Editorial

Unbuilding Ageism is a collaboration between e-flux Architecture and the Chair of Architecture and Care in the Department of Architecture at ETH Zürich, supported by the Stavros Niarchos Foundation. It features contributions by Edna Bonhomme, Irina Davidovici, Mariana Delgado, Mark Hammond and Niamh Kavanagh, Diana Rodríguez Franco, Simon(e) van Saarloos, Deane Simpson, and more.

“Ageism” is typically understood as a social phenomenon that relates to people who are above retirement age. However, there is an ongoing debate around what constitutes an older person, and whether “old age” should be chronologically defined, or rather linked to bodily conditions that arise as a result of aging processes.1 Within this context, care for older individuals is continuously shaped by evolving cultural, ideological, and political perspectives. 

More broadly, however, ageism is a form of discrimination that assigns judgement and value based solely on age, meaning it can be directed to (and held by) younger and older age groups alike. Young people might be perceived more favorably in many ways, but they are also often associated with patronizing stereotypes. Ageism thus begins to be cultivated from the moment of birth, and is reinforced through social norms and institutional structures over the course of one’s lifetime. 

In order to approach what might be considered an ageing body, it is necessary to understand the logics of the system that has created the social category of age itself. Architecture is not neutral and has been a key part in the construction of these differences, particularly in the design and organization of care spaces. For instance, many elderly people are segregated within constrained and heavily regulated spaces that limit autonomy and self-determination, and generate biased dichotomies such as care giver and care receiver. 

But architecture can also foster caring spaces that enhance alternative models of kinship. Doing so often requires moving beyond traditional conceptions of the family, dismantling binary understandings of ability/disability, and embracing forms of interdependence and mutual care. And spatial configurations must support older bodies as active members of the community, rather than reinforcing stereotypes of them as weak, ill, and un(re)productive. By understanding how care is spatialized—how responsibility, resources, and power are distributed—architecture can not only respond to existing conditions but also help cultivate new ways of living together.