In February, Amazon announced its latest design for a $2.5 billion headquarters in Arlington, "the Helix." Once visual renderings for the campus were released, the architecture community was quick to respond. Besides heavy criticism of its overall design, discussion regarding its surrounding public space was soon questioned. Architecture critic Kate Wagner addresses the long-rivaled issues between big tech corporate campuses and their intentionality behind fostering a so-called "engaged environment" with public space.
Her article in The New Republic, "How Big Tech Devours Public Space, " assesses large tech companies like Amazon and their double-sided plans to create spaces available for public use. She explains, "Amazon is presenting the Helix as a companion structure to 'the Spheres,' the indoor gardens at its Seattle headquarters. But as a space of consumption and leisure, the Helix actually resembles a lot of classic starchitecture. It is a towering, glass-clad, tree-dotted bauble. The press release announcing its construction comes littered with all the rhetorical bells and whistles of contemporary architecture: The building was designed to foster a sense of community engagement; it will also be sustainable, infusing 'nature into the urban landscape' with 'lush gardens and flourishing trees native to the region.'"
The Helix embodies much of the cynicism of both public relations and architecture. It is a “landmark” that is closed off, isolated, and policed—an architectural testament to corporate power. - Kate Wagner
Comparing the Helix to "landmarks" like the Vessel and other "community engagement" projects like Sidewalk Labs' failed vision for Toronto, Wagner does not mince words when identifying the insufficient and short-sightedness many of these development projects have. "Although Amazon claims to be integrating nature and the community, the Helix, like the Spheres, is not a public park. It is not even a public space in the common sense of the word because access is strictly and privately controlled", she states. "The Helix embodies much of the cynicism of both public relations and architecture. It is a "landmark" that is closed off, isolated, and policed—an architectural testament to corporate power."
The discourse between public and "privately owned public space" is nothing new. Projects like the Helix will continue to appear along with pitches hoping to activate communities and "drum up goodwill." Concise and revealing, her notes and criticism towards big tech giants like Amazon and their attempts to market themselves as companies for the people paint a digestible overview of private enterprises and their attempts to control the built environment. She adds, "the truth is, Amazon's goal is not to be of the city, but to be the city—to control the commons and the land it sits on."
5 Comments
her critiques are as shallow as the architecture.
honestly the public doesn't deserve space
If the NYT wasn't such a neoliberal pile of shit, Kate Wagner would be the architecture critic there.
Big tech occupying and claiming public space as their own is what's wrong with our time.
Arlington, Virginia, is Le Corbusier's Ville Radieuse all grown up. Nothing, but nothing, could make it any worse.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.