Steve Jobs has earned another distinction in his long career of technological innovation: destroyer of architectural history. He tore down Jackling House, one of the finest examples of Spanish revival home architecture in northern California and he did it in a mere two weeks. The home was designed by famed California archiect, George Washington Smith, creator of the Spanish Revival style for which Santa Baraba is known. It was built for copper magnate Daniel Jackling, another ruthless capitalist innovator of his day.
Uphold Our Heritage fought valiantly to preserve Jackling House. But in the end the Town of Woodside did everything possible to accomodate Jobs and destruction of the architectural treasure; while the California Supreme Court refused to acknowledge this was an important enough part of the state’s historic legacy to be worth preserving. The Town’s callousness is epitomized by this statement to the San Jose Mercury News from the Manager:
Town Manager George said the demolition of the Jackling House will “close 11 years of history” for the town.
“No matter what you think about the house, it’s nice to get something wrapped up,” she said.
“Smashed up” would be more like it.
As he almost always does, Steve Jobs has won. He fought a long bloody legal war to demolish Jackling House. Now he has his Pyrrhic victory. All that stands now on the property is the chimney, the remains of a 15,000 square foot stately mansion.
Jobs promised us an even more significant architectural statement for the building that will replace it. But the glaring error in his thinking is that you don’t create architectural distinction by demolishing the history that preceded you. You build on the past, not destroy it.
If anyone can snap a picture of the ruins I’d very much like to display it here. But I understand heavy security rings the property. Steve doesn’t want any pictures of the ruins to mar his reputation any further than it has been. And he clearly thinks we preservationists are as possessed as he is and that we’ll physically protest and disrupt his act of vandlism. We’ve protested all we could. Now Steve has spoken. All hail Steve, destroyer of worlds, like Shiva. I don’t know whether karma exists. But if it does Steve’s earned a whole lotta bad karma. I pity him.
Rest in peace, Jackling House. As for Jobs, not so much.
Richard, what the hell do you have against poor Steve Jobs? And why does the Jackling House mean so much to you? And what does either have to do with the usual subjects of this blog?
I am originally from California, and I’ve seen the Jackling House. There are as many such mansions in and around Santa Barbara and elsewhere in California, that one less “landmark” won’t make an iota of difference to the landscape. If Jobs owns the property he should have the right to do what he wants with it. If only the Israelis would give the same consideration to the Palestinians.
That’s not the way California law works, Gene. If you own a historic landmark you can’t just decide to tear it down if others go to court & prove the distinction of the landmark you wish to destroy. The Superior Court ruled against him on this point numerous times. There is a value to culture, history & traditions in art, music, & architecture. I’m surprised you’re not one who understands this point as you live in a city that is full of such history & tradition. Steve Jobs is a barbarian. A smart one, but still a barbarian. And a self-centered, brutal one at that.
As for why I write about this story, I actually have many interests outside the I-P conflict. One of them is historic preservation.
Touché, Richard. I see your point. I didn’t know the history behind the landmark. Apparently, money talks.
As far as my sensitivity is concerned, my educational formation is architecture (USC), and my travels around the world have only added to my cultural education. I do appreciate history and tradition.
I’m glad to know of your fondness for architecture. Jackling House has a storied history both in Woodside & Calif. Its destruction is akin to tearing down Penn Station in the 1960s. Perhaps Jackling isn’t quite as distinguished. But still worth preserving
That’s precisely the notion rejected by preservationists. Historical landmarks, like works of art other than architecture, belong not only to their respective owner but in a sense to everybody, even though the owner may have exclusive use rights.
It happens all the time that dominant powers claim, and consequently rewrite, history; so would you also say that not just tokens of history but history itself was the sole property of its “owners” and that it was right and proper for them to do with it as they please?
Richard-I’d like to ask you about your animosity towards Jobs. I was reading your article “BANNED AT APPLE: BOOK STEVE JOBS DOESN’T WANT YOU TO READ.” Is your criticism based on the preservation issue, or does it extend to other issues?
To find out, do a simply Google search of my site using the search terms “Steve Jobs” and/or “Jackling House.” In short, I think the worst character flaws of Steve Jobs are exemplified by the high-handedness with which he conducted this assault on this architectural treasure. I don’t know or care much about Steve Jobs in terms of Apple or the way he’s run his company. But it seems to me that the high handedness with which Apple acts in many of its business dealings, & with which Steve Jobs has acted in relation to the media and public are of a piece with his behavior in this circumstance.
If Steve Jobs hadn’t destroyed Jackling House I would care very little about him one way or the other.
Understood, I see you are a big fan of historical restoration.