AcclaimforAlaindeBotton’s

TheArchitectureofHappiness

“Aperceptive,thoughtful,original,andrichlyillustratedexerciseinthedramaticpersonificationofbuildingsofallsorts.”

—TheNewYorkReviewofBooks

“Heartfelt…graceful.…[DeBottonhas]quietintelligence,passionateconvictionandthecharmofapersonalitylightlytingedwithmelancholy.”

—TheWashingtonPostBookWorld

“De Botton has a marvelous knack for coming at weighty subjects from entertainingly eccentricangles.”

—TheSeattleTimes

“De Botton is a lively guide, and his eclectic choices of buildings and locations evince hisconclusion, that ‘we should be as unintimidated by architectural mediocrity as we are by unjustlaws.’”

—TheNewYorker

“Eruditeand readable.…Asmuchapsychological investigationasanaestheticone,plumbing theemotionalcontentofbuildings.”

—SanFranciscoChronicle

“[A] lively, philosophical and joyful book.… It works on a reader like the tuneup of a piano,realigningthemindandeyetopayattentiontoourbuiltenvironments.”

—ThePlainDealer

“Ingenious.…DeBotton analyzes the psychological, biological, and historical idioms that enableboxesofwood,stone,brick,andmortartocomealiveandaddressourdeepestspiritualconcerns.…DeBottonisagracefulandengagingessayist,miraculouslycombiningbothlevityandprofundity.”

—EntertainmentToday

“Aninterestingandperhapsimportantadditiontothedebateovertheemotionaleffectthatourcitiesandbuildingshaveonus.…TheArchitectureofHappiness rightly tellsus to trustour senses andpersonalexperience.”

—TheWallStreetJournal

“Theelegantclarityandbriskhumourofhisstyle,accompaniedbypagesofphotos,opensyoureyestotherichpossibilityofthinkingaboutyourhome,andyourcity,inanewway.”

—TheTorontoStar

“Singlehandedly,deBottonhas takenphilosophyback to itssimplestandmost importantpurpose:helpingusliveourlives.”

—TheIndependent(London)

“DeBottonwantstoencouragehisreaders,andsocietiesmoregenerally,topaymoreattentiontothepsychological consequencesofdesign in architecture: that architecture shouldnotbe treated as an

arcaneandspecialistdisciplinetobelefttoprofessionals,butassomethingthataffectsallourlives,ourhappinessandourwell-being.”

—TheObserver(London)

AlaindeBotton

TheArchitectureofHappiness

AlaindeBottonistheauthorofthreeworksoffictionandfiveofnonfiction,includingHowProustCanChangeYourLife, TheConsolations ofPhilosophy, andTheArt of Travel.He is a foundingmemberofTheSchoolofLife:www.theschooloflife.com.HelivesinLondon.

http://www.theschooloflife.com

AlsobyAlaindeBotton

OnLoveTheRomanticMovementKiss&TellHowProustCanChangeYourLifeTheConsolationsofPhilosophyTheArtofTravelStatusAnxiety

FIRSTVINTAGEINTERNATIONALEDITION,APRIL2008

Copyright©2006byAlaindeBotton

Allrightsreserved.PublishedintheUnitedStatesbyVintageBooks,adivisionofRandomHouse,Inc.,NewYork.OriginallypublishedinhardcoverinGreatBritainbyHamishHamilton,London,andsubsequentlypublishedinhardcoverintheUnitedStatesbyPantheonBooks,adivisionofRandomHouse,Inc.,NewYork,in2006.

VintageisaregisteredtrademarkandVintageInternationalandcolophonaretrademarksofRandomHouse,Inc.

TheLibraryofCongresshascatalogedthePantheoneditionasfollows:DeBotton,Alain.Thearchitectureofhappiness/AlaindeBotton.p.cm.1.Architecture—Psychologicalaspects.2.Architectureandsociety.3.Architecture—Aesthetics.I.Title.NA2540.D342006720.1′3—dc222006044797

eISBN:978-0-307-48156-6

Authorphotograph©RoderickField

www.vintagebooks.com

http://www.vintagebooks.com

v3.1

forCharlotte

Contents

CoverAbouttheAuthorOtherBooksbyThisAuthorTitlePageCopyrightDedication

I.TheSignificanceofArchitectureII.InWhatStyleShallWeBuild?III.TalkingBuildingsIV.IdealsofHomeV.TheVirtuesofBuildingsVI.ThePromiseofaField

AcknowledgementsAlsobyThisAuthor

I.TheSignificanceofArchitecture

1.

A terraced house on a tree-lined street. Earlier today, the house rangwith thesoundofchildren’scriesandadultvoices,but since the lastoccupant tookoff(with her satchel) a few hours ago, it has been left to sample themorning byitself. The sun has risen over the gables of the buildings opposite and nowwashes through theground-floorwindows,painting the interiorwallsabutteryyellow and warming the grainy-red brick façade. Within shafts of sunlight,plateletsofdustmoveasifinobediencetotherhythmsofasilentwaltz.Fromthehallway,thelowmurmurofacceleratingtrafficcanbedetectedafewblocksaway.Occasionally,theletter-boxopenswitharasptoadmitaplaintiveleaflet.Thehousegivessignsofenjoyingtheemptiness.Itisrearrangingitselfafter

thenight,clearingitspipesandcrackingitsjoints.Thisdignifiedandseasonedcreature,with its coppery veins andwooden feet nestled in a bed of clay, hasenduredmuch:ballsbouncedagainst itsgardenflanks,doorsslammedinrage,headstands attempted along its corridors, the weight and sighs of electricalequipmentandtheprobingsofinexperiencedplumbersintoitsinnards.Afamilyoffoursheltersinit, joinedbyacolonyofantsaroundthefoundationsand,inspringtime,bybroodsofrobinsinthechimneystack.Italsolendsashouldertoafrail(orjustindolent)sweet-peawhichleansagainstthegardenwall,indulgingtheperipateticcourtshipofacircleofbees.Thehousehasgrownintoaknowledgeablewitness.Ithasbeenpartytoearly

seductions, it haswatched homework beingwritten, it has observed swaddledbabies freshlyarrived fromhospital, ithasbeen surprised in themiddleof thenight by whispered conferences in the kitchen. It has experienced wintereveningswhenitswindowswereascoldasbagsoffrozenpeasandmidsummerduskswhenitsbrickwallsheldthewarmthofnewlybakedbread.Ithasprovidednotonlyphysicalbutalsopsychologicalsanctuary.Ithasbeen

a guardian of identity. Over the years, its owners have returned from periodsawayand,onlookingaroundthem,rememberedwhotheywere.Theflagstonesonthegroundfloorspeakofserenityandagedgrace,whiletheregularityofthekitchen cabinets offers a model of unintimidating order and discipline. Thedining table,with itswaxy tableclothprintedwith largebuttercups, suggests aburstofplayfulnesswhichisthrownintoreliefbyasternerconcretewallnearby.Along the stairs, small still-lives of eggs and lemons draw attention to theintricacyandbeautyofeverydaythings.Onaledgebeneathawindow,aglassjarofcornflowershelpstoresistthepulltowardsdejection.Ontheupperfloor,a

narrowempty roomallows space for restorative thoughts tohatch, its skylightgiving out onto impatient clouds migrating rapidly over cranes and chimneypots.Althoughthishousemaylacksolutionstoagreatmanyofitsoccupants’ills,

its rooms nevertheless give evidence of a happiness towhich architecture hasmadeitsdistinctivecontribution.

2.

Yetaconcern forarchitecturehasneverbeen free fromadegreeof suspicion.Doubtshavebeenraisedaboutthesubject’sseriousness,itsmoralworthanditscost.A thought-provokingnumberof theworld’smost intelligentpeoplehavedisdained any interest in decoration and design, equating contentment withdiscarnateandinvisiblemattersinstead.TheAncientGreekStoicphilosopherEpictetusissaidtohavedemandedofa

heart-broken friend whose house had burnt to the ground, ‘If you reallyunderstandwhatgovernstheuniverse,howcanyouyearnforbitsofstoneandpretty rock?’ (It is unclear how much longer the friendship lasted.) LegendrecountsthatafterhearingthevoiceofGod,theChristianhermitAlexandrasoldherhouse, shutherself ina tombandnever lookedat theoutsideworldagain,while her fellow hermit Paul of Scete slept on a blanket on the floor of awindowlessmudhutandrecited300prayerseveryday,sufferingonlywhenheheardofanotherholymanwhohadmanaged700andsleptinacoffin.Such austerity has been a historical constant. In the spring of 1137 the

Cistercian monk St Bernard of Clairvaux travelled all the way around LakeGeneva without noticing it was even there. Likewise, after four years in hismonastery, StBernard could not reportwhether the dining area had a vaultedceiling(itdoes)orhowmanywindowstherewereinthesanctuaryofhischurch(three).Onavisit to theCharterhouseofDauphiné,StBernard astonishedhishosts by arriving on a magnificent white horse diametrically opposed to theasceticvaluesheprofessed,buthe explained thathehadborrowed the animalfromawealthyuncleandhadsimplyfailedtoregisteritsappearanceonafour-dayjourneyacrossFrance.

3.

Nevertheless, such determined efforts to scorn visual experience have alwaysbeen matched by equally persistent attempts to mould the material world tograceful ends. People have strained their backs carving flowers into their roofbeamsandtheireyesightembroideringanimalsontotheirtablecloths.Theyhavegivenupweekends tohideunsightly cablesbehind ledges.Theyhave thoughtcarefullyaboutappropriatekitchenwork-surfaces.Theyhaveimaginedlivinginunattainably expensive houses pictured inmagazines and then felt sad, as onedoesonpassinganattractivestrangerinacrowdedstreet.Weseemdividedbetweenanurgetooverrideoursensesandnumbourselves

tooursettingsandacontradictoryimpulsetoacknowledgetheextenttowhichouridentitiesareindeliblyconnectedto,andwillshiftalongwith,ourlocations.An ugly room can coagulate any loose suspicions as to the incompleteness oflife,whileasun-litonesetwithhoney-colouredlimestonetilescanlendsupporttowhateverismosthopefulwithinus.Beliefinthesignificanceofarchitectureispremisedonthenotionthatweare,

for better or for worse, different people in different places – and on theconvictionthatitisarchitecture’stasktorendervividtouswhowemightideallybe.

4.

Weare sometimes eager to celebrate the influenceofour surroundings. In thelivingroomofahouseintheCzechRepublic,weseeanexampleofhowwalls,chairsandfloorscancombinetocreateanatmosphereinwhichthebestsidesofus are offered theopportunity to flourish.Weacceptwithgratitude thepowerthatasingleroomcanpossess.But sensitivity to architecture also has itsmore problematic aspects. If one

roomcanalterhowwefeel,ifourhappinesscanhangonthecolourofthewallsortheshapeofadoor,whatwillhappentousinmostoftheplacesweareforcedto look at and inhabit?What will we experience in a house with prison-likewindows,stainedcarpettilesandplasticcurtains?Itistopreventthepossibilityofpermanentanguishthatwecanbeledtoshut

oureyestomostofwhatisaroundus,forweareneverfarfromdampstainsandcracked ceilings, shattered cities and rusting dockyards. We can’t remainsensitiveindefinitelytoenvironmentswhichwedon’thavethemeanstoalterforthegood–andendupasconsciousaswecanaffordtobe.EchoingtheattitudeofStoicphilosophersorStBernardaroundLakeGeneva,wemayfindourselvesarguingthat,ultimately,itdoesn’tmuchmatterwhatbuildingslooklike,whatisontheceilingorhowthewall is treated–professionsofdetachment thatstemnot so much from an insensitivity to beauty as from a desire to deflect thesadness we would face if we left ourselves open to all of beauty’s manyabsences.

Architecturecanrendervividtouswhowemightideallybe:MiesvanderRohe,diningarea,TugendhatHouse,Brno,1930

5.

Thereisnoshortageofreasonstobesuspiciousoftheambitiontocreategreatarchitecture. Buildings rarelymake palpable the efforts that their constructiondemands.Theyarecoylysilentaboutthebankruptcies,thedelays,thefearandthedustthattheyimpose.Anonchalantappearanceisafrequentfeatureoftheircharm.Itisonlywhenwetryourownhandatconstructionthatweareinitiatedinto the torments associated with persuading materials and other humans tocooperatewithourdesigns,withensuringthattwopiecesofglasswillbejoinedinaneat line, thatalampwillhangsymmetricallyoverthestairs, thataboilerwill light upwhen it should or that concrete pillarswillmarry a roofwithoutcomplaint.Even when we have attained our goals, our buildings have a grievous

tendencytofallapartagainwithprecipitatespeed.Itcanbehardtowalkintoafreshly decorated house without feeling pre-emptively sad at the decayimpatientlywaitingtobegin:howsoonthewallswillcrack,thewhitecupboardswill yellow and the carpets stain. The ruins of the Ancient World offer amockinglessonforanyonewaitingforbuilderstofinishtheirwork.HowproudthehouseholdersofPompeiimusthavebeen.Inhisessay‘OnTransience’(1916)SigmundFreudrecalledawalkhetookin

theDolomiteMountainswith thepoetRainerMariaRilke. Itwasanexquisitesummer’s day; the flowers were in bloom and brightly coloured butterfliesdancedabovethemeadows.Thepsychoanalystwasgladtobeoutdoors(ithadbeenrainingallweek),buthiscompanionwalkedwithhisheadbowed,hiseyesfixedon theground,and remained taciturn throughout theexcursion. Itwasn’tthatRilkewasoblivioustothebeautyaroundhim;hesimplycouldnotoverlookhow impermanent everythingwas. In Freud’s words, he was unable to forget‘that all this beautywas fated to extinction, that itwould vanishwhenwintercame, like all human beauty and all the beauty thatmen have created ormaycreate’.Freudwas unsympathetic; for him, the capacity to love anything attractive,

howeverfragileitmightbe,wasahallmarkofpsychologicalhealth.ButRilke’sstance, though inconvenient,helpfullyemphasiseshow it canbe thosemost inthralltobeautywhowillbeespeciallyawareof,andsaddenedby,itsephemeralcharacter. Such melancholic enthusiasts will see the moth hole beneath thecurtain swatch and the ruin beneath the plan. They may at the last momentcancelanappointmentwithanestateagent,havingrealisedthatthehouseunder

offer,aswellasthecityandevencivilisationitself,willsoonenoughbereducedtofragmentsofshatteredbrickoverwhichcockroacheswilltriumphantlycrawl.They may prefer to rent a room or live in a barrel out of a reluctance tocontemplatetheslowdisintegrationoftheobjectsoftheirlove.At its apex, a passion for architecturemay turn us into aesthetes, eccentric

figureswhomustwatchovertheirhouseswiththevigilanceofmuseumguards,patrolling their rooms in search of stains, a damp cloth or sponge in hand.Aestheteswillhavenochoicebut toforgothecompanyofsmallchildrenand,duringdinnerwithfriends,willhavetoignoretheconversationinordertofocuson whether someone might lean back and inadvertently leave a head-shapedimprintonthewall.It would be pleasant to refuse in a muscular spirit to lend stray blemishes

genuinesignificance.However,aesthetesforceustoconsiderwhetherhappinessmaynotsometimesturnonthepresenceorabsenceofafingerprint,whetherincertainsituationsbeautyanduglinessmaynotlieonlyafewmillimetresapart,whetherasinglemarkmightnotwreckawalloranerrantbrushstrokeundoalandscapepainting.Weshouldthankthesesensitivespiritsforpointinguswiththeatrical honesty towards the possibility of a genuine antithesis betweencompetingvalues: forexample, anattachment tobeautifularchitectureand thepursuitofanexuberantandaffectionatefamilylife.Howwisewere theancientphilosophers insuggesting thatweexcludefrom

our vision of contentment anything thatmight one day be covered by lava orblowdowninahurricane,succumbtoachocolatesmearorabsorbawinestain.

6.

Architectureisperplexing,too,inhowinconsistentisitscapacitytogeneratethehappiness on which its claim to our attention is founded.While an attractivebuildingmayonoccasion flatteranascendingmood, therewillbe timeswhenthe most congenial of locations will be unable to dislodge our sadness ormisanthropy.Wecanfeelanxiousandenviouseventhoughthefloorwe’restandingonhas

been imported froma remotequarry, and finely sculptedwindow frameshavebeenpaintedasoothinggrey.Ourinnermetronomecanbeunimpressedbytheefforts of workmen to create a fountain or nurture a symmetrical line of oaktrees.We can fall into a petty argumentwhich ends in threats of divorce in abuildingbyGeoffreyBawaorLouisKahn.Housescaninviteustojointhemina mood which we find ourselves incapable of summoning. The noblestarchitecturecansometimesdolessforusthanasiestaoranaspirin.Thosewho havemade architectural beauty their life’swork know only too

wellhowfutiletheireffortscanprove.AfteranexhaustivestudyofthebuildingsofVenice, inamomentofdepressivelucidity,JohnRuskinacknowledgedthatfewVenetiansinfactseemedelevatedbytheircity,perhapsthemostbeautifulurbantapestryintheworld.AlongsideStMark’sChurch(describedbyRuskininTheStonesofVeniceas‘aBookofCommonPrayer,avastilluminatedmissal,boundwithalabasterinsteadofparchment,studdedwithporphyrypillarsinsteadofjewels,andwrittenwithinandwithoutinlettersofenamelandgold’),theysatincafés,readthepapers,sunbathed,bickeredandstolefromoneanotheras,highon thechurch’s roof,unobserved, ‘the imagesofChristandHisangels lookeddownuponthem.’Endowed with a power that is as unreliable as it often is inexpressible,

architecturewillalwayscompetepoorlywithutilitariandemandsforhumanity’sresources. How hard it is to make a case for the cost of tearing down andrebuildingameanbutserviceablestreet.Howawkwardtohavetodefend,intheface ofmore tangible needs, the benefits of realigning a crooked lamppost orreplacing an ill-matchedwindow frame.Beautiful architecturehasnoneof theunambiguous advantages of a vaccine or a bowl of rice. Its construction willhenceneverbe raised toadominantpoliticalpriority, foreven if thewholeoftheman-madeworldcould, throughrelentlesseffortandsacrifice,bemodelledto rival StMark’s Square, even ifwe could spend the rest of our lives in theVillaRotondaortheGlassHouse,wewouldstilloftenbeinabadmood.

7.

Notonlydobeautifulhousesfalterasguarantorsofhappiness,theycanalsobeaccusedoffailingtoimprovethecharactersofthosewholiveinthem.Itseemsreasonabletosupposethatpeoplewillpossesssomeofthequalities

ofthebuildingstheyaredrawnto:toexpectthatiftheyarealivetothecharmofanancient farmhousewithwallsmadeof irregularchiselled stones set in lightmortar, if they can appreciate the play of candlelight against hand-decoratedtiles, canbe seducedby librarieswith shelves filled from floor to ceilingwithbooksthatemitasweetdustysmellandarecontenttolieonthefloortracingtheknotted border of an intricate Turkoman rug, then they will know somethingabout patience and stability, tenderness and sweetness, intelligence andworldliness, scepticism and trust. We expect that such enthusiasts will becommittedtoinfusingtheirwholeliveswiththevaluesembodiedintheobjectsoftheirappreciation.But, whatever the theoretical affinities between beauty and goodness, it is

undeniable that, in practice, farmhouses and lodges, mansions and riversideapartments have played host to innumerous tyrants andmurderers, sadists andsnobs,tocharacterswithachillingindifferencetothedisjuncturesbetweenthequalitiesmanifestedintheirsurroundingsandintheirlives.

Wewouldstilloftenbeinabadmood:PhilipJohnson,TheGlassHouse,NewCanaan,Connecticut,1949

Medievaldevotionalpaintingsmaytrytoremindusofsadnessandsin, theymay seek to train us away fromarrogance andworldly pursuits and render usproperlyhumblebeforethemysteriesandhardshipsoflife,buttheywillhangina livingroomwithoutactiveprotestwhilebutlerscirculate thefinger foodandbutchersplottheirnextmove.Architecture may well possess moral messages; it simply has no power to

enforcethem.Itofferssuggestionsinsteadofmakinglaws.Itinvites,ratherthanorders,ustoemulateitsspiritandcannotpreventitsownabuse.We should be kind enough not to blame buildings for our own failure to

honourtheadvicetheycanonlyeversubtlyproffer.

8.

Suspicionofarchitecturemayintheendbesaidtocentrearoundthemodestyoftheclaims that can realisticallybemadeon itsbehalf.Reverence forbeautifulbuildings does not seem a high ambition on which to pin our hopes forhappiness, at least when compared with the results we might associate withuntying a scientific knot or falling in love, amassing a fortune or initiatingrevolution.Tocaredeeplyaboutafieldthatachievessolittle,andyetconsumessomanyofourresources,forcesustoadmittoadisturbing,evendegradinglackofaspiration.In its ineffectiveness, architecture shares in the bathos of gardening: an

interest in door handles or ceiling mouldings can seem no less worthy ofmockery than a concern for the progress of rose or lavender bushes. It isforgivabletoconcludethattheremustbegrandercausestowhichhumanbeingsmightdevotethemselves.However,aftercomingupagainstsomeofthesternersetbackswhichbedevil

emotionalandpoliticallife,wemaywellarriveatamorecharitableassessmentofthesignificanceofbeauty–ofislandsofperfection,inwhichwecanfindanechoof an idealwhichweoncehoped to lay a permanent claim to.Lifemayhavetoshowitselftousinsomeofitsauthenticallytragiccoloursbeforewecanbegintogrowproperlyvisuallyresponsivetoitssubtlerofferings,whetherintheformofatapestryoraCorinthiancolumn,aslatetileoralamp.Ittendsnottobeyoungcouplesinlovewhostoptoadmireaweatheredbrickwallorthedescentofabanistertowardsahallway,adisregardforsuchcircumscribedbeautybeingacorollaryofanoptimisticbeliefinthepossibilityofattainingamorevisceral,definitivevarietyofhappiness.

Themoralineffectivenessofabeautifulhouse:HermannGöring(inwhite)athomewiththeFrenchAmbassadorand,totheright,GeneralsVuilleminandMilch.Inthebackground,SaintsMargaretheandDorothea,German(fifteenthcentury),andLucretia

(1532)byLucasCranach

Wemayneed tohavemadean indeliblemarkonour lives, tohavemarriedthewrongperson,pursuedanunfulfillingcareerintomiddleageorlostalovedonebeforearchitecturecanbegintohaveanyperceptibleimpactonus,forwhenwespeakofbeing‘moved’byabuilding,wealludetoabitter-sweetfeelingofcontrastbetweenthenoblequalitieswrittenintoastructureandthesadderwiderrealitywithinwhichweknow them to exist.A lump rises in our throat at thesightofbeautyfroman implicitknowledge that thehappiness ithintsat is theexception.In his memoirs, the German theologian Paul Tillich explained that art had

alwayslefthimcoldasapamperedandtrouble-freeyoungman,despitethebestpedagogicaleffortsofhisparentsandteachers.ThentheFirstWorldWarbrokeout,hewascalledupand,inaperiodofleavefromhisbattalion(threequartersof whose members would be killed in the course of the conflict), he foundhimselfintheKaiserFriedrichMuseuminBerlinduringarainstorm.There,inasmalluppergallery,hecameacrossSandroBotticelli’sMadonnaandChildwith

EightSingingAngels and,onmeeting thewise, fragile,compassionategazeoftheVirgin,surprisedhimselfbybeginningtosobuncontrollably.Heexperiencedwhathedescribedasamomentof ‘revelatoryecstasy’, tearswellingup inhiseyes at the disjunction between the exceptionally tender atmosphere of thepictureandthebarbarouslessonshehadlearntinthetrenches.

Lifeisnotusuallylikethis:KenShuttleworth,CrescentHouse,Wiltshire,1997

SandroBotticelli,MadonnaandChildwithEightSingingAngels,1477

It is in dialogue with pain that many beautiful things acquire their value.Acquaintancewithgriefturnsouttobeoneofthemoreunusualprerequisitesofarchitectural appreciation.We might, quite aside from all other requirements,needtobealittlesadbeforebuildingscanproperlytouchus.

9.

Taking architecture seriously therefore makes some singular and strenuousdemands upon us. It requires that we open ourselves to the idea that we areaffectedbyour surroundings evenwhen theyaremadeofvinyl andwouldbeexpensive and time-consuming to ameliorate. It means conceding that we areinconvenientlyvulnerable to the colourofourwallpaper and thatour senseofpurpose may be derailed by an unfortunate bedspread. At the same time, itmeansacknowledgingthatbuildingsareabletosolvenomorethanafractionofour dissatisfactions or prevent evil from unfolding under their watch.Architecture, even at itsmost accomplished,will only ever constitute a small,and imperfect (expensive,prone todestructionandmorallyunreliable), protestagainstthestateofthings.Moreawkwardlystill,architectureasksustoimaginethathappinessmightoftenhaveanunostentatious,unheroiccharactertoit,thatitmightbefoundinarunofoldfloorboardsorinawashofmorninglightoveraplasterwall–inundramatic,frangiblescenesofbeautythatmoveusbecauseweareawareofthedarkerbackdropagainstwhichtheyareset.

10.

But if we accept the legitimacy of the subject nevertheless, then a new andcontentiousseriesofquestionsatonceopensup.Wehavetoconfrontthevexedpoint onwhich somuch of the history of architecture pivots.We have to askwhatexactlyabeautifulbuildingmightlooklike.LudwigWittgenstein,havingabandonedacademiaforthreeyearsinorderto

constructahouseforhissisterGretlinVienna,understoodthemagnitudeofthechallenge. ‘You think philosophy is difficult,’ observed the author of theTractatus Logico-Philosophicus, ‘but I tell you, it is nothing compared to thedifficultyofbeingagoodarchitect.’

II.InWhatStyleShallWeBuild?

1.

Whatisabeautifulbuilding?Tobemodernistoexperiencethisasanawkwardandpossiblyunanswerablequestion, theverynotionofbeautyhavingcome toseemlikeaconceptdoomedtoigniteunfruitfulandchildishargument.Howcananyoneclaim toknowwhat isattractive?Howcananyoneadjudicatebetweenthecompetingclaimsofdifferentstylesordefendaparticularchoiceinthefaceofthecontradictorytastesofothers?Thecreationofbeauty,onceviewedasthecentral task of the architect, has quietly evaporated from serious professionaldiscussionandretreatedtoaconfusedprivateimperative.

2.

Itwasn’talways thought sohard toknowhow tobuildbeautifully.ForoverathousanddiscontinuousyearsinthehistoryoftheWest,abeautifulbuildingwassynonymouswithaClassicalbuilding,astructurewithatemplefront,decoratedcolumns,repeatedratiosandasymmetricalfaçade.The Greeks gave birth to the Classical style, the Romans copied and

developed it, and, after a gap of a thousand years, the educated classes ofRenaissance Italy rediscovered it.From thepeninsula,Classicismspreadnorthandwest,ittookonlocalaccentsandwasarticulatedinnewmaterials.Classicalbuildings appeared as far apart as Helsinki and Budapest, Savannah and StPetersburg. The sensibility was applied to interiors, to Classical chairs andceilings,bedsandbaths.AlhoughitisthedifferencesbetweenvarietiesofClassicismthathavetended

tointeresthistoriansmost,itisthesimilaritiesthatareultimatelymorestriking.For hundreds of years there was near unanimity about how to construct awindoworadoor,howtofashioncolumnsandpedimentedfronts,howtorelaterooms to hallways and how tomodel ironwork andmouldings – assumptionscodifiedbyRenaissancescholar-architectsandpopularisedinpatternbooksforordinarybuilders.

RulesforClassicalcolumns:ArchitecturalplatefromDenisDiderot,editor,Encyclopédie,1780

Acity-wideconsensusaboutbeauty:JohnWoodtheElder,northside,QueenSquare,Bath,1736

TheArchofConstantine,Rome,c.AD315

RobertAdam,rearelevation,KedlestonHall,1765

Sostrongwas thisconsensus thatwholecitiesachievedastylisticunity thatstretched across successions of squares and avenues. An aesthetic languagedating back to the Temple of Apollo at Delphi ended up gracing the familyhomesofEdinburghaccountantsandPhiladelphialawyers.FewClassical architects or their clients felt any impulse towards originality

Fidelitytothecanonwaswhatmattered;repetitionwasthenorm.WhenRobertAdamdesignedKedlestonHall(1765),itwasapointofprideforhimtoembedanexact reproductionof theArchofConstantine (c.315) in themiddleof therearelevation.ThomasHamilton’sHighSchoolinEdinburgh(1825),thoughitwas made of sombre grey Craigleith sandstone, sat under sepulchral Scottishskiesandhadsteelbeamssupportingitsroof,waslaudedfortheskillwithwhichitimitatedtheformoftheDoricTempleoftheParthenoninAthens(c.438BC).Thomas Jefferson’s campus for the University of Virginia, in Charlottesville(1826),quotedwithoutshamefromtheRomanTempleofFortunaVirilis(c.100BC)andtheBathsofDiocletian(AD302),whileJosephHansom’snewtownhallinBirmingham (1832) was a faithful adaptation, set down in the middle of anindustrialcity,oftheRomanMaisonCarréeatNîmes(c.AD130).

MaisonCarrée,Nîmes,c.AD130

JosephHansom,TownHall,Birmingham,1832

Thus large parts of theman-madeworld in the early-modern periodwouldnot,intheiroutwardappearanceatleast,haveshakenmanyofthearchitecturalassumptions of a magically resurrected contemporary of the Roman emperorMarcusAurelius.

3.

Whenitcametosimpler,cheaperhouses,therewasagainaconsensusaboutthemost fitting way to build, though here the canon was the result not of anycommonculturalvisionbutofahostoflimitations.Foremost among these was climate, which, in the absence of affordable

technologytoresistit,usuallydictatedanausteremenuofoptionsforhowmostsensibly to put up a wall, pitch a roof or render a façade. The expense oftransporting materials over any significant distance likewise limited stylisticchoice, forcing the majority of householders to settle uncomplainingly foravailablestone,woodormud.Thedifficultiesoftravelalsohinderedthespreadofknowledgeaboutalternativebuildingmethods.Printingcostsmeantthatfeweversawsomuchasapictureofhowhouseslookedinotherpartsoftheworld(whichexplainswhy,insomuchofearlynorthernreligiousart,Jesusisborninwhatappearstobeachalet).Limitationsbredstrong localarchitectural identities.Withinacertainradius,

houses would uniformly be constructed of a particular native material, whichwouldcedeitsubiquitytoanotherontheoppositesideofariveroramountainrange.AnordinaryKentishhousecouldthusbedistinguishedataglancefromaCornish one, or a farm in the Jura from one in the Engadine. In most areas,housescontinuedtobebuiltastheyhadalwaysbeenbuilt,usingwhateverwasaround, with an absence of aesthetic self-consciousness, with their owners’modestprideatbeingabletoaffordshelterinthefirstplace.

4.

Then,inthespringof1747,aneffeminateyoungmanwithatasteforluxury,lace collars and gossip bought a former coachman’s cottage on forty acres ofland in Twickenham on theRiver Thames – and set about building himself avillawhichgravelycomplicated theprevailingsenseofwhatabeautifulhousemightlooklike.AnynumberofarchitectscouldhavefurnishedHoraceWalpole,theyoungest

sonof theBritishprimeminister,SirRobert,with something conventional forhis new estate, a Palladian mansion, perhaps a little like his father’s home,Houghton Hall, on the north Norfolk coast. But in architecture, as in dress,conversationandchoiceofcareer,Walpolepridedhimselfonbeingdifferent.Inspite of his Classical education, his real interest lay in the medieval period,which thrilled him with its iconography of ruined abbeys, moonlit nights,graveyards and (especially) crusaders in armour.Walpole therefore decided tobuildhimselftheworld’sfirstGothichouse.Because no one before him had ever attempted to apply the ecclesiastical

idiomoftheMiddleAgestoadomesticsetting,Walpolehadtoberesourceful.Hemodelled his fireplace on the tomb ofArchbishopBouchier inCanterburyCathedral,copied thedesignofhis libraryshelvesfromthe tombofAymerdeValenceinWestminsterAbbey,andderivedtheceilingofhismainhallfromthequatrefoilcompartmentsandrosettesoftheAbbey’sChapelofHenryVII.

Feweversawsomuchasapictureofhowhouseslookedinotherpartsoftheworld:SmallhythePlace,Tenterden,Kent,earlysixteenthcentury

Anewunderstandingofdomesticbeauty:HoraceWalpole,StrawberryHill,Twickenham,1750–92

When he was done, being temperamentally disinclined to keep any of hisachievements quiet, Walpole invited for a tour everyone he knew, whichincludedmostoftheopinion-formersandgentryoftheland.Forgoodmeasure,heissuedticketstothegeneralpublicaswell.

TheLongGallery,StrawberryHill

After a viewing, many ofWalpole’s astonished guests began to wonder ifthey,too,mightnotdaretoabandontheClassicalmodeinfavouroftheGothic.The fashion started modestly enough, with the construction of the occasionalseaside or suburban villa, but,within a fewdecades, a revolution in tastewasunder way which would shake to the core the assumptions on which theClassical consensus had formerly rested. Gothic buildings began to appear inBritain,thenacrossEuropeandNorthAmerica.Transcendingitsoriginsasthefancyofadilettante,thestyleacquiredarchitecturalseriousnessandprestige,totheextent that, just fiftyorsoyearsafterWalpolebrokegroundatStrawberryHill,defendersofGothiccouldclaim–muchinthewaythattheClassicistshaddonebeforethem–thattheirswasthemostnobleandappropriatearchitectureofall, the natural choice for both domestic buildings and the parliaments anduniversitiesofthegreatnations.

Themostnobleandappropriatearchitectureofall:ImreSteindl,HousesofParliament,Budapest,1904

5.

The factors which fostered the Gothic revival – greater historical awareness,improved transport links, a new clientele impatient for variety – soon enoughgeneratedcuriosityaboutthearchitecturalstylesofothererasandlands.Bytheearly nineteenth century, in most Western countries, anyone contemplatingputtingupahousewasfacedwithanunprecedentedarrayofchoicesregardingitsappearance.Architects boasted of their ability to turn out houses in Indian, Chinese,

Egyptian,Islamic,TyroleanorJacobeanstyles,orinanycombinationofthese.Among the most versatile of the new polymaths was an Englishman namedHumphryRepton,who earned a reputation for presenting hesitant clientswithdetaileddrawingsofthemanystylisticoptionsavailabletothem.For thoseofmoremodestmeans,newpatternbookswerecreated, themost

popularofwhich,JohnLoudon’sTheEncyclopaediaofCottage,FarmandVillaArchitecture (1833), presented self-builders with plans enabling them toconstructhouses fromanypartof theworld,an initiativewhich rapidlywipedoutregionaltypesofarchitecture.

Optionsforyournexthome:HumphryRepton,CharactersofHouses,1816

Lefttoright:SwissstylecottageandOldEnglishstylecottageFromJohnLoudon,TheEncyclopaediaof

Cottage,FarmandVillaArchitecture,1833

Changes in the way property was developed served to promote furtheropportunitiesforeclecticism.Intheeighteenthcentury,London,likemostcitiesinEurope,hadexpandedprimarilythroughtheeffortsofaristocraticlandowners,whogave their names to the squareswhich theycarvedacross theirold farmsandfields:LordSouthampton, theEarlofBedford,SirRichardGrosvenorandtheDukeofPortland.Theseweremenofsharedtaste:comfortableinLatinandGreek, students of Cicero and Tacitus, and unambivalent proponents of theClassicalstyle.WhentheEarlofBedfordissuedcontractsforthebuildingofhiseponymous square in 1776, his stipulations revealed an almost maniacalobsessionwithClassicalharmony,settingdownastheydidrulestogoverntheexactheightofeachstorey,thedepthofeverywindowframe,thecolourofthebricks and the specific kind of wood to be used in the floorboards (‘the bestMemelorRigatimberwithoutatraceofsap’).SoconcernedwastheearlwithClassicalproportionandprecision thathe regularly roseatdawnandwentoutwithapairofgardenscissorstoensurethatthebushesatthecentreofhissquareweretrainedtogrowsymmetrically.But in the century that followed, royals and aristocrats withdrew from

speculativeconstructionevenasdemandforhousingexploded.ThosewhocameintheirwakewerenottypicallyreadersofCiceroandTacitus.Moreoften,theywere entrepreneurs with a penchant for variety and whimsy. Instinctivelyscornful of the martial sobriety of the Classical tradition, they competed toattractclientsthroughtheplayfulnessandexuberanceoftheirdevelopments,asepitomisedbyastreetinPlymouthwhichcombined,withinonlyafewhundredmetres, a row of Roman Corinthian terraced houses, a Doric town hall, anOriental chapel, a pair of private homes in the Ionic style and an Egyptianlibrary.

AvanishingClassicalconsensusaboutbeauty:BedfordSquare,London,1783

Newvisionsofbeauty:JohnFoulston,KerrStreet,Devonport,Plymouth,1824

Frontelevation,CastleWard,StrangfordLough,1767

6.

Theonlyproblemwithunrestrictedchoice,however,isthatittendsnottoliesofarfromoutrightchaos.Thedangerinherentinsuchfreedomfirstandfamouslybrokethroughonthe

shores of a quiet lough in Northern Ireland, where, around themiddle of theeighteenthcentury,alocalaristocratandhiswifedecidedtobuildthemselvesahouse. Both passionate about architecture, Viscount Bangor and Lady AnneBlighnevertheless found that they couldn’t agreeon an appropriate style.Theviscount was a Classicist. He wanted something with three bays, engagedcolumns, Palladian proportions and windows topped with triangular consoledpediments.Anne, in contrast,was keener on theGothic, preferring castellatedroofs with pinnacles, centre-pointed windows and quatrefoils. She had heardabouttheceilingsatStrawberryHillandlongedtohaveafewofherown.Thestrugglegrewstubbornandill-natured,untilthecouple’sarchitectcameupwithasolutionofSolomonicingenuity:hewoulddividethehouseintwo.Thefronthalf was built in the Classical style, the rear in the Gothic. The compromisecontinued inside,with themusic roomandstairwellbeingClassical in feeling,embellished with Doric friezes and columns, while the boudoir and privateroomshadaGothicair,completewith fan-vaultedceilingsandpointed-archedfireplaces.

Rearelevation,CastleWard

Themore sensitive critics were appalled and, with such buildings inmind,begananardentsearchforawaytorestoreameasureofvisualconsensus.‘Wesuffer from a carnival of architecture,’ complained Augustus Pugin in 1836.‘Privatejudgementrunsriot.Everyarchitecthasatheoryofhisown.’In1828ayoungGermanpractitionernamedHeinrichHübschpublishedabookwhosetitlecharacterisedthedilemmaofanentireage:InWhatStyleShallWeBuild?TherehadtobeawayforthedefendersoftheGothic,OldEnglishandSwissstylestoresolvetheirdisputes;therehadtobeawayofknowingwhethertofurnishthediningroomwithAncientEgyptianorChinesechairs;awayofgivingtheupperhandtoeitherLadyAnneorViscountBangor–andthusofensuringthathouseswouldneveragainbebuiltfacingintwodifferentdirections.Butwherecouldsuchaprinciplebefound?Justwhatstylewerearchitectsto

buildin?

7.

Theanswerthateventuallyemergedwasnotreallyananswer;rather,itwasanadmonishmentthatitmightbeirrelevantandevenindulgenttoraisethequestioninthefirstplace.Aprohibitionagainstdiscussionsofbeautyinarchitecturewasimposedbya

newbreedofmen,engineers,whohadachievedprofessionalrecognitiononlyinthelateeighteenthcentury,buthadthereafterrisenquicklytodominanceintheconstruction of the new buildings of the Industrial Revolution.Mastering thetechnologiesofironandsteel,ofplateglassandconcrete,theydrewinterestandinspired awe with their bridges, railway hangars, aqueducts and docks. Morenovel even than their abilities, perhaps, was the fact that they seemed tocompletetheseprojectswithouteverdirectlyaskingthemselveswhatstyleitwasbest to adopt.Chargedwith erecting a bridge, they tried to design the lightestpossibleframethatcouldstretchoverthewidestspanatthelowestcost.Whenthey built a railway station, they aimed for a hall that would allow steam todisperse safely, let in a large amount of natural light and accommodate aconstant crowd of travellers. They demanded that factories be able to houseunwieldymachineryand that steamshipscarrycargoesof impatientpassengerspunctuallyacrossheavyseas.But theydidnotappear togivemuch thought towhetherthereshouldbeaCorinthianoraDoricsetofcapitalsgracingtheuppergalleriesofaship,whetheraChinesedragonmightlookpleasingattheendofalocomotive orwhether suburban gasworks should be done up in aTuscan orIslamicstyle.Yet, despite this indifference, the new men of science seemed capable of

buildingthemost impressiveand, inmanycases, themostseductivestructuresoftheirconfusedage.

8.

Thephilosophyoftheengineersflewinthefaceofeverythingthearchitecturalprofession had ever stood for. ‘To turn something useful, practical, functionalinto something beautiful, that is architecture’s duty,’ insisted Karl FriedrichSchinkel.‘Architecture,asdistinguishedfrommerebuilding,isthedecorationofconstruction,’echoedSirGeorgeGilbertScott.IftheDoge’sPalacedeservedtobeclassifiedasgreatarchitecture,itwasnotbecausetheroofwaswatertightorbecause it provided Venice’s civil servants with the necessary number ofmeeting rooms but rather, the architects defensively suggested, because itsportedcarvingsonitsroof,adelicatearrangementofwhiteandpinkbricksonits façades, and deliberately slender, tapering, pointed arches throughout –details that would have had no place in a design by a graduate of the ÉcolePolytechniqueinParisortheEngineeringAcademyofDresden.Theessenceofgreat architecture was understood to reside in what was functionallyunnecessary.

Theirrelevanceofaestheticdiscussion:JohnFowler,BenjaminBaker,ForthRailwayBridge,constructionofthecentralgirder,September1889

‘Toturnsomethinguseful,practical,functionalintosomethingbeautiful,thatisarchitecture’sduty’:Doge’sPalace(detail),Venice,1340–1420

9.

The principles of engineering may have brutally contradicted those ofarchitecture, but a vocalminority of nineteenth-century architects neverthelessperceivedthattheengineerswerecapableofprovidingthemwithacriticalkeyto their salvation – for what these men had, and they so sorely lacked, wascertainty. The engineers had landed on an apparently impregnable method ofevaluating thewisdomof a design: they felt confidently able to declare that astructure was correct and honest in so far as it performed its mechanicalfunctions efficiently; and false and immoral in so far as itwas burdenedwithnon-supportingpillars,decorativestatues,frescosorcarvings.Exchangingdiscussionsofbeautyforconsiderationsoffunctionpromisedto

movearchitecture away fromamorassofperplexing, insolubledisputes aboutaestheticstowardsanuncontentiouspursuitoftechnologicaltruth,ensuringthatitmighthenceforthbeaspeculiartoargueabouttheappearanceofabuildingasitwouldbetoargueabouttheanswertoasimplealgebraicequation.With functional principles standing as a new measure of worth, the entire

historyofarchitecturecouldbescannedanditsmasterworksreassessedintermsof their relative degrees of veracity and falsehood. TheRomanswere deemeddishonest forhavingaddedcolumns to theColosseum,because theseelegantlysculpted, costly pieces of stone only pretended to support the upper storeys,whereasinfact–asanyengineercouldsee–thewholestructurewasbeingheldupbythearchesalone.Equally, Johann Balthasar Neumann had lied in almost every aspect of his

VierzehnheiligenPilgrimageChurchinBanz.Heretheinsidewallsmadeashowofholdingupthebuilding,but inreality that taskfell toaseparateandhiddenframe.EvenNeumann’sdomed,paintedceilinghadnothingtodowiththerealroof but was merely a stucco skin nestled beneath the actual, conventionallypitcheddesign.

Amendaciousceiling:JohannBalthasarNeumann,VierzehnheiligenPilgrimageChurch,Banz,1772

CharlesCockerell,AshmoleanandTaylorianInstitute,Oxford,1840

Similarly, Charles Cockerell was judged to have been almost disgracefullydeceptiveandwastefulinhisdesignfortheAshmoleanMuseumandTaylorianInstituteinOxford.HiscrimehadbeentoplacemassiveIoniccolumns,whichcouldhavesupportedfourstoreys’worthofmasonry,aroundtheoutsideofthebuilding,wheretheycarriednothingheavierthanpotsandstatues,whileleavingtherealweightofthestructuretobebornebyanothersetofcolumnsconcealedwithinthewalls.

10.

Butwhatwouldahouselooklikewhosearchitecthadrenouncedanyinterestinbeauty inorder to focusexclusivelyonmechanical functioning?Tobelieve itscreatorincertainofhismoods,itmightresembletheVillaSavoye.In the spring of 1928 a Parisian couple named Pierre and Emilie Savoye

approached the 41-year-old Swiss architect Le Corbusier and asked him todesignacountryhouseforthemandtheiryoungsonRogeronawoodedplotofland theyownedoverlooking theSeine, inPoissy,westofParis.LeCorbusierhad by this point in his career built fifteen private houses and acquiredinternationalrenownforhiscategoricalviewsonarchitecture.‘Ourengineersarehealthyandvirile,activeanduseful,balancedandhappyin

their work,’ he exclaimed in Towards a New Architecture (1923), while ‘ourarchitectsaredisillusionedandunemployed,boastfulorpeevish.Thisisbecausetherewillsoonbenothingmoreforthemtodo.Wenolongerhavethemoneytoerect historical souvenirs. At the same time, everyone needs to wash! Ourengineersprovideforthesethingsandsotheywillbeourbuilders.’LeCorbusierrecommendedthatthehousesofthefuturebeasceticandclean,

disciplinedand frugal.Hishatredofanykindofdecorationextended toapityfor the British Royal Family and the ornate, golden carriage in which theytravelledtoopenParliamenteveryyear.HesuggestedthattheypushthecarvedmonstrosityoffthecliffsofDoverandinsteadlearntotravelaroundtheirrealmin a Hispano-Suiza 1911 racing car. He even mocked Rome, the traditionaldestinationfortheeducationandedificationofyoungarchitects,andrenameditthe ‘city of horrors’, ‘the damnation of the half-educated’ and ‘the cancer ofFrencharchitecture’–onaccountofitsviolationoffunctionalprinciplesthroughanabundanceofBaroquedetailing,wall-paintingandstatuary.

FromLeCorbusier,TowardsaNewArchitecture,1923

ForLeCorbusier, true, great architecture –meaning, architecturemotivatedby thequest forefficiency–wasmore likely tobe found ina40,000-kilowattelectricityturbineoralow-pressureventilatingfan.Itwastothesemachinesthathis books accorded the reverential photographs which previous architecturalwritershadreservedforcathedralsandoperahouses.Once askedby amagazine editor to namehis favourite chair,LeCorbusier

citedtheseatofacockpit,anddescribedthefirsttimeheeversawanaeroplane,inthespringof1909,intheskyaboveParis–itwastheaviatortheComtedeLamberttakingaturnaroundtheEiffelTower–asthemostsignificantmomentofhislife.Heobservedthattherequirementsofflightofnecessityridaeroplanesof all superfluous decoration and so unwittingly transformed them intosuccessfulpiecesofarchitecture.ToplaceaClassicalstatueatopahousewasasabsurdastoaddonetoaplane,henoted,butatleastbycrashinginresponsetothis addition, the plane had the advantage of rendering its absurdity starklymanifest.‘L’avionaccuse,’heconcluded.

FromLeCorbusier,TheCityofTomorrowandItsPlanning,1925

FromLeCorbusier,TowardsaNewArchitecture,1923

Butifthefunctionofaplanewastofly,whatwasthefunctionofahouse?LeCorbusier arrived (‘scientifically’ he assured his readers) at a simple list ofrequirements, beyondwhich all other ambitionswere nomore than ‘romanticcobwebs’. The function of a house was, he wrote, to provide: ‘1. A shelteragainstheat,cold,rain,thievesandtheinquisitive.2.Areceptacleforlightandsun. 3.A certain number of cells appropriated to cooking,work, andpersonallife.’

11.

Behind awall on the summit of a hill inPoissy, a gravel path curves throughdense treesbeforeopeningout intoaclearing, in themiddleofwhichstandsathin, white, rectangular box, with ribbon windows running along its sides,supportedoff thegroundonaseriesof implausiblyslenderpillars.Astructureon the roof of theVilla Savoye resembles a water tower or gas cylinder, butturnsoutoncloserinspectiontobeaterracewithasemicircularprotectingwall.The house looks like a piece of finely tooled precision machinery, someindustrial object of unknown purpose, with flawless white surfaces that on abright day reflect back the sun with the luminescent intensity of fishermen’scottagesontheislandsoftheAegean.Itseemsthatthehousemaybenomorethanatemporaryvisitorandthatitsrooftopequipmentcouldatanypointreceiveasignalthatwouldleadittofireitsconcealedenginesandriseslowlyoverthesurrounding trees and historically styled villas on the beginning of a longjourneyhometoaremotegalaxy.Theinfluenceofscienceandaeronauticscontinuesinside.Afrontdoormade

ofsteelopensontoahallwayasclean,brightandbareasanoperating theatre.Therearetilesonthefloor,nakedbulbsontheceilingand,inthemiddleofthehall,abasinwhichinvitesgueststocleansethemselvesoftheimpuritiesoftheoutsideworld.Dominating the room isa large rampwitha simple tubular railwhichleadsuptothemainlivingquarters.Herealargekitchenisequippedwithalltheconveniencesofitsera.Steel-framedstripwindowsfeednaturallightintotheprincipal rooms.Thebathroomsareshrines tohygieneandathleticism; theexposedpipeworkwoulddojusticetoasubmarine.Even in these intimate spaces, the mood remains technical and astringent.

There is nothing extraneous or decorative here, no rosettes or mouldings, noflourishesorornaments.Wallsmeetceilingsatperfectrightangles,withoutthesoftening influenceof borders.Thevisual language is drawn exclusively fromindustry, theartificial lightprovidedbyfactory lamps.Therearefewpiecesoffurniture,forLeCorbusierhadrecommendedtohisclientsthattheykeeptheirbelongings to aminimum, reactingwith injured alarmwhenMadame Savoyeexpressedadesiretofitanarmchairandtwosofasinthelivingroom.‘Homelifetodayisbeingparalysedbythedeplorablenotionthatwemusthavefurniture,’herarchitectprotested.‘Thisnotionshouldberootedoutandreplacedbythatofequipment.’

LeCorbusier,livingroom,VillaSavoye,Poissy,1931

‘What[modernman]wantsisamonk’scell,welllitandheated,withacornerfromwhichhecanlookatthestars,’LeCorbusierhadwritten.Asthebuildersfinished theirwork, theSavoye familyhad reason to feel confident that in thehouse he had designed for them, these aspirations, at least, would beconsummatelymet.

LeCorbusier,VillaSavoye,Poissy,1931

12.

Governed by an ethos conceived by engineers, Modernism claimed to havesuppliedadefinitiveanswertothequestionofbeautyinarchitecture: thepointofahousewasnottobebeautifulbuttofunctionwell.Yetthisneatseparationbetweenthevexedmatterofappearanceandthemore

straightforwardoneofperformancehasalwayshungonanillusorydistinction.Althoughwemayatfirstglanceassociatetheword‘function’withtheefficientprovisionofphysicalsanctuary,weareintheendunlikelytorespectastructurewhichdoesnomorethankeepusdryandwarm.Ofalmostanybuilding,weasknotonlythatitdoacertainthingbutalsothat

it look a certain way, that it contribute to a given mood: of religiosity orscholarship,rusticityormodernity,commerceordomesticity.Wemayrequireitto generate a feeling of reassurance or of excitement, of harmony or ofcontainment. We may hope that it will connect us to the past or stand as asymbolof the future, andwewould complain, no less thanwewould about amalfunctioningbathroom, if thissecond,aesthetic,expressive levelof functionwereleftunattended.Inamoreencompassingsuggestion,JohnRuskinproposedthatweseektwo

thingsofourbuildings.Wewantthemtoshelterus.Andwewantthemtospeaktous–tospeaktousofwhateverwefindimportantandneedtoberemindedof.

13.

In reality, the architects of the Modernist movement, just like all theirpredecessors,wantedtheirhousestospeak.Onlynotofthenineteenthcentury.Or of privilege and aristocratic life.Or of theMiddleAges orAncientRome.Theywantedtheirhousestospeakof thefuture,withitspromiseofspeedandtechnology, democracy and science. They wanted their armchairs to evokeracingcarsandplanes,theywantedtheirlampstoevokethepowerofindustryandtheircoffeepotsthedynamismofhigh-speedtrains.Itwasn’tthattheyeverlostsightoftheimportanceofarousingfeelings;their

argument was, instead, with the family of feelings that previous architecturalstyleshadgenerated.WithhiscentralstaircaseintheVillaSavoye,LeCorbusier–justlikeAnge-

JacquesGabrielattheClassicalpavilionofLePetitTrianoninVersailles,afewmilestothesouth–wastryingtodosomethingotherthansimplycarrypeopletoanupperfloor.Hewastryingtopromptastateofthesoul.Despite their claims to a purely scientific and reasoned approach, the

relationshipofModernist architects to theirwork remained at base a romanticone:theylookedtoarchitecturetosupportawayoflifethatappealedtothem.Theirdomesticbuildingswereconceivedasstagesetsforactorsinanidealiseddramaaboutcontemporaryexistence.

Twostaircasestoprompttwodifferentstatesofthesoul:Left:LePetitTrianon,Versailles,1768Right:VillaSavoye,Poissy,1931

Astagesetforactorsinanidealiseddramaaboutcontemporaryexistence:Advertisementforthe1927Mercedes-Benz,setagainstLeCorbusierandPierreJeanneret’sDouble-house,

Weissenhofsiedlung,Stuttgart,1927

14.

So strong was the aesthetic interest of the Modernists that it routinely tookprecedence over considerations of efficiency. The Villa Savoye might havelooked like a practically minded machine, but it was in reality an artisticallymotivated folly. The bare walls were handmade by artisans using costlyimportedSwissmortar,theywereasdelicateaspiecesoflaceandasdevotedtogenerating feelings as the jewel-encrusted naves of a Counter-ReformationChurch.ByModernism’s own standards, the roof of the villa was equally, and yet

more ruinously, dishonest. In spite of initial protests from the Savoyes, LeCorbusierinsisted–supposedlyontechnicalandeconomicgroundsalone–thataflatroofwouldbepreferabletoapitchedone.Itwould,heassuredhisclients,becheapertoconstruct,easiertomaintainandcoolerinsummer,andMadameSavoyewouldbeabletodohergymnasticexercisesonitwithoutbeingbotheredbydampvapours emanating from the ground floor.But only aweek after thefamily moved in, the roof sprang a leak over Roger’s bedroom, letting in somuch water that the boy contracted a chest infection, which turned intopneumonia, which eventually required him to spend a year recuperating in asanatoriuminChamonix. InSeptember1936,sixyearsafter thevilla’sofficialcompletion,MadameSavoyecompressedherfeelingsabouttheperformanceoftheflatroofintoa(rain-splattered)letter:‘It’sraininginthehall,it’srainingontheramp,andthewallofthegarageisabsolutelysoaked.What’smore,it’sstillraining inmy bathroom, which floods in badweather, as the water comes inthrough the skylight.’LeCorbusier promised that theproblemwouldbe fixedstraightaway, then took the opportunity to remind his client of howenthusiasticallyhisflat-roofeddesignhadbeenreceivedbyarchitecturalcriticsworldwide:‘Youshouldplaceabookonthetableinthedownstairshallandaskallyourvisitorstoinscribetheirnamesandaddressesinit.You’llseehowmanyfineautographsyouwillcollect’.Butthisinvitationtophilographywasoflittlecomfort to the rheumatic Savoye family. ‘After innumerable demands on mypart, you have finally accepted that this house which you built in 1929 isuninhabitable,’ admonished Madame Savoye in the autumn of 1937. ‘Yourresponsibility is at stake and I have no need to foot the bill. Please render ithabitable immediately. Isincerelyhope that Iwillnothave to takerecourse tolegal action.’ Only the outbreak of the Second World War and the Savoyefamily’sconsequentflightfromParissavedLeCorbusierfromhavingtoanswer

in a courtroom for the design of his largely uninhabitable, if extraordinarilybeautiful,machine-for-living.

Beautifulbutnotrain-proof:Rooftop,VillaSavoye,1931

15.

IfModernist architects privately designed with beauty inmind, why did theyjustifytheirworkprincipallyintechnologicalterms?Fearseemstohavelainattheheartoftheirdiscretion.Theendofabeliefina

universalstandardofbeautyhadcreatedaclimateinwhichnoonestylecouldbeimmune from criticism. Objections to the appearance of Modernist houses,voicedbyadherentsofGothicorTyroleanarchitecture,couldnotbeshruggedoffwithoutinvitingaccusationsofhigh-handednessandarrogance.Inaesthetics,asindemocraticpolitics,afinalarbiterhadgrownelusive.Hence the attractions of a scientific language with which to ward off

detractorsandconvincethewavering.EventheGodoftheOldTestament,facedwiththecontinualquerulousnessofthetribesofIsrael,hadoccasionallytoigniteapieceofdesertshrubtoawehisaudienceintoreverence.TechnologywouldbetheModernists’burningbush.Tospeakoftechnologyinrelationtoone’shouseswastoappeal–nowthattheinfluenceofChristianitywaswaningandClassicalculturewasbeingignored–tothemostprestigiousforceinsociety,responsiblefor penicillin, telephones and aeroplanes. Science, then, would apparentlydeterminethepitchoftheroof.

16.

Yet,intruth,scienceisrarelysocategorical.In1925thearchitectanddesignerMarcel Breuer unveiled a chair which he touted as the world’s first soberlylogical solution to ‘theproblemof sitting’.Everypartof theB3chairwas theresult,heexplained,ofanintensiveefforttobanish‘thewhimsicalinfavouroftherational’.TheB3’sseatandbackweremadeofleatherfordurability;itsoffsetangular

shapewas the inevitable answer to the needs of the human vertebrae; and itssteel frame, because itwas a hundred times stronger thanwood,would neversplinterorchip.ButBreuer’sattempttomakeascientificcaseforhischaircouldnotbreach

animpregnablereality:whileitmaybenecessarytoresorttospecificmaterialsandformswhenconstructingabridge,thereisnocorrespondingtechnicalneedto limitone’s imagination indesigningapieceof living-roomfurniture,whichmustmerelysupporttheweightofahumanbody–andsocanbebuiltofcurvedsteel but also as happily of oak, bamboo, plastic or fibreglass. A chair canequallywell satisfy itsmodest brief in the guise of aB3, aQueenAnne or aWindsorarmchair.Sciencealonecannottellushowourseatsshouldlook.Eveninmorecomplexcommissions,thelawsofengineeringseldomdictatea

particular style. The Montjuïc Telecommunications Tower in Barcelona, forexample, could have taken on any number of forms while still managing totransmit its signals adequately. The antenna could have been sculpted to looklikeapearratherthanlikeajavelin;thebasemighthavebeenmadetoresemblearidingbootratherthantheprowofaspacecraft.Dozensofoptionswouldhaveeach worked well mechanically. But as its architect, Santiago Calatrava,recognised, only a very few designs would have conveyed with appropriatepoetrythepromisesofmodernitytothepeopleofBarcelona.

17.

The incoherencies of the Modernist relationship to science return us to theconfusing plethora of architectural options that the earlyModernists had oncehoped to eradicate. We return to the carnival of architecture. Why not carveflowersonourbuildings?Whynotuseconcretepanelsimprintedwithpicturesofaeroplanesandinsects?WhynotcoataskyscraperwithIslamicmotifs?If engineering cannot tell us what our houses should look like, nor in a

pluralisticandnon-deferentialworldcanprecedentortradition,wemustbefreetopursueallstylisticoptions.Weshouldacknowledgethatthequestionofwhatisbeautifulisbothimpossibletoelucidateandshamefulandevenundemocratictomention.

Achairdictatedbyscience?MarcelBreuer,B3chair,1925

Functionalchairs:Left:QueenAnnejapannedarmchair,c.1710Right:High-backWindsorarmchair,1850s

Artratherthanscience:SantiagoCalatrava,MontjuïcTelecommunicationsTower,Barcelona,1991

18.

However,theremightbeawaytosurmountthisstateofsterilerelativismwiththe help of John Ruskin’s provocative remark about the eloquence ofarchitecture. The remark focuses ourminds on the idea that buildings are notsimplyvisualobjectswithoutanyconnectiontoconceptswhichwecananalyseand then evaluate. Buildings speak – and on topics which can readily bediscerned. They speak of democracy or aristocracy, openness or arrogance,welcomeorthreat,asympathyforthefutureorahankeringforthepast.

Thereturnofchoice:Left:Herzog&deMeuron,LibraryoftheEberswaldeTechnicalSchool,Eberswalde,1999

Right:JeanNouvel,proposedskyscraper,Doha,2004

Left:TiasEckhoff,RegentService,Porsgrund,1961

Right:BlueCameoService,Sèvres,1778

Any object of design will give off an impression of the psychological andmoralattitudesitsupports.Wecan,forexample,feeltwodistinctconceptionsoffulfilment emanating from a plain Scandinavian crockery set on the one handandanornateSèvresoneon theother–an invitation toademocraticgracefulsensibilityintheformercase,toaceremonialandclass-bounddispositioninthelatter.Inessence,whatworksofdesignandarchitecturetalktousaboutisthekind

of life thatwouldmostappropriatelyunfoldwithinandaroundthem.Theytellusofcertainmoodsthattheyseektoencourageandsustainintheirinhabitants.Whilekeepinguswarmandhelpingusinmechanicalways,theysimultaneouslyholdoutaninvitationforustobespecificsortsofpeople.Theyspeakofvisionsofhappiness.To describe a building as beautiful therefore suggests more than a mere

aesthetic fondness; it implies an attraction to the particular way of life thisstructure ispromotingthroughitsroof,doorhandles,windowframes,staircaseandfurnishings.Afeelingofbeautyisasignthatwehavecomeuponamaterialarticulationofcertainofourideasofagoodlife.Similarly, buildings will strike us as offensive not because they violate a

private and mysterious visual preference but because they conflict with ourunderstanding of the rightful sense of existence – which helps to explain theseriousnessandviciousnesswithwhichdisputesaboutfittingarchitecturetendtounfold.

19.

Theadvantageofshifting thefocusofdiscussionawayfromthestrictlyvisualtowardsthevaluespromotedbybuildingsisthatwebecomeabletohandletalkabout the appearance of works of architecture rather as we do wider debatesaboutpeople,ideasandpoliticalagendas.Arguments aboutwhat is beautiful emerge as no easier to resolve, but then

again no harder, than disputes about what is wise or right. We can learn todefendorattackaconceptofbeautyinthesamewaywemightdefendorattackalegalpositionoranethicalstance.Wecanunderstand,andpublicallyexplain,whywebelieveabuildingtobedesirableoroffensiveonthebasisofthethingsittalkstousabout.Thenotionofbuildingsthatspeakhelpsustoplaceattheverycentreofour

architecturalconundrumsthequestionofthevalueswewanttoliveby–ratherthanmerelyofhowwewantthingstolook.

Whatdowewantourbuildingstotalktousabout?:Left:MichaelShanlyHomes,OakingtonPlace,Middlesex,2005Right:OfficeofMakotoYamaguchi,Villa,Karuizawa,2003

III.TalkingBuildings

1.

If our interest in buildings and objects is indeed determined asmuch bywhatthey say to us as by how they perform their material functions, it is worthelaborating on the curious process by which arrangements of stone, steel,concrete, wood and glass seem able to express themselves – and can on rareoccasions leave us under the impression that they are talking to us aboutsignificantandtouchingthings.

2.

We will, of course, run a risk if we spend extended periods analysing themeanings that emanate from practical objects. To be preoccupied withdecipheringthemessageencodedinalightswitchoratapistoleaveourselvesmore than usually vulnerable to the commonsensical scorn of thosewho seeklittlefromsuchfittingsbeyondameansofilluminatingtheirbedroomorrinsingtheirteeth.To inoculate ourselves against this derision, and to gain confidence in

cultivating a contrary, more meditative attitude towards objects, we mightprofitably pay a visit to a museum of modern art. In whitewashed gallerieshousingcollectionsoftwentieth-centuryabstractsculpture,weareofferedarareperspective on how exactly three-dimensionalmasses can assume and conveymeaning – a perspective thatmay in turn enable us to regard our fittings andhousesinanewway.

3.

It was in the first half of the twentieth century that sculptors began elicitingequalmeasuresofaweandopprobriumforexhibitingpiecestowhichitseemedhardtoputaname,worksthatbothlackedaninterestinthemimeticambitionsthat haddominatedWestern sculpture since theAncientGreeks and, despite acertainresemblancetodomesticfurnishings,hadnopracticalcapacitieseither.

Whatabstractobjectscansay:HenryMoore,TwoForms,1934

AlbertoGiacometti,HouroftheTraces,1930;JasperMorrison,ATMTable,2003

AnthonyCaro,Whispering,1969;MiesvanderRohe,column,BarcelonaPavilion,1929

DonaldJudd,Untitled,1989;DienerandDiener,Migros,Lucerne,2000

Yet, notwithstanding these limitations, abstract artists argued that theirsculptures were capable of articulating the greatest of themes. Many criticsagreed. Herbert Read described Henry Moore’s work as a treatise on humankindnessandcrueltyinaworldfromwhichGodhadrecentlydeparted,whileforDavid Sylvester, AlbertoGiacometti’s sculptures expressed the loneliness anddesireofmanalienatedfromhisauthenticselfinindustrialsociety.Itmay be easy to laugh at the grandiloquence of claims directed at objects

which on occasion resemble giant earplugs or upturned lawnmowers. But,insteadofaccusingcriticsof reading toomuch into too little,weshouldallowabstractsculpturestodemonstratetoustherangeofthoughtsandemotionsthatevery kind of non-representational object can convey. The gift of the mosttalented sculptors has been to teach us that large ideas, for example, aboutintelligenceorkindness, youthor serenity, canbe communicated in chunksofwood and string, or in plaster and metal contraptions, as well as they can inwords or in human or animal likenesses. The great abstract sculptures havesucceeded in speaking to us, in their peculiar dissociated language, of theimportantthemesofourlives.Inturn,thesesculpturesaffordusanopportunitytofocuswithunaccustomed

intensity on the communicative powers of all objects, including our buildingsand their furnishings. Inspiredby amuseumvisit,wemay scoldourselves forourpreviousprosaicbeliefthatasaladbowlisonlyasaladbowl,ratherthan,intruth, an object over which there linger faint but meaningful associations ofwholeness,thefeminineandtheinfinite.Wecanlookatapracticalentitylikeadesk, a column or an entire apartment building and here, too, locate abstractarticulationsofsomeoftheimportantthemesofourlives.

4.

A bright morning in the Tate Gallery, St Ives, Cornwall. On a plinth sits amarble sculpture byBarbaraHepworth, first exhibited in 1936.Although it isunclear what exactly these three stones might mean or represent – a mysteryreflected in their reticent title,TwoSegmentsandaSphere– theyneverthelessmanage toarrest and rewardourgaze.Their interest centreson theoppositionbetween the ball and the semicircularwedge onwhich it rests.The ball looksunstableandenergetic;wesensehowkeenlyitwantstorolldownthesegment’sleadingedgeandbowlacrosstheroom.Bycontrastwiththisimpulsiveness,theaccompanyingwedgeconveysmaturityandstability: it seemscontent tonursegently from side to side, taming the recklessness of its charge. In viewing thepiece, we are witness to a tender and playful relationship, rendered majesticthroughtheprimordialmediumofpolishedwhitemarble.InanessayonHepworth,thepsychoanalyticcriticAdrianStokesattemptedto

analyse the power of this apparently simplework.He arrived at a compellingconclusion. If the sculpture touches us, he ventured, it may be because weunconsciously understand it as a family portrait. The mobility and chubbyfullnessof thespheresubtlysuggest tousawrigglingfat-cheekedbaby,whiletherockingampleformsofthesegmenthaveechoesofacalm,indulgent,broad-hippedmother.Wedimlyapprehendin thewholeacentral themeofour lives.Wesenseaparableinstoneaboutmotherlylove.Stokes’sargumentdirectsustotwoideas.First,thatitdoesn’ttakemuchfor

ustointerpretanobjectasahumanoranimalfigure.Apieceofstonecanhavenolegs,eyes,earsoralmostanyofthefeaturesassociatedwithalivingthing;itneedhaveonly themeresthintofamaternal thighorababyishcheekandwewill start to read it as a character.Thanks to thisprojectiveproclivity,wecanendupasmovedbyaHepworthsculptureaswearebyamoreliteralpictureofmaternaltenderness,fortoourinnereyes,thereneedbenodifferencebetweentheexpressivecapacityofarepresentationalpaintingandthatofanarrangementofstones.

BarbaraHepworth,TwoSegmentsandaSphere,1936

Secondly,our reasons for likingabstract sculptures, andbyextension tablesandcolumns,arenotintheendsofarremovedfromourreasonsforhonouringrepresentational scenes. We call works in both genres beautiful when theysucceedinevokingwhatseemtousthemostattractive,significantattributesofhumanbeingsandanimals.

5.

Oncewestarttolook,wewillfindnoshortageofsuggestionsoflivingformsinthe furniture and houses around us. There are penguins in ourwater jugs andstoutandself-importantpersonagesinourkettles,gracefuldeerinourdesksandoxeninourdining-roomtables.A weary, sceptical eye gazes out at us from the roof of Alfred Messel’s

Wertheim Department Store in Berlin, while upturned insect legs guard theCastel Béranger in Paris. An aggressive beetle lurks in Malaysia’s PutrajayaConvention Centre and a warmer, hedgehog-related creature in the Sage ArtsCentreinGateshead.

Hedgehogs,beetles,eyesandlegs:Clockwisefromtopleft:FosterandPartners,SageArtsCentre,Gateshead,2005

HijjasKasturi,ConventionCentre,Putrajaya,2003AlfredMessel,WertheimDepartmentStore,Berlin,1904

HectorGuimard,CastelBéranger,Paris,1896

Even in somethingasdiminutiveas the lettersofa typeface,wemaydetectwell-developed personalities, about whose lives and daydreams we couldwithoutgreat difficultywrite a short story.The straightbackandalert uprightbearingofaHelvetican‘f’hintatapunctual,cleanandoptimisticprotagonist,whereas his Poliphilus cousin,with a droopy head and soft features, strikes asleepier,moresheepishandmorepensivenote.Thestorymaynotendwellforhim.

In a kitchenware shopmay be found an equally vivid assortment of types.Stemmed glasses seem generically feminine, though this category nonethelessencompasseswarm-heartedmatrons,nymphetsandnervyblue-stockings,whilethemoremasculine tumblerscountamong theirnumber lumberjacksandsterncivilservants.

The tradition of equating furniture and buildings with living beings can betraced back to the Roman author Vitruvius, who paired each of the threeprincipal classical orders with a human or divine archetype from Greekmythology.TheDoric column,with its plain capital and squat profile, had itsequivalent in the muscular, martial hero Hercules; the Ionic column, with itsdecorated scrolls and base, correspondedwith the stolid,middle-aged goddessHera; and theCorinthiancolumn, themost intricatelyembellishedof the threeand theonewith the tallest,slenderestprofile, found itsmodel in thebeautifuladolescentdeityAphrodite.InhomagetoVitruvius,wemightpassthetimeoncarjourneysaligningthe

pillarsofmotorwaybridges toappropriatebipedalcounterparts.Adrivemightreveal a sedentary and cheerful woman holding up one bridge, a punctilious,nervousaccountantwithanauthoritarianairsupportinganother.Ifwecanjudgethepersonalityofobjectsfromapparentlyminusculefeatures

(achangeofa fewdegrees in theangleof the rimcanshiftawineglass frommodesty to arrogance), it is because we first acquire this skill in relation tohumans,whosecharacterswecanimputefrommicroscopicaspectsoftheirskintissueandmuscle.Aneyewillmovefromimplyingapologytosuggestingself-righteousnessbywayofamovementthat is inamechanicalsenseimplausiblysmall.Thewidthofacoinseparatesabrowthatwetaketobeconcernedfromone thatappearsconcentrated,oramouth that implies sulkiness fromone thatsuggestsgrief.Codifyingsuchinfinitesimalvariationswasthelife’sworkofthe

Swiss pseudoscientist Johann Kaspar Lavater, whose four-volume Essays onPhysiognomy (1783) analysed almost every conceivable connotation of facialfeaturesandsuppliedlinedrawingsofanexhaustivearrayofchins,eyesockets,foreheads, mouths and noses, with interpretative adjectives appended to eachillustration.

Whatfacesmean:JohannKasparLavater,EssaysonPhysiognomy,1783

Thewealthofinformationweareattunedtodeducingfromlivingformshelpstoexplain the intensityof feelingsgeneratedbycompetingarchitecturalstyles.Whenonlyamillimetreseparatesalethargicsetofthemouthfromabenevolentone, it isunderstandablethatagreatdealshouldseemtohangonthedifferingshapesoftwowindowsorrooflines.Itisnaturalforustobeasdiscriminatingaboutthemeaningsoftheobjectsweliveamongasweareaboutthefacesofthepeoplewespendtimewith.To feel that a building is unappealing may simply be to dislike the

temperamentofthecreatureorhumanwedimlyrecogniseinitselevation–justas to call another edifice beautiful is to sense the presence of a character wewould like if it took on a living form. What we search for in a work ofarchitecture is not in the end so far fromwhatwe search for in a friend. Theobjectswedescribeasbeautifulareversionsofthepeoplewelove.

Whowouldwewanttobefriendswith?

6.

Even when objects don’t look anything like people, we can find it easy toimaginewhatkindsofhumancharacterstheymighthave.Sorefinedisourskillatdetectingparallelstohumanbeingsinforms,textures

andcoloursthatwecaninterpretacharacterfromthehumblestshape.Alineiseloquentenough.Astraightexamplewillsignalsomeonestableanddull,awavyonewillappearfoppishandcalm,andajaggedoneangryandconfused.

Considerthestrutsonthebacksoftwochairs.Bothseemtoexpressamood.Thecurvedstrutsspeakofeaseandplayfulness,thestraightonesofseriousnessand logic.And yet neither set approximates a human shape.Rather, the strutsabstractly represent two different temperaments. A straight piece of woodbehaves in itsownmediumasastable,unimaginativepersonwillact inhisorher life,while themeanders of a curvedpiece correspond, howeverobliquely,withthecasualeleganceofanunruffledanddandyishsoul.

Theeasewithwhichwecanconnectthepsychologicalworldwiththeouter,visual and sensory one seeds our language withmetaphors.We can speak ofsomeonebeingtwistedordark,smoothorhard.Wecandevelopasteelyheartorfallintoabluemood.Wecancompareapersontoamateriallikeconcreteoracolour like burgundy and be sure thereby to convey something of his or herpersonality.TheGermanpsychologistRudolfArnheimonceaskedhisstudentstodescribe

agoodandabadmarriageusingonlylinedrawings.Althoughwemightbehard

pressed, working backwards, to divine Arnheim’s brief from the ensuingsquiggles,wecould comeclose, for they are strikingly successful at capturingsomethingofthequalitiesoftwodifferentkindsofrelationship.Inoneexample,smoothcurvesmirrorthepeaceableandflowingcourseofalovingunion,whileviolentlygyratingspikesserveasavisualshorthandforsarcasticputdownsandslammeddoors.

TwostoriesaboutmarriedlifefromRudolfArnheim,VisualThinking,1969

Ifevencrudescratchesonapieceofpapercanspeakaccuratelyandfluentlyofourpsychicstates,whenwholebuildingsareatstake,expressivepotentialisexponentiallyincreased.ThepointedarchesofBayeuxCathedralconveyardourand intensity, while their rounded counterparts in the courtyard of the DucalPalace in Urbino embody serenity and poise. Like a person weathering life’schallenges,thepalace’sarchesequitablyresistpressurefromallsides,avoidingthe spiritual crises and emotional effusions to which the cathedral’s appearineluctablydrawn.

Contrastingtemperaments:Left:DucalPalace,Urbino,1479;right:BayeuxCathedral,1077

If, to take Arnheim’s exercise several steps further, we were tasked withproducingmetaphoric images of Germany in two periods of her history, as afascist state and a democratic republic, and if wewere allowed to workwithstone,steelandglassratherthanwithjustapencil,itislikelywecouldnotbetterthe iconic designs of Albert Speer and Egon Eiermann, who created nationalpavilions forWorld’s Fairs on either side of the SecondWorldWar. Speer’soffering, for the Paris Fair of 1937, makes use of the quintessential visualmetaphorsofpower:height,massandshadow.Withoutevenlayingeyesontheinsigniaofthegovernmentwhichsponsoredit,wewouldalmostcertainlysensesomething ominous, aggressive and defiant emanating from this 500-footNeoclassicalcolossus.Twenty-oneyearsandaworldwar later, inhisGermanPavilion for the 1958 World Exposition in Brussels, Egon Eiermann wouldresort to a trio of very different metaphors: horizontality to suggest calm,lightnesstoimplygentlenessandtransparencytoevokedemocracy.

AlbertSpeer,GermanPavilion,World’sFair,Paris,1937

EgonEiermann,PavilionoftheFederalRepublicofGermany,WorldExposition,Brussels,1958

So eloquent are materials and colours, then, that a façade can be made tospeakofhowacountryshouldberuledandwhichprinciplesoughttogovernitsforeignpolicy.Politicalandethicalideascanbewrittenintowindowframesanddoor handles. An abstract glass box on a stone plinth can deliver a paean totranquillityandcivilisation.

7.

Thereisyetathirdwayinwhichobjectsandbuildingscommunicatemeaning,onewemightbegintogetafeelforifwewereinvitedtodinnerattheGermanAmbassador’s inWashington,DC.Sitedonawoodedhill in thenorth-westernsectionof thecapital, the residence isan imposingstructurewitha formalandClassicalair, itsouterwallscladinwhitelimestoneanditsinteriorsdominatedbymarblefloors,oakdoors,andleatherandsteelfurniture.UsheredoutontotheverandaforapreprandialglassofsparklingRhinewineandacocktailsausage,wewould–givenarelevanthistoricalawareness–seesomethingsounexpectedandshockingthatwecouldonlygaspasourimpeccablypolitehostspointedoutfeaturesoftheskylineintheirflawlessEnglish.Itwouldnotbethesilhouettesofthecity’s landmarks,however, thatoccasionedourastonishmentbut rather theportico itself, whispering in our ears of torch-lit parades,military processionsandmartialsalutes.Inbothitsdimensionsanditsforms,therearelevationoftheGermanAmbassador’sResidence bears an uncanny likeness toAlbert Speer’sambulatoryattheNurembergParadeGround.Insofarasbuildingsspeaktous,theyalsodosothroughquotation–thatis,by

referring to, and triggering memories of, the contexts in which we havepreviouslyseenthem,theircounterpartsortheirmodels.Theycommunicatebypromptingassociations.Weseemincapableoflookingatbuildingsorpiecesoffurniturewithouttyingthemtothehistoricalandpersonalcircumstancesofourviewing; as a result, architectural and decorative styles become, for us,emotionalsouvenirsofthemomentsandsettingsinwhichwecameacrossthem.

AlbertSpeer,ambulatory,Zeppelinfeld,Nuremberg,1939

OswaldMatthiasUngers,ResidenceoftheGermanAmbassador,Washington,DC,1995

So attentive are our eyes and our brains that the tiniest detail can unleashmemories. The swollen-bellied ‘B’ or open-jawed ‘G’ of anArt Deco font isenough to inspire reveries of short-hairedwomenwithmelonhats andposters

advertisingholidaysinPalmBeachandLeTouquet.

ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ

Just as a childhoodcanbe released from theodourof awashingpowderorcupoftea,anentireculturecanspringfromtheanglesofafewlines.AsteeplyslopingtiledroofcanatonceengenderthoughtsoftheEnglishArtsandCraftsmovement, while a gambrel-shaped one can as rapidly prompt memories ofSwedishhistoryandholidaysonthearchipelagosouthofStockholm.

C.F.A.Voysey,Moorcrag,Cumbria,1899

Stallarholmen,nearMariefred,Sweden,c.1850

Walkingpast theCarltonCinemaonLondon’sEssexRoad,wemayremarksomethingoddlyEgyptianabout thewindows.Thisstylistic termwilloccur tousbecauseatsomepointinourpast–perhapsonaneveningwhenwewatchedadocumentaryaboutAncientEgyptwhileeatingdinner–oureyes tooknoteofthe angles of the pylon gateways to the temples atKarnak,Luxor andPhilae.Thatwecannowretrievethathalf-forgottendetailandapplyittothenarrowingofacitywindowistestamenttothesynapticprocessbywhichoursubconsciouscanmasterinformationandmakeconnectionsthatourconsciousselvesmaybewhollyincapableofarticulating.

TempleofIsis,Philae,c.140BC

GeorgeCole,CarltonCinema,EssexRoad,London,1930

Relying on our associative powers, architects can dimple their arches andwindowsandfeelconfidentthattheywillbeunderstoodasreferencestoIslam.They can line their corridors with unpainted wooden planks and dependablyallude to the rustic and theunpretentious.Theycan install thickwhite railingsaround balconies and know that their seaside villaswill speak of ocean linersandthenauticallife.Amoredisturbingaspectofassociations lies in theirarbitrarynature, in the

way they can lead us to pass a verdict on objects or buildings for reasonsunconnectedtotheirspecificallyarchitecturalvirtuesorvices.Wemaymakeajudgementbasedonwhattheysymboliseratherthanonwhattheyare.

Wemaydecidethatwehatenineteenth-centuryGothic,forinstance,becauseit characterised a house in which we were unhappy at university, or revileNeoclassicism (as exemplified by the GermanAmbassador’s Residence or bytheworkofthearchitectKarlFriedrichSchinkel)becauseithadthemisfortunetobefavouredbytheNazis.Forproofofthecapriciousnesswithwhicharchitecturalandartisticstylesfall

victim to baleful associations, we need only note that, in most cases, littlebesides time is requiredfor themto recover theircharm.Theremoveofa fewgenerationsormoreallowsustoregardobjectsorbuildingswithout thebiaseswhichentrammelalmosteveryera.Withthepassageoftime,wecangazeataseventeenth-century statuette of the Virgin Mary untroubled by images ofoverzealousJesuitsorthefiresoftheInquisition.Withtime,wecanacceptandloveRococodetailingonitsownterms,ratherthanseeingitasameresymbolofaristocraticdecadencecutshortbyrevolutionaryvengeance.Withtime,wemayeven be able to stand on the veranda of theGermanAmbassador’sResidenceandadmiretheproud,boldformsofitsporticowithoutbeinghauntedbyvisionsofstormtroopersandtorch-litprocessions.Wemightdefinegenuinelybeautifulobjectsasthoseendowedwithsufficient

innateassetsastowithstandourpositiveornegativeprojections.Theyembodygoodqualitiesratherthansimplyremindusofthem.Theycanthusoutlivetheirtemporalorgeographicoriginsandcommunicatetheirintentionslongaftertheirinitial audiences have disappeared. They can assert their attributes over andabovetheebbandflowofourunfairlygenerousordamningassociations.

8.

Despitetheexpressivepotentialofobjectsandbuildings,discussionofwhattheytalk about remains rare. We appear to feel more comfortable contemplatinghistoricalsourcesandstylistictropesthanwedodelvingintoanthropomorphic,metaphoric or evocative meanings. It remains odd to initiate a conversationaboutwhatabuildingissaying.We might find such activities easier if architectural features were more

explicitly connected with their utterances – if there existed a dictionary, forexample,which systematically correlatedmedia and formswith emotions andideas.Suchadictionarywouldmosthelpfully supplyanalysesofmaterials (ofaluminium and steel, of terracotta and concrete) as well as of styles anddimensions (of every conceivable roof angle and every thickness and type ofcolumn).Itwouldincludeparagraphsonthesignificanceofconvexandconcavelines,andofreflectiveandplainglass.Thedictionarywouldresemblethegiantcatalogueswhichprovidearchitects

withinformationonlightfittingsandironmongery,but,ratherthanfocusingasthose do on mechanical performance and compliance with building codes, itwould expound on the expressive implications of every element in anarchitecturalcomposition.In its comprehensive concern with minutiae, the dictionary would

acknowledgethefactthatjustasthealterationofasinglewordcanchangethewholesenseofapoem,so, too,canour impressionofahousebe transformedwhenastraightlimestonelintelisexchangedforafractionallycurvedbrickone.With theaidof sucha resource,wemightbecomemoreconscious readers, aswellaswriters,ofourenvironment.

9.

Asusefulassuchahandbookmightbe,however,inannotatingwhatarchitecturetalkstousabout,itwouldnotonitsowneverbeabletoexplainwhatitisaboutcertainbuildingsthatmakesthemappeartospeakbeautifully.The buildings we admire are ultimately those which, in a variety of ways,

extol valueswe thinkworthwhile –which refer, that is,whether through theirmaterials, shapes or colours, to such legendarily positive qualities asfriendliness, kindness, subtlety, strength and intelligence.Our sense of beautyand our understanding of the nature of a good life are intertwined. We seekassociationsofpeaceinourbedrooms,metaphorsforgenerosityandharmonyinour chairs, and an air of honesty and forthrightness in our taps. We can bemovedbyacolumnthatmeetsaroofwithgrace,bywornstonestepsthathintatwisdomandbyaGeorgiandoorwaythatdemonstratesplayfulnessandcourtesyinitsfanlightwindow.Itwas Stendhalwho offered themost crystalline expression of the intimate

affiliation between visual taste and our values when he wrote, ‘Beauty is thepromiseofhappiness.’Hisaphorismhasthevirtueofdifferentiatingourloveofbeauty from an academic preoccupation with aesthetics, and integrating itinstead with the qualities we need to prosper as whole human beings. If thesearch forhappiness is theunderlyingquestofour lives, it seemsonlynaturalthatitshouldsimultaneouslybetheessentialthemetowhichbeautyalludes.ButbecauseStendhalwassensitivetothecomplexityofourrequirementsfor

happiness,hewiselyrefrainedfromspecifyinganyparticulartypeofbeauty.Asindividualswemay,afterall,findvanitynolessattractivethangraciousness,oraggression as intriguing as respect. Through his use of the capacious word‘happiness’, Stendhal allowed for thewide range of goals which people havepursued.Understanding thatmankindwould always be as conflicted about itsvisual tastes as about its ethical ones, he noted, ‘There are asmany styles ofbeautyastherearevisionsofhappiness.’

Apromiseofplayfulnessandcourtesy:ThomasLeverton,fanlightwindow,BedfordSquare,1783

To call a work of architecture or design beautiful is to recognise it as arendition of values critical to our flourishing, a transubstantiation of ourindividualidealsinamaterialmedium.

Everyarchitecturalstylespeaksofanunderstandingofhappiness:JohnPardey,DuckettHouse,NewForest,2004

IV.IdealsofHome

Memory

1.

If it is true that the buildings and furnishings which we describe as beautifulevoke aspects of happiness, we might nevertheless ask why we find suchevocationtobenecessary.Itiseasyenoughtounderstandwhywewouldwantsuchqualitiesasdignityandclaritytoplayaroleinourlives;lesscleariswhyweshouldalsoneedtheobjectsaroundustospeaktousofthem.Whyshoulditmatterwhatourenvironmenthastosaytous?Whyshouldarchitectsbothertodesign buildings which communicate specific sentiments and ideas, and whyshouldwebesonegativelyaffectedbyplaceswhichreverberatewithwhatwetake to be the wrong allusions? Why are we vulnerable, so inconvenientlyvulnerable,towhatthespacesweinhabitaresaying?

2.

Oursensitivitytooursurroundingsmaybetracedbacktoatroublingfeatureofhumanpsychology:tothewayweharbourwithinusmanydifferentselves,notall ofwhich feel equally like ‘us’, somuch so that in certainmoods,we cancomplainofhavingcomeadriftfromwhatwejudgetobeourtrueselves.Unfortunately, the self we miss at such moments, the elusively authentic,

creative and spontaneous sideof our character, is not ours to summonatwill.Ouraccesstoitis,toahumblingextent,determinedbytheplaceswehappentobein,bythecolourofthebricks,theheightoftheceilingsandthelayoutofthestreets.Inahotelroomstrangledbythreemotorways,orinawastelandofrun-downtowerblocks,ouroptimismandsenseofpurposeareliabletodrainaway,likewaterfromapuncturedcontainer.Wemaystarttoforgetthatweeverhadambitionsorreasonstofeelspiritedandhopeful.Wedependonoursurroundingsobliquelytoembodythemoodsandideaswe

respectandthentoremindusofthem.Welooktoourbuildingstoholdus,likeakindofpsychologicalmould,toahelpfulvisionofourselves.Wearrangearoundusmaterialformswhichcommunicatetouswhatweneed–butareatconstantriskofforgettingweneed–within.Weturntowallpaper,benches,paintingsandstreetstostaunchthedisappearanceofourtrueselves.Inturn,thoseplaceswhoseoutlookmatchesandlegitimatesourown,wetend

tohonourwiththeterm‘home’.Ourhomesdonothavetoofferuspermanentoccupancyorstoreourclothestomeritthename.Tospeakofhomeinrelationto a building is simply to recognise its harmonywith our own prized internalsong.Homecanbeanairportoralibrary,agardenoramotorwaydiner.Ourloveofhomeisinturnanacknowledgementofthedegreetowhichour

identity is not self-determined.Weneed a home in thepsychological sense asmuchasweneedoneinthephysical:tocompensateforavulnerability.Weneedarefugetoshoreupourstatesofmind,becausesomuchoftheworldisopposedto our allegiances. We need our rooms to align us to desirable versions ofourselvesandtokeepalivetheimportant,evanescentsidesofus.

3.

Itistheworld’sgreatreligionsthathaveperhapsgivenmostthoughttotheroleplayed by the environment in determining identity and so – while seldomconstructing places where we might fall asleep – have shown the greatestsympathyforourneedforahome.Theveryprincipleof religious architecturehas its origins in thenotion that

wherewearecriticallydetermineswhatweareabletobelievein.Todefendersofreligiousarchitecture,howeverconvincedweareatanintellectuallevelofourcommitments to a creed,wewill remain reliablydevoted to it onlywhen it iscontinually affirmed by our buildings. In danger of being corrupted by ourpassionsandledastraybythecommerceandchatterofoursocieties,werequireplaces where the values outside of us encourage and enforce the aspirationswithinus.Wemaybeneareror furtheraway fromGodonaccountofwhat isrepresented on the walls or the ceilings. We need panels of gold and lapis,windowsofcolouredglassandgardensofimmaculatelyrakedgravelinordertostaytruetothesincerestpartsofourselves.

4.

Afewyearsago,caughtoutbyaheavydownpour,withacoupleofhoursto