The third-graders lay flat on the floor, looking up at the dome, 160 feet above.
What did they see, the tour guide asked?
“Stars” the children said as they examined the inner dome of the Michigan State Capitol in Lansing. The star-filled dome represents the vastness of the universe, encouraging us all to “reach for our stars,” the guide suggested
Historically, architects designed government buildings to be inspirational and aspirational – to capture a country’s legacy and ideals.
Michigan’s leaders decided in the 1990s to restore the state’s 140-year-old Capitol to its original glory, much like the project Minnesota completed in St. Paul three years ago. Stearns County’s leaders took a similar path when they decided to restore, rather than remodel or tear down, the gold-domed courthouse built in 1921. Michigan’s project reversed years of unfortunate alterations and aging.
My spouse and I toured Michigan’s Capitol while visiting one of our daughters, who is working on a doctorate at Michigan State. We joined an already scheduled tour of third-graders from Ann Arbor. With them, we learned about the history and art that creates an inspiring setting for the state’s political leaders.
While on the tour, I recalled that Donald Trump is considering an executive order that would overhaul the guidelines for federal buildings to discourage modern design and ensure that classical architectural style, inspired by Greek and Roman construction, be the preferred style for future federal buildings.
I disagree with just about every Trump policy, but this time he’s got it right. Trump’s one true talent is branding.
Visitors to Washington, D.C., are familiar with the White House, Capitol and perhaps the Supreme Court and Library of Congress. These are grand, beautiful buildings. In the federal triangle bounded by Pennsylvania and Constitution avenues, visitors find more classic buildings housing Treasury, Justice, Commerce and other federal departments and agencies. From the mid 1880s to the early 20th century, the U.S. government managed to design and erect these buildings despite the Civil War, World War I and the Great Depression.
Walking a few blocks south, beyond the Smithsonian museums and across the mall, a visitor finds a totally different world.
Instead of pillars, art and statues, massive concrete boxes house government agencies. Erected in the 1960s and 1970s to house newer or expanding federal agencies, the boring boxes are home to the departments of Energy, Education, and Health and Human Services. Perhaps if these buildings were not so oppressive and dreary, those agencies would produce more innovative policies.
When the story about Trump’s draft executive order appeared, “Making Federal Buildings Beautiful Again” (yes that’s really the title), critics pushed back, complaining it would stifle innovation and architectural experimentation. Perhaps, but Trump’s plan may also derail more ugly square boxes.
The principles that guide the design of federal buildings, written by future senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan in 1962 when he was serving in President John F. Kennedy’s administration, mandate architecture that gives visual testimony to “the dignity, enterprise, vigor and stability of the American government.” Moynihan emphasized that “an official style must be avoided. Design must flow from the architectural profession to the government and not vice versa.”
I’d prefer that future designs focus on the first part of that policy – dignity, enterprise, vigor and stability.
When future generations of third-graders tour our government buildings they will still be inspired to reach for the stars.
