Goodbye, space ship!
Aww, that line made me teary-eyed for a moment dear @soulsdetour. Despite the unforeseen demise of that interestingly alien-looking monument, its peculiar beauty alone is not sufficient to pass as a genuine work of architecture. You see, during my university days in this highly specialized profession, we were trained to create successful projects that embody 3 essential requirements: aesthetics, durability, and functionality. 👍
However, I believe there's one more significant ingredient that's needed to complete the ideal architectural package - the human experience. As I've been strongly advocating for our emotional connections and perceptions of the built environment since the beginning, I'm afraid that architecture schools haven't covered much about this subject yet (at least during my architecture studies). The "sense or spirit of place", also referred to as "Genius Loci" (I've covered this in my previous POST, is definitely crucial for sustainable buildings. 😊
As in the case of that saucer-shaped edifice from the town of Dimitrovgrad, perhaps they've discovered errors (spatial feasibility) or other issues related to the key components I've mentioned above. Thus, it's not a surprise that the developers/owners had to let it go. Unless they wanted to let it stand there forever as a "White Elephant Project" (a financial investment that fails to fulfill its expectations), would that be a wise decision? So, would you agree to its eventual demolition?