Architecture is Art - Except When It's Hostile

Send tweet.

Aug 09, 2021

Hostile architecture is also referred to as defensive or "anti-homeless" architecture. The term "anti-homeless" obejctifies people without homes so I will be using the term "hostile" for this issue. Aside from lacking objectification, I think the term hostile eliminates the separation between those with homes and those without. The architecture is simply hostile to human beings, but especially to those without homes. TLDR: People without homes are still people.

Generally, I see architecture as art - I'm sure many people do, or maybe you never thought of it that way, and that’s okay too. It requires a creative thought, mixed with process and execution, and delivered to inspire emotion from visitors, inhabiters, or passersby. Historically, we've even looked to architecture as a form of spiritual inspiration. A Mosque or Gothic Cathedral could inspire most, perhaps even the non-religious.

But from the most minimal to the most gothic, architecture is the intersection of people and space. The way a space is designed reflects its intended use and you can typically tell the kind of person/people behind a design if it leans from one extreme or the other. Perhaps the space has a wall built entirely of windows - the architect could value light and the way it opens up the modern interior. Or maybe the architect is like Sir David Adjaye and designs their buildings to meet the needs of the community and "enrich daily life."

Which is why hostile architecture is simply not art. It's not art because it’s cruel, and one could argue art should never be cruel. I think some of these hostile attributes are designed to give off an air of brutalism, which is evil and wicked because how dare something so diabolical exist under the guise of a modern art style.

I recently discovered the term Neoliberalization - which is FILLED with everything we hate, but put simply, it eliminates the "undesirable" in order to capitalize on the idea that the space in question is really "safe!" and "clean!" we promise! The act of designing and enforcing hostile architecture is a form of Neoliberalization, which makes hostile architecture that much more hostile. Just take Moynihan Station. Seating was eliminated from the design plans, except in areas where you must purchase food or the VIP-only sections. I'm sorry, no seats? Does the need to keep out those without homes really consume these people so much they chose to not include benches or chairs into their design plans? It's maddening.

I'd say "No Loitering" signs are level one on the hostility scale, followed by this dumb shit somewhere in the middle, and then finally all of these examples.

Hostile architecture is everywhere, and it's often disguised as art. Don't be fooled.

As always, thanks for reading.

Elizabeth