I’m sorry, but I just could not let the following misleading comment by John Frietag go by without some explanation of my own. It seems to be at the heart of the debate:

“You can’t negate 100 years of progress in architectural theory just because people like old things.”

Well, it is now emerging that, for the last 100 years, so-called architectural theory has been nothing of the sort. Instead, we have seen a massive production of propaganda whose whole purpose is to prop up a totalitarian design style, as well as the vast superstructure of architects and educators who have profited from imposing anti-architecture on societies all around the world.

I ought to know, since I write books on genuine architectural theory. There are stringent criteria for what can be called “theory” in any discipline. What architectural academia misleadingly labels as “architectural theory” needs to be finally put aside if a humane architecture is ever to be implemented.

Best wishes.

Your reply was far more articulate and thoughtful than your initial comment would suggest. Your bluntness does you a disservice. It seems that we are both elevating a certain decorative style as a priori. What I would say is that America’s rich and wonderful historic architecture provides a fantastic palate for the modern architect and that whilst we should not remain rooted in the past we should not stray too far from it either lest we repeat the mistakes of the sixties and seventies. Thankfully I am something of an architecture enthusiast and looking at the developing skylines of your great cities I see many great structures rising every week. You on the other hand seem to be arguing that every new construction should be modernist and not ‘look like it belongs in the time and place of two hundred years back and a continent to the right’. Well this construction isn’t bad to be fair, I just find the facade to be very bland indeed. It looks like it belongs in the time and place of two decades in the past and of a continent to the right, it being designed by an Italian architect and close in spirit to works like Henri Labrouste’s design for the National Library in Paris, a slap in the face to the beau arts movement by a Frenchman.

I wouldn’t want every new construction to be in a historic style, just as I wouldn’t not want every new construction to be modernist as this would lead to bland architectural uniformity. I think what we do need to do is strike up the correct balance.

If you visit my country you will see that it was the victim of a failed brutalist experiment which wreaked so many of our city centres and decimated much of our architectural heritage. A lot of the sites now visited by American tourists were under serious threat of demolition for a long time, and many many more treasures were lost. ‘Backward’ and NIMBY viewpoints such as ours are valuable because the modernists do get it wrong, and when they do their handwork is left for future generations to puzzle over and wonder why anyone could have erected such a vile structure.

As for the British Empire, well that’s a separate argument. I don’t mourn it one bit, but I’m glad it lives on in the anglosphere and the spirit of co-operation and shared heritage between our countries; hence why you marines won’t be ‘taking us on’ anytime soon.

H

It’s not at all difficult to grasp the principal architectural notions of form, space, mass, and order. These are the building blocks of the built environment. Without them, there cannot be any design, and without design, there is no architecture. The problem here is that rather than taking in a structure based on the primary shapes employed — which ideally should be structural — (form), what those forms occupy (mass), what stemming from those is habitable (space), and how all of it is arranged, that is, whether or not it follows a pattern or implements a central concept (order), you are evaluating buildings based on whether or not they conform to a decorative style or styles which you have anointed a priori. Of course there’s nothing wrong with existing structures. When older buildings are in need of renovation, it is very important that they be carried out in a way so as to preserve the originality of such. However, for example, when it comes to new construction, it ought not look like it belongs in the time and place of two hundred years back and a continent to the right. It could be said, that’s not so; the British of the nineteenth century didn’t need to do that. Thing is, construction technology has grown by leaps and bounds, so why limit the ways in which you can approach solving a problem? The architect’s responsibility is first and foremost to his or her client, and although it is also to the public, too, the client enjoys pride of place. If you ask me, Renzo Piano’s design works pretty damn well. If you look at the Morgan Library’s website (http://www.themorgan.org/about/campus.asp) you’ll find that the new construction does, indeed, function as a mixed circulation space, linking together existing parts of the complex, while also providing some new exhibition space, which, by the way, realizes an optimum balance between natural and artificial illumination so as to be of service to the works of art which the library holds.
As far as the former English colonies in the New World are concerned, we may have enjoyed a high standard of living, but if you ask me, it’s much more preferable to live in a land where we rule ourselves (albeit by way of representatives) rater than be slaves allowed to do things deemed benign to the servile condition. If you are at all sour over Britain’s loss of her empire, I suggest you talk to India, half of Africa, Australia, Canada, and 85% of Ireland, because our Marines could take your guys twice a day, any day of the week. But hell, what does it matter? We’re all in NATO, anyway.

Semper rectvs,

JPM

It is highly amusing to see you accusing myself and my fellow commentators of being ‘poncing twits’ and then proceeding to reel off meaningless statements about ‘space, mass and order’. Here is a small tip from this side of the pond. If a building’s beauty is so obscure that it requires you to have a job at an architectural firm and a lectureship in modernism to appreciate it, it is probably rubbish. I would also venture to suggest that you read up on your history as well. If having the highest standard of living in the world at the time, as was the case with the American colonists, is a state of subjugation then it seems like no bad thing. Furthermore, if your rude demeanor is indicative of the rest of your countrymen then I demand that British rule is restored as soon as possible.

In just what sense, Shoo, is the addition “appropriate” or “respectful”?

*

The idea of “progress” in art is highly suspect. Indeed, many early modernists were inspired by the timelessness of ancient & even prehistoric art.

Experimentation has been a hallmark of modernist architecture, & the fact is, many of these experiments have failed. Nonetheless, great works of architecture have been created since 1900.
But they are few & far between.

Embracing any “approved” style eventually leads to a kind of dead end, creatively speaking, & Nikos is right to point out that our doing has become a vicious, destructive, cycle. At least, it has in what is commonly called “international design.”

Finally, my concern is not so much the creation of new “modern” buildings, but the trend to “morph” old & new into something that mocks both.

You are right to criticize the new addition to the Morgan Library. However, aside from Dino Marcantonio, whom I know from Notre Dame, I’m surprised by the innocent remarks of many of your readers. Surely they must have noticed the world embracing inhuman architecture as an “approved” style, to be enforced everywhere and anywhere? It’s not a question of aesthetics or good taste; architecture critics are endorsing a certain “brand” of building to clients. Those, in turn, don’t wish to be seen as “old-fashioned”. It’s a vicious, destructive cycle.

I am trying to make a small dent in this onslaught through my books and writings. Perhaps your readers might want to look them up.

Best wishes.