Quote:
Originally Posted by Drybrain
It's funny because in my experience it's often the opposite (although certainly there are no hard-and-fast rules). I find older generations are often quite willing to write off demolitions as the price of progress, but among people in their 20s and 30s, there's a real value placed on the historic character of place.
I'm 35 (so getting to the end of youth!) but I've always cared about this stuff, and so does almost everyone I know.
|
Most people I know in their forties and older tend to care about the history and architecture of the older structures. Some don't care so much, but I don't ever hear anybody saying that they prefer to have the old stuff torn down for the generic new stuff that's being put up. Typically, even if it's not on the forefront of their thoughts, if you bring up the subject of an old structure being razed they think it's a shame at the very least.
That said, my social circle doesn't intersect much with the business sector, and I expect that the percentage of business-oriented people who favour tearing down old buildings would be much higher than average, as their priorities would tend to be more focused on creating revenue rather than preserving history. IMHO.
If it's true that younger generations prefer the preservation of older architecture, then perhaps AGBANS would be well-served to recruit from that age group and promote activism for this very activity among them. After all, once the older generations have torn down their built heritage and have passed on, it's the younger generations, their children and grandchildren, that will have to live with the results of our current society's misdeeds.