensues. But we just couldn’t help but bring up this ridiculously ignorant comment from an article in The Art Newspaper about preserving modernist structures, via our pals at Artkrush:
Take, for instance, Finnish architect Eero Saarinen‘s 1962 Bell Laboratories in Holmdel, New Jersey, where pioneering communication technologies were developed. Real estate developer, Preferred Real Estate Investments, has entered into an agreement to purchase the property from Lucent Technologies with plans to demolish part of the post-war two million sq. ft campus. A spokesman for the developer outlined the commercial aspect of the venture: “The building is, for all intents and purposes, functionally obsolete in today’s commercial market. The building was…constructed in a manner that would make modernisation extremely costly, if not entirely implausible. Our proposed concept plan for the site, however, does include preserving Phase One of Saarinen’s original design.”
And what in the world do you do, Preferred Real Estate Investments? Maybe you’re the ones who are constructed in a manner that makes modernization costly. You can’t even spell modernization right, how are you going to modernize anything? In fact, we can’t think of anything more “obsolete” than real estate.