William Brinkman-Clark: Rethinking Architecture's Forgotten Mandate

Throughout late-modernity, Architecture has progressively relied on scientific and technological knowledge as a means to justify itself and its projects. With some notable exceptions, aesthetic considerations have been relegated to a secondary or complementary role. Beauty in Architecture has become something that can be considered only if Reason has first solved its socio-economical requirements; and even then, we tend to frame the quest for Beauty as superficial, capricious, and banal.

Throughout Western Culture, Beauty has had an unrelinquishable part in the construction of any World deemed worthy of chasing. Architecture holds a special responsibility in these Ethics: the Vitruvian Triad does not give us a choice on whether we should incorporate Beauty into our design of the habitable world; it mandates Stability, Utility,and Beauty.

In the relation between Architecture and Migration, this forgotten mandate becomes apparent. Solving problems such as -- among others -- housing for the displaced or shelter for those in movement in a functional and economical manner is, of course, indispensable. However, Architecture must remember that Beauty it is one of the main forces that jumpstarts human movement. Aristotle speculated that only a beautiful image can move us in the direction of what is fair and just. Has that really changed? If not, Architecture must not only reconsider the importance of Beauty, it must also question who determines what is Beautiful: are we to continue pretending a few can dictate what Beauty is, or are we to open our eyes to what really moves people; to Democratic Beauty?

‍