
I mean, think about it, 123 years old is like, an eternity for a house, right? It's been through so much - two decades of disrepair, foreclosure, and all that... And now, it's being sold again, for like, $350k. But what does that really say about the value we place on our history, on our architecture, you know? Is it just about making a quick buck, or is there something more to it?
And I see both sides here - preservation groups are all about saving this piece of history, but Darnell Shields's group is like, "Hey, let's not overpay for it." But what if the right owner comes along and knows exactly how to restore it without messing with its integrity? It's like, a delicate balance, you know?
The thing that gets me is, we're always talking about progress and innovation, but when it comes to our cultural heritage, do we really take it seriously? I mean, this house has been around for over a century - what would Wright himself think if he saw it in disrepair like this?
