Cultural Sociology· 2026Q1
Iconic Architecture, Meaning-Making, and the Social Drama of Antwerp’s ‘Farmers’ Tower’
- 0citations
- Q1SCImago
- 2026year
Short summary
Antwerp's 'Farmers' Tower' controversy reveals how iconic architecture becomes a battleground for competing urban visions, with a private buyer's redesign proposal igniting public debate over community and the city's global role.
AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.
Key points
- The 'Farmers' Tower' controversy in Antwerp (2020-2025) centered on a proposed redesign of the 1931 Art Deco landmark by Daniel Libeskind, commissioned by private owner Fernand Huts.
- The public backlash against the redesign, ultimately withdrawn, is framed as a 'social drama' involving breach, crisis, redress, and reintegration.
- The debate over the tower's exterior redesign served as a symbolic battleground for competing interpretations of Antwerp's community bonds, historical trajectory, and international significance.
- The conflict illustrates how architectural icons become sites of contested meaning-making, influenced by the unequal 'performative power' of social actors.
AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.
Abstract
This article examines how urbanites debate their city’s transformations through the symbolic medium of iconic architecture. In the Belgian city of Antwerp stands the so-called Farmers’ Tower, a 1931 Art Deco icon, long celebrated by architecture enthusiasts and local inhabitants. An episode of public controversy emerged, however, when industrialist and art patron Fernand Huts privately purchased the tower and circulated visual representations of its exterior redesign – the latter commissioned from architect Daniel Libeskind and, under mounting public pressure, ultimately withdrawn. Building on the Strong Program in cultural sociology, this controversy is reconstructed as a ‘social drama’ consisting of a breach, crisis, redress, and reintegration. Across a five-year period (2020–2025), the Farmers’ Tower constituted a symbolic surface through which the drama’s protagonists and antagonists – Huts and Libeskind on the one hand, and an amalgam of architecture critics on the other – developed competing understandings of the city’s community bonds, temporal trajectory, and changing role on the world stage. The article thus reveals how architectural icons become objects of conflictual meaning-making among social actors endowed with unequal levels of performative power.
The authors' abstract, as published at the source. Cultural Sociology, 2026 · DOI ↗
Continue with a free account
Ask the paper: 3 free questions a day about this paper; save it, get its citation, new summaries every day for your field. Takeaways are Premium.
Continue free on the webSign in with Google or Apple; no card needed. You come back to this paper.
On your phone:
Field: Architecture
ArchitectureEngineering