Washington, D.C. is a complex city. However, the city is not just complex in its architectural design. It is complex in the intentions of the design: to both portray the cultural growth of Western society since the Renaissance, and to be the symbol of the United States as the new leader of the Western world’s cultural growth going forward. The design was not merely illustrated to be aesthetic, but to pay homage to an era of political and philosophical ancestry, signifying a cultural rebirth centered in a new nation, and thriving in its exemplifying nature.
The architectural design winks at the Renaissance era of Europe. This was an era studied heavily by the Founding Fathers. Democratic and individualistic philosophy became an art during this era, and the city of Washington was designed to acknowledge the architectural work of the past, while signifying that architectural work as the physical embodiment of the art that is democracy and liberty. This is why “Four of the nation’s most distinguished experts...spent seven weeks in Europe during the summer of 1901 at McMillan’s personal expense studying buildings and parks in London, Paris, Vienna, Rome, Venice, and Budapest” (Lewis, 1976, 29).
Furthermore, Charles R. McKim, a prominent planner of Washington, D.C., was heavily influenced by the Beaux-Arts. The roots of Beaux-Arts is in French culture, paying attribute to the classics. “Beaux-Arts was not so much a new style, as a method for combining ancient, Renaissance, and Baroque elements into imaginative new compositions” (Penczer, 2007, 20). McKim’s contributions to the architectural design on the city helped shape it an independent record on the timeline of Western culture, while existing as a collage of the eras that came before it.
Penczer is not the only scholar to pay attention to the influence of the Renaissance era on Washington’s architectural design. Wilson relays “Buildings, such as...the Cannon House Office Building of Washington, D.C., are creative replays of the paradigms of Italian and French palaces” (Wilson, 1983, 70).
However, the brilliant architects behind the structure of our nation’s capital city intended for their artwork to be more than a mere tip of the hat to an expired age. In discussing the impact of D.C.’s monuments on society, Savage discusses “Thus, monuments stand apart from everyday experience and seem to promise something external, akin to the sacred” (Savage, 2009, 6-7). Savage makes the dichotomy of monuments apparent. This is seen in how a moment in fleeting history becomes immortalized through architectural design, forever holding a perspective through which one may view history that is yet to be made.
Penczer also provides insight as to how D.C. becomes a piece of the future, structurally. Penczer mentions the reflecting pool being an intended piece of art in the McMillan plan: “Some of the cities most important icons, including the Lincoln Memorial and the reflecting pool, first appeared as part of the plan” (Penczer, 2007, 21). It is important to note the symbolism of the reflecting pool in front of the Lincoln Memorial as a statement that the ideology of liberty will be reflected on those that lay their eyes upon it. The reflecting pool is a turning point on the timeline of Western culture as it intends to lay the groundwork for future progress.
However, this idea that the capital city’s design was intended to not only mark history, but be a platform for the future development of Western society is not agreed on by all scholars. Clement writes, in regards to this claim, “The interpretation here is plausible, though not fresh. But in the view of Lauria’s thesis, what is wanted is evidence of whether L’Enfant’s plan reflected something more than merely a conscious translation of political symbolism into city plat” (Clement, 2011, 80). However, one may argue that the concept of the capital city’s design being meant to influence future generations, specifically when viewed through an artistic lens, is seen in Malbin’s population spreadsheet of D.C. He relays that in 1901: “City Beautiful...Turning circles into monuments” (Malbin, 2012, 1).
Washington, D.C. was intelligently crafted by well educated individuals with an educational background in not only architectural design, but philosophy, containing a nuanced appreciation for self expression, both as individuals and as representatives of a young nation’s spirit. In composing the nation’s capital, these artists also developed a timeline consisting of compounds from rock to water that tells the story of Western society before their existence, and at the same time marks its development as the first page of a new chapter for both the United States, and the Western world as it observes what the nation founded on the principle of liberty will accomplish.
Bibliography
Clement, Bell. City Thinking, City Spaces. JSTOR, 2011. Web. 23 Feb. 2017.
Lewis, David L. District of Columbia A Bicentennial History. W.W. Norton & Company, Inc.,
- Web. 23 Feb. 2017.
Malbin, M. THE U.S. GOVERNMENT AND ITS CAPITAL GROW UP TOGETHER. 2012.
Population Spreadsheet.
Penczer, Peter R. The Washington National Mall. Oneonta Press, 2007. Web. 23 Feb. 2017.
Savage, Kirk. Monument Wars Washington D.C., The National Mall, and the Transformation of
the Memorial Landscape. University of California Press, 2009. Web. 23 Feb. 2017.
Wilson, Richard G. Architecture and the Reinterpretation of the Past in the American
Renaissance. Chicago Journals, 1983. Web. 23 Feb. 2017.
Self-photographed from the Senate Minority Balcony
Zach Levitan