On October 29, 2001, Chicago Tribune architecture critic Blair Kamin's column focused on a new threat emerging in the wake of the September 11 terrorist attacks: a danger that "Americans will overreact to the destruction of the twin towers by barricading public spaces that form centers of community and symbolize American openness and optimism."

Walking through downtown Chicago, Kamin observed numerous changes intended to increase security - or the perception of it - but whose main effect was to impede pedestrian access and create "a new architecture of fear." Concrete "Jersey barriers" were protecting three icons of that city's skyline: the Sears Tower, the Aon Center (formerly Amoco Building), and the John Hancock Center; as well as the Chicago Federal Center and its outdoor plaza. Public passageways through private buildings had been closed, and the management of the historic Rookery Building had even closed its lobby to tour groups in the name of security. 

Meanwhile, in stark contrast to the scene at the Federal Plaza, people were making merry at the city's Richard J. Daley Center Plaza, enjoying pre-Halloween events and hot cider. "Are Americans being prepared or paranoid?" Kamin asked. In interviewing several city officials and building managers, he found that in many cases, owners of buildings were requesting even more barriers and security measures - in part to soothe the fears of their tenants. What are the costs of such measures - in terms of both finance and freedom? 

Carol Ross Barney, the Chicago architect who designed a building for the site of the former Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City, noted that even if threats have not multiplied, awareness of them has - and that would indeed affect design. And Kamin recalled that after the 1995 attack on the Murrah Building, security at the Chicago Federal Center (a Ludwig Mies van der Rohe landmark) was beefed up - but discreetly. The architecture of the building itself was not modified, and the plaza remained open, hosting events that included a weekly farmers' market. 

After the attacks in New York, however, the farmers' market came down and the concrete barriers went up. Kamin observed that the plaza had become an entirely different place: "people could still walk through it, passing through small openings in the barriers, but it seemed chillingly empty." While defending their overall decision, Federal officials also noted that part of the reason for erecting the barriers was to lessen the anxieties of those inside the building. But one official also noted that the effect is selective: Many people acknowledge the ugliness of such security measures, while also noting that they are hardly infallible. 

Concrete barriers also went up on one side of the Aon Center, Kamin noted, even though that particular side of the building has a "moat like plaza" and large stone steps. Similarly, closing the Rookery to tour groups and closing its famed atrium seem to be overbearing measures. Given all the concerns of real estate firms - who tend to say they are increasing security in response to their tenants' desires - Kamin speculated whether building managers are really acting on behalf of the best interests of their tenants - or acting in their own self-interest, in case something goes wrong.

It's up to city officials, Kamin noted, to establish policies "to prevent sidewalks from turning into a gauntlet of Jersey barriers." Once a trend toward this type of in-your-face security has started, it tends to take on a life of its own: "a phenomenon that former Sen. Daniel Moynihan of New York, an outspoken opponent of fortress architecture, once termed 'the iron law of emulation.'"

Kamin complimented the city for its approach at Daley Plaza, which included subtle changes like moving granite benches to the perimeter of the plaza, and employing metal planters as attractive fortification. He also recalled a tried-and-true phenomenon of public space: people tend to draw more people, and that, in turn, makes everyone feel safer. Pointing to Daley Plaza, Kamin noted, "Here is one way to balance security and openness and to keep those competing interests -- and our fears -- in proper perspective."