Comments on: Fantasy, failure, and faux: that’s Victoria! http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/yulelog/2008/11/20/fantasy-failure-and-faux-thats-victoria/ I am a mongrel - O ma! A gremlin... Thu, 24 Sep 2009 04:34:17 -0400 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Yule http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/yulelog/2008/11/20/fantasy-failure-and-faux-thats-victoria/comment-page-1/#comment-9420 Yule Sat, 22 Nov 2008 05:30:45 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/yulelog/?p=1097#comment-9420 Sure, it could. Much depends on whether it's as well-crafted as David Robinson's antique shop (I think that's the building you're thinking of), and on <i>whether the economic base is in place to keep these buildings maintained.</i> . I absolutely don't have any quibbles with that. What drives me crazy, though, is this infantile attachment to a Beatrix Potter world that's supposed to run itself, with nary a concern for economic realities, <i>or for real people</i>, a world in which everything is based strictly on aesthetics: on whether it's quaint, charming, attractive in a superficial sort of way. . That's what gets me about the Victorian attachment to fantasy. At some point, it's just not good enough anymore to dither around like Peter Rabbit - or perhaps we're talking about The Wind in the Willows, with make-believe Toads of Toad Hall, or Rattys of the Riverbank? . When some people here (the letter writer and his blogger friend) espouse the virtues of heritage, they're not talking about <i>working</i> heritage, or heritage that's productive for the future. They're talking about an infantile attachment to a childish fantasy from "back in the day" where they were all-powerful conquerors ...as opposed to the sadder reality of their present. Sure, it could. Much depends on whether it’s as well-crafted as David Robinson’s antique shop (I think that’s the building you’re thinking of), and on whether the economic base is in place to keep these buildings maintained.
.
I absolutely don’t have any quibbles with that. What drives me crazy, though, is this infantile attachment to a Beatrix Potter world that’s supposed to run itself, with nary a concern for economic realities, or for real people, a world in which everything is based strictly on aesthetics: on whether it’s quaint, charming, attractive in a superficial sort of way.
.
That’s what gets me about the Victorian attachment to fantasy. At some point, it’s just not good enough anymore to dither around like Peter Rabbit – or perhaps we’re talking about The Wind in the Willows, with make-believe Toads of Toad Hall, or Rattys of the Riverbank?
.
When some people here (the letter writer and his blogger friend) espouse the virtues of heritage, they’re not talking about working heritage, or heritage that’s productive for the future. They’re talking about an infantile attachment to a childish fantasy from “back in the day” where they were all-powerful conquerors …as opposed to the sadder reality of their present.

]]> By: Robert Randall http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/yulelog/2008/11/20/fantasy-failure-and-faux-thats-victoria/comment-page-1/#comment-9401 Robert Randall Fri, 21 Nov 2008 05:25:26 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/yulelog/?p=1097#comment-9401 I suppose Tudorbethan could become genuine heritage. Our Italianate buildings are, and they are derived from Renaissance forms which in turn of course, are inspired by classical sources. The best Downtown example of Tudorbethan is probably the antique store (name escapes me) that has the bike shop next door in the 1000 block Fort. There's a mid-century photo of it on the BC Archives site. It's unusually well-crafted. I suppose Tudorbethan could become genuine heritage. Our Italianate buildings are, and they are derived from Renaissance forms which in turn of course, are inspired by classical sources.

The best Downtown example of Tudorbethan is probably the antique store (name escapes me) that has the bike shop next door in the 1000 block Fort. There’s a mid-century photo of it on the BC Archives site. It’s unusually well-crafted.

]]>