In her column (“Pointless preservation,” Oct. 8), Amelia Meyer refers to the restoration of the Lawn and Range rooms as “pointless preservation.” Public and private institutions in possession of historic structures must make difficult choices about how to balance the demands of preservation with other objectives.
Meyer admits that “maintaining the integrity of the buildings” is “an acceptable undertaking worth the cost,” but it follows that the use of authentic building materials and methods is a part of such maintenance. The preservation of the Academical Village — a World Heritage Site — demands sensitivity to the craftsmanship of these buildings. The replacement of decayed or inappropriate window sashes (window framing, not curtains) is certainly expensive, but such costly repairs for landmark buildings are necessary rather than pointless.
It is disappointing that Meyer suggests that the preservation of the Lawn and Range rooms evokes feelings of a time when “segregation and gender discrimination were openly endorsed.” Such a charge could be leveled at nearly all old buildings.
Philip Herrington
GSAS III
Read More
A statement from 191 concerned faculty to the new Board of Visitors
By Concerned Faculty | February 20, 2026Critical questions of process regarding the appointment of Beardsley remain unanswered.
A statement from 201 concerned faculty about U.Va. President Beardsley’s appointment
By Concerned Faculty | January 16, 2026By acting in bad faith, the Board has flouted its fiduciary duties to the University and has violated its own bylaws calling on it to protect the University from outside interference.
LETTER: When everything is labeled hazing, nothing is
By Scott Gleason | January 4, 2026Worse still, over-policing benign practices risks driving genuinely harmful behavior underground.
