The beauty of neoclassicism decreed by law in the fight against the ugliness of modernism
Donald Trump at the end of his presidency issued a long-awaited decree relating to the aesthetics of public buildings. Henceforth, all federal buildings are to be "beautiful." Modernism (and references to it), which has been cast aside, is to be replaced by a return to classicism, but without an explicit order.
US Capitol
photo by Martin Falbisoner / Wikimedia Commons
The first announcements of a new law regulating public architecture in the US came in February. The return to "classicist architectural style" was to ensure that "federal buildings are restored to beauty." The proposal provoked fierce opposition from professional organizations (including the AIA) as contrary to democratic values and restrictive of creative freedom. In the end, the decree's provisions do not explicitly mandate a return to the classical style, although the text of the decree mentions a number of examples of such buildings as models to follow, led by the Capitol.
J. Edgar Hoover Building
photo by Brunswyk / Wikimedia Commons
In turn, it is unequivocally negative about the edifices erected since the 1950s, which are supposed to be unattractive to the public. Henceforth, the purpose of architecture is to be overtly political - "it is necessary to ensure that all designs of federal buildings inspire public respect for their beauty and visual embodiment of America's ideals." The new law includes a list of preferred architectural styles and those designated for avoidance and special oversight. Among the potential suspects are brutalism, deconstructivism and all related trends. It is predicted that despite the start of several attempts to implement the new law and investments, the beginning of Joe Biden's term will derail Trump's intentions.
Poland under construction
What is the situation in Poland? It's hard to talk about the aesthetic consistency of the buildings under construction. Nor is this an indictment of them or the architects. After all, good designs should suit not only the investor, but the users, the context and the spirit of the times. What is sometimes debatable, however, are the procedures by which projects are selected. State patronage does not always mean selecting the best concept through an architectural competition. As the recent example with the latest Foreign Ministry investment shows, the state investor often treats architecture as a necessary evil. By relying on a bidding procedure, he strips a public building of its representative and standards-building function. It deprives it of the added value of intellectual work and searching for different design answers to the task at hand.
A new better Social Security
ZUS buildings in Warsaw, Poznan and Lublin
photo by Kacper Kepinski
It seems that in the chaotic space of Poland's transformation, only two institutions stand out for their coherence and consistency. These are the buildings of the Social Insurance Institution and the edifices of courts at all levels. The former, springing up all over the country as a result of the reform of the pension system and structural changes at the Social Insurance Institution itself, have for years been the only such common architectural symbol of transformation at the institutional level. Filling up mainly with car dealerships, shopping malls and fast-food bars, Polish cities had to wait several more years for a boom in public investment. For years, the gap was filled by ZUS, fitting seamlessly into the context of the transformation. In building the image of a modern institution, it drew mainly on the architectural models of the capitalist West. Architects creating designs for the insurance company's branches combined dynamic forms, postmodernism and deconstructivism with completely sexless interiors, distinctive celadons and reflective glass.
We can't think of anything else
The buildings of the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals in Cracow and the District Court in Siedlce
photo: Wikimedia Commons / MS / HRA
The case is different for courts. Here we are more likely to find projects selected in competitions. However, it is difficult not to notice consistency , or rather repetition, superficiality and literalness of forms. The solemnity of the edifices of the judiciary is all too often built with large colonnades, simplistic porticoes, monumental scale. These are not open institutions, but build respect in the compositionally simplest way possible. The architecture of Polish courts is thus a mixture of inspiration from the fascist modernism of the interwar period and the corporate architecture of the 21st century. Seriousness and strength mixed with apparent neutrality. The aesthetic effect is sometimes pleasing to the eye, although the individual buildings begin to be interesting only in a broader juxtaposition.
