By continuing to use the site you agree to our Privacy & Cookies policy

Your browser seems to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser.


Your browser is no longer supported

For the best possible experience using our website we recommend you upgrade to a newer version or another browser.


Libeskind: nothing but a populist in academic clothing?


Daniel Libeskind has assumed his rightful place in the architectural firmament: a showman, a populist and a public relations dream.The Libeskind who has been liberally splattered across the media over the past eight days is a slap-happy mish-mash of prodigious genius, personal tragedy and snappy soundbite.Little wonder that several publications have eschewed the usual photographic portrait in favour of a caricature.

This is a man who bears little or no resemblance to the Libeskind who, until recently, enjoyed a reputation as the thinking architect's architect, a pioneer at the vanguard of architectural theory.Armed with a serious academic career and a portfolio of impenetrable line drawings dotted with snatches of Dadaist text, he was one of a select band of thinkers deemed too brilliant to convey their ideas to less educated minds.

Yet here he is, single-handedly transforming sections of the media into a 'bluffer's guide'to architectural theory.Overnight, vast sections of the populace have become au faitwith the symbolic use of light and shade, the use of form as metaphor, even elementary mapping - think of the 'Paths of Heroes', a permanent record of the routes taken by New York firemen during the rescue operation.Libeskind has tapped into the popular conscience with a collection of gimmicks so blatant as to be verging on kitsch. Could it be that he has managed to design a building that, like the stories of CS Lewis or JRR Tolkien, can be read at two levels: a simplistic fantasy that is masterfully grafted on to an exploration of lofty ethical concerns? Maybe, maybe not. I have heard Libeskind talk theory to a supposedly 'knowing' audience on numerous occasions and have never understood a word he's said.Obfuscation, in academia in general and in architecture in particular, is often a smokescreen for either incoherence or simplicity. It could well be that the layman's understanding of Libeskind's ideas is pretty much all there is - and that the need to garner widespread appeal has forced the revelation that his true genius lies simply in tapping into popular opinion and translating into a suitably populist response.

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment.

The searchable digital buildings archive with drawings from more than 1,500 projects

AJ newsletters