Architecture Of The New Capitalist Society example essay topic

Architecture of the New Capitalist Society INTRODUCTORY THEME Daniel Libeskind's winning design for the new World Trade Center takes a sentimental and metaphorical approach. He claims that the completed WTC would become the representation of America's belief in humanity, its need for individual dignity, and its beliefs in the cooperation of human. Libeskind's original design focused on restoring the spiritual peak to the New York City and creating an icon that speaks of America's vitality in the face of danger and her optimism in the aftermath of tragedy. The design considered the city's neighborhood and residents, rather than simply the economic demands of the commissioners.

However, Libeskind's revised plan that revealed in September 2003 altered his original humanistic vision of creating buildings that respond to the neighborhood, and an environment that will have richness and openness. Pressured by the leaseholder of the WTC site Mr. Silverstein, Libeskind's new plan added an emphasize on the commercial purpose of the site. The marketability of office and retail spaces has become the major concern of the project. The new World Trade Center project has stirred a significant amount of debates among authorities and the public since Daniel Libeskind first revealed his original mater plan in February 2003. Some have proposed to redesign and decentralize lower Manhattan; others have questioned that if New York really needs another world's tallest building, or maybe something more modest like affordable housing, linear parks, and true public spaces and institutes. However, beyond these issues, there is a far more intricate question cannot be easily answered: How the architecture profession has been influenced by the new capitalist society?

And what is the role of the architects in the twenty-first century? Architecture has been known as the product of aesthetics, structure, and function that serves to address social needs, resolve environmental and humanitarian problems through built form. Architecture not only shelters, but also has the ability to consolidate boundaries within our society. It realizes the role by physically defining space and by imposing its symbolic, representative meaning onto our living environment.

As Ludwig Wittgenstein once said, "Architecture immortalizes and glorifies something". Indeed, architecture must be documentary and didactic. It should represent a coherence of qualities of social and political situations in its period, and must teach the audience the values and virtues that embedded in the built form. In the case of twenty-first century society, architecture has successfully documented the compelling forces that drive our society to change: the rapidly changing technologies, the changing political institution, the internal need to improve performance and competitive situation, and the market forces.

Nevertheless, the architecture of the new capitalist society has also documented the traces of the impact of capitalism on the architectural design and practice. In the twenty-first century's capitalist society, architecture's once privileged cultural position has been diminished. As part of a consumerist culture, where ideas, objects, and images are commoditized, architecture's role has gradually been converted into a tool for the merchandising of space. Architecture once shapes the society is now shaped by the new capitalist society. CHANGING SOCIETY Compared to Daniel Libeskind's original vision of the World Trade Center, the most dramatic change in the revised plan is the more slender office towers.

It was done to reduce density and to provide more open space and fewer physical obstacles. More importantly, the slimmer and taller office buildings with smaller cores, will allow for more retail space in adjacent areas. It is obvious that "the quest for profitability" boils down to be the rationale behind this revision. We are now living in a world where maximized value of equity is the single goal to strive for; where commercialization comes before creativity. Almost every creation is analyzed from a monetary perspective.

During the interview with Anthony Burke, a Professor of Architecture at UC Berkeley, he admitted that although architects trained in the academy are in general very optimistic and idealistic, believing that architecture can solve social problems, create better societies, and maintain cultural relevance. However, once they enter the real world where profitability is the biggest resistance they are against, it becomes almost impossible to refuse to compromise visions and values. Under the social context of the twenty-first century, architecture needs to respond to the changes in technology advances and political situation, but also respond to a changing capitalist society that values economic interests and profitability. With the transition from the industrial to the service economy, the architecture profession is also transforming itself to become a service sector. Instead of being the product that shapes society, architecture, under the current circumstances, is employed as an indispensable engine of the capitalist society to represent a singular vision of the "ownership class". Moreover, as architecture profession is merging into the service sector, the architect's role is redefined from visionary or the leader to a mediator of an arbitrary mediocrity.

CHANGING PROFESSION While the leaseholder and developers of the World Trade Center's main concern lies within the profitability and marketability of the site, the public calls for a community space. It should include a transportation hub, which links existing and new transportation centers and integrating them with pedestrian flows and open spaces. At the same time, it should encourage diversity of uses capitalizing on the cultural, historical and geographic assets of the district, thus to stimulate the economic development of lower Manhattan as well as the entire New York city. Once Daniel Libeskind's revised design was unveiled, it was widely criticized for only representing the vision of the tenants, rather than the vision of the society at large.

Although, this is an imbalanced criticism, for it is almost impossible to have a uniform vision of society. However, the design process of the new World Trade Center demonstrates to us how capitalist society influences the architecture profession. Professor Burke asserted that this situation is not unique in the United States. From his experience, almost every capitalist society emphasizes on profitability and imposes great constraints on architecture profession. Even though economic interest is not the single factor that has altered the architecture profession, but it is definitely one of the most significant factors. Within the last few decades, architecture has been dominated by the marketplace, which emphasizes on consumption rather than production.

Because of the institutional roles of buyer and seller competing in the market toward private consumption of space and equity, there has always been a profit motive inherent in the property of capitalism. And the profit motive is illustrated in almost all types of architecture in our society. The task of architecture in this case is not only to create pleasurable experiences for its users, but also to serve as an instrument to secure economic interests. Moreover, under the consumerist culture, like all other creations, architecture is also commercialized to maximize profits for its tenants.

In the capitalist social context, people are now conditioned to define oneself by what one consumes and possesses, and in which one enclose him / herself. Therefore, the imbedded market value in architecture ensures its endless acquisition. Under such circumstances, architecture in our capitalist society defines the physical environment, as well as the social structure. Rather than creating a classless society through built forms and city planning that is capable of disengaging individuals from present social division and affirming a capability of association and cooperation between individuals, architecture impacted by capitalism is designed to fulfill commissioners' economic interests and represent their singular visions.

As the architecture profession has marginalized into service sector, the role of architects has transformed as well. Architects now have to take a much different role. They are not leaders of the project any more. Instead, they are acting as consultants.

Like all service professions, the final production is no longer an integral part of the entire architecture profession. Meanwhile, the design process has become much more important. Architecture to a great extent is presently maneuvered by the political and economic contingencies, bureaucratic and otherwise. It is now greatly influence by the design review boards and tenant association groups, the consumer groups, the interior designers and construction administrators and managers, the developers that sponsor architecture. And the role of architects has converted into coordinators between the landlords, investors, and etc. Since architecture profession is no longer the autonomous discipline that produces merely the instrument to transform living environments and social conditions, architects are rarely the visionaries.

CHANGING PRESENT As the design process of the new World Trade Center continues, participants in the design process have posed many threats to Daniel Libeskind's original vision. Questions about the final appearance of the WTC site are still far from being answered. But the WTC project has cast on us a new perception of the American society. Under the capitalist structure of American society, which determines that profit and self-interest are valued above public interest and development of the larger society, the architecture profession has gradually marginalized to become a service provided exclusively to its tenants to produce economic interests. While the developers and Mr. Silverstein are calling for ten million square feet of commercial spaces at WTC site, many are questioning the necessarily of creating another world's number one skyline.

Perhaps, modesty can also show the rest of the world that New York has learned from its past and the American values. This could be one of the most significant lessons September 11th attack has taught us.

Bibliography

Abby Busse l, "As the World Trade Center Turns", Architecture, V. 92, N. 9 (Sept 2003), 11.
Andrew Mead, "Close Inspection of a Capitalist World [book and exhibition review]", Architects' Journal V. 206, N. 17 (Nov 1997), 59.
Anthony Burke, interview held during meeting, University of California, Berkeley, November, 2004.
Colin St. John Wilson, "Speer and the Fear of Freedom", Architectural Review V. 173 No. 1036 (June 1983): 22.
Christopher Hawthorne, "Not the Object but the Emptiness", Metropolis V. 23, N. 9 (May 2004), 113.
Joseph A. Demkin. The Architect's Handbook of Professional Practice (John Wiley & Sons, Inc: 2002), 13.
Karr ie Jacobs, "The Power of Inadvertent Design", Metropolis, V. 23, N. 6 (Feb 2004), 50.
Peter J. L arkham, "Planning the twentieth-century city: the advanced capitalist world [book review]", Planning Perspectives. V. 18, N. 8 (Apr 2003), 245.
Reg McLe more, "City Planning in an Economy in Transition", Plan Canada, V. 39, N. 4 (Sept 1999), 22.
Sam Lu bell, "Libeskind's World Trade Center Guidelines Raise Doubts", Architectural Record, V. 192, No. 6 (June 2004), 47.