WAKE FOREST -- When architect Brian Shawcroft arrived in Raleigh in 1960 to teach at N.C. State University's School of Design, the M.I.T. graduate must have wondered, as many newcomers do, whether good design was important to those who paid for state buildings.
"It was very minimal, with a few surprises here and there," the 80-year-old says today.
With the exception of the neoclassical 1840 State Capitol by Ithiel Town, Alexander Jackson Davis and David Paton, a newcomer has to look hard for examples of good design.
The Capitol sits at the center of five squares drawn up in 1792 by a Franklin County surveyor and state senator, William Christmas. He called Union Square "a beautiful eminence which commands a view of the town," using an adjective rarely applied to state designs today.
After World War II, the School of Design ambitiously worked to bring architecture here up to modern standards. One revolutionary example is Matthew Nowicki's Dorton Arena, completed by William Deitrick in 1953. A brilliant and economical solution to the challenge of creating a large space with a dynamic, iconic form, it's now on the National Register of Historic Places.
By 1963, Edward Durell Stone, who designed New York's Museum of Modern Art, unveiled his N.C. State Legislative Building, developed with Holloway Reeves Architects. Controversial then and now, it's still a heroic gesture that boldly heralds the advent of urban influences in state politics and culture.
These architects and designers understood that the buildings we leave for future generations are indicators of our character. They tell our descendants what we believe to be important. Their designs are windows into our collective soul.
But what has happened to state architecture since 1963? One need only look north of Stone's legislative building -- at the five banal structures flanking and terminating its sterile plaza -- to know that something's gone awry. Put another way, who stole Carolina's design mojo?
The answers lie within the dynamics of culture and politics here.
It has been some time since state architecture has had a champion for beauty. That role requires a 21st century Jeffersonian persona -- an agrarian who understands the rural interests of the legislature, a politician willing to take risks for well-thought-out urban planning and an enlightened mind to advocate and demand good design. These are characteristics hard to find in one group today, let alone in one person.
Then there's the architect selection process -- ideally, one that focuses not just on the state as client and an agency as user, but also on the interests of citizens in the beauty of their buildings. They are, after all, paying for them. Beautiful buildings come from an accountable and transparent leadership demanding a holistic approach from planners, architects and engineers.
North Carolina is a thrifty client when it comes to architecture, and it should be. But almost any architect will acknowledge that an aesthetically pleasing building need not cost more than a mundane one. Aesthetics simply require more careful analysis at the front end of the budget, design and selection processes.
Today, a new generation of designers is flocking to North Carolina for its architecture schools and opportunities. Some are committed to moneymaking, and others to place-making. It's the talent and passion of the latter group that can benefit our state buildings most, because they believe first in making a meaningful and attractive impact on people's lives.
In the past 200 years, North Carolina has been known for innovative architecture. In recent decades, we've steered toward safe and maintainable state buildings, with budgets serving as primary drivers. But when a state commits itself to pleasing architecture, urban property values go up. The tax base increases. Cities become more desirable for citizens and tourists, enhancing civic pride.
So how might we find a path leading to beautiful state buildings?
Architects might consider an annual coaching session for legislators at the start of the General Assembly, to bring them up to speed on the benefits of good design. Selection committees for state buildings might be expanded to include respected, independent architects known for excellent work. And citizens might give thought to what makes a building both enduring and beautiful -- and make their opinions and inspiration known to the media and their leaders.
But ultimately, as Shawcroft says, the state must take the lead. "It can show the way, in context and in energy conservation, in aesthetics and in delight."
The citizens of North Carolina deserve nothing less.
