After enduring decades of failed modernism, the residents and politicians of Sweden’s second-largest city, Gothenburg, want to see more new traditional architecture. This has led architects and officials to call for a crisis meeting.
During the 1960s and 1970s, Gothenburg underwent a dramatic transformation, which led to the loss of many historic buildings. This period, often referred to as the ‘Swedish demolition frenzy,’ saw local politicians proudly label the changes as ‘Europe’s largest sanitation project.’ The seeds for this radical overhaul were sown by Swedish modernists in the 1930s, who envisioned a future where the historical city centers would give way to modern conveniences such as parking garages, broader highways, and modernist suburban developments.
In Gothenburg, entire districts were razed, including Masthugget, which would likely be recognized as a world heritage site today. A significant number of the unique Landshövdingehus buildings, distinctive to the city, were also demolished. The remaining Landshövdingehus in the city today owe their survival largely to public protests.
Gothenburg Residents Stand Against the Disfigurement of Their City
Today, it’s safe to say that few residents appreciate the wave of demolitions or the modernist transformation of the city. The districts or streets that have been somewhat preserved are the most sought after by residents and tourists alike, a pattern echoed in cities across Sweden.
However, the degradation of Gothenburg’s architectural heritage continues. While entire districts are no longer being demolished, individual blocks and buildings are still being replaced by colorless and anonymous modernist structures. Officials, often architects themselves, ensure that nothing but modernist architecture is approved. There have even been instances where they have changed local plans to stop actors who want to built new architecture in the classical tradition.
The people of Gothenburg are growing weary and calls for change are becoming increasingly vocal. Numerous surveys have shown that a vast majority of residents prefer new architecture in the classical tradition over the modernist style. In 2020, a survey conducted by the University of Gothenburg revealed that a majority of supporters from each individual party in the Gothenburg City Council backed a proposal to build more in a classical or traditional style.
Top Politicians Tune In to Public Discontent
The politicians in Gothenburg have acknowledged the public’s concerns. The Social Democrats, with the support of the Left Party and the Green Party, have written into the budget that:
‘The City Building Committee is tasked, in collaboration with the Exploitation Committee and AB Framtiden, to ensure that the planning and construction of new multi-family houses maintain high architectural quality, for example through planning of classical, traditional architecture and modern Landshövdingehus.’
The overview plan contains a formulation that ‘the overall direction for Gothenburg’s urban development should be a building structure based on the traditional block city and garden city structure.’
Johannes Hulter (S) is a municipal councilor responsible for urban development issues and chairman of the city’s urban development committee:
”We want more classical, traditional architecture in the city, and it’s not just because I personally want it but because I want us to have democratic architecture.”
Johannes Hulter (S)
Architects and Academics in Crisis Meeting Over ‘Ethical Stress’
This has caused architects, builders, and academia to call for a crisis meeting. The officials feel ‘ethical stress’ over working for something other than modernism. The concept of ethical stress it defined as ‘occupational stress resulting from disparities between one’s ethical values and expected behaviors’, and is often used to describe situations found in hospitals or the military.
In this case, one could argue that ethical stress is adult language for ‘I don’t want to.’ The officials remain convinced that modernist architecture and urban planning principles are still valid, overlooking the views of residents and the decisions of elected officials.
In an article in the magazine Arkitekten, Fredrik Rosenhall from INOBI Arkitekter asserts that the conflict has been unnecessarily stigmatized and is paralyzing the industry.
Richard Stark, OkiDoki Arkitekter, also expresses his views:
“I’m a bit tired of many architects not even trying to understand what the politicians mean. If what was built had been good enough, this would have been different. Now a resistance movement has arisen at the political level that goes against what many architects have worked with for several decades. The best thing we architects can do now is to take the criticism to heart. I hope it can lead to us collectively raising the level of what is built”
Richard Stark, OkiDoki Arkitekter
From Shadows to Spotlight
Regardless of where one stands in the debate, it’s encouraging to see discussions about our shared urban spaces gaining visibility and becoming more approachable. For most people outside the profession, it has been unclear or difficult to understand why the city has changed in the way it has. The common assumption has been that any perceived decline in the city’s aesthetics was a result of practical or financial necessities.
However, it’s now becoming clear to all that these changes, often viewed as negative impacts on our living spaces, have been deliberate choices. What’s more, they have been made by officials who are tasked with doing what is best for the city—officials funded by the public purse.
My best wishes for the success of The Architectural Uprising. I have always thought of Sweden as a place that believes in a democratic and humanistic public consciousness. I worked for Lund’s stadsarkitektkontoret in 1966-67 and came to love the beautiful city of Lund. Now retired from architectural practice and from teaching in the School of Architecture, Univ. of Notre Dame, I like to think back on the wonderful quality of ‘place’ that was Lund. I am also pleased to see Sweden as leading the way to return the practice of architecture to its once deeply humanist roots.
Norman Crowe, Architect and Professor Emeritus, University of Notre Dame