While I agree that beauty is important, and would love that all of the world's buildings were beautiful, economics prevent it (and always have).
Only the rich can support such conspicuous consumption, and so only the rich do it, making such beautiful things rare.
The author is falling victim to survivorship bias: The old, beautiful buildings are still around BECAUSE they are beautiful. All of the ugly, utilitarian buildings of each past era have long since fallen, as will the ugly utilitarian buildings of today at some point.
There was, however, a sharp rise in cheap, ugly buildings during the reconstruction after WW2 (out of necessity), and we're still feeling the effects of that.
Only the rich can support such conspicuous consumption, and so only the rich do it, making such beautiful things rare.
The author is falling victim to survivorship bias: The old, beautiful buildings are still around BECAUSE they are beautiful. All of the ugly, utilitarian buildings of each past era have long since fallen, as will the ugly utilitarian buildings of today at some point.
There was, however, a sharp rise in cheap, ugly buildings during the reconstruction after WW2 (out of necessity), and we're still feeling the effects of that.