Technocratic Style, is a product of specifically architectural imagination, with doctrinal overtones that are generally accepted by engineers and business professionals alike.
This framework bisects science and control equating them together, each example of technocratic style is a monument to that owners participation inside of that control. An emblem of function, and alignment in a system of rationalized power.
These styles do not, in themselves, make anyone richer. Their practical utility lies instead in their publicity value. They signal competence, order, and proximity to systems of influence. The technocratic class has come to regard its buildings not simply as shelters, but as managerial instruments. T'ols for organizing, projecting, and ultimately facilitating the extraction of wealth.
Unsurprisingly, this aesthetic is closely tied to sources of power. The living function of architecture becomes secondary. Inadequacies in livability—once considered unacceptable, even scandalous—are now tolerated, even overlooked. Nonfunctionalism and symbolic excess persist, often in forms that suggest dominance more than habitation. The Trylon and Perisphere are excellent examples technocratic frameworks.
The demand for aesthetic conformity permeates the mind, in thought and action. From the Managerial class, the technocratic style is for immediacy and total visibility. The form must reveal itself immediately, with minimal effort from the observer. No patience for ambiguity, no curiosity about what is in the next room or around the next corner. The form must not change its appearance under the night with casting shadows, it must not change in the weather it must not age. It is architecture to be consumed at a glance.
This demand for appearance, forces the technocratic style to be fully visible in the shortest time possible, with the least possible amount of effort, no wondering about whats around the corner, no questions what the next room is like, and no diminution with night, weather or age.
In this sense, the style does for architecture what Reader’s Digest does for literature—it condenses, simplifies, and packages experience into something quickly legible and widely digestible.
The contemporary house, within this paradigm, must at all expenses avoid suggestions of personal power, or deviation from the norm. It's role is to express belonging, to align it's owner with the group perceived as closest to the technological matrix.