Is there a shortage of preserved Quonset and Nissen huts available
for future study, or is it desirable to preserve a few examples in
places where they can function as historical focal points?  These are
two different questions. If the intent is to save a collection of
study specimens for purposes of criterion D (or other nations'
equivalents), it doesn't matter where they are. If the purpose is to
save a piece of history for public view and adulation, this is a
practical administrative matter, best left to museum professionals.

Iceland is crammed with these structures. There is a WWII museum
housed entirely in them. The Hertz garage at the Reykjavik airport is
in one. After the War, they were sold to farmers, radically altering
the nature of Icelandic rural architecture. I suppose there are
examples worldwide of adaptive uses that will ensure the continued
preservation of the fabric for future architectural study.

But that other symbolic function is a real problem. I just finished a
WWII base survey and found some remarkable facts that skew the
historical record:

First, the "temporary" base was mostly frame, with a scattering of
cement block buildings. All the frame buildings are gone. Looking
over the WWII and Korea remains, we do not have a representative
sample. We have only the exceptions.

Second, military buildings get upgraded. With two exceptions, the
WWII buildings on this base had been regularly adapted to new
functions, new heating systems, etc. What survived were shells of
dubious value. We did find a parachute shop and a warehouse happily
functioning in their original roles with few changes; they were
deemed eligible. A hangar that still is in use was found eligible,
but because of association and not because of its surviving original
fabric.

Third, while military administrators are obliged to "consider" the
historical, and many are quite sensitive, they are constrained by
dozens of other requirements, and they are constantly being inspected
by people who might not be historically sensitive. They will make
their decisions on practical grounds, except where there is a
narrowly-defined sense of the "historical" in terms of "relics." So a
base is likely to be littered with monuments, old bells, and deceased
airplanes, sooner than a range of Quonset huts. This has been the
history of military bases for generations, and you aren't going to
change it. If you can show that the building was the site of
something important, the military sense of history may be aroused
because the building will become a monument. This is not a
professional's view of historical significance, but it seems to be
consistent witht the military orientation toward history.
--
*****[log in to unmask]******
*                      *
* Grass clippings this *
* year can be lettuce  *
* next year if you     *
* think ahead and      *
* put them on a        *
* compost heap.        *
*  --Thanks very mulch *
************************