Why New Buildings Suck

The Current State of Architecture.

This Substack is by David Perrine. I write about architecture, aesthetics, design theory, and philosophy. I share new posts bi-weekly. If you enjoy my work, please consider subscribing.

---

At least a few times a week, I see someone online or in person complaining about contemporary architecture. These critics vary in their grievances but all share a similar frustration with modern styles. Some of these comments are nostalgic for an older style or suggest a new direction for the practice's future. These comments also vary significantly in their sophistication implying that this sentiment is shared by people who are educated in architecture and those who aren’t. I thought it would be nice to publish a blog post addressing this topic in hopes of alleviating some of the confusion on this question, and getting more Substack engagement by addressing a popular subject :).

Before addressing such a topic, there is a certain due diligence required. One needs to make sure that such a question has enough significance. Is there something special about modern architecture that makes it dislikable? Is there a similar discourse about other architectural styles or periods? Has such discourse always existed? In general, I don’t find the same disdain for older architectural styles. The widespread hate I see online seems to be concentrated at architecture built after 1929 in the styles of those times, those being The International Style, Brutalism, Deconstructivism, postmodernism, Bauhaus, and Contemporary Architecture. Although cathedral haters exist, they are not nearly as common as postmodern haters, or brutalist haters. Thus, I believe this question is sufficient for research given its uniqueness.

The way that the public has in a sense turned on post-1929 architecture implies that there was a shift in the values of the practice at this time. Simply by looking at the architecture in question, one can see that this is true, and articulating why this has occurred could be useful, I honestly don’t know for sure.

I have a decent understanding of the values of architecture throughout history, as this is required information in M.Arch programs in the United States. In general, architecture at one point was primarily an aesthetic exercise. In “The Modern System of the Arts”, Paul Oskar Kristeller explains that architecture was seen as one of the fine arts during antiquity, grouped with painting, poetry, music, and sculpture.¹ Mark Foster Gage in his introduction to “Aesthetic Theory: Essential Texts for Architecture and Design” States quite straightforwardly that “design” or the aesthetic consideration of form, has been losing value compared to other theoretical or conceptual considerations in architecture.² This idea clearly implies that aesthetics and form was at one point a much more serious consideration in the design of a building. This sentiment is expressed beautifully in the juxtaposition of these two quotes, The first by Schopenhauer written in 1818, and the second by Bjarke Ingles written within the last decade:

“Architecture is distinct from the visual arts and poetry in that it does not produce an imitation but rather the thing itself: it does not repeat the Idea that is cognized, as those other arts do in which the artist lends the viewer his eyes; rather, in this case the artist orients the object properly for the viewer and facilitates his apprehension of the Idea by making the actual individual object express its essence clearly and completely. Unlike other works of fine art, works of architecture are very seldom constructed for purely aesthetic purposes: instead, these are subordinated to other, practical purposes that are foreign to art itself, and so the great merit of the architect consists in carrying through the purely aesthetic goals in spite of their subordination to foreign ones, and achieving them by skillfully adapting them in a variety of different ways to each of the arbitrary goals, and judging correctly which aesthetic-architectonic beauty would suit and be joined to a temple, which to a palace, which to an armory, etc. The more a harsh climate steps up the demands of necessity, of practicality, determining them more tightly and prescribing them more imperatively, the less room there is for beauty in architecture.”³

“The escalating complexity of the world and the accelerating speed of change exceed any individual’s capacity to comprehend. For architects operating today, the Golden Ratio is no longer the standard - rather, the UN’s 17 Sustainable Development Goals are. From a single elegant equation, architects are now held to multidimensional success criteria with almost infinite variables.”⁴

These quotes show that the values of architecture have clearly changed as society has become more complicated and as we’ve become more sophisticated in discussing these problems. It seems that the firm B.I.G has in a sense shorted aesthetic consideration in favor of other investments. Have other architecture firms followed this strategy?

Well… Yes.

To investigate this more precisely, I performed a sentiment analysis of the mission statements of the 50 biggest global architecture firms based on revenue. Here is the full list of firms and their mission statements:

1. Gensler

   1. We are guided by our mission to create a better world through the power of design and believe the source of our strength is our people.

2. HKS

   1. We aim to inspire and empower the people and communities who encounter our work. To preserve and respect our natural resources, we create places that conserve and rejuvenate our planet, too.

3. Perkins&Will

   1. Since 1935, we’ve been on a mission to create beautiful spaces that inspire. To respect and restore our natural world. To foster feelings of belonging and holistic well-being in the built environment. To relentlessly pursue knowledge and innovation.

4. Corgan

   1. We design places that enhance the lives of all who experience them.

5. Perkins Eastman

   1. Staying mindful of environmental, technological, economic, and social shifts, we strive to leave a lasting positive impact on people's lives and the world we inhabit. We design to enhance day-to-day experiences and once-in-a-lifetime moments.

6. ZGF

   1. Making a difference in people's lives, fighting climate change, and advancing social justice.

7. NBBJ

   1. Our mission is to create beautiful, high-performance environments that are good for people, good for business and good for the planet.

8. HOK

   1. We are dedicated to improving people’s lives, serving our clients and healing the planet.

9. Cannon Design

   1. We imagine, create and implement solutions that advance human vitality, further equity, optimize business and protect our planet all at once.

10. Aedas

    1. We create world-class design solutions that are tailored to the needs of cities and communities around the world.

11. Populous

    1. We create places for people to laugh, to cry, to high five, to celebrate, and to be a part of something bigger than themselves.

12. Kohn Pedersen Fox

    1. KPF's mission is to create buildings and places that are contextual, high quality, and contribute to the cities they inhabit.

13. Interior Architects

    1. Through innovation, research, and building on smart, highly creative solutions that embody our clients’ brands, we advance the field.

14. HMC Architects

    1. To partner with our clients and communities to serve the greater good.

15. KTGY

    1. To Move the Discourse of Architecture Forward by Continuously Searching for Better. KTGY designs innovative, market driven, thoughtful solutions that produce lasting value for our clients, the community, and our firm.

16. Foster + Partners

    1. Foster + Partners' ambition is to be the world's leading architectural and design practice, investing in people, innovation and research with sustainability at its core.

17. Bjarke Ingels Group

    1. We take on the creation of socially, economically and environmentally perfect places as a practical objective.

18. LS3P Associates

    1. To engage our clients and communities, to design meaningful places, with proven results that transform.

19. AO

    1. We enrich their visions, minimize their risks, and make the whole collaborative process engaging and rewarding for all.

20. Nelson Worldwide

    1. To boldly transform all dimensions of the human experience, elevating the design and performance of the physical and digital environments where people eat, shop, work, relax, heal, and play.

21. Elkus Manfredi Architects

    1. Our mission is to create common ground that brings people and communities together.

22. SCB

    1. push the boundaries of design to deliver innovative, effective solutions ranging from architecture to planning to interior design.

23. DGA

    1. Uniting Inspired Design with Technical Expertise

24. Hord Coplan Macht

    1. Create a better future by clear, purposeful design solutions. Through diverse perspectives, the power of place, and the importance of craft we continually challenge the familiar to discover the unique. Diversity is the foundation of our approach.

25. Cooper Carry

    1. Cooper Carry is a creative collective, actively working to break down the traditional walls between studios and building types… We believe that well-designed places have the power to positively affect people’s lives."

26. MG2

    1. We empower brands and enrich lives. MG2 works with the world’s most notable companies to design, optimize, and deliver environments that connect people through new discoveries and memorable experiences.

27. WATG

    1. Distinct, timeless, strategically centered, and operationally sound. These qualities have been delivered consistently by WATG's global team since our inception, resulting in destinations that are famous for perpetually high performance..

28. Moody Nolan

    1. We practice responsive design, pairing empathetic listening with innovative thinking, to find harmony between client, community, and environment. We use intentional collaboration to transform ideas into high performance design solutions, responsive to people and place.

29. Humphreys and Partners Architects

    1. Committed to creating inspiring spaces that connect communities and improve local economies.

30. Moseley Architects

    1. Provides professional architectural, engineering, and interior design solutions to clients seeking responsive and reliable planning and design services, as well as specialized expertise.

31. McMillan Pazdan Smith

    1. Our purpose is to create a meaningful and lasting impact for the good of all. We work to design a better future through thoughtful, creative, and purpose-driven solutions. We are in service to each other, our clients, and our communities.

32. CO Architects

    1. We strive to make buildings as useful as they are beautiful. The people who need our buildings to perform

33. Cuningham

    1. Together, we create enduring experiences for a healthy world." Their Vision is to dream big, be daring, and create change

34. EUA

    1. We design to elevate opportunities for our community and the next generation of talent

35. VLK Architects

    1. It is our desire to add value to the communities in which we serve, and to strive, always, to meet 100% of our clients' needs.

36. Payette

    1. We are a thinking practice with a keen desire to execute complex building types with precision. To do so, we strive to deeply understand the problems our clients face. We begin there, because we are a human-centered practice.

37. Niles Bolton Associates

    1. We define success by how well a project realizes the vision of our clients and ultimately fulfills the needs of the people who live, use and work within the environments we create.

38. Ayers Saint Gross

    1. Our mission is to engage people and places to create designs which enrich our world.

39. HNTB

    1. Enhancing mobility, opportunity and quality of life for everyone through responsive, innovative solutions

40. RATIO Design

    1. Cultivates connections between people and place. We design for impact by shaping environments of purpose, beauty, and meaning with teams that are fully interdisciplinary, wholly collaborative, and fully immersed in every unique space they touch.

41. Kirksey Architecture

    1. Healthy buildings, Healthy people, Healthy planet

42. BWBR

    1. We're committed to making the world and people better through design excellence,

43. SGA

    1. We are adept at balancing our own commitment to design excellence with our client's goals, budgets, and schedules, enabling us to deliver high-performance buildings that meet the needs of developers, institutions, corporations, and end-users.

44. Quinn Evans

    1. Our mission is to create places that give back. We believe in the enduring power of places. Design has the power to solve problems, improve lives, and unlock potential. Our national impact and shared commitment to helping places and people thrive continues to grow.

45. JCJ Architecture

    1. Our mission is to provide design solutions that enhance the built environment, enrich people's lives and help organizations to succeed. The quality of built environment has the power to transform places and positively impact communities and institutions.

46. TPG Architecture 

    1. Creating interior environments that serve our clients’ strategic objectives. The success of our practice is inherent in our ability to remain agile, mobile, flexible and adaptable.

47. LMN Architects

    1. Our practice has been committed to the advancement of our community, the profession, and the world. We are dedicated to crafting a more equitable and resilient future through our leadership in regional, national, and global forums on design, planning, sustainability, technology, and mentorship.

48. Shepley Bulfinch

    1. We design spaces that inspire, we build dynamic relationships that endure. We regard our clients as partners, and value their voices and insight in the design process.

49. Zaha Hadid Architects

    1. We create transformative cultural, corporate, residential, and other spaces that work in synchronicity with their surroundings.

50. Beck Architecture

    1. Create the Future. We integrate architecture, construction, sustainability, and technology to transform how our clients'​ design and build.

---

To perform the analysis, I used a software to track the frequency of certain words throughout the mission statements. Significant points of the word frequency analysis are shown below.

People: 21
Place(s): 15
Client(s): 14
Community/Communities: 13
Environment(s)/Environmental(ly): 12
Solutions: 11
Innovation/Innovative:7
Perform(ance): 6
Impact: 5
Inspire: 5
Healthy: 2
Beauty: 4
Creative: 3
Sustainability: 3
Social(ly): 3
Justice: 1

---

As you can see, the word “beauty” or any mention of an aesthetic or formal quality, only came up four times. On the other hand, a large proportion of firms mention community, client needs, and environmental advocacy.

It is vital to note that all of these values are very important, but in general, we have lost the ability or desire to consider aesthetics due a complex world. I have no idea what a solution could be. Architects already work incredibly hard only to make buildings that don’t consider aesthetics, and we are paid quite poorly for that service.⁵

To put it bluntly, most architecture firms no longer consider beauty a core value in their practice. We have other things to worry about. I feel quite heart-broken as I write this, as I don’t see the world becoming any simpler in the future. However, this does not mean that contemporary architecture sucks. Rather, we focus our energy on different things. Many of these things are less visible, but that doesn’t mean they are not important. There are still plenty of architecture practices that focus on aesthetics, but until the free-market adjusts, these practices will remain small and overworked. Again, I want to show humility and mention that I am in no position to suggest solutions, but I hope this text enjoyable or at least intriguing.

Thank you for reading. Please consider subscribing.

1. Kristeller, P. O. (1951). The Modern System of the Arts: A Study in the History of Aesthetics Part I. Journal of the History of Ideas, 12(4), 496–527. https://doi.org/10.2307/2707484

2. Gage, M. F. (Ed.). (2011). Aesthetic theory: Essential texts for architecture and design. W. W. Norton & Company.

3. Schopenhauer, A. (1969). The World as Will and Representation (Vol. 1). Dover Publications. (originally written in 1818).

4. https://big.dk/about

5. https://sourceable.net/why-architects-are-stuck-at-bottom-of-construction-pay-scale/