People can inhabit anything. And they can be miserable in anything and ecstatic in anything. More and more I think that architecture has nothing to do with it. Of course, that's both liberating and alarming.

The quote by Rem Koolhaas, “People can inhabit anything. And they can be miserable in anything and ecstatic in anything... architecture has nothing to do with it,” presents a provocative and somewhat paradoxical reflection on the relationship between architecture and human experience. Koolhaas, a renowned theorist and architect, is challenging the long-held belief that the design of buildings directly determines people’s happiness or well-being. Instead, he suggests that human adaptability often outweighs architectural intent—people find ways to live, thrive, or suffer regardless of their physical surroundings.

By claiming that “architecture has nothing to do with it,” Koolhaas is not dismissing architecture entirely but rather pointing out its limitations in shaping emotional and social outcomes. This view is both liberating and alarming, as he notes: liberating because it frees architects from the burden of trying to control human behavior through design alone, and alarming because it questions architecture’s power and purpose in society. It forces a reevaluation of what value architecture brings if people can experience joy or misery in virtually any environment.

This quote is consistent with Koolhaas’s broader body of work, which often explores the complexity, contradiction, and unpredictability of urban life. Through his firm OMA and his writings like S,M,L,XL, he has argued that cities and buildings should not strive for utopian perfection but instead embrace chaos, imperfection, and plurality. His skepticism toward the deterministic role of architecture marks a significant departure from modernist ideals that believed design could engineer a better society.

The origin of this quote is likely drawn from one of Koolhaas’s many public lectures or interviews, where he often reflects candidly on the philosophical challenges of being an architect in a world full of unpredictable human dynamics. It embodies his recognition that while architecture can influence behavior, it is ultimately people—and their histories, relationships, and inner lives—that define how spaces are truly experienced.