Article 24, The Mirror of Society

As a writer of alternative architecture (yes I know how amazing) I thought it was time to hold a mirror to society and show it what it really looks like, literally, through its architecture. I think the reaction of most people, if they actually had to face such a thing, would range from indifference, to disgust to admiration. Generally speaking however I think indifference is what most people feel about the built environment and the architecture found within it (with the possible exception of infra-structure but even that...). They are content with having a certain ignorance about the places where they work, conduct business, visit or live. They go about their daily routine accepting what ever architecture is presented before them believing that's just the way it is. I'm not saying people don't have an opinion good or bad about the architecture they experience, like when they visit a museum, theater or how to improve a certain space for better functionality but for the most part they are just not willing to take any substantive action to change or improve common architecture in a deeper way. I can hear the critiques now, "how dare you judge people like that!"  Yes to judge a people through the architecture they accept is a valid thing in my opinion. To be fair, would I care about the built environment if I were not an architect? Possibly not; I am not above the common citizen except in the realm of architecture because that's what I do. There are others out there championing worthy causes that I am oblivious to and they would have the same opinion about my indifference to their cause. Oh well, maybe I need to try harder myself.  Most never question life beyond their own reality and for the most part don't care to; they accept the world around them including their architecture as god send. This is an unfortunate attitude to take, not just about architecture but about life in general.  I have come to understand and accept that no matter what I do many will simply not care or take an interest in this issue. Why would you? What do you get out of it? What do I get out of it?  However like Socrates, (I'm no Socrates, please settle down) a little prodding and pricking to get people to question things in the world, in this case about architecture, is a good thing in my estimation. We need to make people (notice I said we) understand that architecture is a reflection of themselves and also the society they live in. We need to own up to all architecture, not just the rarefied super star elite stuff on the cover of magazines which most people don't identify with anyway. True reflection comes from what you experience day in and day out. Your quality of life, regardless of whether you realize it or not is tied to your architecture which influences how you work, shop and live. What we build and design is a reflection of how we see and treat ourselves. It tells a story of a particular people living in a certain time and place.

If we look back at history it's not difficult to understand a civilization and it's people through its architecture. An obvious example are the ancient Greeks and Romans with their wonderful temples, amphitheaters, and villas.

Casa dei Vetii, Pompei. Photo credit:Sailko

Even today we can see the unique qualities of a people through their architecture as for instance in the architecture of Tibet (see photo below). However for the purposes of this article I will examine the architecture of my community and what it says about my society in 2015, Long Island, New York.

White Palace of the Potala Photo source:www.onwardtibet.org

Your primary architectural experience is your home; a place you know and understand best. Unfortunately it's not a great experience, at least not from an architectural point of view. The problem is you are born into a type of architecture, raised in it and then become attached to it. If you live on Long Island you likely grew up in one of the many identical sub-division tract homes which is common to the area. This becomes your indoctrination to the suburban sprawl system of living. It's likely you will carry on this experience handed down to you when it comes time for you to buy your own home. Of course there are exceptions and you may develop a new understanding of architecture beyond sprawl living or move up into a new socio-economic bracket which may include higher end architecture. I am generalizing here and many people on Long Island are raised in old historic homes, mansions and progressive modern dwellings, however by comparison this latter group is in the minority. Most of us live in an architecture that lacks real character, and creativity: the tract home. It's birth comes from the spirit of profit making with no regard to any real architectural substance. A comparison would be to accepting a fake Rolex to the real one- We are happy to do so, just as long as it looks like the real one, works like real one and is half the price. The question to ask is, are we as a society as shallow or as fake as a counterfeit Rolex because we choose to live in "fake" architecture? I suppose my views are highly debatable, however holding up the mirror once again the correlation is there, generally speaking. Now if you are a homeowner reading this and you live in suburbia you may want to scream at me because in your estimation I got it all wrong and you love your home; you are by no means fake and you think it is the most beautiful place in the world, it's where you raised your family. This is not the point I am disputing- I am only saying we need to stop and really think about what we are accepting as architecture, because cartoon, fake Rolex looking architecture built in treeless sub-divisions is not the best that we can do.

So after our first architectural experience comes our second, the place where we spend most time outside the home; the work place. These places in suburbia range from the corner deli to a multi story office building to an Industrial park. They vary considerably in function, size, style and appeal. Some of the architecture is well thought out some not. However a huge preponderance of it is tired utilitarian with a smattering of superfluous embellishment. These places of work don't express function through their architecture except if you want to call bleak and haggard an architectural style. On second thought maybe our places of work do express our work sentiments through its bleak and haggard architecture. If this is the case (and I have no scientific studies to prove it) then why not change the work place architecture to change the reflection? Imagine places designed to inspire the work force, make people want to come to work? You are laughing no doubt about this suggestion but it could be done. If work places offered day care for parents so their kids could come to work with mom or dad and gyms where the work force could get some exercise in, a lunch room rather than a dingy break room, an auditorium for gathering, work stations integrated with nature (or a great simulation like Johnson wax) and finally make the building architecture so uplifting  you forget you are even at work....(let's not get carried away)

The "Great Work Room" of the Johnson Wax Head quarters. Photo credit and copyright: Jeff Dean

Productivity would soar and "Bleak and Haggard" would be replaced by inspiring and productive. Thinking about our work place architecture here on the Island, there are not many such examples. Maybe the former Swiss Air building or the Federal Courthouse, both by Richard Meier would qualify (both found in suburbia Suffolk County Long Island) but now we are getting into the rarefied architecture that is very limited. Of course there are many lesser known architectural firms that do nice work, however this is not the norm.

An interesting looking work place (at least from the exterior) in Bohemia. You can see the air traffic tower of McArthur airport to the left.

Moving from the workplace we need to discuss the most predominate type of architecture on the suburban scene: the strip mall. If you live on Long Island you are familiar with the ever present strip mall shopping centers that exist everywhere it seems. These havens of asphalt and concrete dominate most roadways where there is development. Zones of double lane highways with endless store front after store front interspersed with fast food chains, banks, deli's, pizzeria's and drugstores abound. As you move off from these places where there is a little bit more breathing room, you will find your box stores, public storage, warehouses and industrial parks. The automobile is the life line to all these places. The pedestrian, rarely seen, has no chance on these congested filled roads, except for the occasional homeless man or kid on his bike braving the speeding cars. These places I mentioned are soulless in architectural merit, with no redeeming aesthetic appeal except in the necessary services they provide. Often, (not always) strip malls are tired looking buildings built of material in the most uninspiring way. We need their business no doubt but no one wants to enjoy the spaces they create for longer than they have to. Because of prescriptive short sighted planning combined with bottom line construction budgets the strip mall is as appealing as a war zone; a "no man's" land that we are forced to cross because we have to. Dirty looking buildings, littered over sized parking lots, cars zooming around every where, in many ways is like a battle field, a suburban one. Maybe this architecture is indicative of how we view our shopping needs: An unfortunate necessity (living in suburbia we are "zero" percent self sufficient) a daily chore that must be done quickly so we have time to finish all the errands we must run throughout the day. Going from one place to the next, who cares what the architecture looks like? However that is short sighted thinking  in all it's un-creative glory. Architecture could be used as a tool to increase the pleasure of shopping, attract more business and beautify and bring order to the cluttered built environment; builders take note.

Lastly, stretching our attentions beyond our homes, workplace and shopping centers, we have our public places of gathering: Plaza's, theaters, parks, and civic centers. Not only do we come to public places to socialize, or attend an event, we come to govern, share our thoughts, beliefs, burn witches* and also to express our creative spirit through art, music, theater and yes, enjoy the very architecture of these places. What does this architecture look like in suburbia? That's an easy one; it's typically non-existent. There are a few movie houses here and there, a remote theater, a local kiddie park, maybe a YMCA a few towns over but that's it.  As for true civic centers there are but a few. Now I'm not here to discuss civics or politics but there should exist task specific physical places that actually serve the people of a community. We should have real parks for adults as well as the kids, a town square or plaza to feed the pigeons in, maybe even a community center. How about a "true" civic center that gives people an opportunity to get involved in local politics, a place to gather and address community issues. Typically sprawl planning does not make any allotment for these places. Towns gladly approve 500 home sub-divisions to increase revenue but do not demand a park or community center get built to service it. Instead we must rely on our already over burdened firehouses, schools, and church's to make up for this oversight in planning.

Marin County Civic Center, CA. Photo source: Fizbin and Fizbin's crappy camera (his words not mine) designed by Frank Lloyd Wright

Another view of the Marin County Civic Center photo source:nandhp

So unfortunately I cannot describe our "civic" architecture as it simply does not exist, except in limited form. I would be happy with a few ancient Greek Temples, here and there (yes, I know, move to Greece) or a Marin county civic center in California (see photo above)  We cannot depend on our firehouses and schools to make up for this short fall since they can only do so much beyond their primary function for which they were designed. You don't need to be an architect to know that architecture should maximize the expressive potential of its function. No reflection, in this case, is still a reflection; we should demand more from ourselves and more from our Lawmakers. We need to provide places that express through its architecture a visible form of our "higher" ideals and values as a civilized people, and not the message that we are merely surviving. Even in suburbia we deserve better.

 OK, so I could go on and on, discussing how our architecture is truly a reflection of ourselves. If you made it this far through the article maybe you would stick around to learn about architectural class division, planning segregation, how we label and divide people or NIMBY; a weapon to kill off anything that threatens suburban solitude. However I must stop here as I think you get my message. My writings may seem like a rant and my views anti-suburbia or demeaning to homeowners but they are not. Maybe I just love where I live so much I'm trying to improve it and make it better for everyone.
Lewis Portal AD

*Time travel note.