"Buildings should serve people, not the other way around"
About this Quote
A good building is a piece of public manners: it anticipates human need instead of demanding human submission. John Portman’s line lands because it flips a long-standing, half-acknowledged arrogance in architecture - the idea that people should adapt to the designer’s vision, navigate the grand gesture, learn the “right” way to move through space. His phrasing is bluntly moral. “Serve” implies obligation and care; “the other way around” evokes a quiet humiliation most of us recognize: getting lost in a corporate atrium, hunting for a door that feels like a secret, feeling small in a lobby that performs power.
Portman isn’t a neutral messenger here. He helped define late-20th-century American commercial architecture, famous for soaring hotel atriums that turned circulation into spectacle. That makes the quote read less like a generic human-centered design slogan and more like a self-aware defense of an era often accused of prioritizing image, retail flow, and controlled experience. The subtext: yes, architecture can be theatrical and still be humane - if the drama doesn’t come at the user’s expense.
Context matters, too. Postwar cities were reshaped by urban renewal, corporate towers, and privatized “public” interiors; people were routinely treated as foot traffic, not citizens. Portman’s sentence is a compact rebuke to that logic. It calls for buildings that respect bodies (wayfinding, comfort, access), social life (places to pause, meet, belong), and dignity (welcoming rather than intimidating). The intent isn’t to make architecture smaller; it’s to make its ambition accountable.
Portman isn’t a neutral messenger here. He helped define late-20th-century American commercial architecture, famous for soaring hotel atriums that turned circulation into spectacle. That makes the quote read less like a generic human-centered design slogan and more like a self-aware defense of an era often accused of prioritizing image, retail flow, and controlled experience. The subtext: yes, architecture can be theatrical and still be humane - if the drama doesn’t come at the user’s expense.
Context matters, too. Postwar cities were reshaped by urban renewal, corporate towers, and privatized “public” interiors; people were routinely treated as foot traffic, not citizens. Portman’s sentence is a compact rebuke to that logic. It calls for buildings that respect bodies (wayfinding, comfort, access), social life (places to pause, meet, belong), and dignity (welcoming rather than intimidating). The intent isn’t to make architecture smaller; it’s to make its ambition accountable.
Quote Details
| Topic | Wisdom |
|---|---|
| Source | Unverified source: The Architect as Developer (John Portman, 1976)
Evidence: Part 2, chapter/section titled "An architecture for people and not for things" (page number not verifiable from accessible primary scan). Multiple secondary sources attribute the exact sentence to Portman in this specific book, including a blog post that quotes the surrounding passage and explici... Other candidates (2) Joe Biden (John Portman) compilation44.4% ongress must act to codify roe and the filibuster should not stand in the way bu Buildings Should Serve People, Not the Other Way Around. ... (Quotes Lovers, 2020) compilation22.2% JUST FOR YOU ! A Simple Lined NoteBook, But the quote is Legendary Your GORGEOUS notebook by Note Lovers is here! Gre... |
| Featured | This quote was our Quote of the Day on December 21, 2024 |
More Quotes by John
Add to List





