Sometimes I tend to think to myself how my beliefs and views of the world tend to be odd in nature. Certain things that I value highly and hold in high regard seem to have no shared feelings by almost nobody. One such example is found in architecture where I noticed the most potential for beauty and treat it as an art form. Upon showing one my appreciation for the historical architectural styles and express my grief at how death of such styles in the modern period has been rather detrimental to the human soul. I get responses such as "oh they are pretty" at best and eye rolls at worst. It seems as if people's souls living in the urban landscapes have forgotten what makes them alive, they grew blind to the world around them. Which as I will get to later on in the post, I have found has been almost entirely a consequence of the modern world as a whole. However the person capable of noticing the beauty of the classical architectural styles is already one step closer to understanding their value. However I do not merely believe that the aesthetic property of those buildings is the only thing going for them.
I take the idea a step further and imagine a life surrounded by the finest of architectural styles crafted with the highest of effort designed primarily for the well being of a human being. The singing of birds surrounded by the greenery of trees in a garden decorated with a fountain, leading to a rather modest house exterior surrounded with well kept flowers where one opens the door to enter a welcoming and lively room, with a window on one side and a painting of a landscape on the other as well a painting of The Wanderer a famous piece of the Romantic Era.
Contrast this with the picture of urban streets the lowest of life surrounded with the loud noises of the car engine, the air that you breathe polluted as you walk down those streets surrounded with the incredibly large skyscrapers beyond your comprehensions a contrast in size that makes you feel small and powerless. Each building appears same and every story of each room as a single window to which to gaze down upon the traffic below. As monotonous it sounds, the very place you call home resides inside the complex. You enter your flat and are coldly welcomed by the empty grey walls and perhaps an abstract minimalist painting followed by one of human anatomy to complement the minimalism of the life your soul has to live with.
The comparison between the two settings makes it is obvious that the one where soul lacks the most is the second, the one where your whole being is reduced to its core components and treated to the most minimal of lives possible one that is purely satisfying the need to exist, but not the need to live and to breathe. It is a suffocating as much as it is dull. The painting's symbolism shows how the subject is treated in both scenarios. In the first scenario you are treated as a being with intrinsic worth the one that deserves not only to live but to do so in great luxury a testament to your soul. The landscape painting example represents the connection to nature that still resides in the human as a being that serves as a reminder to live in harmony with nature. The Wanderer painting represents the human spirit to transcend oneself, works as a reminder that you are not here merely to exist, but to have a purpose higher than oneself and to overcome oneself. The second scenario where we can see an abstract painting hanged on the wall we can observe as a byproduct of loss and disconnection that man feels within one's soul that is trying to make the meaning of the strange and alien place it finds itself in. The anatomy painting is a show of reduction of the human being to its bodily function, in contrast to the Wanderer where man is overcoming itself, here man is condemned to his very own body unable to escape the grasp of control. There is no space for soul here, only that which could be measured and examined.
From this example I point at the very specific aesthetic choices being made by our culture and how they are impacted by their respective metaphysical views on life. On one scenario we have a holistic view that celebrates every single aspect of being a human and seeks to be for the human, as such in this culture being a human isn't just limited to itself. On the other we have an instrumental view of what it means to be a human. This is clearly represented in the architecture that surrounds us.
A world dominated by massive skyscrapers overwhelms the human spirit, reducing individuals to mere cogs in a vast technological system. These structures are not monuments to human mastery but expressions of a civilisation enslaved to rationality and the present moment. Their monotonous blue facades, a hollow symbol of stability, project the illusion of an eternal, unchanging order, one that seeks to freeze time and suppress the dynamic nature of human existence.
In contrast, the castle stands as a true testament to human accomplishment. It is not merely an external display of power but an embodiment of the human spirit an architectural extension of the self. Where the skyscraper isolates and constrains, the castle invites exploration, offering a sense of fluidity and transformation within its walls. Its design, rich with contrasts and textures, mirrors the depths of human passion and creativity, evoking a longing for growth and transcendence rather than resignation to the present.
I hope this dialectical analysis has illustrated the profound cultural decline reflected in our built environment, a decline rooted in the metaphysical worldview that elevates profit and utilitarian value above all else. Modernity has by reducing everything to its measurable components and extracting value for capital, effectively drained the depth, passion and the intrinsic worth of the human being.
It is important to clarify that the comparisons I presented are not a simplistic contrast between past and present or tradition or modernity. I have not chosen a specific historical era to elevate but rather sought to highlight architectural forms on which I have modeled an ideal state of architectural design on historical creations such as castles, gardens, and fountains, using these as tangible examples of architecture that embodies human flourishing. This essay reflects my broader contention: that architecture is never neutral it is more than mere physical space - it is a cultural expression of metaphysical values, shaping and being shaped by how we understand ourselves and our place in the world. Modern architecture reveals a culture obsessed with control, stability and efficiency, values that once taken to such lengths strip human existence of its transcendent and holistic dimensions.
The concept of "soul" serves here as a symbol of human depth, something immeasurable and resistant to the reductionism of modernity. This is not merely an aesthetic critique but a cultural and philosophical one: architecture reflects how society views human life. While classical forms celebrate the holistic and transcendent aspects of existence, much of modern design prioritizes efficiency and control, alienating us from ourselves and our environment.
This essay is only the beginning of a larger project: to rediscover the human amidst the alienation of the urban landscape and to investigate how our metaphysical assumptions have shaped the world we inhabit. Future discussions may delve into how we might rediscover the human within urban spaces and how shifting metaphysical views, rooted in Enlightenment rationality and industrial commodification have reshaped our environment. The task at hand is not simply to critique but to imagine, to envision architecture that once again serves as a testament to the human spirit, reconnecting us to nature, creativity and transcendence.
Further Reading:
Jean-Jacques Rousseau: His concept of the "natural man" inspired my connection between nature and the nourishment of the human soul. Rousseau's emphasis on living in harmony with nature underpins the idea that environments shaped by beauty and organic forms foster a deeper sense of well-beings.
Theodor Adorno and Max Horkheimer: Their critique of Enlightenment's emphasis on reason, rationality, and scientific progress that led to the domination of nature and the reduction of human beings to mere objects within a system of instrumental reason. Their concept of the Culture Industry inspired my analysis of modern architecture, showing how mass production becomes standardized and commodified, stripping it of genuine artistic or humanistic value. Drawing further parallels that such buildings represent a civilization that values rationality and stability over human soul and creativity, which reflects the commodification of the built environment in modern capitalist society.
Martin Heidegger: I took his idea that architecture is more than the mere construction of physical spaces; it is a way of being and dwelling in the world. In my essay I contrast the human experience of classical architecture (such as castles) with the alienation caused by modern, industrial-style buildings like skyscrapers. This directly echoes Heidegger’s concern about modernity's treatment of space.
Key Concepts:
Aesthetics, Soul, Architecture, Aesthetics, Ethics, Instrumentalism vs Holism, Alienation, Technological Determinism, Authenticity