Preservation can kill a place by removing its living use

Evidence

The popular Aquarium within its walls had made the fort a busy, bustling place. Without the Aquarium, it was a circle of walls. As one perceptive observer put it, “Now it is [a monument]: to be looked at, but not used. Having achieved the status of Art (Architectural division), it is to be revered as a saintly relic, not involved in the life of the city.” It is still history as it sits there in Battery Park, but it is dead history. — Robert A. Caro, The Power Broker, 2919

Categorization

• XREF: Resonates with the three published essays’ concern for living infrastructure vs preserved relics — trees as working infrastructure rather than monuments. — connects to: Preservation requires removing something from its immediate existence — Catherine Malabou, The Future of Hegel: Plasticity,…, 1059; Museumification exterminates what direct worms and decay could not — Jean Baudrillard, Simulacra and Simulation, 41; Preservation always involves an economy of loss and distress — Catherine Malabou, The Future of Hegel: Plasticity,…, 1060 (+6 more)

Broader Connections

• Preservation requires removing something from its immediate existence #expands (0.85) — Catherine Malabou, The Future of Hegel, 1059
• Mere preservation of tradition destroys culture, not sustains it #exemplifies (0.85) — Mark Fisher (edited by Darren Ambrose), K-Punk, 564
• Attempts to preserve the fleeting actually destroy what they seek to keep. #corroborates (0.85) — Theodor W. Adorno, Minima Moralia, 141
• Museumification exterminates what direct worms and decay could not #exemplifies (0.80) — Jean Baudrillard, Simulacra and Simulation, 41
• Preservation always involves an economy of loss and distress #corroborates (0.80) — Catherine Malabou, The Future of Hegel, 1060