FOR THE LAST 15 OR 20 YEARS, but especially in the last ten, public agencies have been practicing an active architectural politics.' This has enriched the Parisian landscape with les projets du President, since this is the designation given to l'Opera de la Bastille, la Pyramide and the extension of the Louvre, the park and la Cit6 de la Musique at La Villete, l'Arche de la Defense, I'Institut du Monde Arabe, and le Ministbre des Finances at Bercy, which will be joined by the future Bibliothbque de France and le Centre International de Conf6rences at Quai Branly.2 Admittedly, some cities in the provinces have also received, or should receive, new monuments-a few Zeniths here, a museum there-but these remain marginal in comparison to the investments concentrated in the capital. In this architectural politics, diverse motivations seem to converge and to reinforce each other: pursuit of prestige for the country, which is not without its effects on the tourist industry; aspiration on the part of state power for the gratitude (reconnaissance, in both senses of the word) of its subjects, by presenting itself to them as an enlightened patron of the arts; and, finally--since it is necessary to include a zest of social consideration-a desire to be perceived as the artisan of urban civilization (in the words of the President de la Republique). The latter is a vague term, but much in use right now by public agencies (notably by the Ministre de la Ville); in it are mixed connotations that are as much socio-spatial (urbanity, integration, the right to the city) as political and cultural (citizenship, the right to culture). How should we look at these grands projets du President? How can we analyze them, not only in their form and style, but also in their functional ambitions and their meaning? To answer these questions, it is no doubt necessary to develop a double analysis: a first one focusing on the particular style of these edifices--on the tools of contemporary architectural creation as applied to large public buildings; and a second analysis of the meaning and pertinence of monumental architecture, and of the social and political finality of undertaking such projets in a technological and democratic society.