A skyscraper is not aspirational architecture. It’s like an XXXL soda cup at a convenience store. The outrageous size distracts you from how soulless it is. Its merit is an efficient use of space. But what if it’s a symbol for an underlying culture? A Ferrari for the financial elite of a city.

I find skylines define cities. The silhouettes of skyscrapers are what separate metropolitans from suburbs. Growing up in Hong Kong, I saw skyscrapers as the celebrities of the concrete jungle. It seemed buildings wanted to look like it and people aspired to work in them. I saw them as symbols of power and money. I wanted to work in one too. 

The Mid-life Skyscraper

Ferraris or Lamborghinis are the same. I don’t think guys would drive it if they didn’t care for what it symbolized. If the commercial for a Toyota Corolla had women in bikinis surrounding a muscular hunk who told you making a value purchase was cool, more people in finance would buy Corollas. But the ad shows a mom with two kids or a balding father with a belly for reliability. There is nothing shiny, wowing, or desirable about that. Is that why financial centres are defined by skyscrapers and vice versa?

Finance is a mixed pit of testosterone, aggression, Type-A, materialism, speed, risk, and ego. Any field dominated by men will inevitably have dick-measuring contests. A figurative gesture of comparing titles, salaries, cars, and business cards — ahem..Patrick Bateman..ahem. 

A Freudian lens would say this is all for sex. I should’ve written my greek philosophy paper on how skyscrapers are the literal erected phallic symbols of men — predominantly in finance. I don’t know why but most skyscrapers have the names of banks, accounting firms, consulting firms, law firms, and investment funds. I’ve worked for and with all of them and they’ll all the same shit, just different shapes. 

Skyscrapers and Underlying Culture

Skyscrapers don’t don the skyline of Paris, London, Zurich, Berlin or Vienna — though they are metropolitan cities. They, however, live in NYC, Toronto, Tokyo, Seoul, Shangai, Hong Kong, Dubai, and Abu Dhabi. I have to ask, is it a difference between old versus new money? The wealth in Europe appears to be generational from aristocracies and family-owned businesses. Whereas most in Asia and North America are the result of adopting capitalism in the last century.

I would think cities that sprout more "spires of wealth" to be the place of economic growth. Isn’t it fair to assume prosperity in cities building skyscrapers to fit more people to get more economic value? A virtuous cycle of growth. But I hesitate to group it with a city exploding with innovation and creativity. Both traits I find many cities aspire to have.

Skyscrapers are the embodiment of efficiency. Glass factories furthering the industrialization of labour moving from the factory to the keyboard. A world for rationalists focused on self-preservation, not optimism. 

It’s a world of quick and sure wins. But groundbreaking work is uncertain and requires lots of trial and error. It requires the patience and self-awareness that runs contrary to the culture that loves skyscrapers. 

You often hear a bank or consulting firm say they are innovative. Do you trust a person that has to advertise their honesty? When my girlfriend says “I’m fine”, I know she is not. 

Skyscraper folk want quick wins. They think with the head between their legs and not the one on their neck. That’s why they erected their metal dick. 

It runs opposite to creative and aspirational work. I would guess that kind of work happens in cities with few skyscrapers. It’s only when the aspirational work hits commercial success that the suits in Ferraris will come to ‘gentrify’ the neighbourhood.