The Politics of Architecture

Introduction
According to a famous architectural scholar, the architectural industry's slow growth results from wanting political goodwill (Jencks 1973). A good relationship between the two realms is critical to architectural designs' progress, and the stakeholders in both disciplines should understand the underlying relationship (Milne 1981). Goodman first explained the possibility of politics affecting architecture in 1947, but up to now, many have not realized the existing connection between the two domains (Goodman and Goodman 1947.
In this study, the relationship between politics and architecture will explain how architecture is used to play political games and how architecture designs are based on the political environment. The study will also highlight the contribution of politics to modern architectural designs.
The best way to understand how architecture and politics have been relating over the years is to observe different past occurrences concerning the two domains. It is worth noting that the point of interest is not the political differences between individual architects but how the two realms interrelate with each other (Milne 1981). The politics in architecture affects the industry naturally, so it isn't easy to notice its connection. In this paper, the point of emphasis will be technical faces directly related to the day's politics. Historical data on architectural art will be referenced to illustrate its role in shaping architectural designs (Smith 1966).
The influence of politics in shaping the architecture
Art is solely based on what is happening in society. Politics remain an essential element in any community, and architecture is an art that depends on the political environment to remain relevant to society. Politicians use different tactics to pass a message to their followers, and art remains the favorite since it is easy to understand. If a politician manages to patronize the art, it is possible to exalt an agenda or interest without boring the target group (Parker 1950). The political environment changes every other day, and the individuals who hold positions change with time. The different formations will always arise to sell different agendas, and opposition forces will form in response. Politicians prefer representing their agendas in the form of art, so they involve an artist to visualize a formation's beliefs. A good example of an art application is in Renaissance Prince, famous of Machiavelli, yet admired for generosity and tolerance (Parker 1950).
It is possible to identify a transition pattern that is in line with political changes. This can be done by examining the changes that have occurred in the world of architecture over time. The pattern shows that the changes are based on a civilization that happens from generation to generation. Political advancement remains the key guide to the pattern's changes, and therefore it is ironic to see the two realms disconnected. Parkinson was the first to decipher the pattern, and the relationship was highlighted in his sixth law (Parkinson 1957).
The architectural design in ancient Egypt is a clear indication of the political environment being represented in art. The stable and static designs represented the enduring power when Pharaoh was the leader in Egypt. Some of the designs that show stability include pyramids at Giza, colossal halls at Karnak, and giant figures of Ramses II (Milne 1981). The use of monolithic rocks in the design indicates how art can communicate a different message to the community. In this case, art was used to show a political regime that was unshakable.

Figure 1: Pyramid complex, Giza, (c 2500BCE)
The history of the political environment in Egypt is represented in architectural designs. Through the use of different characters, defining different entities' roles during that time is possible. Besides passing the message on the state of politics, the designs are attractive, so they remain iconic in the world. We can now see how the two domains are related and how they depend on each other. The designs speak for politics, and the day's political status is represented through architectural designs. This forms the basis of different theories that explain the relationship that exists between politics and architecture
Ecology and the politics of architecture
According to Urban political ecology (UPE), urbanization is highly influenced by political, social, and economic dynamics, and that is why inequality is visible across different landscapes. Cities are viewed as part of nature since they emerge due to various changes in the contemporary world. The main issue of concern has been explaining how urbanization depends on changes in the surroundings to shift to different states. The transformation is interpreted as a metabolic process (Cornea, N., 2019).
The metabolic process can logically be viewed as a combination of the economic, social, and political systems that bring changes within society. Infrastructure arrangements are key in determining the forces that influenced a particular design, and that's why it is significant to carry out more research on the field. UPE analysis focuses more on observing the historical occurrences during specific times concerning political power. Different cities emerged due to various adjustments in different power levels, which can be political, social, or economic. Following the fact that the adjustments are uneven, the distribution of cities is also uneven. That is why we can conclude that surrounding changes affect the shape that urbanization takes (Cornea, N., 2019). To fully understand the influence of power on Urbanization, UPE researchers examine the pattern followed by different development signals such as water network, electricity, sanitation, urban greenery, and food to determine what was happening during a particular time.
Figure 2: House in Lincolnshire (1994): Theme of the "physical nature of construction" (Adapted from Architecture Foundation 2020)
With what is happening in the modern world, it is obvious that there is a need to keep track of the ecological changes that prompted the emergence of our cities. Recording the changes at the time of occurrence will ensure we have an accurate history that explains why cities are organized in a certain way. Having a clear understanding of the ecology will ease formulating the policies that will guide the next phase of civilization. Technology and scientific research are important in advancing the cities, but understanding humans' relationships and the surrounding will remain critical. The surrounding can be viewed as politically, socially, or economically (Kwinter, 2010). A clear understanding of the relationship between the environment and any of the domains will help in suggesting the best adaption strategies that will make human lives better
Different cities and even megacities represent different environmental changes in the past, but this is not a good reason to conclude that they are sustainable. The argument is based on the fact that the forces that support their existence are trapped in ecological thinking, which may change with time. Different ecological thinking remains more oppressive than liberatory, and therefore their sustainability is questionable (Kwinter 2010).
To overcoming the challenge of ecological thinking, we must understand that it is impossible to separate humans and the environment. We must view both as one, and that is the only way to appreciate the aesthetic. It is also worth noting that human behaviors are highly affected by historical happenings that shaped their thinking. Different conceptions have emerged trying to explain the relationship between humans and nature, and among them, the Deep Ecology movement in the 1970s (coined 1973) appears fruitful. It views humans as part of the ecological circle and not an independent entity that can be isolated (Kwinter 2010).
The movement views nature as part of the ecosystem and not a resource that humans should use to benefit themselves. Many arguments surround the thinking brought ahead by this movement. Still, the take-home message is that environment and humans are of equal value and should coexist with no room for separation. The opposing parties base their argument on morals, juridical, and cosmological inclinations.
Cities have become the main areas of habitant in the modern world. As a result, the population in the regions has become dense, and resources have become scarce. This is contrary to the traditional setting when a small controlled group shared resources. Each group member had an opportunity to enjoy sharing the available resources considering it was enough for everyone. The social setting of the stone Age also defined what belonged to a specific gender or even religion. Ecological changes slowly dismantled the setting, but the thinking remains planted in the mind of different cultural backgrounds. Environmental changes that happen everyday necessities a shift, which explains why it is impossible to separate the environment and humans. It is not plausible to predict the specific cultural changes that will happen in the future but what is agreeable is that some changes will occur (Kwinter 2010).
Changes have been happening since the olden days, and it would be risky to assume that no more changes will occur. The environment in modern days will take different courses, and it only fair for humanity to reorganize the community settings to ensure a conducive coexistence with the environment. Preparations should be directed in the area of politics, social life, and economy. Putting all forms of imagination in place is necessary to ensure all disciplines are integrated into the new formations.
Architecture and the Public Realm
Architectural designs have remained visible in the public domain for years, and they always communicate different messages to the world. The major place where historical structures are manifested includes churches, arcades, temples, capitols, mausoleums, and piazzas. The different design represents various political activities, religious affiliation, and cultural beliefs. In some cases, the architectural designs were used to convey power in different settings (Milne 1981).
An example is the Gothic cathedrals of medieval Europe and ancient Greek temples of the Acropolis. The two designs are iconic, and it easy to derive the relationship between architectural design and religion or political orders of the day. In the olden days, the buildings were used to indicate different levels of civilization, and that is why architecture was an essential component in society. Architectural designs in the ancient day were known to represent an occurrence in society. This made them very strong since it was clear that the intention was to serve the public interest rather than personal interests. Other than designs, the materials were also tuned to communicate some message (Milne 1981).
In places where architectural designs represent the day's civic status, the day's authorities were involved to some extent in the design. The use of art to communicate different messages to the community was widespread in the olden days, and that is why authorities collaborated with architects to embed their beliefs in the designs. In some cases, the designs were used to show power and stability. Sometimes the authorities may change the level of access to some architectural design to preserve its history. A good example is plazas and boulevards landmarks that used to be public but are now protected by police. In other cases, individuals have privatized public landmarks to make money. It is wrong to prevent people from accessing public landmarks that hold a rich history of how life was like before them. History is the only way to helps people understand the events that happened in the past. Having a solid understanding of the past can help the public connect well with the modern world (Schaule 1991).
Architecture is used to represent different political characters in the public domain. The idea is evident in many structures, and we cannot exhaust all. The public always has a particular interest in whatever is happening in political space, as explained by Greek. Perhaps that is why politicians use the strong art embedded in architecture to sell their plan to the public. Politics is evidence in different political spaces, and architects should pass a clear message to the public. The design should attractive, and at the same time, it should hold a meaning that makes sense to the public.
A good example is the West's political war between Greece and Egypt and Athens over Thebes. These events were put in the public domain through architectural designs, and the division that existed can be seen in the designs (Milne 1981). The above example is a clear indication of architectural designs' big role in communicating different messages to the public. Despite sharing a message, the designs are attractive, and they remain attractive up to date. A powerful architectural design should aim at fulfilling the two characteristics.
Art remains very powerful when communicating to the public, and that why even musicians have borrowed some ideas from it. In the song "Apes**t - The Carters" sang by Beyonce in 2018, the artist references Louvre, a space known for fantastic art. Tracing ancient Rome and Ancient Greece is a way of reminding the public of the origin of art, which is the pillar of civilization. Black artists associate their art with ancient Egypt, which holds the richest history in Africa (Lnag 2018). Museums rarely include Egypt when highlighting black art, and it is because they consider this rich history as part of ancient Greece and Rome. Beyonce has a background in activism, and she is passionate about black art. The two pillars blended made her deliver a compelling message. The story connects with Africa's history, where innovation in the world of art was admirable.
Political influence on architecture today
Different countries have adopted a system that embraces democracy, but the facts remain, conflict of interest still exists. Interests are divided in line with profession and income classes, and it is the government's responsibility to protect the interest of each group. States use art to connect with different groups, and therefore in one way or another, they influence architectural designs to communicate their idea, but they do so with moderation (Parker 1950).
Authorities are always keen to ensure the art is not used against them. As a result, they usually attempt to influence art to their favor, with a recent case being Wellington Parliament House where there was classicism. The opportunity to vary the designs usually occurs when renovation work in different landmarks such as schools, libraries, and hospitals. The architect should have the freedom to experiment with their art in the public's best interest, and authorities should avoid having a hand in the work to ensure relevance. The collaboration of private and official architects can help advance the world of architecture to the next level. Modern designs should pave the way for civilization and should set a good precedence for the future generation. In today's world, people admire the creative work seen in traditional architectural designs, and therefore the architects should be focused on making improvements. Here a diagram of a civilized architectural design.

Figure 3: the United States, TVA dam, 1936. Architects and engineers combined their creativity to come up with this undecorated but civilized structure.
Figure 4: Democracy builds: A school in England.
Democratic states have allowed the revolution of architectural design by allowing them to apply their creativity in their plans. This is contrary to Nazi and Soviet governments, where the authorities dictate designs. States build on democracy do not even require an architect to follow a specific standard, and therefore there is no limit for creativity. Architectural designs can be used to represent political powers, popular occurrences, or even traditional happening. Allowing public members to speak through art is a great way to ensure that everybody has a chance to raise a voice. Having a platform that creates such an environment is important since the authorities can learn what is in the public's heart, and it can include it in the policies. Designs can also show creative ideas that the government can pick up to advance the economy's state. Some people hire an architect to represent their innovative ideas in architectural designs, and therefore the power of the designs cannot be underrated. (Parker, 1950). The concept of embracing freedom in the world of art can tighten the relationship between the public and authorities, and it is a great way to set a pace for future generations.
Conclusion
Modern architecture has lost its independence due to the political influence that use the money to push personal interest. The traditional designs focused on satisfying the public's desires are slowly fading away, which is unfortunate, considering the power that art has to the day's political space. In the modern world, a political hand is involved when designing and building different structures. Therefore, it isn't easy to apply a unique level of creativity. It is also worth noting that authorities sponsor many structures, and thus the final decision is always with the initiator of a particular program. This is a clear indication that politics depend on art to push the agenda, and art can visually represent different political messages.
Having too much control of architectural work limits creativity, which is not good for the public. Letting the authorities suggest a structure's design always results in biased pieces that do not represent the public interest but an individual one. It would be great if the environment allowed freedom of art with minimal disruption. Having space where individuals can freely express their ideas and thought in designs will open a room for democratic debate, which will guide the state in the next face of development. Different states will use all powers within their reach to stop freedom in design since they avoid a space where they might be criticized. Again, an open space can act as an opportunity for opposing parties to fight back. What is important is understanding the role that each of the realms should play in serving the public. It is now clear that the two disciplines are related, and it is impossible to separate art from politics.
References
Architecture Foundation, 2020, November 22. Caruso St John: Yesterday and Today - In conversation with Nana Biamah-Ofosu and Ellis Woodman. YouTube. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dpCpl-L7iNg&feature=emb_logo
Beyonce, 2018, June 16. APES**T - THE CARTERS. YouTube. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kbMqWXnpXcA
Cornea, N., 2019. Urban Political Ecology. Oxford Bibliographies Online. DOI: 10.1093/OBO/9780199874002-0203.
Goodman, P., and Goodman, P., 1947. Communitas: Means of livelihood and ways of life. New York: Vintage.
Jencks, C., 1973. Modern movements in architecture (Vol. 5). Editions Mardaga.
Kwinter, S., 2010. Notes on the third ecology. Ecological Urbanism, pp.94-105.
Lnag, C., 2018 June 19. Art History Experts Explain the Meaning of the Art in Beyoncé and Jay-Z's 'Apesh-t' Video. Time. Retrieved from https://time.com/5315275/art-references-meaning-beyonce-jay-z-apeshit-louvre-music-video/
Milne, D., 1981. Architecture, politics, and the public realm. Canadian Journal of Political and Social Theory, 5(1-2), pp.131-146.
Parker, R.S. 1950. Architecture and Politics. Design Review, Volume 3, Issue 3. pp.64
Parkinson, C.N., 1957. Parkinson's Laws. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin Co.
Schaule, P., 1991. From the arcade to the shopping mall: The transformation of public space (Doctoral dissertation).
Smith, N.K., 1966. Frank Lloyd Wright: A Study in Architectural Content. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.