Life has a funny way of taking the odd turn now and then. This would be one of those “now” times.
This week’s blog was supposed to be about the importance of speaking out—about how the queer community cannot be silent in the current political climate, and about the risks we face by staying quiet. Even better, I was prepared to tie that back to the Silence = Death poster from the AIDS crisis and the No Kings protests.
But then Pumpkin Spice Palpatine decided to level the East Wing of the White House.
Well, shit.
Because this act of wanton ego has now created so many questions and so many issues that any self-respecting architect cannot ignore it.
First and foremost, my LEGO White House set is ruined. What am I supposed to do with that now? There’s a whole section that no longer exists. Do I throw it out? Do I keep it for nostalgia purposes? Will LEGO release a new set that’s just the god-awful ballroom? Millions of LEGO enthusiasts will want to know. Knowing Humpty Trumpty, he’ll probably try to partner with LEGO to offer a gold-plated version complete with a miniature box of Epstein files.
Second, as an architect, I would like to know how any self-respecting architect can willingly be involved in this fiasco. Look at what’s left of McCrery Architects’ website (now reduced to just a landing page), and their experience in classical architecture is evident. But as classical architects—or just as architects—who at that firm thought designing a structure of this size for the White House, not to mention Captain Cankles, would be appropriate? Or that ripping down a historic structure made sense?
This didn’t happen in a vacuum—or overnight. People at McCrery knew what was going to happen with the East Wing. Dollars to donuts, the ballroom plans have been in the works since the last go-round of the administration. That they were kept under wraps for that length of time is impressive. But no one in the firm—even at the lowest level—thought about how inappropriate the plans are? Is the NDA I’m sure they were required to sign so scary that no one was willing to spill the beans?
Finally, I have to wonder what dollar amount is required to sell your soul. If the right figure came along, would I be willing to toss out any ethics or morals and accept the project? Looking at The Line project in Saudi Arabia, architects didn’t appear to give a second thought to the country’s history of human rights abuses. Instead, they were more concerned about image—and no doubt money—when they should have been concerned about what their involvement says about the architecture profession.
We are stewards of the built environment. Also, as members of professional architecture organizations, we are bound by a code of ethics. We know better—or we should. That any firm was willing to overlook the implications of the new ballroom does not speak well of who we are as professionals, or what we’re willing to do for money and fame.
Such a shame.
