University of Tennessee, Knoxville TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Doctoral Dissertations Graduate School 5-2012 FORM FOLLOWS VALUES. Explaining Embassy Architecture Natasha Dimitrova Guenova Natasha D. Guenova, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_graddiss Part of the International Relations Commons Recommended Citation Guenova, Natasha Dimitrova, "FORM FOLLOWS VALUES. Explaining Embassy Architecture. " PhD diss., University of Tennessee, 2012. https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_graddiss/1298 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Doctoral Dissertations by an authorized administrator of TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a dissertation written by Natasha Dimitrova Guenova entitled "FORM FOLLOWS VALUES. Explaining Embassy Architecture." I have examined the final electronic copy of this dissertation for form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the equirr ements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, with a major in Political Science. Bruce E. Tonn, Major Professor We have read this dissertation and recommend its acceptance: Patricia K. Freeland, David J. Houston, Robert E. Jones Accepted for the Council: Carolyn R. Hodges Vice Provost and Dean of the Graduate School (Original signatures are on file with official studentecor r ds.) FORM FOLLOWS VALUES Explaining Embassy Architecture A Dissertation Presented for the Doctor of Philosophy Degree The University of Tennessee, Knoxville Natasha Dimitrova Guenova May 2012 To Prof. Harold D. Lasswell, for whom policy and architecture were tools for realizing the ―the human dignity.‖ ii Acknowledgements I would like to express my appreciation and gratitude to all, who in different ways have assisted me in the completion of this dissertation. My advisor, Prof. Bruce Tonn, for his assistance, patience and kindness. Members of the committee: Prof. Patricia Freeland, Prof. David Houston and Prof. Robert Jones for their time and constructive criticisms. The political scientists, whose work I have used profoundly: Prof. Charles Goodsell, Prof. James Mayo and Prof. Craig Webster. The scholars, Ron Robin and Jane Loeffler, whose works on American embassies became the reason for the development of this project. Prof. Blagovest Valkov, who inspired me in examining the politics-architecture nexus long time ago and who – with his students – assisted immensely with the survey. My colleagues Nurgul R. Aitalieva and Yongjae Lee for their assistance and support. All the respondents, who took the time to complete the survey and without whose assistance this study could not have been completed. iii Abstract What influences the embassy architecture as expression of political values? For a cross- section of fifteen countries, the author performs linear regression analysis for fifty one embassies from 15 countries in 30 host countries. The measurements for the political values, reflected in embassies, were derived from a specially designed and conducted survey, for which 138 respondents from 14 countries rated buildings on the four political values of tradition, innovation, wealth and security. As explanatory variables, the analysis takes into account the wealth of both countries owning and hosting the respective embassy, domestic politics of the owner country, culture and regionalism. This examination of embassies demonstrates that political values can be measured and thus empirically examined, explained and predicted by different objective factors as well as by cultural affiliations. The major contribution of this study is the empirical support for the designed model for deriving stable measurements of political values. Values expressed in political architecture have the potential to support existing relations, to influence changes in behaviors, processes and activities and even to influence social and political change. The major finding of this study is that the wealth of host country is the single most important predictor of embassy design as reflection of values. Limitations for this study may be considered the use photographs as proxies for embassies, the comparatively small sample size and its Eurocentric focus. Despite these limitations, this study holds promise for a fruitful research agenda for examining first, how and why values change over time; second, how architectural forms support old or influence the occurrence of new and different values and third, if architecture matters, an empirical study of individual perceptions may reveal how architecture is important for different people. While there is substantial scholarship on the politics- architecture nexus, this study compliments this impressive scholarship, demonstrating that values reflected in and through architecture can be examined and measured empirically, and thus predicted by external factors. While values exist throughout all human activity, in architecture they are ―frozen‖ and thus amenable to solid scientific examination because the function of political architecture is politics and the form is value-laden. iv Table of Contents Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................................ iii Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... iv List of Tables ................................................................................................................................ vii Chapter 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1 1.1. Embassy Architecture Matters ............................................................................................. 2 1.2. Thesis Statement and Research Question ............................................................................ 6 1.3. Research Methods ................................................................................................................ 8 1.4. Conclusions, Limitations and Dissertation Outline ............................................................. 9 Chapter 2. Political Architecture................................................................................................... 12 2.1. Architecture Defined .......................................................................................................... 13 2.2. Architecture Matters .......................................................................................................... 19 2.3. The Politics-Architecture Nexus Is about Values .............................................................. 23 2.3.1. Architecture as power ................................................................................................. 25 2.3.2. As political authority................................................................................................... 30 2.3.3. As national representation........................................................................................... 38 Chapter 3. Explaining Embassy Architecture: Form Follows Function ....................................... 46 3.1. Explaining form and function ............................................................................................ 47 3.2. Explaining Architectural Functionalism ............................................................................ 49 3.3. Explaining Values .............................................................................................................. 52 3.3.1. Theory of Integrated Value Systems........................................................................... 55 3.3.2. Theory of Intergenerational Value Change ................................................................. 58 3.4. Explaining Embassies ........................................................................................................ 62 3.5. Explaining embassy architecture ....................................................................................... 67 Chapter 4. Methods ....................................................................................................................... 84 4.1. Architecture as Data ........................................................................................................... 84 4.2. In search of a method ......................................................................................................... 90 4.3. Sample of photographs as proxies of embassies ................................................................ 94 4.4. Variables: definitions and measurements .......................................................................... 97 4.4.1. Dependent Variables ................................................................................................... 98 4.4.2. Independent variables ............................................................................................... 112 4.5. Analysis techniques ......................................................................................................... 115 Chapter V. Analysis .................................................................................................................... 117 5.1. Descriptive statistics .......................................................................................................