Gary wrote: "See what I mean? It's another world. This is right in the CBD of Adelaide near the Central Market. It shows the decay of a city that has lost its way."

Actually, Gary, I don't see what you mean. I'd rather see these dilapidated shells than a whole new suburb of Tuscan toilets that obliterate the landscape.
And isn't "World Without Tears" a thing of beauty as well?
It seems to me that you are down on Adelaide recently. What brought this on? What criteria are you using?

Michael,
Just contrasting or playing off the different capital cities against one another on a bleak winter day.

The dominant economic /political nexus in Australia is Melbourne, Canberra, Sydney, Brisbane. Adelaide has been sidelined like Hobart. This offers the opportunity to become something different in terms of an urban mode of life.

The aesthetics of decay promises the development of the new from the decayed old.

It is unclear what the new represents in Adelaide. The new is forming in the CBD--what what does the development represent in terms of a mode of life? What do you think?

I'm playing around with this in a naive way, as I'm pressed for time due to being caught up as a blogger in the Adelaide Festival of Ideas.

I agree---both the shed and Lucinda William's 'World Without Tears ' do express a form of beauty.

I must admit I do not really engage with the "new" in Adelaide. As long as there are still galleries, record & book shops, cinemas and places to eat, I'm quite happy.
Adelaide has no need to be like Bris/Melb/Syd and should never see itself in competition with them. It should develop itself like a town with a small population. I'm sure Port Pirie doesn't compare itself to Sydney and it's better off for it.
The "new" that Adelaide has to develop is one that is greener than green. We are small enough to make it happen. And then I'm sure that in itself would attract all sorts of development, be it artistic or economic, to this city.
Unfortunately all development is done by people who just want more and more development for economic reasons. Adelaide needs to turn this on it's head. No new development unless it adheres to very strict ideas on sustainability.
The reason Adelaide looks so sick is because it tries to be what it is not.
Where Adelaide is at it's best are in things like the Fringe and Womadelaide.

Michael,
sum of the new in Adelaide is quite interesting even though it is few and far between.

It's true that there little by way of sustainable architecture in Adelaide. Peter Cullen, for instance, mentioned at the Festival of Ideas that the hotel he was staying at(The Hilton?) did not even have dual flushing toilets.

The suite of new buildings around News Corps' Advertiser building in King William and Waymouth Streets in the CBD are meant to be green, but I do not know what that actually means.

This blurb says:

The office tower has been designed and built to achieve a 5 star Australian Building Greenhouse Rating and a 5 star Green Building Council of Australia Green Star rating.Some of the 'green' features included in the office tower include a passive chilled beam air conditioning system, increased fresh air passing through the building and installation of energy efficient lighting.

What about capturing rain water, water recycling and renewable energy. I would hazard a guess that it is a no.