A leading architect and architectural critic has declared that “architecture has embraced an ideological rigidity that limits open debate and inhibits engagement with large sections of the public.”
Austin Williams—director of the Future Cities Project, series editor of Five Critical Essays, and author/editor of books including New Chinese Architecture: Twenty Women Building the Future—took to the pages of Building Design (subtitled “Intelligence for Architects”) and decried how
Government legislation enforcing equity mandates and net zero targets may be deemed legitimate by some, but it has increasingly been framed as a moral absolute, leaving little room for counterarguments.
While concerns about environmental impact may be valid, Williams writes that net zero ideals break sharply from the idea that architecture—and society more broadly—should be about creating more opportunities, not fewer. Controversially within his profession, Williams argues that populists, from Donald Trump to Giorgia Meloni, are gaining traction in part because of a wider public pushback against these limitations.
In response, the managerialist mindset prefers to shriek about the threat of the ‘far right.’ When Trump returned to office with an executive action to reinstate his Promoting Beautiful Federal Civic Architecture programme (civic buildings should “respect regional, traditional and classical architectural heritage in order to uplift and beautify public spaces and ennoble the United States”), the reaction included “the next global dictatorship,” seeing “echoes of fascist architecture” everywhere (and “memes of Nazi rallies amid Corinthian columns”).
As Williams argues, “classical stylisation is not to everyone’s taste–but grow up.” He hopes for a more creative era when the architectural profession starts to draw its energy from the wider populist moment.
