A bridge officially designated the tallest in the world was inaugurated by President Jacques Chirac in southern France -- a spectacular feat of engineering that will carry motorists at 270 metres (885 feet) above the valley of the river Tarn.
Before an audience of around 1,000 people including architect Norman Foster, Chirac unveiled a plaque by the largest of the bridge's seven pillars which rises to 343 metres above ground level. French air-force jets swept by overhead.
Why is this relevant to a bridge? Why should the French celebrate the fact that one of the pillars rised 343 meteres above ground level? Aren't bridges usually ranked by how long they are? I mean, bridging a gap is the purpose of a bridge. The height of that pillar is really beside the point, is it not?
I am probably making too much of this but somehow I think this gives us an insight into the thought processes of the French government. They build a de Gaulle airport recently that is quite elegant apparently, but which collapsed recently in one part and was therefore unable to function as an airport. They build an aircraft carrier, the de Gaulle again, that seems unable to leave port for long and therefore carry out its function of carrying aircraft. What is it hailed as, the narrowest aircraft carrier? The ship with the best menu?
And now a bridge that they celebrate for being tall. I really think the French need to concentrate more on designing for the purpose for which the thing is designed and not irrelevant factors.
This says something...
