YEAR 5 GLAMOUR UNIT BRIEF by andrewstoane

Model, standing, in profile with her hand on her hip, by a clock. Vogue 1939, Toni Frissell

DJCAD YEAR 5 ARCHITECTURE

THE GLAMOUR UNIT STUDIO BRIEF 2021

Andy Stoane

Background: The “Halstonettes” at “The Battleof Versailles,” The most glamourous night in fashion history. From https://agnautacouture.com

IT IS PROBABLY NO ACCIDENT THAT THE W FIRST MEANING, IS A A RECOGNITION O EVERYONE IS ALWAYS MORE OR LESS CONS ROLE. … IT IS IN THE KNOW EACH OTHER; THAT WE KNOW OUR Ezra Park, Robert. (1950), Race and Culture, The Free Press.

O MERE HISTORICAL WORD PERSON, IN ITS A MASK. IT IS RATHER OF THE FACT THAT S AND EVERYWHERE, SCIOUSLY, PLAYING A ESE ROLES THAT WE ; IT IS IN THESE ROLES RSELVES. 2

Julius Shulman’s famous photograph of Pierre Koenig’s Case Study House #22, also known as the Stahl House.

THE GLAMOUR UNIT

“. . . a swanky outfit at the end of a gala evening, bad behavior with no morning-after . . . glamour slights the labor of everyday life, the hard work of getting to the office, getting along, just getting accepted.”

In a 1939 article in The New York Times, the cultural correspondent Mildred Adams discussed the emergence of a new “time bound sort of beauty.” This was the rise of “glamour.” As art historian Sandy Isenstadt puts it, in the architectural sphere, “for postwar architects, glamour involved not merely a submission to media conditions or even a more or less willing prostitution to client demands. Glamour was, rather, an aesthetic category or, at least, a prevailing framework for aesthetic assessment.” Yet in seven decades since, such an assessment has never adequately been made, and architecture still clings to absolutist ideals of permanence and contrived notions of formal beauty. In reaction to this, the studio will engage in the allure and artificiality of quotidian public glamour, asking if a participatory, transient constructed reality, predicated on public appearance and imagination, is a truer aesthetic assessment of our age. As the ghost of Gottfried Semper continually reminds us, aesthetics are part of a public “act,” constituted and contextualised by appearance before others. Temporal beauty, in a choreographed public realm, is indebted to architecture’s tectonic assemblages. You will go out into the city, questioning the “masks” that architecture wears, and proposing new forms of dramaturgical urbanism prefigured not by preconceived notions of beauty, but by temporal processes you discover in the rapidly changing contemporary urban landscape. The studio will seek to reclaim the idea of glamour and spectacle from the tectonics of the static and deterministic commodity form, re-positioning it firmly in an indeterminate public realm, stitching together a new imaginary of how an alternate “glamorous” society might look. As Adams wondered, should we “go so far as to wonder openly whether beauty, in an age of mass production and mass ideals, would not smack of treason, being unattainable by the multitude.” A studio brief will be issued in week 1. Andy Stoane, September 2021.

SHOULD WE “GO SO FAR AS TO WONDER OPENLY WHETHER BEAUTY, IN AN AGE OF MASS PRODUCTION AND MASS IDEALS, WOULD NOT SMACK OF TREASON, BEING UNATTAINABLE BY THE MULTITUDE.” 4

APPEARANCE BACKGROUND The philosophical and sociological interest in the mask, spanning nearly two and a half milenia, from Plato to Goffman, conflates the idea of theatre and human social interaction. Social dramaturgy shapes our personalities to the extent that we grow into them. As Goffman was to warn, “choose your self-presentations carefully, for what starts out as a mask may become your face.”1 If the roles we play form a dramaturgical self, playing out in space as we appear before others, then the notion of a “public” as famously described by the political theorist Hannah Arendt, becomes central.

The space of appearance comes into being wherever men are together in the manner of speech and action, and therefore predates and precedes all formal constitution of the public realm and the various forms of government, that is, the various forms in which the public realm can be organized.2

The political scientist Marion Iris Young follows Arendt in articulating the importance of “plurality” in formatons of a public realm. In Young’s words,

For Arendt, the public is not a comfortable place of conversation among those who share language, assumptions, and ways of looking at issues. Arendt conceives the public as a place of appearance whereactors stand before others and are subject to mutual scrutiny and judgement from a plurality of perspectives. the public consists of multiple histories and perspectives relatively unfamiliar to one another, conected yet distant and ireducible to one another. A conception of publicity that reques its members to put aside their differences in order to uncover their common good destys the very meaning of publicity because it aims to turn the many into one.3

This notion of a pluralistic public realm of appearance leads to the kinds of “agonistic public spaces of confrontation” that forms much of the recent thinking of political theorists such as Chantal Mouffe and others operating at the intersection of politics, space and community.4 Mouffe contests that a new “unifying story” is necessary to bind together the fragmented forms of resistance to the hegemony of the post-political oligarchy. “The democratic principle of liberty and equality has to impose itself as the new matrix of the social imaginary,” she says. Social movements that are able to sketch out “a radical imaginary” of what an alternative society might look like are the most likely to achieve social change.5 What kinds of imaginary of can bring about the forms of spatial “unity” that might foster “plurality?” At first, this question may seem paradoxical, yet it develops logic through the understanding that most spatial ideas of fragmentation are concommitant with the individuation and atomising forces of the post-political era to which Mouffe refers. As the forefather of urban sociology, Henri Lefebvre, was to say,

Space crumbles, is exchanged (sold) in bits and pieces, investigated piecemeal by the fragmented sciences, whereas it is formed as a worldwide and, even, interplanetary totality.6

1 2 3 4 5 6

. . . THE PUBLIC IS NOT A COMFORTABLE PLACE OF CONVERSATION AMONG THOSE WHO SHARE LANGUAGE, ASSUMPTIONS, AND WAYS OF LOOKING AT ISSUES. ARENDT CONCEIVES THE PUBLIC AS A PLACE OF APPEARANCE WHERE ACTORS STAND BEFORE OTHERS AND ARE SUBJECT TO MUTUAL SCRUTINY AND JUDGEMENT FROM A PLURALITY OF PERSPECTIVES.

CONTINUITY AND PLURALITY AN EMPIRICAL STUDY The fragmentation of the public realm and its realtionship with societal atomisation raises fundamental questions about unity. Your first task will be to dig into this paradoxical question of continuity and plurality. You will return to a previous age where dreams of urban continuity momentarily were instantiated in the city as overlapping, pluralistic mixes of programmes that stood in opposition to individuated ownership and isolated object. You will focus on two historic dramaturgical fields, both with ambitions of continuity and evidence of plurality, yet both orchestrated very differently, and both highly dramaturgical. 1. The Barbican. 2. The South Bank Arts Complex (including The National Theatre, The Royal Festival Hall, The Hayward Gallery, Queen Elizabeth Hall and The Purcell Rooms, BFI and all associated spaces). You should draw large scale plans and/or sections of these projects, unravelling their multiplicitous programmes. You should discuss their significance, their inter-relationships, and the political backgrounds that they emerged from. You should build a framework for comparison. Crucially, you should consider the mechanisms these projects use to promote and foster their ideas of a dramaturgical public. Finally, how do they still manage to operate in an age where the public apparatus of the state that they relied on has been entirely dismantled. It might be a good idea to contextualise this thinking in a lineage of public space. For example: the Spaces of Appearance (Arendt): the political spaces of the classical city, the public rituals of the medieval city, the attempts at urban continuity of the modern era, the architecture of spectacle of the postmodern city. This work will become embedded in a major group book, outlined over the following pages of this brief. The book will be assessable as a key part of year 5. Your individual thesis will emerge from the themes investigated for the book chapters and their contiguous intellectual offshoots.

London South Bank complex: The National Theatre

THE CENTRAL PROBLEM CONFRONTED HERE CAN BE FORMULATED AS FOLLOWS: WHICH MODES OF COLLECTIVE PRACTICE CAN PLAUSIBLY GIVE RISE TO A CRITICAL SENSE OF COMMUNITY THAT IS NOT ULTIMATELY DERIVED FROM INTERSUBJECTIVE RECOGNITION OF A DETERMINATE SHARED IDENTITY? Brian Elliott

THE BOOK SPACES OF APPEARANCE IN THE AGE OF INDIVIDUATION* * Working title.

Your empirical study of continuity and plurality will become embedded as a chapter in a book, researched and predominantly written in semester 1, but revisited and potentially recurated in semester 2. The book will, I hope, stand as an important and original piece of research into, and speculations on, a new way of reading and understanding the city. It it intended that the book will be presented as a series of thematic chapters, each fleshing out attributes of glamour in the public realm. Suggested chapters and their associated research themes are outlined below: 1 TEMPORAL SPACES To return to Goffman, in his seminal book The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life, , through associating public behaviour with theatrical performance, he discusses the complexity and sophistication with which we construct and use social identities (masks). Whether consciously or unconsciously, it is this dramaturgical role-playing, Goffman tells us, that defines our public being. Essentially, the mask is the true representation of self because it begins to determine how we act, how others respond to us, and over time, who we are. In this regard, our studio’s personification of the architectural realm allows us to understand that, in architecture, materials are also playing a role - a role not just in their place in composition and form but in their mediation of the very conditions which allow us to act out our societal relationships in public. The organisation of the tectonic components of a building are part of a complex and continual interplay between various dialectics: public and private, outside and inside, free and institutional, and in London perhaps water and land. Such interplay invariably stimulates and affects relationships between the individual and the collective. In this sense, architecture is a stage for Goffman’s dramaturgical performance and its thresholds are the curtains. The association between architecture and theatre is explored in Gottfried Semper’s nineteenth century treatise on “Style.” As Gevork Hartoonian puts it, Semper “. . . saw architecture as a frame accommodating human experience. The tectonic of such a ‘frame’ should absorb the beholder first and then direct his/her attention to the drama of life.” [37] The carnival and the mask are central in Semper’s thesis on theatricality and, accordingly, the idea of movement, change, and particularly montage important in architecture’s “masking of reality.”

Gottfried Semper, Theatereinbau im Crystal Palace in Sydenham, Aufriss.

THE POSTER IS THE MODERN FRESCO, AND ITS PLACE IS IN THE STREET. IT LASTS NOT FIVE CENTURIES BUT TWO WEEKS, AND THEN IT IS REPLACED. Le Corbusier

The first piece of research might be to build an understanding of architecture as a series of temporal layers. These layers have not only varying degrees of longevity but also varying degrees of interactivity with each other, with the body and with the multiplicity of bodies we know as the public. In this research, it is recommended that you try to unravel the layers of selected case studies, attempting to discover 1. how each layer changes over time, 2. how that change affects other layers and 3. how the changes affect publicity. The combination of these three phenomena might be referred to as the “reactivity” of the architecture. Once the layers are extrapolated, the architecture might be redrawn in a way that suspends the convention of representing physical thresholds, and instead focuses on representing the discovered reactivity. A possble method might be as follows: First separate the layers of the subject into familiar tectonic components with different longevities and configurational possibilities – site, structure, skin, services … Next, assess the temporality of these tectonic layers in relation to the building and the body. Causal relations across the layers might be “active” - the opening of a window or the pivoting of a screen affecting interior spaces for example, but they might also be passive light penetration of a skin stimulating sensorial reaction or altered spatial perception. In understanding the idea of building as layers’ a useful point of departure is Stewart Brand’s Lifecycle Diagram, which asserts that buildings typically exist as a series of layers with different rates of obsolescence, from ‘structure’ (200 years) to ‘stuff’ (1 day). The different rates of obsolescence in these ‘shearing layers’, as Brand describes them, mean there is little or no exchange between them. This makes the building continually ‘tear itself apart’. Iwould like you to ‘attack’ this diagram and to propose a reorganisation. In particular, you might attack the relationship between the structure and the skin (or envelope), considering how they might have more of a dynamic relationship – one likely to effect change on the public threshold and, in doing so, making the “internal” programme reciprocate with the dramaturgical urban context. In the propositional phases of your thesis, you might speculate on how the layers might be reassembled to not only better interact with each other but, more crucially, with the city. In this way, adaptability is not just about changing programme of the occupier but is about the continual state of agitation experienced in the city.

A temporal drawing: The now famous “Increasing Disorder in a Dining Table” by Sarah Wigglesworth and Jeremy Till.

… THERE ISN'T ANY SUCH THING AS A BUILDING. A BUILDING PROPERLY CONCEIVED IS SEVERAL LAYERS OF LONGEVITY OF BUILT COMPONENTS. Frank Duffy

2 SCENOGRAPHIC SPACES It can be argued that theatricality is the flesh of construction whose thickness speaks for the invisible presence of the dialectics of seeing and making, that is the way a building re lates to its site, framing a constructed space and opening it to the many horizons of today’s culture.

The “flesh” of construction, as Gevork Hartoonian puts it in his book Crisis of the Object, is a question central to the thinking of Semper in his treatise on “Style.” In considering the place of the tectonic in architecture, Hartoonian etymologises that there is no distinction between art, making and method. “Central to the Greek understanding of making is the artistic will to sustain a homology between the technical, symbolic and aesthetic aspects of architecture …”

In “clothing” your architecture, you should aim to sustain such a homology between a technical understanding of material, a symbolic and aesthetic response to the city and an engagement with the performative public realm. You should avoid diminishing that homology through thinking of a single external skin only, which Hartoonian tells us “reduces the dialogue between structure and dressing to that of surface effect”. Much of Hartoonian’s thinking in this area is centred around Semper’s thesis on “Appearances and Essences,” where he considers a continual dialogue in architecture between structure and skin (dressing) as being centred around questions of “what to reveal and what to conceal.” These questions are effectively answered through the deployment of architecture’s “masks,” which mediate the relationship with the public. The clothing of your architecture may be fixed layers, moveable layers or responsive layers in its attempt to engage the temporal and cyclical fluctuations of performance and ritual that make up urban life. The skin layer of architecture will conventionally include windows, or may well be entirely glass. This layer acts as gateway, lens, threshold, climate controller, and above all, clothing. You should carefully consider how it can mediate publicness in various ways, particularly with respect to performance. Beatriz Colomina, in her book Privacy and Publicity, talks of the early twentieth century as a period in which material technology of glass allowed the window to extend significantly, to the point where it consumed entire walls, thus subverting the performative relationship between interior and exterior. The internal inhabitant became an audience, able to achieve a panoramic view on the ‘stage’ of the city. She describes how “the object calls into question its own objecthood” and destroys “the unity of the classical subjects presumed to be outside of it.” Perhaps you could extend this convention of window further - first materially, by considering the use of other lightweight material layers (fabrics) and, second, by exploding it horizontally into a more dynamic threshold involving a series of layers that may go deep into the building, perhaps

Philippe Rahm, Architectural plan derived from thermal values between layers of glass.

. . . IF “PURPOSE” IS REDUCED MERELY TO REPRESENTING VALUES EXTRANEOUS TO THOSE EMANATING FROM CONSTRUCTION, THEN THE LINE BETWEEN ATECTONIC AND TECTONIC IS BLURRED AND ARCHITECTURE IS RELEGATED TO THE REALM OF THE SCENOGRAPHIC. Gevork Hartoonian

3 INDETERMNATE SPACES In the book Ugly, Useless, Unstable Architecture, Miguel Paredes Maldonado points out that “an architectural object can only approach the classical ideal of beauty insofar as if it is articulated as a whole. The conditions of such articulation are both a high degree of internal coherence and a clearly established boundary between the object and the rest of the world.” He goes on to outline processes in opposition to “the classical canon” - processes such as subtraction, addition, agglomeration, entropy, and breaking of boundaries. In our mission to challenge the determanism of beauty and examine the potentials of time-bound “glamour,” this chapter will look at the multi-faceted indterminate processes in existence in the contemporary city. GROWTH (AND RETRENCHMENT) Beginning with the historical imperatives of the movements of megastructure and metabolism, both of which had indeterminate processes of growth and uncertainty at their ccore, you should find and explore current processes of indeterminacy that operate in the city. This will most likely include global population movements, demographic, lifestage and lifestyle trends, and of course the processes of gentrification and other forms of socio-spatial displacement that have consumed the modern city. PARTICIPATION IN SPACE Again, a point of departure might be the uncertainty of the early postmodern age. As the stable grounds of the industrial age were relaced by the volatility of the serviceeconomy, factions of the 1960s avant-garde experimented with architecture’s potential to alter spatial perception and to adjust spatial envelopes through technically mediated environments and new, often ephemeral, materials. Sixty years on, most of this work remains in the realm of provocation and curiosity, architecture in the twenty-first century seeming to encourage environmental determanism and human passivity, endorsing permanence and fixed spatial containment as readily as it did a hundred years ago. Essentially, we still construct architecture as bound, fixed, spatial entity - as object. Through revisiting “the radicals” and questioning architecture’s indeterminate contexts, you can hopefully develop spatial ideas which can be fully responsive to the flux of the contemporary city and indexed to human activity.

Let us compare the screen on which a film unfolds with the canvas of a painting. The painting invites the spectator to contemplation; before it the spectator can abandon himself to his associations. Before the movie frame he cannot do so. No sooner has his eye grasped a scene than it is already changed. It cannot be arrested... Walter Benjamin

OBSOLESCENCE In Stephen Cairns and Jane Jacobs’book Buildings Must Die, the authors explore processes of deterioration in architecture. we are told that “[t]heir investigation of the death of buildings reorders architectural notions of creativity, reshapes architecture’s preoccupation with good form, loosens its vanities of durability, and expands its sense of value. It does so not to kill off architecture as we know it, but to rethink its agency and its capacity to make worlds differently.” This investigation recalls the question of obsolescence, particularly the idea of tectonic layering outlined earlier in the brief. The examination of layers, processes and procedures of decay and obsolescence might take you into propositional territory where architecture might celebrate its changes, rather than seeing them as the inevitibility of a trajectory away from an Cedric Price’s Fun Palace, 1961 optimum, fixed state. 15

NO NEED TO LOOK FOR AN ENTRANCE – JUST WALK IN ANYWHERE. NO DOORS, FOYERS, QUEUES OR COMMISSIONAIRES: IT’S UP TO YOU HOW YOU USE IT. LOOK AROUND – TAKE A LIFT, A RAMP, AN ESCALATOR TO WHEREVER OR WHATEVER LOOKS INTERESTING. The Fun Palace, Cedric Price, 1960-61

4 TRANSIENT SPACES SPEED Beatriz Colomina, in discussing Benjamin, talks of how transience and speed are essential conditions of modrnity. “Perception is tied to transience” she argues. What is “strange” about the “big city” to which, as Benjamin argues, people now have to “adapt” is the speed, the continuous movement, the sens that nothing even stops, that there are no limits. Trains, traffic, films, and newspapers use the verb run to describe their very different activities. As in to “run” an ad in a newspaper. Even meeting somebody has become running into somebody. With this relentless movement that effaces boundaries comes a new mode of perception that has become the trademark of modernity. Perception is now tied to transience. If photography is the culmination of centuries of efforts to arrest the image, “to fix fleeting reflections,” to use Benjamin’s words, is it not somewhat paradoxical that once the fleeting image is fixed, the mode of perception is what becomes fleeting? Now the observer (the flaneur, the train traveler, the department store shopper) is what is transient. This transience, and the new space of the city in which it is experienced, cannot be separated from the new forms of representation. [12]

Benjamin, in the 1930s, and Guy Debord, in the 1960s, fixated on the idea of a free movement through the city. For Benjamin, the “flaneur” was a carefree, bourgeois dilettante - a product of the modern metropolis. For Debord, his “derive” was a state of free, playful urban meander unregulated by the forces of capitalism. Our societal contract with movement and speed now plays out in hyperactive fashion in the gamut of ever expanding means of speed-prefixed organisational tools - QUICKtime, INSTAgram, FASTconnect, INSTAsize, HYPERlapse all allow us to organise and edit our relentless and fleeting reflections on the world in a digital media which plays an increasingly important role in the social realm. As mass media begins to entirely pervade our lives and as the pulse of the modern city becomes hyperactive, perhaps the represenattion of architecture as static object has now run its course, left behind by a need for immediacy and responsiveness which conventional design and construction simply cannot deliver? MOBILITY An architecture that packs up and moves on has for over half a century been a compelling and radical counterproposal to the fixity of conventional design. Radical propositions have been made which contract architecture to transportation (Cedric Price’s Potteries Thinkbelt for example) to the scale of whole cities (Archigram’s No Stop City). But it is perhaps the architecture of the fairground, the travelling show or the circus that might yield the most interesting conceptual clues for this studio.

The “instant” architecture of the travelling show. Left, 19th century; right, 1960s.

NOW THE OBSERVER (THE FLANEUR, THE TRAIN TRAVELER, THE DEPARTMENT STORE SHOPPER) IS WHAT IS TRANSIENT. THIS TRANSIENCE, AND THE NEW SPACE OF THE CITY IN WHICH IT IS EXPERIENCED, CANNOT BE SEPARATED FROM THE NEW FORMS OF REPRESENTATION. Beatriz Colomina

5 FASHIONABLE SPACES

The Italian philosopher Giorgio Agamben has defined ‘the time of fashion’ as ‘an ungraspable threshold between a “not yet” [non ancora] and a “no more” [non piu], which he identified as a caesura between ‘being-in-fashion’ or no-longer-being-in-fashion. [3]

CYCLES The intangibility of such thresholds resonate with many of the previous “spaces” discussed in this brief, particularly those of temporality and indeterminacy. Yet perhaps it is the cyclicality of fashion - its constant repositioning of an indeterminate range of components into something of the future, yet something that usually references the past - that is most analogous with our urban mission. RITUALS Also to be considered is the association of fashion and space in a ritualistic sense. From London’s Pearly Kings and Queens, to the Italian nightly passeggiatato (promenade), the ritualistic performances that take place in our urban spaces every weekend night, fashion, ritual and space are tightly bound together. Carefully consider the multiple resonances between fashion, architecture, space and the city. The following list may stimulate some initial thoughts: 1. Fashion’s Cyclicality (seasons), Obsolescence and Continuity. 2. Fashion’s need for immediacy and responsiveness (which perhaps conventional design and construction solutions simply cannot respond to). 3. The Exchanges in the Path to Mass Dissemination. Street fashion, subcultures and fleeting fashion ‘accidents’ exert as much influence on the ‘designer’ end of the spectrum (the bubble-up effect) as the catwalk does on the ‘street’ end (the trickle-down effect). The middle ground of this process is ‘High Street’ mass dissemination. 4. The Systemic Exchanges between the speculative, critical and theatrical realm of the fashion industry (The Show) and the commercial machine which drives it (The Shop). 5. The Sociological Exchanges in the ‘Control versus Choice’ Spectrum. Fashion is both divisive and accordant; individual and universal; subversive and compliant. Unquestionably and congenitally accepted, without any immunity, as one of our most important means of societal positioning, social communication and self expression, it is unique in its ability to claim a universal, yet dramatically polarised, patronage. 19

1982

2016 AD314

1837

THE CONDUCTOR HAS ONCE MORE PULLED THE CORD, AND, WITH A QUICK MOVEMENT THAT CAUSES A BELL TO SOUND, HE ADVANCES THE NEEDLE ON A TRANSPARENT DIAL TO INDICATE THAT ANOTHER PERSON HAS ENTERED; BY THIS MEANS THEY KEEP TRACK OF RECEIPTS. NOW THAT THE CAR IS MOVING, YOU REACH CALMLY INTO YOUR WALLET AND PAY THE FARE. IF YOU HAPPEN TO BE SITTING REASONABLY FAR FROM THE CONDUCTOR, THE MONEY TRAVELS FROM HAND TO HAND AMONG THE PASSENGERS; THE WELLDRESSED LADY TAKES IT FROM THE WORKINGMAN IN THE BLUE JACKET AND PASSES IT ON. From Walter Benjamin’s Arcades Project, 1927-1940. Page from Walter Benjamin’s notebook.

Semper, Gottfried (2004). Style in the Technical and Tectonic Arts: Or, Practical Aesthetics, J Paul Getty Trust Publications. Arendt, Hannah (1958). The Human Condition, University of Chicago Press. Friedman, Alice T (2010). American Glamour: and the Evolution of Modern Architecture, Yale University Press. McLuhan, Marshall and Fiore, Quentin (2008). The Medium is the Massage: An Invetory of Effects, Penguin. Evans, Caroline and Vaccari, Alessandra (2020). Time in Fashion, Bloomsbury. Benjamin, Walter (2008). The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction, Penguin. Hartoonian, Gevork (2006). Crisis of the Object : The Architecture of Theatricality, Routledge. Particularly chapter 1 : ‘The Crisis of the Object’ and chapter 2 : ‘Theatricality : The Structure of Tectonic’. Goffman, Erving (1959). The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life, Doubleday. Particularly ‘Introduction’ and chapter on ‘Performances’. Colomina, Beatriz (1996). Privacy and Publicity: Modern Architecture as Mass Media, MIT Press. Particularly chapters on ‘Archive’, ‘City’ and ‘Window’. Benjamin, Walter (2002). The Arcades Project, Harvard University Press. Particularly chapter M [The Flaneur], chapter O [Prostitution, Gambling] and chapter P [The Streets of Paris]. Debord, Guy (1958). “Theory of the Dérive, Les Levres Nues #9” (November 1956). Reprinted in Internationale Situationniste #2 (December 1958). Various online transcripts eg ‘Bureau of Public Secrets’, ‘Situationalists International Online’. Pelletier, Louise (2006). Architecture in Words: Theatre, Language and the Sensuous Space of Architecture, Routledge Mathews, Stanley (2007). From Agit Prop to Free Space: The Architecture of Cedric Price, Blackdog Publishing Sadler, Simon (1999), The Situationist City, The MIT Press. Lang, Peter and Menking, William (2003). Superstudio: Life without Objects, Skira Editore. Sadler, Simon (2005). Archigram: Architecture without Architecture, MIT Press. Koolhaas, Rem/Obrist, Hans (2011). Project Japan. Metabolism Talks, Taschen. Banham. Rayner (2020). Megastructure: Urban Futures of the Recent Past, Monacelli Press. Marion Young, Iris (2000). Inclusion and Democracy, Oxford University Press. Elliott, Brian (2010). Constructing Community: Configurations ofthe Social in Contemporary Philosophy and Urbanism, Lexington.