Preservation Maryland interviewed me about my new book, Managing the Magic of Old Places (U. of Tennessee Press).
I talk about how I got into preservation, challenges of improving public preservation policy, and ways to make public policy more human-focused.
www.preservecast.org/2026/01/12/m...
Did you know that, in the UK, it's still legal to use lead paint for historic buildings, but not other building types?
historicengland.org.uk/advice/techn...
Public historic preservation policy at the local, state, and federal levels doesn't represent Americans.
Learn more in my book, Managing the Magic of Old Places: Crafting Public Policies for Human-Centered Historic Preservation (University of Tennessee Press), out now.
70% of historic preservation is driven by regulations that impact millions of Americans, each day. A core rule, "historical significance" validates the historicity of places bc of the requirements of small group of long-dead men & ignores values of most Americans.
youtube.com/shorts/d_E1C...
Historical significance wants to convince long-dead men that a place is historic.
Historical significance is a fundamental part of local, state, and federal public historic preservation policy & only represents the values of 95 long-dead people, not the public.
youtu.be/4u_1Dv5aYuo
Historic preservationists aren't so willing to take on advocating for preservation independently of historical significance.
They should.
www.inquirer.com/real-estate/...
In the US, historic preservation—defined by the majority of its paid work—is synonymous with public policy. And, public preservation policy ignores people when it should, instead, center their values & experiences. Historic preservation is much more than things.
youtube.com/shorts/4ILCA...
The creation of US federal historic preservation policy was a racist act, rooted in the Jim Crow south and upholding the "Lost Cause."
Read more in my book, Managing the Magic of Old Places (University of Tennessee Press), out now.
youtube.com/shorts/Qq2mU...
William Sumner Appleton (1874-1947), an American who founded Historic New England, helped develop today's US historic preservation policies.
By preserving the bldgs of New England, he believed he was preserving the superiority of the white people associated with them.
youtube.com/shorts/z6vz0...
Old (or "historic") places are fundamentally significant because of the emotions they instill in us.
Public historic preservation/built heritage policy is irrelevant to most people bc it can't recognize this "magic."
For more info, see my book, Managing the Magic of Old Places, out now.
Old (or "historic") places are fundamentally significant because of the emotions they instill in us.
Public historic preservation/built heritage policy is irrelevant to most people bc it can't recognize this "magic."
For more info, see my book, Managing the Magic of Old Places, out now.
Camillo Boito (1836-1914) was an Italian architect whose scientism began the multi-decade path of elite white, male Europeans (and later Americans) devising increasingly more complicated ways to sideline the values that the public held for the historic built environment.
youtube.com/shorts/0x0o2...
William Morris is well acknowledged as one of the "godfathers" of historic preservation.
He believed that the material culture of other peoples in the world was inherently inferior to his own.
Learn more in Managing the Magic of Old Places (U of TN Press), out now.
Actually, historic preservation doctrine and the US policies (e.g., laws, regs) built around it has quite a deep history around white supremacy, fascism, and eugenics. I talk about this on my YouTube site. www.youtube.com/@OldPlaceMagic
Actually, in the US, historic preservation laws (and regulations) are rather weak. Especially with the White House, which is exempt under Section 107 of the National Historic Preservation Act, there really isn't much for preservation advocacy organizations to do other than issue statements.
John Ruskin is THE acknowledged Godfather of historic preservation.
He was also well-documented racist.
Learn more in Managing the Magic of Old Places: Crafting Public Policies for Human-Centered Historic Preservation (University of Tennessee Press), out now.
youtube.com/shorts/p4kbw...
While you might be familiar with some aspects of historic preservation law and regulations, do you know what the differences and similarities are between a historic preservation law, a regulation, or a guideline?
Here's a video that explains it all.
youtu.be/WpdWrqGqFjk
The Landmarks Board is beholden to the 95 ppl who created the most important parts of US public preservation policy from 1850 to 1980. Design guidelines, integrity, historicity that the Board uses were all made by these ppl more than 50 years ago. Public preservation policy doesn't serve the public.
Most people have no idea how small the historic preservation field is. Only 20k people in total work in it. (About the same number as fashion designers.) Most people are passive supporters: the National Trust has 300K members, most of whom are in it for the aesthetics and love of historic homes.
Blame this on the 100 years of very narrow preservation doctrine created by about 70 or so people that was then absorbed wholesale into US public preservation policy. (At all levels--local, state, federal.) Public preservation policy hasn't changed in 50 years in the US and doesn't serve the public.
Historic preservation policy at the local, state, and fed levels embodies the ideas of many fascists, racists, and eugenicists.
These individual’s ideas are still alive and well in today’s preservation policies.
Learn more in my book, Managing the Magic of Old Places (U of TN Press), out now.
Public historic preservation policy is a BIG DEAL.
HP employment is not in architecture or the construction industry, museums, or advocacy; it’s in government or cultural resource management.
See, Managing the Magic of Old Places (University of Tennessee Press)
youtube.com/shorts/a1V4x...
If you were born after WWII, your values and perspectives are not represented in US public historic preservation policy at the local, state, and federal levels.
Learn more in my book, Managing the Magic of Old Places (U of TN Press), which is out now.
Public historic preservation policy in the US is a big deal, but not enough people know what it is, what it does, and how it is inherently exclusionary. This video fills this gap.
Governmental agencies can make preservation more people-centered without new legislation.
youtu.be/-VkOgwLfeBE
If you don’t have a degree from a place like Columbia or Harvard, your perspective and lived experience isn't represented in US public preservation policy. (Lucky you, if it is.)
Learn more in my book, Managing the Magic of Old Places (U of TN Press), which is out now.
If you missed it, the US Senate's hearing on Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act on Oct 30 is now available as a video. Lots of interesting takeaways here, especially the consensus that change is needed. www.energy.senate.gov/hearings/202...
I'd go much further. What would US public historic preservation policy actually look like if Latinx people--any at all--were involved in its creation?
Well, I have to admit "design overlays" probably sounds better to many people than "historic districts," but fundamentally these are the same things from a regulatory standpoint.
An introduction to what public historic preservation policy at the local, state, and federal levels emphasizes and what it misses: the "magic" that comes from the emotional experience human beings have to old or "historic" places. youtu.be/cZ8tWCTUk3E
An affinity for historic preservation (built heritage conservation in UK parlance) seems to run in the royal family rather strongly. King Charles founded the International Network for Traditional Building, Architecture & Urbanism. But, regardless, the interaction does, indeed, sound rather weird.
