WHY ARE OUR K.H's UGLY?

by plmkrzy 14 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  plmkrzy

  Don't know how many here are from Southern California. Some of the areas here are sectioned off like a Canadian pizza (the few that I've seen cut into small squares)

  It's because we have so many cities that are sooo conjested they have to build a ton of KH's in order to compensate.

  I was just wondering how many besides me have noticed how much nicer the KH's (asuming they all look like this) are in the East in comparison tp the West?

  Our K.H's look like some place to take your car for repairs compared to this.

  This is one of the nicer KH's I've seen.

  btw, I like Canadian pizza
• 

  refiners fire

  Not much in the way of meeting attendance though.
• 

  plmkrzy

  Guess not.

  I drive by so many Kingdom Halls everyday and I'm not kidding when I say they look like run down barrios.

  I don't mean the paint is pealing off and the roofs are falling in, just they are old and puny and many don't even have

  Decent parking. Some have to double and Triple Park and when there are only 15 or 20 cars in the lot thats pretty bad.

  It doesn't seem to unreasonable to expect that with all the "consistency" the WTBST places on how we are to look personally and maintain a certain standard of grooming, the KH's should at least reflect some consisentancy.?NO?

  Why doesn't the "HEADQUARTERS" make sure that all the KH's be consistent in their appearance?

  I've seen some that look like nice restaurants and I've seen many that look like back houses.

  I feel like loading up my camera and go around taking PICs of all the crappy looking KH's and sending them to the GB and ask them why they can't afford to build better buildings then that but yet expect everyone to live by a dress code.

  Edited by - plmkrzy on 25 July 2002 6:51:43
• 

  SYN

  Better looking KHs are more expensive, and the Tower needs all the money it can get for upcoming LAWSUITS!
• 

  plmkrzy

  LOL syn, I guess then they've been planning these lawsuits for about 100 years?
• 

  Francois

  It's a statement of contempt for beauty; deliberately ugly. Don't want anyone to mistake 'em for a church now do we? We want to make sure we look like we worship God in a building that appears to be a converted gas station right?

  We wouldn't want to have to compete with Chartres, now would we?

  francois
• 

  blondie

  My experience,

  The uglier the KH, the longer ago it was built. There about 5 to 6 basic styles available now for new KHs and the one posted above is an example.

  If possible, older KHs when remodeled are brought more in line with these styles.

  The funds available from the people in each congregation also determines how it looks. Poorer ones are plainer and not as well-maintained. In days gone past, the CO would review the upkeep and state of the KH and make recommendations to the BOE partly because the WTS self-insures these buildings.

  I am willing to bet the uglier KHs are in poor areas and are older buildings.

  The decorations inside the new ones have vastly improved since most regional building committees have a qualified decorator on staff (usually a sister) who selects several color palettes for the congregations to vote on.

  Maintenance on the KH is not considered a prime privilege among the elders. This responsibility is usually shoved off on the newest elder or the one with the least pull. If there are 2 or more congregations sharing one KH, that complicates the issues trying to 4 or more elders to agree on anything.
• 

  Joyzabel

  The KH reflects the god they worship and the lifestyle the jws promote.
• 

  invisible

  Agreed. I've always found KH construction styles rather bland, unflattering and never whilst upon a quick build team did I ever hear anything about environmental impacts. Their garden designs leave a tad to be desired too. You would have thought that any group advocating paradise conditions on earth would be slightly more clued up and ingenious in their design implementation than most present day models.

  Celty
• 

  Matty

  Up until the 70's Kingdom halls were definitely low priority. In the UK, most congregations met in rented halls. If the congregation had a hall, it would be a cheap scruffy little scout-hut type. After all what's the point in spending so much money for a hall when Armageddon was just around the corner - money should be spent on the preaching work!

  Things seriously changed in the 80's with the advent of the Quick Builds! The society suddenly saw Kingdom Halls as a marketing tool, not just for the people outside, but for the people in the congregation too. Most halls built since the 80's are tidy and functional, not particularly ugly, but not architectural masterpieces either. Where I live these halls, although not wonderful to look at, are usually very well maintained compared to surrounding buildings. This is mainly because they are usually situated in the more cheaper and run down parts of town.

  It would be an awfully dull world if there were nothing but these boxes everywhere!

  Edited by - Matty on 25 July 2002 8:28:12