Against Minimalism
Perhaps the most prevalent and pernicious design philosophy of today is that of minimalism. One need only look at newly constructed buildings in the International Style, Apple devices, and Kim and Kanye’s old house to see its influence. We are in a moment of clean lines, solid colors, neutral tones, replication, and simplicity.
And it sucks.
Minimalism is one step removed from Brutalism and Utilitarianism. These are not human styles by-and-large. They are corporate styles: easy to design quickly, easy to build, and efficient to churn out, and can be plopped down anywhere in the world. Living in a pristine grey box with nary an interesting feature on the walls, ceiling, or floor is not living - it is survival.
Perhaps it could be said that this state of affairs is better than being surrounded by visual noise and pointless clutter, but it is not against this extreme that minimalism struggles. Both are extremes, and should necessarily be avoided. Yet it seems we have seen it fit that in order to be anti-hoarding or anti-materialistic that we must become simply anti-material. This is too far. The proper way is not to shun things entirely, but to understand their purpose and to organize them accordingly.
In order to have an appropriately organized chaos, one must first have their own ability to find and create beauty. It seems we don’t prioritize the human effect of new houses, developments, or artworks in regards to aesthetic pleasure. Everything is mass produced, vague, neutral, inoffensive, and capable of being “just okay” anywhere instead of “perfect” somewhere. Nothing is to be bold or say anything at all lest it not fit in with its surroundings, leaving us with only invisible spaces.
Matters of Taste
It’s not controversial or interesting to say that capital M Minimalism is a fairly new design style. It seems to be born of a culture with too much material wealth, where asceticism is a virtue purely because it is seen as difficult and trendy and - most importantly - a signal of wealth. Anything that is seen as a signifier of success will find a paper thin simulacrum of itself trickling down to the middle class without any of the background or depth that constituted it in the first place.
Square, boxy, clean, and uniform IKEA furniture and meaningless mass produced art with no message is ubiquitous in countless homes, rendering places that should be unique and interesting spaces into flat near perfect copies of each other. This doesn’t have to be the case however. I’m not an interior designer but it shouldn’t be radical to say that buildings should use local materials as much as possible (this alone would make our world so much more interesting and create true difference in spaces). Homes in the Sonoran desert and the forests of Maine should be built differently to account for available materials, and the designs needed to keep occupants comfortable. Uniformity is actually inefficient here. Building desert houses in a style that was created in much cooler climes makes it more expensive to manage temperature.
Take a look at this room.
This type of sterile, extreme, and uncomfortable design is railing against anything resembling humanity. And I can guarentee you someone out there would pay an interior designer a million bucks for it. Why? There is no life here. Worst of all, it’s not even cozy. Our homes should always strive to be cozy where they can be. This is a showroom that someone happens to live in. It’s only function is to show off to other rich people how well-disciplined you are by not adding any true color to the room, or getting it dirty in any way. We cannot live like this, and we must not laud this failed style as high-class or desireable.
Now imagine yourself living in a town with designs like this:
Frankfurt am Main, built 2018
Look at all the different textures! The colors! The geometry is varied! It is simultaneously internally varied and consistent. It acts as a unique whole. We are capable of building new sites that actually evoke aesthetic pleasure from regular people, not just overpaid designers and classless millionaires. Not one piece of this building is overshadowing another, their artfully crafted organization makes the whole greater than the sum of its parts. Creating a true space requires one to have honed their view of what constitutes beauty and how humans naturally want to interact with that beauty. Note too that none of the other buildings nearby are exact copies of each other. They are unique in and of themselves yet still work together to create a unified sense of place. Each building feels integrated into its environment.
Look at the most visited tourist attractions: the cities of Rome, Paris, Dubrovnik, Athens, Barcelona, et al. At their core they keep their cultural identity separate from each other through employment of interesting architectural styles and use of local materials. There is a sense of being in a true space that is well defined and harmonious with its surroundings. Even with its famously gridded streets, Barcelona still manages to avoid the trap of boring monotony that would be so easy to fall prey to in more contemporary styles.
Take a look at the difference between these buildings and tell me which you think serves their purpose better.
William J. Clinton Presidential Library & Museum, Little Rock, AR
I don’t have enough prestigious degrees to find this type of building beautiful, but I do have enough eyes to find it lacking. I find it difficult to be inspired by this style, it does not speak any timeless truth in its organization. I struggle to find any coherence in its construction at all, frankly. A Presidential library and museum deserves to be more than a literal box of glass and steel plopped down in an indiscriminate spot. No amount of think pieces or blithering artists statements can change the fact that this building is just an affront to man and nature.
N Lamar St in Dallas, TX. If I didn’t say where it was there would be no way to know what city, state, or even country it was in - how boring.
Unfortunately, this is an incredibly normal urban road. What was the direction that this road was aiming for? What unique properties do the surrounding buildings have? Is there any coherence to their organization? Do they employ unique textures, colors, fine details, or practical elements? No, none of these. This style of construction is essentially hostile to all life that is not inside its walls. Offering no protection from rain or sun to those not indoors, this road and these buildings are purely for placing things inside of them and hoping that anyone outside is protected inside a car. Nothing sets these buildings apart from each other besides incredibly trivial differences. Without its exact address it would be nigh impossible to guess where this road was located. Ubiquity is not a flag of success, but of unimaginative designers.
To the contrary, not all contemporary buildings with a large amount of glass have to be incoherent and painful to behold. With careful consideration of the purpose of the building and integration within its environment, one can come away with a well made work of architecture.
Thorncrown Chapel in Eureka Springs, AR. Photo by Randall Connaughton.
Among the many things that Thorncrown Chapel architect E. Fay Jones did well here was incorporating native stonework into the chapel’s construction. Careful placement of the chapel along with maintaining the nature surrounding the property ensured that Thorncrown works with nature and is truly a unique building and defined space, not a copy and paste of someone else’s work. Thorncrown would only work in the Ozarks, it would be out of place anywhere else. That is what makes this building a success.
Not all examples of good design in old styles are European - and thank God for that. The United States has a particular penchant for designing good and unique places that feel grounded and purposeful. They just happen to be almost exclusively at college campuses.
Virginia Tech “Hokie Stone” in Blacksburg, VA. Photo from https://vt.edu/about/traditions/hokie-stone.html
In a self-described neo-Gothic style, Virginia Tech makes excellent use of their local geography and materials by actually quarrying the native limestone themselves and artfully rendering it into a cohesive pattern across campus. The purposeful use of native materials in a manner that is expressly for beautifying a space should be the prime objective of every architect, designer, and occupant.
When we find ourselves surrounded by beauty it tends to make us focus on beautiful things, elevating our thoughts and goals. Even the mundane can be elevated when given the proper opportunity. In the case of colleges and universities, such campuses are indeed great places to spend time learning and researching the wonders of our world. Imagine having to do arduous research and writing while stuck in a purely utilitarian box that is antithetical to its environment. The muses tend to not inspire souls in such non-spaces. Imagine attending a church service inside a modern design that is so angular and jarring that it makes it all the more difficult to find the beauty of the divine. Well designed buildings change how we feel, that alone makes them important to get right.
Affecting Change
To fight against Minimalism is to reinvigorate ourselves with the value of creating truly unique spaces that actually work in concert with the surrounding environment. We must realize that there is no inherent virtue in having a simple and clean and inoffensive room, building, or city. It is artistic laziness and indicative of a world wide dearth of inspiration that we hold the International Style as king. We must rediscover the beauty that is held within the fine details of beautiful buildings our ancestors built that we still go on pilgrimages to see today. If you want to have great places to live and work, they must be formed to fit the human person, and to elevate us by simply existing as monuments to true beauty.
You can start with just one room.