In January the top 77 manmade wonders of the world were narrowed to 21 by a panel of world famous architects (7 of them). In 2007 the top 7 will be named. Here is the site where you can vote for them, if you'd like.
Would you agree with the ones they listed? Did they miss any? Is there anything there that shouldn't be?
With the exception of the Sydney Opera House, they all have religious or political purposes. It appears that if we remove religion and politics from the human equation, we don't often make thousands of people sweat and die for some glorious edifice.
With the exception of the Sydney Opera House, they all have religious or political purposes.
I am not convinced of that. I don't think the Eiffel Tower was politically or religiously inspired and Stonehenge (the present-day antics of the Druids nothwithstanding) has no religious significance so far as anyone has been able to establish. Petra was a trading centre as is Timbuktu (and why on earth is that fly-blown god-foresaken outpost a "wonder"?). The Taj Mahal is only religious in the sense that it is a tomb. Neuschwanstein Castle was the product of the fevered brain of "Mad" King Ludwig of Bavaria and was certainly not political in the sense that the Bavarian Government decided to undertake the project. Indeed, it nearly bankrupted Bavaria - although now, of course, it brings in millions of Euros from tourists.
By the way, why the "New7Wonders"? Stonehenge is certainly not new, by any standards.
Richard English
Posts: 8038 | Location: Partridge Green, West Sussex, UK
Originally posted by Richard English: Hmm. And two from the same architect, I notice.
Which if I remember rightly is the designer of the Eiffel Tower (Monsieur Eiffel, probably) and the Statue of Liberty- which has also only a tenuous connection with politics- although it's supposed to represent a young woman of the Revolution, it has more to do with American beliefs at the time. But I must admit I agree with Asa on this, every time I look at a religious artifact, I appreciate the workmanship and the sacrifice- York Minster always leaves me in awe-but as an Athiest I question the reasons for it- yes, it does leave me with an impression, but it doesn't make me a believer. I personally think religion has stagnated human progress more than anything else. Returning to the original topic, surely it should have been 7 wonders of the modern world?
Richard, I think they call them the "new" 7 wonders because they were comparing them to the ancient 7 wonders of the world.
That is a fair comment - although Stonehenge is about 5000 years old and thus of similar age to the Great Pyramid of Giza.
Of course, it seems unlikely that the builders of Stonehenge even knew of the existence of Egypt - and the builder of the Pyramids of the existence of the British Islands - let alone the artifacts themselves.
Richard English
Posts: 8038 | Location: Partridge Green, West Sussex, UK
I personally think religion has stagnated human progress more than anything else.
It's had its moments. A lot of science in the Islamic golden age and the Renaissance was driven by the philosophy that to know the Creator you study the creation.
Originally posted by Asa Lovejoy: It appears that if we remove religion and politics from the human equation, we don't often make thousands of people sweat and die for some glorious edifice.
Originally posted by Asa Lovejoy: It appears that if we remove religion and politics from the human equation, we don't often make thousands of people sweat and die for some glorious edifice.
That just goes to show...as my Dad says. I hadn't clicked Tinman's link as I thought it really was a brief history of religion, and I didn't want to read it. The cartoon was great though!
