Sometimes I read something and am so struck by its "rightness," that I just have to share it with everyone I know. That happened today when I read a column in the March 1, 2007 edition of The Southampton Press by Anne Surchin, a Sag Hampton-based architect and writer. Ms. Surchin used the Press' s architecture column to discourse on the importance of historic preservation. She first compared and contrasted the difference in approach taken by the Towns of Southold (effective) and Southampton (virtually non-existent outside of Sag Harbor). She then speculated on the reasons for this disparity, concluding with the following paragraphs that I really wish I had written.

"Since the goose that laid the golden egg, the very sense of place that has attracted tourists to the East End for over a hundred years, is fast disappearing, newcomers arrive with the conviction that what they are placing in the landscape is somehow appropriate for this place. And since they have no connection and no historical memory regarding the Hamptons, they offer a pitch about improving the economy with their projects.

"How much more improved does this economy need to be?

"It is simply a mono-economy no longer based on tourism but rather on second homes.

"Ironically, preservation is good for a diversified business economy, for investment, for attracting visitors, for establishing unique places to live and work, for increasing property values, for federal tax benefits and for saving valuable resources.

"It's all about the value of our identity, stupid!"

Amen.

Thanks to Mike Anthony, Chairman of the Southampton Town Democratic Committee for bringing this article to my attention.
Note: There's no link to the full article here, because you have to be a paid subscriber to read the Press online.

-------------------------------------------------------
Currently listening to: Not California by Hem