conservation
by uzwi
I’m waiting for the time when the Roman Wroxeter Heritage Site falls into ruin and far-postmodern generations place its replica Roman villa (2010) on a historical par with the remains of the second century municipal baths, so that the Heritage experience becomes in itself heritage, as authentic as the real thing. It’s the future of Heritage to replace the past. Meanwhile, I heard someone complain recently that the cooling towers of the about-to-be-decommissioned Ironbridge B power station “spoil” the Ironbridge World Heritage Site. And what, exactly, we ask ourselves, is the heritage of Ironbridge Gorge? Why, it’s the decommissioned remains of a couple of hundred years of industrial spoliation; that’s what brings the punter in. There are some cheap ironies here if anyone’s interested in conserving them.
the m john harrison blog 
I think it’s operationalism which suggests that s we cannot detect a difference, there is no difference. That would seem to apply here.
It’s like apologising for the past – where do you stop. You can’t keep everything just because it’s old – we’d be drowning in old crap, and suing the Italians and scandinavians for hundreds of years of genocide and oppression.
AlanT
Cheap ironies are certainly the only remnants of my historical existence.
They can make the Heritage Site a more-or-less secular equivalent to those mosques built on cathedrals built on temples.
I live near a Cracker Barrel built atop the footprint of a defunct evangelical cable station. I can’t imagine a ranker or more perfect harmony.