I usually point out that most loss of life and property has been due to the collapse of antiquated and unsafe structures, mostly of brick and other masonry.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
I have never advised the destruction of life, but of property, yes.
In every area of the world where there is earthquake risk, there are still many buildings of this type; it is very frustrating to try to get rid of them.
What I have found most surprising is the amount of damage we have done to environment in the course of my lifetime - not even five and a half decades.
If a building looks better under construction than it does when finished, then it's a failure.
I knew I was going to lose my house in Ireland and all the other properties. It's all gone. But my house was the one material thing that was very important to me.
A building has at least two lives - the one imagined by its maker and the life it lives afterward - and they are never the same.
I am convinced that a good building must be capable of absorbing the traces of human life and taking on a specific richness... I think of the patina of age on materials, of innumerable small scratches on surfaces, of varnish that has grown dull and brittle, and of edges polished by use.
It is not the beauty of a building you should look at; its the construction of the foundation that will stand the test of time.
When we rebuild a house, we are rebuilding a home. When we recover from disaster, we are rebuilding lives and livelihoods.
The garden is growth and change and that means loss as well as constant new treasures to make up for a few disasters.
No opposing quotes found.