| Popis: |
We can no longer argue that the Home Insurance Building was the first skyscraper (Fig. 1). It was not. Then the question is, what was? Part of my purpose is to demonstrate that there is really no such thing as the first skyscraper, although we can certainly make a case for the emergence of the potential form. My chief argument against the claim for the Home Insurance Building is that it rests on an unacceptably narrow idea of what constitutes a multistory high-rise commercial building. Such a structure is a great deal more complex than what has always been claimed. I am going to use the word skyscraper for convenience, but it applies to any large multistory commercial, public, or residential building regardless of its shape or height. |
