I fear that most of my reading responses are very reactionary forms of “oh my god how could this be happening?” I do not think I’m cut out for sociology. But seriously, how far are we from the kind of ghettoization of arab communities during the Algerian war being applied to social classes? What struck me most in this article, for whatever reason, was the focus on Gehry’s neoconservative architecture. I’d never thought about architecture as a basis for division—it just never occurred to me. I’ve always seen architecture as more or less innocuous—utility over form and whatnot—but the amount of thought put into making these buildings as uninviting as possible for those of the lower-classes is sickening and mind-boggling. It’s classism being literally built into the foundation of a city—how much further from egalitarianism can we get? Even if these class divides were solved, these buildings would remain like grim reminders. But this has me thinking: what does egalitarian architecture look like? I can see why vertical facades and fortress-like premises are the domain of classist architecture, but does architecture exist for the cohabitation of classes? What does that look like? How does it function? My mind immediately brings up the image of large, very horizontal designs that might take up more room than anyone would benefit from, but surely this is a thing that’s been talked about, right? Please tell me there is architecture designed for class integration. Please.