5 thoughts

  1. These last two posts/photos leave me with the thought:

    “What were they thinking.”

    With the remaining visual signs of historic architecture “ruined” by modern convenience I feel a loss.

  2. Earl, Juha: I have similar feelings regarding this old/new combinations. But re-thinking what I’ve seen, especially the image above might show a – not really successful – insulation of the house, that tries to at least hint to the historic wall material that lies under the styrofoam and the plaster. The thickness of the layer over the old stones and the way window and door are recessed in the wall for me is a sign that this explanation is correct.
    And while the optical effect certainly is worth discussing, for me it’s soothing that it already is more economical to insulate a building instead of using energy excessively for cooling or heating.

  3. HmmHmm … somehow I don’t find this that bad … you know what the alternatives are … demolish the arcs completely. When I am seeing things like this I always think: okay, they somehow tried to conserve something. A little bit at last.
    And I like the “exercise in geometry” to quote Juha, btw.

  4. Martina, this kind of compromise certainly is a good attempt to re-fit a centuries-old house for modern requirements. I have to admit that besides the quirks I still do like it better than those modern, sterile buildings also overabundant in the suburbs of Krk.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *