President Donald Trump’s reinstatement of the ‘Promoting Beautiful Federal Civic Architecture’ memorandum has sparked controversy over its potential impact on creative freedom and architectural styles.
Since humans first built permanent settlements, architecture has been a powerful tool for communicating authority and ideologies. Rulers across millennia have sought to shape national identity through construction—the ‘architecture of power‘ has long served as a vital tool for authorities to influence public opinion, convey values, and mold cultural mindsets.
The architecture of power refers to the physical and symbolic structures that embody a nation's authority, influence, and control.
It encompasses various elements such as government buildings, monuments, infrastructure, and institutions that represent a country's power and prestige.
The architecture of power can be seen in iconic landmarks like the White House in Washington D.C., the Eiffel Tower in Paris, or the Forbidden City in Beijing.
These structures not only serve functional purposes but also symbolize a nation's history, culture, and values, reflecting its rise to prominence on the world stage.
The use of classical styles in architecture has often been employed by dictators to shape national character. For instance, when Mussolini and Hitler rose to power, they both sought to shape national identity by calling for a return to Classical styles that referenced the monumental construction of ancient Greece and Rome. ‘We build in order to fortify our authority,’ said Hitler, who commissioned Albert Speer to plan Germany‘s new capital. Mussolini used the classical motif and identification with ancient Rome to frame his fascist regime as the rightful heir to the Roman Empire.
A dictator is a ruler who has complete control over a government and its citizens, often using force and intimidation to maintain power.
Dictators typically arise in countries with weak institutions or unstable governments.
They often use propaganda to promote their own image and ideology, suppressing opposition and dissent.
According to a study by the University of Maryland, 141 out of 167 countries (84%) experienced some form of authoritarian rule between 1946 and 2002.
The average lifespan of a dictatorship is around 15 years.
Concerns Over Trump’s ‘Classical’ Mandate
In light of such historical precedents, some individuals and groups have raised concerns about President Donald Trump‘s reinstatement of the ‘Promoting Beautiful Federal Civic Architecture‘ memorandum—a 2020 executive order mandating the use of a ‘classical style’ that ‘commands public admiration.’ The memorandum recommends advancing ‘a policy that Federal public buildings should be visually identifiable as civic buildings and respect regional, traditional, and classical architectural heritage in order to uplift and beautify public spaces and ennoble the United States and our system of self-government.‘
A presidential mandate refers to a president's authority and power to implement policies and laws.
Donald Trump's mandate was based on his 2016 electoral victory, where he won 304 electoral votes compared to Hillary Clinton's 227.
This gave him the necessary support to fulfill his campaign promises and legislative agenda.
However, Trump's mandate was also marked by controversy and opposition from Democrats and some Republicans.
Despite this, he was able to pass several significant laws, including tax reform and judicial appointments.
The American Institute of Architects (AIA) has warned that the executive order poses a direct threat to creative freedom. ‘AIA is extremely concerned about any revisions that remove control from local communities; mandate official federal design preferences or otherwise hinder design freedom; and add bureaucratic hurdles for federal buildings,’ the organization declared in a January 21 statement.
The Vagueness of ‘Classical’ Architecture
But what, exactly, constitutes these ‘American classical traditions‘? The order conveniently sidesteps the fact that early U.S. architecture was little more than a Neoclassical remix of Andrea Palladio‘s work—filtered through 18th-century British tastes and the Romantic revival of an idealized classical past. Palladio himself, the official architect of the Venetian Republic, was already working off the Roman playbook, adapting it to the needs of his time.
The founding fathers, including Thomas Jefferson, found in Palladio‘s Four Books on Architecture a style they felt could convey a sense of balance and harmony in a country that was at the time troubled by ongoing division. That’s why the White House is draped in Neoclassical grandeur that draws from the Palladian vocabulary.
However, the executive order’s definition of ‘Classical‘ is vague at best and confusing at worst, encompassing Georgian, Greek Revival, Gothicism, Beaux-Arts, and Art Deco styles before broadening even further to specify that ‘Traditional architecture‘ includes all ‘the historic humanistic architecture,’ from Gothic and Romanesque to Pueblo Revival and Spanish Colonial—anything, really, so long as it predated the modernist era.
A Threat to Creative Freedom
The order specifically calls out the Brutalist style, which grew out of the early 20th-century modernist movement and became very popular in the postwar race for urbanization and production. The order outright forbids the ‘Deconstructivist‘ style, which emerged in the late 1980s as a radical break from architectural orthodoxy.
For decades, the U.S. government has favored a more flexible approach to architecture. The Guiding Principles for Federal Architecture, published in 1962, encouraged modernist styles over classical pastiche, arguing that government buildings should reflect contemporary design rather than be locked in historical mimicry. The recently released memorandum calls for revisions to the Guiding Principles that would significantly narrow the scope of the kinds of buildings capable of ennobling the United States.
The reinstatement of Trump‘s ‘classical‘ mandate has raised concerns among architects and historians, who worry about the potential impact on creative freedom and the homogenization of architectural styles. As one historian noted, ‘Architecture is not just about aesthetics; it’s also about politics and power.‘
