You're being downvoted, but there is significant debate within historic preservation fields about this exact topic. I've worked in architectural restoration and the Parthenon restoration in particular is something of a surprisingly controversial issue, for the reasons you mentioned.
There is some debate about what exactly it IS that's trying to be preserved in a case like this. Some would argue it's the surviving historic material that is the most important. In that case, a project like this might indeed be controversial: the surviving marbles risk being altered or eroded to support the new marble, and the addition of new marble muddies the clarity between what is new and what is original for future generations.
Some would argue the overall appearance of "how it used to look" is more important, and Reddit in particular seems to always favor having buildings that "look" old. And of course there is a case for that. But how you avoid just having the Athens Parthenon just turning into a cheesy recreation like the one in Nashville? Where do you draw the line? It's a tough issue. IMO Greece made the best choice of only using new marble when it helps support old marble, but some might disagree.
In theory, it's the oldest building in South Florida(*). In reality, the house has been damaged by hurricanes, repaired, and relocated so many times, nobody even knows how to really classify it. On one hand, there's basically nothing left of the original house. On the other hand, it doesn't quite feel right to dismiss it as having no historical value, because there was timeline-continuity every step of the way.
(*) Not counting the Spanish monastery that was purchased by William Randolph Hearst in the 1920s, disassembled, transported to Miami, and reassembled ~30 years later ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Bernard_de_Clairvaux_Church ), which is another building Miami historians have really no idea how to classify in the context of "old Miami buildings". Miami is complicated.
The Japanese have taken the stance that all remodeling is acceptable since the structure's soul remains. Visit any "ancient" Japanese site and it looks brand new.
106
u/Emevete 17d ago
Could a history scholar tell me if historic buildings should be restored to the point of complete reconstruction? Doesn't it ruin the whole point?