The relationship between architecture and capitalism, which parametricism was premised upon, has long since faded. This is the argument put forth by Douglas Spencer, an educator, theorist, and writer on architecture, urbanism, and landscape. Spencer critiques the idea that parametricism, a theory of architecture developed by Zaha Hadid Architects principal Patrik Schumacher, can become a dominant architectural style in the 21st century. He argues that the forces of capitalism are no longer interested in the lives of the masses, and thus, parametricism's relevance is diminished.
In his critique, Spencer highlights the disconnect between Schumacher's manifesto and the actual significance of parametricism. Schumacher positioned parametricism within the avant-garde, suggesting a kinship with formal experimentation, but this fails to capture the programmatic essence of his project. Instead, Spencer argues that parametricism should be understood in the context of modernism and its correlation with contemporary capitalism. He suggests that parametricism, like modernism, advocates for the alignment of architecture with the socio-economic era of post-Fordism and neoliberalism.
However, Spencer points out that the relationship between architecture and capitalism, which parametricism was premised upon, has changed. Capitalism is now focused on accelerating inequality and maintaining unevenness, and it no longer plans to incorporate the urban masses into its operations. As a result, projects like the Dongdaemun Design Plaza (DDP) in Seoul, designed by Zaha Hadid Architects, are confined to an existence as urban relics, unable to achieve the scale and impact envisioned by Schumacher's manifesto.
In conclusion, Spencer argues that parametricism's potential as a dominant architectural style is limited by the changing nature of capitalism. He questions whether parametricism can truly address the complexities of urbanisation and the organisational ambitions it aims to achieve. This thought-provoking article raises important questions about the relationship between architecture, capitalism, and the future of urban development.
