Simple. Evolution of architecture into modern design. Out with the old, in with the new methodology.
As for California and Chicago, I cannot say as Im not versed in the events surrounding those cities. But, given that both were disasters with high casualties and infrastructure destruction, one might consider they bricked over entire areas where there was massive loss of life and there was nothing to salvage as far as sublevel infrastructure.
So basically like dozers used in the world wars to build mass graves, the respective cities you mentioned perhaps literally buried the dead. Bricking them in, a form of mausoleum. Most wouldve been charred remains anyhow.
At work, will definitely look later though, thank you!
I would be remiss if not to remind you though, CA was developed many years before the gold rush. The Spanish had been there for quite some time establishing many elaborate buildings and settlements. One of those being the SF area. Very comparable to other Spanish colonies throughout the Americas and Caribbean.
Outside of churches and later various latin American revision/restructuring the Spanish did use bricks, and often times used the neoclassical designs themselves for the very structure types you mentioned. E.g. the stucco plaster shit you see all over Latin America is 99% repair work done well after the fall of the Spanish empire. Shit, we've been using bricks on a massive scale for 1000+ years. The common red mortar bricks most people recognize go back to the 1500s if Im not mistaken.
That's like saying "how come the world uses suspension bridges (starting not long after the aforementioned time frame) instead of arch & keystone method stone bridges???"
Just playing devil's advocate here with simplistic reasoning that can be easily researched. As mentioned before, im no expert on the US history involving SF & Chicago. Lol I only opened my trap in your post because I've heard so much conjecture from "experts" about Eastern and Northern Europe about said "mud flood" and it's super easy to debunk. Witness wise, there's millions of people still alive today in the former USSR that literally had a hand in the reconstruction due to communism. Additionally, all of these counties kept very good books on the processes and details of said work.
Reading through that, one person claims that it's impossible to construct those types of buildings even now. Really? Is it that it's impossible or rather that the elites choose not to, instead opting to lean into brutalist architecture to create a sense of oppression? How many of these people making these claims are architects and not just speaking out of their ass?
You are overlooking the fact that by the time the gold rush in California happened, the Spanish had been colonizing California since the 16th century and had built a highway system, El Camino Real, which is now a modern road but still there. There was shipping activity at the natural ports of San Diego, Monterey, and San Francisco. It wasn't the frontier. The Oregon Trail brought plenty of people from the east. There were railroads all over the place. And as to craftsmanship, there are and have always been very few artists of Michaelangelo calibre, but they were there. No need to postulate aliens or whatever. It's just hard to get really good when the average lifespan is only about 45, most people die first.
Why don't people make stuff like that anymore?
Simple. Evolution of architecture into modern design. Out with the old, in with the new methodology.
As for California and Chicago, I cannot say as Im not versed in the events surrounding those cities. But, given that both were disasters with high casualties and infrastructure destruction, one might consider they bricked over entire areas where there was massive loss of life and there was nothing to salvage as far as sublevel infrastructure.
So basically like dozers used in the world wars to build mass graves, the respective cities you mentioned perhaps literally buried the dead. Bricking them in, a form of mausoleum. Most wouldve been charred remains anyhow.
At work, will definitely look later though, thank you!
I would be remiss if not to remind you though, CA was developed many years before the gold rush. The Spanish had been there for quite some time establishing many elaborate buildings and settlements. One of those being the SF area. Very comparable to other Spanish colonies throughout the Americas and Caribbean.
Outside of churches and later various latin American revision/restructuring the Spanish did use bricks, and often times used the neoclassical designs themselves for the very structure types you mentioned. E.g. the stucco plaster shit you see all over Latin America is 99% repair work done well after the fall of the Spanish empire. Shit, we've been using bricks on a massive scale for 1000+ years. The common red mortar bricks most people recognize go back to the 1500s if Im not mistaken.
That's like saying "how come the world uses suspension bridges (starting not long after the aforementioned time frame) instead of arch & keystone method stone bridges???"
Just playing devil's advocate here with simplistic reasoning that can be easily researched. As mentioned before, im no expert on the US history involving SF & Chicago. Lol I only opened my trap in your post because I've heard so much conjecture from "experts" about Eastern and Northern Europe about said "mud flood" and it's super easy to debunk. Witness wise, there's millions of people still alive today in the former USSR that literally had a hand in the reconstruction due to communism. Additionally, all of these counties kept very good books on the processes and details of said work.
Reading through that, one person claims that it's impossible to construct those types of buildings even now. Really? Is it that it's impossible or rather that the elites choose not to, instead opting to lean into brutalist architecture to create a sense of oppression? How many of these people making these claims are architects and not just speaking out of their ass?
You are overlooking the fact that by the time the gold rush in California happened, the Spanish had been colonizing California since the 16th century and had built a highway system, El Camino Real, which is now a modern road but still there. There was shipping activity at the natural ports of San Diego, Monterey, and San Francisco. It wasn't the frontier. The Oregon Trail brought plenty of people from the east. There were railroads all over the place. And as to craftsmanship, there are and have always been very few artists of Michaelangelo calibre, but they were there. No need to postulate aliens or whatever. It's just hard to get really good when the average lifespan is only about 45, most people die first.