Ouroussoff Deplores Fortress Mentality

A must-read article by architecture critic Nicolai Ouroussoff on the “Ideas & Trends” page of yesterday’s NY Times “Week in Review” section: He critically examines how post-9/11 architecture has been conscripted to “create not only major civic landmarks but lines of civic defense, with aesthetically pleasing features like elegantly sculpted barriers around public plazas or decorative cladding for bulky protective concrete walls.”
Taking another swing at New York’s planned Freedom Tower at Ground Zero, he says that it “rests on a 20-story, windowless fortified concrete base decorated in prismatic glass panels in a grotesque attempt to disguise its underlying paranoia. And the brooding, obelisk-like form above is more of an expression of American hubris than of freedom.”
He concludes:
To some, compromise may be preferable to surrounding our cities with barbed wire and sandbags. The notion that we can design our way out of these problems should give us pause, however. Our streets may be prettier, but the prettiness is camouflage for the budding reality of a society ruled by fear.
I wish he would have taken his argument one step further—spelling out how he thinks architects and civic planners should (or should not) respond to the heightened fear of terrorism. It appears that he believes we should take our chances, opting to enhance our built environment with unfettered architecture, rather than being “ruled by fear.”
A provocative notion, meriting serious thought.