Beauty as a Business

Continuing with the debate of aesthetics and its validity, I would like to say that Ceci made a very good point with the mention of selfishness among some of the environmentalists in the reading. Although the area replaced by the cement plant would be less pleasing to the eye than the wilderness that was once there, this is true for any site untouched by industry. For a citizen of Hudson to say that the plant should not be build because it wouldn't look nice is unreasonable as it implies either that the plant would look nice somewhere else, or that no new industry is justified because it is not as pleasing to the eye as a forest or river. The plant will replace views of nature no matter where it is built and what these people are saying is "don't build over my view." Signs that read:"save our city, save our river" signify to me a kind of instinctual possessiveness completely unconcerned with anyone else's city or river. On a personal note I find it a little hard to take seriously a group of people so opposed to unaesthetic arcitechure when, from what I could see in the video,these people live in a city made up of rundown former brothels. In my opinion such concerns for aesthetics should be geared more toward the preservation of already inhabited areas in which beauty has been maintained and is enjoyed by a majority.

This brings me to the topic of Cape Wind, also brought up by Ceci in her most recent post. Being a year round resident of Cape Cod I hear many opinions about the towering windfarms to be placed in nantucket sound. Just as with the city of Hudson, some citizens' only argument is that the structures would mar the beauty of the area. Although I enjoy very much the beauty of my home and the surrounding areas, I can by no means glorify them to the extent that they would be too beautiful for something so potentially benefitial to the environment as these wind farms. In this case,however, there is some validity to the argument of aesthetics as Cape Cod is highly tourist based in its economy. Citizen's owe their living to the beauty of the area and I feel as though the concern for aesthetics is much less selfish here as thousands from around the country visit the cape so that they too can enjoy its sights. Although I believe that tourism is a powerful argument, my major concerns are more related to the economics of the construction itself. If these windfarms were entirely effective, I think it would be a great advancement in environmentalism and a step toward keeping our earth clean. If these farms were inneffective or somehow failed, however, this would be a disaster and presents a risk I am very reluctant to see taken. This project being the first offshore windfarm in the U.S. presents many potential problems. If the 130 proposed turbines break down or cause an oil leak, the cost for upkeep may prove these structures as being more trouble than they are worth. This is not to mention the damage it would do to the surrounding ecosystem. When one thinks of the traditional windfarm in a field in the middle of nowhere, these issues are much less powerful as failure doesn't necesarrily mean the destruction of a region's fishing and tourist economy. For these reasons I have to conclude that although beauty is in the eye of the beholder, it must be evaluated in a personal as well as an economic sense.