prose like this always makes me wonder if i'm stupid. it seems like somebody spent a lot of time crafting it, but it just goes nowhere.
so in the absence of a point in the article, here's the point i wish it made alongside those pictures: all of those buildings would surely be called "ugly" if somebody proposed building them in my city. it seems like every time a new building is proposed, the general consensus amongst the neighbours is that it's ugly, and will ruin the "character of the neighbourhood". but looking back on historical buildings, it seems like almost nothing is considered ugly. everything is a style, and a specific building might be a good or bad example of the style. but everything that gets built is worthy of appreciation (and preservation).
once a building exists and has been used, or even just experience by people passing by, people will come to love the building for what it is. there's no such thing as an ugly building.
so in the absence of a point in the article, here's the point i wish it made alongside those pictures: all of those buildings would surely be called "ugly" if somebody proposed building them in my city. it seems like every time a new building is proposed, the general consensus amongst the neighbours is that it's ugly, and will ruin the "character of the neighbourhood". but looking back on historical buildings, it seems like almost nothing is considered ugly. everything is a style, and a specific building might be a good or bad example of the style. but everything that gets built is worthy of appreciation (and preservation).
once a building exists and has been used, or even just experience by people passing by, people will come to love the building for what it is. there's no such thing as an ugly building.