Gallery: The Design of Parliaments Has a Funkadelic Impact on Politics
XML01Excerpt-from-XML-Parliament-Introduction-6.jpg
XML identified just five typologies for parliament buildings. The "opposing benches" layout is most useful for heated debate between two distinct parties.
XML02Excerpt-from-XML-Parliament-Introduction-7.jpg
The majority of the world's parliament assembly halls follow the "semicircle" layout. Like a good concert hall, a semicircle parliament room affords more people a decent view, creating a stronger sense of egalitarianism among its members. Democracies often meet and operate in this layout.
XML03Excerpt-from-XML-Parliament-Introduction-8.jpg
The "horseshoe" layout is something of a hybrid of the "opposing benches" and "semicircle" typologies. There are two phsyical arrangements here: tête-à-tête confrontation and side-by-side alignment. Former British colonies like Australia, South Africa and Bangladesh meet in horseshoe rooms.
XML04Excerpt-from-XML-Parliament-Introduction-9.jpg
The "circle" typology is the newest of the five. XML's research found that it's based on the 10th century room used for Iceland's parliament, but only reemerged as a modern space in the 1980s. Only 11 parliaments around the world use this typology, but it's thought to be the most democratic of them all, because it totally eschews a front and central dominant figure.
XML05Excerpt-from-XML-Parliament-Introduction-10.jpg
Favored by non-democratic, authoritarian, Communist regimes, the "classroom" layouts transfers a ton of power to the person at the front. Imagine the way ideas might flow between a single professor and an entire class—the group might contribute, but one person is the leader.
