Architectural Design Choices and the Perceived Phallus-Shaped Headquarter of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints

For years, there has been a persistent and somewhat scandalous debate surrounding the design of the Church Office Building, headquarters of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, built in the 1960s. Some observers have claimed that this iconic building bears a striking resemblance to a phallic symbol, sparking conversations about architectural design choices, gender, and cultural sensitivity.

Architectural Context and Design Philosophy

It is crucial to understand that the architectural design of the Church Office Building, along with many other skyscrapers built during the 1960s, was deeply rooted in a utilitarian philosophy. During this era, the prevailing design consideration was often centered on maximizing space and achieving structural stability, rather than creating aesthetically provocative forms.

The Church Office Building is an excellent example of the design philosophy of the times. Like the aforementioned London skyscraper constructed in the early 2000s, it exemplifies the practical approach to urban planning and space optimization. Skyscrapers are naturally tall and slender due to their structural advantages. Vertically oriented forms are inherently stable and efficient, allowing for the maximum use of vertical space which is often a premium in urban environments.

Common Architectural Design Patterns

Many tall buildings, including the Empire State Building, the Smith Tower in Seattle, and a North Carolina building, share a common phallus-like shape. This shape is not a mere coincidence but a result of specific design principles rather than deliberate symbolic intent. These structures are tall and narrow, which provides multiple advantages:

Maximized Volume: The vertical form allows for an efficient use of the limited vertical space available in urban settings, thereby maximizing the interior space. Structural Stability: The slender design is inherently more stable, which is crucial in high-rise buildings subject to wind forces and other external pressures. Construction Efficiency: Such forms require less material and are easier to construct, providing both practical and economic benefits.

Nature, too, follows similar principles in the design of phalluses, suggesting that functional necessity rather than symbolism dictates such forms.

Cultural Sensitivity and Architectural Intent

The perception of the Church Office Building as a phallic symbol seems to stem from a more modern, and perhaps more sensitive, view of architectural forms. However, it is important to recognize that the architects who designed this building did so with careful consideration of functionality, safety, and the overall urban landscape, not with any deliberate use of symbolism.

It is always beneficial to ask "What was the thinking behind this?" as it can reveal the underlying architectural decisions and principles that shape our built environment. In this case, the design was likely driven by practical considerations rather than any form of intentional symbolism. The shape of such buildings is a result of complex engineering and design principles that prioritize function over form.

Conclusion

The Church Office Building, like many high-rise structures, is a product of its time and location. The shape may not have been consciously designed to resemble a phallic symbol, but it is a natural result of architectural and engineering principles. Understanding the context and purpose of such designs helps us appreciate the complexity and thought that goes into creating our urban landscapes.