ABSTRACT
The state is an assemblage of statutes and standards, of stations and stages, that
stabilize practices of power in space and over time. This reiteration of the root sta
(to stand) is not accidental; the stability of the state has long gone hand in hand
with an architecture that stands for authority with its statues and stabilizing
images. The state has stamina, staying power; its various chambers and court-
rooms are stages for the practice of authority. The various branches of govern-
ment are organized in a tree-like structure where the uniforms and letterheads
resonate with the palaces, houses of parliament and courthouses to legitimate
authority. I have argued elsewhere that authority sits alongside force, coercion,
manipulation and seduction as primary but overlapping dimensions of power as
mediated by built form (Dovey 2008: 14). Authority is defined by unquestioned
compliance and is the most efficient means of social control. If we are arrested
by the police we may argue about whether we have broken the law, but if the
trappings of authority are evident (car, badge, hat) we do not argue the right of
the state to enforce the law. Authority is the most pervasive, reliable, productive
and stable form of power, yet it needs both the trappings of legitimating imagery
and the coercive threat of force – the ‘right’ of authority is underwritten by the
‘might’ of force. The key linkage to place identity here is that authority becomes
stabilized and legitimated through both spatial rituals and the architectural
framing of them. Symbols and rituals of legitimation are effective because one
cannot argue with them; they are the way things are done around here. In this
regard architecture has a particular capacity to serve this legitimation imperative
with spatial assemblages that celebrate and reproduce spatial rituals, symbolize
the authority of the state and also embody a sense of intimidation or threat of
force in the event of non-compliance.
