During a recent drive through Whitefish with my children, I couldn’t help but notice the striking Whitefish Middle School just a few blocks into town. Its Art Deco-style architecture stood out against the backdrop of green grass and clean sidewalks, exuding a sense of care and precision in its design that communicates something profound to its students, teachers, and the neighborhood.
In stark contrast, a few months ago while walking through Arlington, Virginia, I was struck by the sight of an unattractive, rundown middle school that brought me to a stop. Surrounded by a chain-link fence, the cinderblock building was accompanied by broken sidewalks overgrown with weeds. The rusted playground and struggling azaleas painted a gloomy picture, reflecting a negative message to its students, teachers, and the community.
People are also reading…
Monforton Middle School in Bozeman falls somewhere in between. While the entrance is inviting with modern features like big glass windows and a farmhouse-style awning, the rest of the school is made of uninspiring cinderblock. On the other hand, the new Gallatin High School, despite its hefty price tag of $91 million and being overcrowded, resembles more of a prison than an educational institution.
Why do we settle for building unattractive and uninspiring structures to house what we claim to be our most valuable assets? Why do so many schools resemble prisons, and why do we neglect the landscapes that welcome our children every day? It seems like a cult of ugliness has taken over public architecture intentionally, and it’s both offensive and concerning.
In 1963, Congressman Syd Herlong of Florida listed “The 45 Declared Goals For The Communist Takeover Of America” in the congressional record. Goal number 22 was to “eliminate all good sculptures from parks and buildings, substituting shapeless, awkward, and meaningless forms.” This highlights a deliberate effort to remove beauty from public spaces.
Just like what is considered good, beauty is also an objective concept, not merely subjective. Features like cinderblocks and broken sidewalks do not uplift our spirits, nor do they inspire us. The Marxist ideology rejects the existence of truth, goodness, and beauty, which is why communist regimes often destroyed historical and traditional buildings in the countries they occupied.
Regardless of whether communists are directly responsible for our unattractive public buildings, it’s worth questioning why we are inadvertently aligning with their goals.
We are often told that schools only need to be functional and constructed with cost-effective materials, but that narrative falls short for me.
Montana boasts some of the most breathtaking landscapes in the nation, rivaling those of any other place on Earth. The natural beauty of our state never fails to impress me, and I believe many others share this appreciation for the environment.
As Montana continues to evolve, we should strive to construct buildings that are not only functional but also aesthetically pleasing— structures that evoke inspiration and promote themes of beauty, peace, and admiration. Perhaps schools could incorporate programs like gardening classes to instill a sense of care and appreciation for these structures.
In one of his final acts as President, Donald Trump signed an executive order banning the use of ugly architecture for federal buildings, condemning styles that deviate from traditional architectural values and principles.
The significance of beautiful buildings cannot be understated. Winston Churchill once said, “We shape our buildings, and afterwards our buildings shape us.”
Emily Daniels resides in Gallatin County and discusses the impact of her conservative values on raising three children. She is associated with the Manhattan Institute, a conservative think tank in New York City focusing on domestic policy and urban affairs such as public safety, higher education, and housing.
