Christopher Alexander's Utopian Blueprint
There is telling people how to live, and there is maximizing people's ability to live the lives they want.

Imagine a federation of independent regions. Each of its cities is a mosaic of distinctive, self-governing neighborhoods, where "people can choose the kind of subculture they wish to live in, and can still experience many ways of life different from their own." Homes and workplaces sit side by side, and those workplaces are a mix of owner-operated businesses and self-managed workshops. Bureaucracy is minimal, and services are administered in small offices without red tape.
Children roam the city freely, and the playgrounds are filled with raw materials for kids to build with. Instead of compulsory schooling, there are voucher-funded "networks of learning": freelance instructors, shopfront schools, apprenticeships, museums. Instead of conventional universities, there are scholarly marketplaces where anyone can offer classes to willing customers. The most important mode of public transportation is a jitney-style fleet of mini-buses. One part of town is a permanent carnival. There are public bandstands, so people can dance in the street.
It is one of the least sterile, most appealing utopian blueprints I have read—tucked away, improbably, in a book about architecture. The book is A Pattern Language, published in 1977. Six names appear on its cover, but the text is most closely associated with the first author listed: Christopher Alexander, who died in March at 85.
One thing that makes this vision so appealing is that it's less interested in telling people how to live than in maximizing their ability to live the lives they want. But it's still a blueprint, and at times it can't help feeling prescriptive.
While Alexander's thinking evolved over the course of his life, he consistently believed that good design principles are encoded in the world and waiting to be discovered. These universal patterns, he stressed, are broad principles, not rigid instructions: ideas that you can use "a million times over, without ever doing it the same way twice."
A Pattern Language lists 253 of them. It begins at the most macro level, with those independent regions, then gradually narrows its way through ever-smaller social institutions before finally discussing individual buildings. By then, the utopian speculations have given way to practical advice on shaping a comfortable living space.
Much of this advice is great. Who could deny that "young children seek out cave-like spaces to get into and under," and that a home with kids should accommodate that? Or that "cupboards that are too deep waste valuable space, and it always seems that what you want is behind something else"? (Alexander's calls for a participatory construction process are similarly attentive to human-scale touches. His 1985 book The Production of Houses recommends a "barrel of beer at the end of every operation.")
But then there's pattern number 138: "Sleeping to the East."
Don't want the sun to wake you? You're not alone: "This is one of the patterns people most often disagree with," wrote Alexander and company. "However, we believe they are mistaken." A healthy sleep cycle, they tell us, demands a solar waking.
Alexander's books do not usually take a we-know-best tone. Their general spirit is anarchistic: In 1983, Nomos magazine even reprinted part of A Pattern Language under the headline "Libertarian Architecture." As the Danish designer Per Galle once said, Alexander aimed to give nonarchitects "control over their physical environments (apparently leaving little or nothing for the professionals to do)." But if you're sensitive to sunlight or fond of sleeping late on weekends, this insistence on eastern exposure will sound awfully imperious.
The social institutions in the book sometimes veer in that direction too, with the authors offering ideas about enacting their patterns through the law. Sometimes that just means striking down existing rules or building basic infrastructure in a way that facilitates free action. But other times, A Pattern Language issues commands. Do not merely allow city land and farmland to interlock; make sure those agricultural strips are only a mile wide. Don't just avoid parking minimums; impose a parking maximum. Don't let people live in buildings more than four stories tall. Suddenly, the man searching for Platonic forms is barking orders like a Platonic government.
Alexander isn't the first thinker to get caught between the ideal of a grand system and the ideal of a spontaneous order. Fortunately, we don't have to buy the whole blueprint. Give me those bandstands and networks of learning. But on Saturday morning, let me recline in a fifth-floor bedroom facing west.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Fuck Joe Biden
That is definitely a pattern.
I'll take east-facing, not for the morning sun which I do like, but because the afternoon sun is elsewhere, letting the east side bedroom cool off for night.
And that city description -- ugh. "A mosaic of distinctive, self-governing regions" sounds like some central planner's dream, not mine. Don't pretend you're doing me any favors by setting up more choices for me. Life changes, people change, businesses change, and as long as people must be neighbors, no neighborhood will be ideal for any situation -- what may be fine today, will annoy me tomorrow and be invisible the day after. Just go away and people will work it out on their own without your cutesy kitsch prescriptions on how wide farms can be, or sidewalks, or streets, or housing lots. Don't assume your ideal playground works for anybody else, or your mix of stores and houses and shopping malls and big box stores. Just top it, go away, and we residents will figure it out ourselves.
Agreed on all points. People, and therefore neighborhoods, change. Urban "planning" assumes a static structure that does not exist.
And an east-facing bedroom is not for the light - I'm perfectly capable of sleeping with my eyes closed - but for the incremental heat.
I agree with you on all points as well. "self governing neighborhoods" is the sort of thing Libertarians are apt to buy into because Libertarians are incapable of understanding that not only is everyone not like them, there are a lot of people out there you really don't want to meet much less live next door to.
Libertarians hate zoning and land use laws. In theory, I can see why. They are abused a lot. In practice, when the truck driving hillbillies move in next door and stop mowing their lawn and park their truck on the street blocking your driveway, you really want to be able to call the cops and get the city to make them do something about it. You don't really don't want to have to confront the truck driving neighbors and get into some kind of running fight with them. You want the city to do that. Those sorts of situations never occur to Libertarians. It never occurs to them that your neighbors might not be people you want making the rules.
That's because they live in fucking bubbles, where there are no wrongthinkers.
Yes. They are always from upper middle or upper class backgrounds and have never really had any contact with the real world.
"You don't really don't want to have to confront the truck driving neighbors and get into some kind of running fight with them. You want the city to do that. Those sorts of situations never occur to Libertarians. It never occurs to them that your neighbors might not be people you want making the rules."
This is a pretty uncharitable simplification of libertarian thought. Only an anarchist has said "no controls what so ever". In general, rendering this down to as local a level as possible is the preferred course of action.
For example, even today, many of the problems people have with their neighbors aren't even rendered to the city level, they are handled by HOAs.
Libertarians don't generally disagree with governing rules. They are generally interested in making those rules as low impact as possible. That generally means rendering them as local as possible.
Being against zoning and land use laws does not make you an anarchist. Libertarians still support laws against theft and murder and such. They are not anarchists. Libertarians think everyone should be able to use their land in any way they want even if it ruins the commons and the quality of life of those around them. That is because they are incredibly naïve.
"They are not anarchists. Libertarians think everyone should be able to use their land in any way they want even if it ruins the commons and the quality of life of those around them."
That is not true at all. I am libertarian, and I specifically chose to move into a community with a covenant. And that covenant includes things like restricting what you can do with your property, as well as the management of common spaces in the neighborhood (pools, parks, etc).
There is nothing unlibertarian about agreeing to certain restrictions on your property in return for assurances that your neighbor won't open a meth lab. You can do these things without expansive zoning or land use laws.
Yes, I get the impression that Alexander wants an ordered anarchism, where he gets to do the ordering. This kind of thinking is not limited to just the utopians on the left, but also popular on the Right with many brands of Anarcho-Capitalists. The AnCaps describe in detail how such a society will be organized. Not may be, but will be. It's one reason why I don't adhere to Anarcho-Capitalism despite being fairly anarchist myself: I do not have the hubris to tell society how it must be arranged.
It's the "Man of Systems" syndrome. All utopians have it. There is this grand system and all must adhere to it. True freedom is messy, true utopia is self-organized. Emergent orders take precedence over planned orders.
There is an old saying that goes Communists believe man can be perfected by the government and Libertarians/anarchists believe man can be perfected by being left alone. There is a lot of truth to that and both propositions are equally Utopian and wrong.
If you read Alexander's books, he doesn't come across that way at all. It's more like, "Here's some useful tips I've figured out. Hope they are helpful to you."
I don't much mind Alexander. I do mind some of his followers. Ditto for Rothbard. I've run across many AnCaps who insist that universal toll roads are the way the New AnCap Utopia will handle ROADZ. Doesn't mean they would use the power of the state to enforce their Visionary Anarchotopia, but they will yell at you if you aren't fully on board their vision.
Murray Rothbard? IMHO, that dude ruined the Libertarian Party.
An excellent book and my ex-partner's bible in our construction company.
Another excellent book with a similar eye opening discussion of another facet of building is Stewart Brand's "How Buildings Learn". The premise is that despite the efforts of architects to seek perfection, all buildings change - are remodeled or added to - over time and flexibility in design should be encouraged. His classifications of building parts by use and components is more than clever. Lots of pictures and illustrations.
https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0140139966/reasonmagazinea-20/
I actually had a fascinating discussion with an architect friend about this book. Many of the concepts map quite well to work that I have done in process engineering and in software design.
If you are ever interested in theories about how these specific principles can be generalized to a sort of "Grand Universal Theory" about adaptability, you should check out another oldie-but-goodie, called "Hidden Order: How Adaptation Builds Complexity".
The author Holland looked at a lot of complex systems that seem to form standing waves- from the human body, to cities and buildings, where the parts inside those systems are constantly changing, but the wave form generally stays the same. He abstracts out several mechanisms that allow adaptive agents to adapt and cooperate in these mediums, and I think you would find that they actually are abstractions to many of the mechanisms you praised in How Buildings Learn.
Thanks Overt. I'll look for that. Sounds fascinating.
I'm reading it right now.
I just finished the new biography of Steward Brand, "Whole Earth". Which prompted me to read "How Buildings Learn" by Brand, and "Steps to an Ecology of Mind" by Gregory Bateson.
Brand's upcoming book on the subject of maintenance should be really good. It speaks to one of my current obsessions, which is how poorly made most things are made as far as being maintainable.
The social institutions in the book sometimes veer in that direction too, with the authors offering ideas about enacting their patterns through the law. Sometimes that just means striking down existing rules or building basic infrastructure in a way that facilitates free action.
Free action huh? You clearly havent seen the effects of ANTIFA BLM Anarchy. You forgot to mention how politicians can ruin cities, neighborhoods and enable violent crime to explode, literally.
Having govt housing projects less than 2 miles away, coupled with Democrats enabling ANTIFA BLM Anarchists, can "facilitate free action". An historic neighborhood replete with US Historic landmarks, well appointed Bed n Breakfasts, wooden churches, gorgeous marble monuments and scenic views, can vanish in months once set ablaze by Democrat black mayors. Richmond lost its beauty in less than 12 months in 2020. Now residents are armed to the teeth, since police do not respond to 911 calls, and dead bodies being found at sunrise on streets with "no one" having any information.
Reason spent all of 2020 cheering on Antifa and BLM while ignoring or excusing their violence. So, I wouldn't hold my breath for reason to ever acknowledge the damage they did to cities all over the country.
Wow. The vision of woke white liberal Utopia is comical.
In the next phase - Now imagine a more prosperous subcultural community rising above the others. Some subcultures around them question the fairness of that culture doing so well, while other subcultures, less utopian on seeing this disparity, rise up and attack Prosperoville. They take Prosperville's goods, rape their women and burn the place to the ground.
And one tin soldier rides away...
Or, just imagine Wokeville deciding it doesn't like what Normalville or Prosperoville are doing, and decide to start moving in in droves and destroying the subculture and insisting on "inculsion" and "equity" in all the villes.
This whole fantasy rests on the idea that people are happy to leave well enough alone and mind their own business. A good portion of people are not, which is amply evident by the way Wokeville can't just leave people alone now.
Yes, and also on the fantasy that we will all be happy when we have enough. Problem is, who defines enough, and at what point does human nature come into play.
I want yours too. And I'm bigger, smarter, prettier or better armed. What are you going to do about it?
You're talking about Asian-Americans, right?
Uh, no. But if by Asian Americans you mean the Ghengis Khan method of community building then you might be onto something.
Im just going to leave this here
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design"
That is a great quote.
Man, this thread took a turn down into MAGA paranoid insanity fast.
Puppies? What do you all think about puppies and kittens?
So skepticism about urban planning is now "MAGA"? Is there anything that isn't "MAGA" these days? Maybe it is a bad idea to make calling something "MAGA" the go to response whenever someone makes a point that you don't like but are not smart enough to give an intelligent argument against it. Just a suggestion.
"I think segregation is bad and counterproductive"
"well look at Mr Maga over here
I believe the kids these days are calling that "Ultra Maga".
I am all in favor of puppies. Much more tender than old dogs. I prefer puppy pupusas over dog pupusas any day. Puppy pupusas and kitty tacos.
OK, why the f is Trump the only President ever to not have a dog, or at least a cat?
He is probably not the only one if you go all the way through history. But if we're attaching a personal connection with having a dog, how about that special breed of animal Biden brought with him to the White House. Talk about a dog and its owner being a reflection of each other. haha.
The only other two were Polk and Andrew Johnson. (Thanks Wikipedia!)
Well done.
The university education replacement one is a pipe dream. The reasons universities are valuable is because they certify you have an education. It's why they will let you audit a course for cheap. If you don't get the certification to prove to other people that you learned about something, then you can't use that certification to leverage better wages and jobs.
Having a college degree was generally something idle rich people did before World War II. Somehow, modern civilization still was built. Indeed, none of the great innovators and titans of American industry before World War II went to college. A lot of them never went past the 8th grade. So, I am having a hard time seeing how mass university education is necessary or really even a good idea.
There are other ways to obtain an education and other means of certifying that a person has one. They are called objective reading and skills tests. The only reason businesses don't give them is because the Supreme Court outlawed them under the CRA in a case called Griggs v. Duke Power. Before Griggs, companies would give reading or IQ tests to perspective employees and then hire the smartest applicants figuring they could train smart people to do the job. After Griggs, companies couldn't do that anymore. So, they instead took having a college degree as a certification of intelligence. That is why you end up with bar tending jobs requiring a college degree and millions of young people wasting four years and tens of thousands of dollars attending college to get a job they would have gotten out of high school in the past.
Universities are just gatekeepers to education, and the quality of education isn't even that good.
Briggs v. Duke Power might be the most important Supreme Court case of the 20th Century. It had enormous and damaging effects on society. It is the reason we have a student loan crisis right now. But, it did make the colleges rich and the Court more than anything protects the gentry class, which colleges are a part of.
Partly yes, partly no. I agree with Kaplan that college degrees are mostly signalling mechanisms. However before WWII there were valid uses for college degrees. Much of engineering for example, needs training and education and the college provides that. Certifications could replace that but certifications didn't really come about until later. Formal medicals schools of the modern variety date back to the early 19th century. And they're what slowly replaced the "hand out a shingle and have a jar of leeches" model of medicine that predated them.
Some things are just more easily learned by others who know it, and universities have been one of those places that accommodates that.
Signalling is still involved. Still want to signal that you have learned something, and a degree is easier than on the job demonstration.
On the other hand, I've been in the workforce close to fifty years now, and not once have I ever been asked to produce my degree or transcript. Previous employers and references yes, but never a parchment. So Kaplan is still right in part.
And the signalling Kaplan talks about is NOT signalling of knowledge. Rather it's signalling that one can stick through four years of tedium. Which is a valuable job skill in itself.
There is a place for college. The problem is that Briggs ensured that college was the only signaling method available to young people entering the workforce and made college necessary for a ton of things that it should not have been.
"The reasons universities are valuable is because they certify you have an education"
Like Briggs I disagree. The Diploma *traditionally* proved not that you had an education, but that you had a grab bag of traits necessary to earn a diploma- ability to self organize, discipline, curiosity for knowledge, perseverance, competitive spirit, etc.
Growing up around engineers, and hiring them, I have never considered University degrees as a sign that a person was educated. Indeed, every company I have been at put its new graduate engineers through weeks to months of classes.
As the country has moved over to "everyone goes to college" we have not increased the number of people with these success traits, we have made university not require those traits. And so the diploma means less and less.
The move towards certifications does exactly what you hoped University would prove. If we can't know that a person has these success traits, we can at least know that they were able to pass a test for very specific knowledge.
As a comment on this, at an older company we were considering an applicant for an software position who had dropped out of college because he had to care for his ailing father. No one else wanted to hire him, but I argued for him as he had the skills we needed and demonstrated it with actual working software he developed on his own. The lack of a degree was irrelevant in my mind.
We ended up hiring him and he turned out to be one of our best employees.
That is an interesting story. I have always heard software development is one of the few fields were college degrees are not valued. I know several software developers who make significantly more than I do and none of them have a four year degree. All of them went to junior college and obtained a few certifications and basically went from there and trained themselves almost in their spare time and on the job. Good for you for standing up to your firm on that.
Even in "technical areas", there is a need to work with other humans. (even democrats)
When computer science degrees were first being issued, we hired a guy with a degree in systems design and a GPA of 4.0.
Give him a box of paperclips and a D-cell battery, and he could build a computer. Send him to a business unit to get specifications, and he could barely find the door. He only lasted a year, because that is how long it took to get HR to admit they made a mistake in hiring him when we specified experience, not a degree.
Along with staff meetings, people like that are one of the things I miss the least about working.
Sounds like an HOA From Hell.
You are all ignoring the fact that though competition is increasing, especially in China, the US is the top destination for engineers, medical professionals, and pure scientists from around the world to study and that still includes the Chinese. Yes, a bachelors degree alone often serves as a high school diploma used to - proof of everything Overt notes above as indicating a reasonably organized and literate person - but graduate degrees are now necessary for the next level beyond competency and universities the home for cutting edge research. Remember also that the goal of a liberal education is not the same as a trade school. Broadening of students intellectual horizons, as well as involvement with others of diverse backgrounds are of value to the individual and they, not employers, are the customers.
Last point: How many of you claiming a university education is a farce are advising your kid or grandkid to skip it? I doubt very many of you and if you do you are giving bad advice. College grads still make on average a lot more money in their life compared to those without. I write this all as a college dropout with an AA degree, but I don't suggest my path will work for many or most.
>>the playgrounds are filled with raw materials for kids to build with
we stole stuff from the housing developments and built a halfpipe and sweet treehouse in the woods.
oops wasn't supposed to be to Joe.
We did the treehouse and somehow got cigars - don't remember how. Probably stolen from somebodies father.
we stole beer, wine coolers, and amaretto lol ... why amaretto?
"A Pattern Language" is a great book.
I have been reading Steward Brand's, "How Buildings Learn", and Brand casually mentions that Alexander and his students wrote a similar book talking about office building patterns that was never published. That's a shame.
Brand was - and maybe still is at 85 or whatever he is - in the middle of a lot of things in Palo Alto, the Bay Area, Stanford over the last 50 years and Eugene with his buddy Ken Kesey. With all that, not to be stereotyped. The Whole Earth Catalog was a catalog of ideas as much as tools.
What's also kind of cool is he is on Twitter, and you can still chat with him about the ideas in his books.
Didn't know that. I know he lives on a house boat in Sausalito and has for a long time.
There are some nice ideas in A Pattern Language, but it does get into some central planning pitfalls, and practical application of the approach has resulted in 'New Urbanist' type communities, which are some of the most forced, fakest bullshit I've ever experienced. Think 'The Truman Show' but in real life.
If you're interested in a more libertarian-leaning approach to urban and suburban design and 'planning', I recommend reading two books by James Howard Kunstler:
The Geography of Nowhere (1993): Takes a deep dive into the problems of the built environment in urban and (mostly) suburban areas. Particularly looks into the root causes of why so many places appear so much the same. Everywhere is 'nowhere' now, because if you blindfolded someone and dropped them off on a typical suburban street, they would have a difficult time telling you if they were in a suburb of Chicago or Dallas.
Home from Nowhere (1996): Looks into potential solutions to the dullness of the built environment, including some pretty 'libertarian' ideas, like abolishing zoning laws:
"Therefore, if you want to make your communities better, begin at once by throwing out your zoning laws. Get rid of them. Throw them away. Don't revise them. Set them on fire if possible and make a public ceremony of it - public ceremony is a great way to announce the birth of a new consensus. While you're at it, throw out your 'master plans' too. They're invariably just as bad."
And reducing or eliminating property taxes:
"Our system of property taxes may be the single most insidious, pathogenic factor contributing to the geography of nowhere. [. . .]
Under this system, a rational person has every reason to put up crappy buildings that will not be highly assessed, or he has every reason to let his property run down, or build nothing at all. This is a major reason for the current desolation of American towns and cities."
Alas, automobiles controls American development and is almost guaranteed to be ugly and tension producing with no-man's lands between destinations. New urbanism sought to curb that with various tricks like on-street parking, retail on the ground floor and apartments above, but it rarely works because automobiles.
Also, we have homogenization of culture through TV, internet, etc so regions have little unique culture and with central heat and air we have universal living environments with less need for regional architecture. The triumph of big box stores and restaurants means little regional cooking. I don't think we can expect regionalism in a nation without regional differences.
By the way, with the disappearance of local newspapers, no one knows what their state governments are doing and are much more likely to follow national politics and know their Congressional delegates than their state representative and senator. Interesting article I read on the appearance of confederate flag now in places that contributed heavily to the Union war dead.
Another interesting book is “Land Use without Zoning”. It’s long out of print, and may describe a Houston that doesn’t exist anymore, but it does lay out a good case for why land use will tend to evolve naturally to have all the features that virtually every city tries to force with zoning laws.
Houston is pretty famous in Urban Design circles for having one of the shortest average age for buildings in its downtown. Most of them are less than 20 years old. (Or were, the last time I took an Urban Planning class, which was ~ 20 years ago).
I'll have to look into Land Use without Zoning.
Seems to still be available:
https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1538148633/reasonmagazinea-20/
Oh, good. I still have a copy, I think.
Imagine some of those "distinctive, self-governing neighborhoods" and "subcultures" are Christian conservatives whose self-governance outlaws abortion and homosexuality within their community (if you practice them, you either get penalized or exiled). Still find this "utopian blueprint" appealing?
That "utopian blueprint" is little different from the utopia communists envision: individual liberty with complete disregard for the wishes, aspirations, and economic realities of real people.
You're showing your true colors.
That "utopian blueprint" is little different from the utopia communists envision: individual liberty with complete disregard for the wishes, aspirations, and economic realities of real people.
Vouchers, looser zoning, and more decentralized government are "little different from the utopia communists envision"? You learn something new every day.
But yes: There are places where Alexander stops calling for more freedom and starts calling on the government to impose his own preferences, and I disagree with him when he does that. Close readers will describe this as "the point of the fucking article."
"Suddenly, the man searching for Platonic forms is barking orders like a Platonic government."
There's a little bit of me in every one of you
Archie Bunker
Nothing gets me more spooked than talking about Utopia. One should be careful of a developing libertarian politic spreading too much into a more general libertarian world view. I think there are moral tenets to libertarianism that come out, I do not think there are aesthetic ones.
College is a four year rumspringa. Sometimes five. Sometimes six. It's a period of time for the academically-inclined 18 year old (who is not the adult he would have been in, say, 1944) to have a fuckton of fun, sports, drugs, alcohol, sex, and friendships, before becoming a boring adult of 22-23. Mixing in a LITTLE learning along the way. Except for engineering majors, they mix in a lot of learning.
Our society is rich enough for families or the government to subsidize rumspringa for about half the population. By the way, the other half, who spent this same time period in the military or on construction or working at Wal-Mart, is going to be REALLLLLLLY resentful that they will pay for the other half's rumspringa, when student debt is cancelled. As well they should be.
So, has this dude read Snow Crash or the Diamond Age?
Because burbclaves are totally a thing and I somehow think the bizarre dystopic versions are more likely than any sort of urban paradises.
It’s more likely there was influence the other way around, with Neal Stephenson reading Christopher Alexander.
Considering that A Pattern Language came out in 1977 and Snow Crash and The Diamond Age were published in 1992 & 1995, you may be on to something . . .