You might have asked why I am choosing to tackle the shape of a circle for the courtroom layout? Why not say a rhombus?
Last year, I went with my studio to the AIA AAJ conference in Miami, FL to present our projects for the design of a U.S. Federal Courthouse. This annual conference is where the AIA's Academy of Architecture for Justice recognizes big advancements, obstacles, and players in this market sector of architecture. There were some insightful ideas that I will always remember from the conference, much of it had to do with the effectiveness of rehabilitation in our current justice system. The most insightful/interesting thing I remembered from the conference was an odd taboo towards the idea of a circular courtroom...
I discovered the taboo when two of my classmates presented their project which featured circular courtrooms in the design. After they were finished much of the criticism was on the design of the courtroom and in particular, the decision to make it in a circle. Why? Many of the members asked. The general consensus among these professionals was that many architects had played with the poetic purity of a circular courtroom and fallen victim to this design's traps; terrible acoustics, resolution of a successful layout, and disintegration of traditional courtroom decorum. One comment even stated that "if the great Frank Lloyd Wright himself could not successively resolve this issue it can't be done. It has been tried and it does not work. Plain and simple."
Think of King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table. The idea of circle poses a substantial social theory in the courtroom, everyone is a part of the process and hierarchy (not order) is minimized. Of course some would argue that their is hierarchy in the courtroom for a reason...and I agree there should be. Hierarchy doesn't have to be through intimidation though, it can also be through mutual respect. More on this later!
