ARCHITECTURAL FORMS AND POLITICAL THEORY

Architectural Forms and Political Theory

Joshua R. Smith
The University of Texas at El Paso

Smith 1

ARCHITECTURAL FORMS AND POLITICAL THEORY

Smith 2

Abstract
The expressive potential of architecture has been a continuous method for conveying ideologies
and philosophies of any type or purpose. There are few more potent than that which is used for
political propaganda. Nations and empires have historically used architectural forms to express
their chosen ideologies and their political ambitions. Questions arise regarding how nations have
accomplished such feats, in what ways do such artistic statements inform and educate the populace,
which ancient forms of government continue to this day in both function and architectural
expression and what should the role of government be in patronizing the arts. In probing such
questions, an analysis of the interplay between architectural styles and political ideology will be
examined from both historical and modern contexts.

ARCHITECTURAL FORMS AND POLITICAL THEORY

Smith 3

Architectural Forms and Political Theory

It is certainly no esoteric secret that visual art is a potent and dynamic form of expression
and communication. Concepts and ideas of varying complexity can be given an articulate voice
through the careful use of artistic media. To illustrate this
concept, Rembrandts, The Return of the Prodigal Son, is able
to convey the lofty themes of forgiveness, filial devotion, mercy,
contrition, fraternal jealousy and even the folly of materialism
through a static image that is rich with expressivity and nuance.
The Dies Irae of Giuseppe Verdis orchestral setting of the
Requiem Mass is able to express the spiritual turbulence of a
Figure 1. "The Return of the Prodigal
Son", Rembrandt, 1669

mans final moments and the incomprehensible fear of the

judgmency of God through stirring and explosive musical movements. Intangible concepts become
living, sensible realities. As opposed to art exhibits or evening symphonies, there is one form of
visual art that remains the most ubiquitous and universally available: architecture. Architecture
surrounds each and every human being. It molds our cityscapes and reflects a societys historical
heritage along with its modern horizons. It can be shaped to express any social or ideological
message with as much intensity and vitality as any other art form. As such, architecture is anything
but a mute product of masonry, sculpture, and engineering. However, the question arises as to what
uses such a medium would have for the grandest of clientele. Have nations and empires capitalized
on architectures expressive potential to further political ends? Four questions arise that can
illuminate this interplay between artistic and political:
1. Have nations historically used architecture to convey their political ideals?

ARCHITECTURAL FORMS AND POLITICAL THEORY

Smith 4

2. Can governmental and monumental architecture serve as a means of informing a citizenry

of their civic duties?
3. Are there current nations whose architectural landscape continues to reflect a political
system that has endured throughout the centuries?
4. What could be the governments role in actively patronizing the arts and architecture, not
only for its own edifices but for public projects within the society it has charge over?
The careful and historically-literate use of architecture can potentially be used to enshrine not only
a political entitys cherished ideals, but their ambitions, conquests, and social theory. The analysis
of historical and current instances of architectural propaganda tied to defined political ideologies
will aid in illuminating the overarching theme of architectural philosophy and its societal
significance.
Have nations historically used architecture to convey their political ideals?
The great pageant of nations stretching back millennia gives a historical researcher a nearly
limitless pool from which to derive any given observation. Focusing on Western patrimony,
Greece has arguably played one of the most formative roles within Western civilization. It has
blazed monumental trails through nearly all spheres of
mans activities whether it be philosophy, education,
metaphysics, democratic governance, poetry, science and
mathematics, law, and, of course, art and architecture.
This fact was not lost on the great peoples and nations of
antiquity. Hellenization, or the adoption of Greek culture,
Figure 2. "School of Athens", Raphael, 1510

was enthusiastically embraced by numerous, disparate

nations from the Macedonian Empire under Alexander the Great to the Roman Empire under

ARCHITECTURAL FORMS AND POLITICAL THEORY

Smith 5

dozens of successive emperors. As the immediate, political influence of the Greek city states
waned, Greek heritage would go on to become a symbol for political, cultural and artistic
enlightenment. Self-proclaimed political heirs to this revered pedigree would choose to express
their lineage in architectural forms. Emperor Augustus of Rome, founder of the Roman Empire
and its first ordained Emperor from 27 BC to 14 AD, would explicitly choose to model the
architecture of the imperial capital of Rome according to classical Greek archetypes. (Bunson,
1994). His Forum of Augustus, begun in 20 BC, draws heavily on Greek architectural forms
including Doric and Ionic structures, culminating in the classical Greek temple to Mars Ultor in 2
BC. Augustus adopted such designs with the
purpose of displaying Rome as being the successor
and perfection of Greek artistic, political and
cultural patrimony. The Roman political system
was to be governed by a demarcated degree of
political representation, and law was to be guided
by a pursuit of reason, logic and civic virtue. Each of

Figure 3. Temple to Mars Ultor, Artistic

Recreation, Rome

which stemming from Greek practice in Athenian democracy and the socio-political philosophies
of Platos Republic () and Aristotles Politics (). By adopting Greek architecture
within a world still vividly familiar with the sight of Greek architectural praxis, Augustus sought
to solidify his new empire as the rightful heir and protector of Western civilization itself.
While the nations of antiquity provide a fascinating insight into the use of architectural
forms in political theory, more modern examples are certainly not lacking. The Unites States of
America, in its effort to formulate a distinct national identity imbued with its political and
philosophical ideals, saw in the Greco-Roman culture a prototype that would be perfected and

ARCHITECTURAL FORMS AND POLITICAL THEORY

Smith 6

come to fruition in American hegemony. The nations capital of Washington DC is rife with such
orchestrated statements. The Greek and Roman plight against tyrannical regimes such as Persia
and Carthage resonated with the American struggle against the English monarchy. Talbot Hamlin,
in his work, Greek Revival Architecture in America, makes the following observation.
If England was now no longer the cultural inspiration, a more vital influence for [the
Founding Fathers] came to take its place that great fecundating inspiration which for
three hundred years and more had sent wave after wave of influences across the surface of
Western life the inspiration of the ancient classic world of Greece and Rome. (Hamlin,
1964)
Classical architecture became a manifestation of
democratic ideals and republican order and was readily
embraced by such men as Thomas Jefferson as the ideal
form for the nubile Republic. As described earlier,
Emperor Augustus constructed his Temple of Mars Ultor
in 2 BC with the intent of displaying Rome as being the
successor and perfection of Greek advances. Neo-Classical

Figure 4. United States Supreme Court,

Washington DC

architecture served much of the same purpose as a natural outgrowth of the concept of Manifest
Destiny which meshed well with the idea of the emergent American empire as the heir and
culmination of all that classical antiquity had contributed to mankind.
Can governmental and monumental architecture serve as a means of informing a citizenry
of their civic duties?

ARCHITECTURAL FORMS AND POLITICAL THEORY

Smith 7

We shape our buildings, and thereafter, our buildings shape us, said Winston Churchill
in a speech in the House of Commons on October 28, 1944 upon the occasion of its rebuilding
after being bombed during the course of WWII. Evidence for a nations identity being manifested
in its architectural palette abound. However, in what ways has architecture functioned as an
educational means for a nations population, stating both civic and governmental expectations and
forming a desirable citizen? Such knowledge would behoove any citizen who desires to have a
broader understanding of his respective nations expectations and principles. Continuing with the
Unites States, attention is now turned toward the Lincoln Memorial in Washington DC. The edifice
itself is patterned off of a Greek temple in the Doric style. Housed within the memorial is a seated
figure of Abraham Lincoln, 16th President of the United States of America, who would preside
over the U.S. Civil War. The use of a temple model of architecture implies an enshrining and
profound reverence for both the persona of Abraham Lincoln, the principles for which he
campaigned and the executive office itself. A citizen who would view such a powerful statement
would be imparted a variety of civic messages. The first
is that the indissolubility of the Union remains a key
political concept to which he must assent to. Secondly,
the office of the Presidency is to be regarded with respect
and submission to its lawful dictates. Additionally the
seat upon which Lincoln is enthroned contains the
fasces symbol carved into the supporting structures
Figure 5. Detail of Lincoln Memorial,
Washington DC

underneath each arm. The fasces symbol, originating

from Roman and Etruscan tradition, consists of a bound bundle of reeds symbolizing that the
strength of the state is dependent upon a united and unified citizenry. An onlooker to this particular

ARCHITECTURAL FORMS AND POLITICAL THEORY

Smith 8

portion would be reminded of the concept that loyalty to the state is essential in maintaining the
integrity of the nation and betrayal would sap the strength of the nation as a whole.
Any nation which ascribes to the doctrine of popular sovereignty has a vested interest in
an educated and cultured populace. Such a political system ideally demands a citizenry that is
capable of wielding the immense responsibility of electing civil leaders with prudence, wisdom,
ethics and an acute understanding of world affairs. This prerogative of educating all echelons of
society has been at the forefront of American social theory. In a 1786 letter to George Wythe,
Thomas Jefferson remarked that, "the most important bill in our whole code, is that for the
diffusion of knowledge among the people no other sure foundation can be devised for the
preservation of freedom and happiness" (Malone, 1948). The eponymously named Thomas
Jefferson Building, a branch of the Library of Congress built in the 1890s by Paul J. Pelz, possesses
a singularly unique artistic addition that encapsulates the republican ideal of the common man
possessing an all-encompassing education. Within the main reading room, there is a dome
designed on a monumental scale which is surmounted by a mural that is positively pregnant with
meaning. Completed by American muralist,
Edwin Blashfield, in 1895, the mural entitled,
The Evolution of Civilization, crowns this
revered space of devoted scholarship. The
circular mural contains twelve seated figures
representing nations and cultures which have
contributed to humanitys advancement in
culture, religion and science. For example, a
Spanish conquistador is depicted in deference to

Figure 6. "The Evolution of Civilization", 1895,

Library of Congress, Washington DC

ARCHITECTURAL FORMS AND POLITICAL THEORY

Smith 9

Spains age of discovery and colonial pioneering. A Roman emperor with a fasces symbol
represents the blessings of republican law and order. America is also included amidst this pantheon
with the objects of a working engine and dynamo, symbolizing this nations advances in science,
technology and industry. Other figures include Egypt, Greece, Italy, and several other primary
contributors to humanitys collective intellectual heritage. The inclusion of such a mural within a
government-commissioned and publicly viewable edifice, imparts to a citizen the desire that he
possess a mind that is enriched with the benefits of a holistic and broad knowledge base. It is an
eloquent statement of the necessity of an educated populace as being the cornerstone of a vital and
active democratic state. It goads the citizen into sharing in the reverence his nation has for
scholarship and into seeing the pursuit of wisdom as an integral part of his civic duty.
Are there current nations whose architectural landscape continues to reflect a political
system that has endured throughout the centuries?
Harkening back to antiquity and on into the tumultuous time of the Age of Revolution
between the 18th and 19th Centuries, the principal form of governance that dominated the vast
majority of the civilized worlds vast tapestry of cultures consisted in monarchy. As of 2014, there
remain forty-four nations ruled by a monarchical form of government, the majority having
relegated their regent to purely ceremonial or minor administrative functions. However, England
remains a noted peculiarity. While its current
sovereign monarch, Queen Elizabeth II, has
indeed been stripped of the vast majority of her
predecessors

former

governance,

the

monarchial structure and royal identity remains

Figure 7. The House of Lords, London, UK

a firmly rooted and integral part of both the

ARCHITECTURAL FORMS AND POLITICAL THEORY

Smith 10

UKs popular and governmental identity. The English monarch is the embodiment of one of
Englands most distinct political features: the full union of Church and State. The King (or Queen)
is at once the head of state and visible head of the Protestant Church of England. This
interconnectedness is expressed in Englands uniquely neo-Gothic architectural landscape in
which a sizable portion of both governmental, royal and ecclesiastical structures all share the same
architectural palette.
This common palette, however, is the fruit of a tumultuous soul-searching on the part of
Victorian England who viewed the architectural hodgepodge that defined the onset of the 19th
century as being an unsatisfactory state of affairs. A loss of national cohesion, expressed
architecturally, was apparent. Augustus Welby Pugin, preeminent neo-Gothic architect of the 19th
century, would describe the malaise as, a complete convulsion in the whole system of the arts,
and a babel of confusion (Bright, 1984). In observing the lasting endurance of the English state
and its political structures, prominent scholars and artisans turned to what was perceived as the
zenith of English hegemony and cultural flowering. This is the time of the neo-Medieval
revolution. Alice Chandler in his work, A Dream of Order, notes the following.
The more the world changed, and the period of medieval revival was an era of everaccelerating social transformation, the more the partly historical and mystical Middle Ages
that had become a tradition in literature served to remind men of a Golden Age. The Middle
Ages were idealized as a period of faith, order, joy, munificence, and creativity. (Bright,
1984)
This renewed Medievalism brought with it the Gothic architectural landscape, defined by its
majestic, imposing and symbolism-laden structures. While across the Atlantic, the United States
was busying itself claiming lineage to Greco-Roman patrimony, England revived an intimate tome

ARCHITECTURAL FORMS AND POLITICAL THEORY

Smith 11

within its own venerable annals of history which even unto this very day, color and festoon the
English landscape. The political apparatus which Gothic architecture enshrined in the context of
English society, as described earlier, has endured into the 21st century. The occasions of royal
functions are notable examples. On April 29th, 2011, Prince William, Duke of Cambridge, and
Catherine Middleton were wed within Westminster Abbey, giving the United Kingdom its latest
addition to the English royal family. Founded in 960 AD, Westminster Abbey has been the
continuous venue for English coronations since the 12th century. This abbey has stood for over a
millennia as a symbol of the continuous presence of Englands monarchial heritage and its
subjects. George Edmund Street observes the following concerning Westminster Abbey in his
essay on English art.
That church so interwoven with all our
English ideas in Church and State, the very
center in some sort for centuries of our whole
system No church in the world is so
national, so firmly rooted in the tastes of the
people,

so

grown

together

with

the

institutions and customs of this country.

(Street, 1866)

Figure 8. Westminster Abbey, London, UK

The United Kingdom is a nation which has readily embraced the 21st century with its dizzying
array of ever-new and ever-innovative trends, fashions, technology and globalizing currents.
However, the ancient figureheads and system of governance which has governed its domain for
centuries have remained largely intact. As Augustus Welby Pugin eloquently opines, this

ARCHITECTURAL FORMS AND POLITICAL THEORY

Smith 12

venerable national identity is chiefly visible in its architecture as though it were, distilled into
stone (Hill, 2009).
What could be the governments role in actively patronizing the arts and architecture, not
only for its own edifices but for public projects within the society it has charge over?
In discussing the long and established tradition of governmental architecture, the question
arises as to what role, if any, ought government to have in artistic expression? While examples
abound of magnificent edifices having governmental patrons, there arises a concern of the heavy
hand of government inaugurating a trend of stagnancy and stifling cronyism. Dr. Max Grossman
is a professor of Art History at the University of Texas at El Paso, Vice-Chair of the El Paso County
Historical Commission and an accomplished architectural historian. Dr. Grossman is of the firm
and impassioned opinion that art and architecture ought to be a pursuit that is relegated to the
private sector whenever possible. Dr. Grossman believes that, The government should not be in
the business of arbitrating beauty Greater privatization would level the playing field. A danger
is perceived when authoritarian structures enter the realm of public expression. The danger is not
necessarily in an inordinate degree of censorship or soft-persecution of conflicting ideologues.
Rather, the danger, according to Dr. Grossman, is that the weight of such a vast institution as
government has the potential of installing a particular artisan or style as an industry standard that
may or may not be in keeping with the pursuit of artistic integrity. A federally-sponsored artisan
is permitted to populate an urban environment solely by virtue of pre-determined contracts and
administrative default. As Dr. Grossman observes, If you dont have bureaucrats in cubicles
making decisions on artistic styles, artists enter into a world of survival of the fittest. They survive
purely on the merits of their own talent without public-funded support. This is the crux of Dr.
Grossmans ideological standpoint. Government has a tendency of sterilizing a pool of potential

ARCHITECTURAL FORMS AND POLITICAL THEORY

Smith 13

talent. Its primary ethos is one of utilitarianism and efficiency with a waning concern for aesthetic
or cultural significance that is constantly in flux.
The pervasive nature of government standardization leaves many observers to see an
architectural landscape that is defined by a uniformity, not in artistic style, but rather in its lack
thereof. Lois Craig, in his work, The Federal Presence: Architecture, Politics, and Symbols in
United States Government Building, observes, the innocent sojourner might wander the
republics length and breadth without ever departing an environmental web created by federally
commissioned architects and engineers. (Craig, 1984). This move toward a uniform and
minimalist grid of edifices arose, according to Dr. Grossman, in the period immediately following
World War II. He states the following.
After WWII, the tendency was toward structural minimalism. The
bottom line was far more important. Throughout human history, the
architectural ideal was the perfect marriage between beauty and
function. Our generation has seen a decisive shift toward purely
function. Workshops capable of sophisticated ornamentation have
largely disappeared architecture pre-WWII tended to be far more
sophisticated, multi-layered and ideological. Today, architecture is
still loaded with meaning, but within a much more diminished range
Figure 9. The Seagram Building,
New York City, NY

of expression. (Dr. Max Grossman, personal communication,

October 27th, 2014).

As America reeled from the economical and psychological trauma of the Second World War, a
rigid militarism descended upon the collective consciousness and was expressed in a sober and
regimented utilitarian architecture that private architectural firms were expected to adopt and

ARCHITECTURAL FORMS AND POLITICAL THEORY

Smith 14

imitate. This is the aforementioned danger of an inordinate attachment to government and its
radically fluctuating shifts in stylistic taste. If artistic expression is tethered to an institution which
does not inherently view artistic integrity as a pursuit worth achieving under all circumstances,
architectural landscapes will quickly become commandeered to express a political ethos which
may run afoul with the flexibility and mobility of cultural expression. Dr. Grossman would
conclude that, in keeping with a democratic nations call for an educated and actively participatory
populace, private citizens and local institutions ought to take the reigns of architectural expression.
Communities and local governments ought to take charge of their own architectural environments,
thereby promoting a communal campaign of seeking artistic expression that is an authentic
reflection of local, organic and enduring patrimony.
Conclusion
Architecture, like all visual art, serves as a dynamic force within a society. It is a force that
can convey the solace of unity and the consolation of a common heritage. Such a formidable
ideological tool has been and continues to be exploited by governmental structures in ways that
have historically contributed to the great pageant of architectural wonders. Empires and lofty
republics, steeped in reverence for history and a yearning for continual political refinement, have
seen architecture as the vessel by which their hallowed principles can be both celebrated, enforced
and preserved for posterity. Architecture is an artistic medium which is never mute. For as long as
its edifice is held erect, a structure possesses an enduring message that ought to be regarded with
the utmost of contemplation by both occupant and passerby. In its construction and symbolism lies
the manifesto of its creator and client. As the eminent Turkish architectural historian, Spiro Kostof,
would say, Landscape shifts and adjusts according to the rhythms of our days, the intervention of
clients, designers, and users, the forces of an impatient future (Robin, 1992). The

ARCHITECTURAL FORMS AND POLITICAL THEORY

Smith 15

magnificently varied and, at times, raucous paths of architectural forms reflect our worlds
tumultuous political landscape and its multitude of social, philosophical and religious
reverberations. A discussion of the interplay between art and governance can only conclude with
a sober evaluation of the purpose of each institution and to see where they are both in harmony
and dissonance with each others purposes. Various propositions are brought forward into this
contentious arena. One might conclude that government can and ought to utilize architectural and
artistic mediums when it appears to be fortuitous to the benefit of its respective domain. While
another voice would caution that government should always be conscious of the grip it holds on
the vitality of the architectural community. Within artistic expression, just as in democratic
governance itself, a choice must be made to choose to be a monolith of guidance or to serve as a
gentle but vigilant vanguard of the collective patrimony so dear to its denizens hearts.

ARCHITECTURAL FORMS AND POLITICAL THEORY

Smith 16

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Alexander, M. (2007). Medievalism: The Middle Ages in modern England. New Haven:
Yale University Press.
Bright, M. (1984). Cities built to music: Aesthetic theories of the Victorian Gothic Revival.
Columbus: Ohio State University Press.
Bunson, M. (1994). Encyclopedia of the Roman Empire. New York: Facts on File Inc.
ISBN 978-0-8160-3182-5
Craig, L. (1978). The Federal presence: Architecture, Politics, and Symbols in United
States Government Building. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Grube, G. (1974). The Republic. Indianapolis: Hackett Pub.Tzonis, A., & Lefaivre, L.
(1986). Classical architecture: The poetics of order. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Hamlin, T., & Hamlin, S. (1944). Greek revival architecture in America: Being an Account
of Important Trends in American Architecture and American Life Prior to the War Between the
States,. London: Oxford University Press.
Hazell, B. (2011, April 30). Royal Wedding. The Telegraph. Retrieved November 5,
2014, from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/royal-wedding/live/8466247/Royalwedding-live.html
Hill, R. (2009). God's architect Pugin and the building of romantic Britain. New Haven:
Yale University Press.
Library of Congress Home | Library of Congress. (n.d.). Retrieved November 17, 2014,
from http://www.loc.gov/
Malone, D. (1948). Jefferson, the Virginian. Boston: Little, Brown.

ARCHITECTURAL FORMS AND POLITICAL THEORY

Smith 17

Marcantonio, D. (2010, January 23). What Makes a Building Classical? Retrieved

November

17,

2014,

from

http://blog.marcantonioarchitects.com/what-makes-a-building-

classical/
Marcantonio, D. (2010, October 31). Shedding Light on the Gothic Style. Retrieved
November 17, 2014, from http://blog.marcantonioarchitects.com/shedding-light-on-the-gothicstyle/
Parkinson, J. (2012). Democracy and public space: The physical sites of democratic
performance. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Robin, R. (1992). Enclaves of America: The rhetoric of American political architecture
abroad, 1900-1965. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
Street, G. (1866). The Church and the world: Essays on Questions of the Day [in 1866],
1867, 1868. [1st-3d ser.]. London: Longmans.
Sudjic, D., & Jones, H. (2001). Architecture and democracy. London: Laurence King.
World War II. (n.d.). Retrieved November 19, 2014, from
http://www.nationalchurchillmuseum.org/world-war-ii-churchill-quotes.html