Nature Vs. Man-Made

I finished my painting of the St. Louis Gateway Arch and it got me to thinking:  do man-made structures enhance or detract from their natural surroundings in a painting?  Except for the top ten ugliest buildings in the world, I guess it depends.  If the structure detracts from the scene, but is essential, it's a moot point. In this painting, I wanted the Arch to be the focal point, but I could certainly have just painted the trees and pond.  I think buildings, interesting structures or people can bring life into an otherwise boring landscape painting. Unless the landscape has something going on like mood - dark stormy skies, crashing ocean waves, huge mountain rocks.

                                             Stand Tall (St. Louis Arch) 8 x 10 Buy This On Etsy

What's your point of view?