Modernist architecture and town planning is inimical to human

Opening Scene – Narrated by Host

The room is softly lit, shadows stretching across the walls as the evening sets in. Jack leans back in an armchair, his hands clasped together, his mind clearly focused on something beyond the immediate surroundings. The room feels quiet, save for the faint sound of the city outside, and the occasional rustling of papers. Jeeny stands by the window, her fingers tracing the edge of the glass, gazing out into the distance. The stillness between them is thick with unspoken thoughts, until Jack finally speaks, his voice breaking the silence.

Character Descriptions

Jack: Male, around 35, tall and lean but strong. Sharp-featured face, grey eyes, low, husky voice. Pragmatic, logical, skeptical, often cynical. Speaks sharply, sometimes sarcastic, but carries hidden pain and loneliness.

Jeeny: Female, around 30, small frame, long black hair, deep brown eyes. Soft-spoken and emotional, yet fierce when defending her beliefs. Represents morality, empathy, and the power of the heart. Speaks poetically and with conviction.

Host: The narrator, an objective observer. Describes scenery, atmosphere, lighting, movements, inner emotions, and the rhythm of tension. Has a cinematic voice — like a camera lens observing the story.

Main Debate

Jack: “Modernist architecture and town planning is inimical to human beings... based on the Darwinian concept that evolution is open ended, that there must always be something new and better. Leon Krier had a point there. Modernism, in all its grandeur and minimalism, was designed to be progressive, always moving forward. But it forgets the human element, doesn’t it? It’s all about form over function, and it’s like they’ve completely overlooked the way people actually live in these spaces. Modernism was about progress, sure, but at the cost of humanity.”

Jeeny: She turns, her eyes focused on Jack, a small frown forming as she listens. “I see where you’re coming from, Jack, but isn’t that just the nature of evolution? There’s always something new, something better. Modernism was a reaction to the chaos of the past, a way of trying to move forward and create something more efficient. It was about changing how we lived, how we built for a new world. I get that it doesn’t always feel human, but progress comes with its own cost. If we’re stuck in nostalgia, stuck in the old ways, then how do we move forward?”

Host: The light from the window fades, the evening sky deepening outside as the conversation takes a more philosophical turn. Jack’s words hang heavy in the air, while Jeeny steps closer to the couch, her arms crossed, waiting for his response. The space between them feels like a conversation about not just architecture, but about the very essence of progress and humanity itself.

Jack: “I get the need for progress, Jeeny. But progress doesn’t always mean better. It’s like modernist design stripped away the parts of life that make us human — warmth, texture, individuality. It was all about efficiency and forward-thinking, but at what cost? The spaces became cold, sterile, not places where people feel truly connected or comfortable. Modernism was about what was new, not what worked for real people, not about the human scale. And that's what I think Krier meant by ‘inimical to human beings.’ It’s a style that’s meant to evolve, but maybe it leaves behind what actually makes people feel at home.”

Jeeny: “But isn't that the point? To leave behind the old to create space for the new, for the future? It’s easy to romanticize the past, but every generation is faced with its own set of challenges. Modernism wasn’t just about aesthetics; it was a shift towards efficiency, towards utility in the urban landscape. It was an attempt to solve the problems of overcrowded cities, poor living conditions, to provide people with a better standard of living. Yes, it may have been too focused on the structural aspect, but it was a move towards building something functional, something for the future.”

Host: The tension in the room builds, the differing viewpoints creating a charged atmosphere. The outside world seems distant now, as if the conversation has cast a spell of its own over the evening. Jeeny stands a little taller, her words firm but reflective, while Jack’s expression remains thoughtful, his hands resting lightly on the armrests, lost in the weight of her response.

Jack: “But that’s the thing — it’s like modernism ignored the human experience. Sure, it was functional, but did it really consider how people actually live, how they interact with spaces? I think it missed the point of humanity in architecture. I’m not saying we should go back to old designs, but maybe there’s a middle ground — a way to bring in modern technology while still creating spaces that feel human, that connect people.”

Jeeny: “I agree with you, in a way. Maybe balance is key. Modernism tried to revolutionize the way we live, but it could have done more to consider the emotional and psychological effects of spaces. Maybe the mistake was thinking that one style, one idea, could solve everything. Progress isn’t just about technology or efficiency; it’s about embracing the complexity of human needs. It’s about designing with empathy, designing for the people who actually live in these spaces.”

Host: The evening seems to slow, the conversation deepening into a more introspective space. The light from the window is now a gentle twilight glow, the city outside still, almost as if in contemplation. Jack and Jeeny sit in a shared understanding, both coming to realize that the conversation isn’t just about architecture but about how we evolve, not just in technology and structure, but in our ability to consider humanity at every step of progress.

Jack: “So, we’re saying that progress can’t be at the expense of human connection? That modernism was right in its approach to efficiency, but wrong in how it forgot people?”

Jeeny: “Exactly. Modernism had its place, but maybe we need to move forward in a way that acknowledges the emotional and social aspects of our lives. Progress should never sacrifice the human experience. It should enhance it.”

Host: The room is now filled with a quiet sense of resolution. Jack and Jeeny have found common ground, understanding that progress is not just about what is new or efficient, but about creating spaces that consider the human soul. The city outside continues its rhythm, but inside, they sit in the peaceful realization that true progress must always balance the physical with the emotional, the efficient with the human. The evening deepens, but the quiet understanding between them holds steady.

Climax and Reconciliation

Jack: “So, it’s not about rejecting modernism, but finding a way to blend the practical with the human. We can embrace new ideas, but we also need to remember what makes us human.”

Jeeny: “Yes, exactly. Progress is important, but it has to support the people it’s meant for. It has to connect with their emotional and psychological needs, not just their functional ones.”

Host: As the night settles, Jack and Jeeny sit together in a moment of quiet understanding. The world outside continues its rhythm, but inside, there is peace. Their conversation has woven a deeper recognition of how architecture — and progress itself — must always account for both the practical and the human. It is in that balance that true progress can be found.