Ugly Architecture: Does It Have An Alibi?

26 September 2007 - 7:00am

This commentary from the Seattle Post-Intelligencer looks at the idea that buildings can make us happy, and asks why we put up with buildings that make us unhappy.

"Why try to make buildings and cities beautiful if not to help us feel better?"

"Which raises a more complicated question: Why do we keep building things that make us unhappy?"

"Architects' egos can lead to buildings that bruise cities. Some are so eager to impose their grand vision that the mundane matter of how it may feel to people at street level is scuttled."

"Frequently it's a lesser-of-evils tradeoff. Public school buildings thrown up from 1950 to the 1970s to engorge the baby boom are almost universally bleak; they exude all the charm of insecticide factories. But replacing them would create a crushing tax burden, so we endure."

"And finally, in many cases there's really no one to blame. Glum buildings ooze into existence because there's no coherent process for saying no."

Source: The Seattle Post-Intelligencer, September 25, 2007

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Demolition Company

I would like to start a demolition company whose slogan would be "So much bad architecture, so little time."

National Trust For Demolition

How about a National Trust for Selective Demolition, which would complement the National Trust for Historic Preservation. The preservationists should work to save good architecture, and the demolitionists should work to get rid of bad architecture. Eg, the demolitionists could hold a celebration when Boston City Hall is demolished.

Charles Siegel

Bookmark and Share
One of the keys to regional and local prosperity is the ability to attract and retain high-skilled people. ... Many people can, and do, choose where they want to live based on factors beyond their ability to make a living.