Community in Spite of Architecture: Disordering Boundaries to Social Potential in Milton Keynes Introduction – Social Boundaries
[Fig. 1 – Juxtaposed Realities] Milton Keynes’ urban fabric, rigidly zoned with over-rationalized grid roads, is resistant to change. Abandoning earlier new towns’ unrealistic expectations that residents “live most of their lives within the immediate locality”, Milton Keynes focussed on nurturing community growth by providing freedom of choice through a network of interconnecting grid-roads.1 However, in attempting to improve access equality, the Plan for Milton Keynes imposed paternalistic restrictions on social mobility. While Jane Jacobs argued post-war developments stopped chance encounters, Milton Keynes’ functional grid-roads erased opportunity for a visual connection with the social life of the city.2 The over-rationalised grid-road, built around the presumption of 100% car ownership, restricted access to the city for those without a car, such an estimated 82% of women in Milton Keynes in 1976,3 since the grid-road design made running an efficient bus route “impossible”.4
Mark Clapson, A Social History of Milton Keynes: Middle England/Edge City (London: Frank Cass, 2004), 43. 2 Jane Jacobs, The Death and Life of Great American Cities (London, UK: Jonathan Cape, 2020). 3 Jane Hobson, “New Towns, The Modernist Planning Project And Social Justice The Cases Of Milton Keynes, UK And 6th October, Egypt” (dissertation, 1999), 12. 4 Oxford Brookes University Planning Department, Transferrable Lessons from the New Towns (London: Department for Communities and Local Government: 2006), 75. 1
[Fig. 2 – Transport Obstacles] Other obstacles, such as underpasses and overgrown planting, made walking in the urban realm uncomfortable for many, even fearful for some women.5 The 15-minute city’s scale varied widely depending on access to various modes of transport, something that may not have been overlooked had there been any public participation or women designers involved. Richard Sennett and MATRIX Feminist Design Cooperative disliked predetermined zoning, unquestioning of existing social norms. Isolation was further compounded by the solitary family home, absorbing functions previously dispersed throughout the city, such as laundrettes, limiting public forums for social interaction. Despite ordered design restricting social potential and perpetuating outdated family values, collective practices have emerged in Milton Keynes; communities formed in spite of architecture. Richard Sennett’s ‘Passage Territories’, ‘Incomplete Forms’ and ‘Non-Linear Narratives’, investigate propositions for opening the closed-system city through disorder and the unknown.6 From the work of community artists, to Beanhill Tenants Association Group, perhaps disorderly community retrofit in Milton Keynes can redress boundaries to social potential.
Mark Clapson, The Plan for Milton Keynes (Wavendon: Milton Keynes Development Corp., 1970), 15. 6 Pablo Sendra and Richard Sennett, Designing Disorder: Experiments and Disruptions in the City (London: VERSO BOOKS, 2020). 5
Passage Territories
[Fig. 3 – Passage Territories] Passage territories are areas between buildings, successively contributing to our understanding of the urban whole. However, their potential is often neglected, resulting in left-over, segregating space, as in the case of a grid-road acting as a boundary between two grid-squares. Limited through-movement means while Netherfield’s parks have fly-tipping, where Eaglestone has public art, Eaglestone residents do not benefit from Netherfield’s community garden. Richard Sennett argues boundaries should instead act as borders, semipermeable, defining an edge condition, and enabling social exchange.7 Milton Keynes is often labelled ‘nowhereville’, perhaps due to Milton Keynes’ Urban Society consultant’s ‘non-place’ theory. Melvin Webber theorized as society becomes more liquid, community need not be based on locality, arguing “cohabitation of a territorial place... is becoming less important to the maintenance of social communities”.8 Therefore, through improving accessibility, transport, and communications, urban life need not be restricted to traditionally dense cities.
Pablo Sendra and Richard Sennett, Designing Disorder: Experiments and Disruptions in the City (London: VERSO BOOKS, 2020), 29. 8 Melvin M. Webber, “The Urban Place and the Non-Place Urban Realm,” in Explorations into Urban Structure (Philadelphia: Univ. Of Pennsylvania Press, 1968), 88. 7
[Fig. 4 – Purity Ritual] However, Milton Keynes’ ineffective public transport system hindered accessibility, and its “urban, visual, monumental” form opposed Webber’s theory.9 In 1971, the year the Plan for Milton Keynes was written, Giancarlo De Carlo wrote, passage territories designed around the car demonstrate “the way in which physical space can be manipulated to provoke that state of total alienation which guarantees social stability.”10 De Carlo championed public transport, since the car-centred city leads to “fragmentation of human life”.11 Sennett argues community fragmentation causes individual experience to be reduced to a “purity ritual”; the need to maintain an image of a community, a perfect lawn, whilst being offended by activities such as sunbathing and skateboarding, deemed anti-social.12 Forging an identity based around the suburban family, rather than the dense, diverse city, results in the creation of a judgmental ‘nomos’; a social convention and reductionist vision of ‘the other’. Milton Keynes’ grid-roads fragmented communities, denying outsiders a “sense of the urban whole”.13
Tim Mars, “Little Los Angeles in Bucks,” The Architects' Journal, April 15, 1992, pp. 22-26, 24. Giancarlo De Carlo, “An Architecture of Participation,” Perspecta, 1980, pp. 74-79, 76. 11 Ibid., 77. 12 Richard Sennett, The Uses of Disorder: Personal Identity and City Life (New York: Norton, 1970), 12. 13 Bill Hillier, “Milton Keynes - Look Back to London,” The Architects' Journal, April 15, 1992, pp. 4246, 42. 9
10
[Fig. 5 – Activity Centres] However, Milton Keynes’ grid-roads were originally intended to host activity centres, combining healthcare, education, retail, and opportunity for social integration between neighbourhoods. However, to accommodate noisy cars, activity centres were moved to the middle of the grid-squares. Although someone from Eaglestone may drive into Netherfield to visit the shops, this function-to-function movement did not enable socially activated passage territories. Underpasses were originally meant to benefit from passive surveillance from these roadside activity centres but in their new location are perceived as unsafe, particularly by women.14 However, even Jane Jacobs ‘eyes on the street’ approach relies on fulfilment of preordained roles and a “regime of surveillance”, exerting control.15
Mark Clapson, The Plan for Milton Keynes (Wavendon: Milton Keynes Development Corp., 1970), 15. 15 Pablo Sendra and Richard Sennett, Designing Disorder: Experiments and Disruptions in the City (London: VERSO BOOKS, 2020), 125. 14
[Fig. 6. – Four Grid-Squares Analysis] Today, effects of boundary-like grid-roads are evident in early residential grid-squares Eaglestone, Netherfield, Beanhill and Coffee Hall, where underpasses and overgrown green spaces act as urban voids. Pablo Sendra argues apprehension caused by “continuous and limitless green space” creates a mental boundary.16 Such space in Milton Keynes often contains public art. Works such Beanhill’s concrete Mushrooms, and the Griffin in Eaglestone, were produced through community participation, their legacy surviving through offshoot theatre and gardening groups. Art’s role in social retrofit, such as murals added to hospitals in the renaissance, is long established. Milton Keynes, without funding for a central art gallery in its first 25 years, invested instead in community art.17 This art was distinct from curatorial sculpture in earlier new towns, criticised as relying upon “creation of a community… centred around… exodus from the metropolis and, consequently, a static model of inclusive exclusion.”18 This art demonstrates a furthering of paternalistic control, whereas Milton Keynes’ art attempted social inclusion.
Pablo Sendra and Richard Sennett, Designing Disorder: Experiments and Disruptions in the City (London: VERSO BOOKS, 2020), 79. 17 “Everyone Is an Artist,” Everyone Is an Artist (BBC Wales: BBC Radio 4, November 27, 2021). 18 Josephine Berry Slater and Anthony Iles, No Room to Move: Radical Art and the Regenerate City (London, UK: Mute Books, 2010), edited excerpt 1. 16
[Fig. 7. Community Artwashing] However, Milton Keynes’ community art today could succumb to ‘artwashing’, like Balfron Tower, where artists were used in a process of value uplift and subsequent displacement of residents.19 Creative placemaking, like Milton Keynes’ Urban Living pop-up, could contribute to gentrification. Yet, through “defamiliarization” with the context, community art could uncover networks of dominance in the city as “the product of a collaboratively generated insight”.20 Unknown outcomes of Milton Keynes’ early community art, determined the nature of space through social acts, not predetermined zoning. However, despite the art improving some passage territories’ social potential, boundaries created by grid-roads still restrict the insular grid-squares.
“Artwashing the Archive with Bow Arts,” Balfron Social Club, November 21, 2019, https://balfronsocialclub.org/. 20 Grant H. Kester, “Dialogical Aesthetics, Stephen Willats and the Audience as Rationale,” in Conversation Pieces: Community and Communication in Modern Art (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2014), 93, 95. 19
Incomplete Objects
[Fig. 8 – Incomplete Objects] Incomplete form opposes the brittle city, a closed system resistant to change, due to an overdetermination of functions during planning. Incomplete objects can receive addition or subtraction without complete demolition. Sennett argues urbanism, when viewed as a completing process, can inhibit social life. The architect’s viewed Netherfield and Beanhill’s metal-clad terraces as complete, and resident customisation as compromising the factory finish. Pastiche PVC windows and cladding are often associated with increased privatisation. Yet ownership affords residents the chance to change supposedly complete architecture, unsuitable for their needs. Sennett defines the difference between the unfinished and the unfinishable as “incomplete; waiting to resolve” versus “an ontological process”.21 The New Town Commission’s advocacy for ‘self-containment’ and ‘social balance’ was questioned before Milton Keynes’ construction. Yet, 1968's Town Planning Review still promoted “complete” communities.22 Sennett notes viewing the city as a machine dangerously compares demolishing an entire community to simply replacing a broken part.
Pablo Sendra and Richard Sennett, Designing Disorder: Experiments and Disruptions in the City (London: Verso Books, 2020), 137. 22 A. A. Ogilvy, “The Self-Contained New Town: Employment and Population,” The Town Planning Review, April 1968, pp. 38-54. 21
[Fig. 9 – Beanhill Timeline] Beanhill underwent resident led retrofit rather than demolition. Originally housing for workers, a community identity grew through the addition of art like the Tin Man sculpture, Wizard of Oz underpass, and theatre group. The corrugated metal cladding, chosen by Norman Foster, was noisy when it rained, and contributed to cold internal temperatures, while flat roofs caused leaking and damp. The material condition invertedly led to the formation of Beanhill Tenants Association Group. After intense campaigning, the houses were retrofitted with insulation and mock-Tudor pitched roofs. The Tenants Association protested other injustices, such as the proposed closure of Moorlands activity centre. Residents were overwhelmingly happier living on the estate after the retrofit, leading to the adoption of pitched roofs on new developments across Milton Keynes.23
Mark Clapson, A Social History of Milton Keynes: Middle England/Edge City (London: Frank Cass, 2004), 36-37. 23
[Fig. 10 – The Neo-vernacular Turn] This shift from modernist to neo-vernacular seemed to mirror a shift towards materialism. Journalists loathed Beanhill’s “indignity of pitched roofs”, supposedly demonstrating “a loss of any sense of communal belonging”.24 Whilst journalists interpreted the retrofit as materialistic destruction of the architectural completeness, the collective practices involved challenged the “wilful innocence” often found in the suburbs according to Sennett.25 The capacity for retrofit aided the social potential. The desire for completeness was accompanied by paternalistic determination of acceptable social activities, reducing social potential for certain groups. Working-class spaces, like social clubs, were ignored by the Plan for Milton Keynes, perceived as less proper than middle-class activities, yet they were still valuable gathering spaces, inexpensive to join. Jane Jacobs argued a middle-class vision of comfortable social space destroyed forums for the working class, suggesting a latent distrust of the working-class, like Haussmann’s Paris redesign. Sennett argues a collective body should gather, not order, all types of people without restrictions. Viewing the city as a complete system has an isolating effect on social potential.
Ibid., 113, 163. Richard Sennett, The Uses of Disorder: Personal Identity and City Life (New York: Norton, 1970), xii. 24 25
[Fig. 11 – Beanhill Isolation] This shift from modernist to neo-vernacular seemed to mirror a shift towards materialism. Journalists loathed Beanhill’s “indignity of pitched roofs”, supposedly demonstrating “a loss of any sense of communal belonging”.26 Whilst journalists interpreted the retrofit as materialistic destruction of the architectural completeness, the collective practices involved challenged the “wilful innocence” often found in the suburbs according to Sennett.27 The capacity for retrofit aided the social potential. The desire for completeness was accompanied by paternalistic determination of acceptable social activities, reducing social potential for certain groups. Working-class spaces, like social clubs, were ignored by the Plan for Milton Keynes, perceived as less proper than middle-class activities, yet they were still valuable gathering spaces, inexpensive to join. Jane Jacobs argued a middle-class vision of comfortable social space destroyed forums for the working class, suggesting a latent distrust of the working-class, like Haussmann’s Paris redesign. Sennett argues a collective body should gather, not order, all types of people without restrictions. Viewing the city as a complete system has an isolating effect on social potential.
Ibid., 113, 163. Richard Sennett, The Uses of Disorder: Personal Identity and City Life (New York: Norton, 1970), xii. 26 27
Nonlinear Narratives
[Fig. 12 – Nonlinear Narratives] Nonlinear narratives oppose sequential development of the city. Sennett argues that “massed together in an assemblage… incomplete forms allow the nonlinear development of the cite”. By “leaving conflictual elements in play”, and utilizing adaptive form, communities may find “informal ways of coexisting”.28 In Milton Keynes, rigid grid-roads and zoning led to the failure of the main bus route, and eventual closure of the central bus station. However, the infrastructure was appropriated by local skateboarders, leading to the opening of a skatepark, youth centre and state shop. This nonlinear narrative opened-up a zone of the city typically hostile to youth.
Pablo Sendra and Richard Sennett, Designing Disorder: Experiments and Disruptions in the City (London: VERSO BOOKS, 2020), 33-34. 28
[Fig. 13 – Urban Contradictions] Linear top-down thinking limited social equality in Milton Keynes. MATRIX queried centring on improving “individual mobility” through grid-roads, instead of collective mobility, through public transport or flexible work and living.29 Grid-roads improved connectivity for the affluent men that used them, while poorly maintained cycle routes, underpasses and bus stops reduced mobility for the rest. Similarly, Napoleon’s progressive ‘code civil’ entrenched oppression, affording “all citizens equal rights”, yet expecting women to maintain the home, preventing a multiplicity of living arrangements.30 Arguably, Milton Keynes’ zoning contributed to the perception of the home as merely a place of leisure, furthering unseen domestic labour of women.
MATRIX Feminist Design Cooperative, Making Space: Women and the Man-Made Environment (London: Pluto Press, 1984), 40. 30 Richard Sennett, The Uses of Disorder: Personal Identity and City Life (New York: Norton, 1970), 9. 29
[Fig. 14 – Views In] Sennett argues denial of nonlinear narratives is a symptom of the closed city, where “things that ‘don’t fit’ diminish value”. This attitude upholds material homogeneity through glorifying ‘context’, repressing that which “sticks out, offends or challenges”.31 Perhaps architects rejected resident appropriation of Netherfield due to the “variety of materials and colours” used such as PVC windows and voile curtains, which offered a glimpse of the disorderly domestic life lived inside.32 Ad hoc repairs imbue connotations of social difference, with one new town resident saying, “Generally, round here everyone keeps to the white Georgian windows, whereas [over there] is a hotchpotch of windows, shutters, brown windows… yellow windows … [round here] people don’t want to stick out”.33 Disorderly material alterations are associated negatively with virtue. Sennet argues community identity based on “a belief in shared values and emotional cohesion… that has little to do with their actual social experiences together”, presents a perceived moral boundary, limiting social potential.34
Pablo Sendra and Richard Sennett, Designing Disorder: Experiments and Disruptions in the City (London: VERSO BOOKS, 2020), 25. 32 Mark Clapson, The Plan for Milton Keynes (Wavendon: Milton Keynes Development Corp., 1970), 19. 33 Dale Southerton, “Boundaries of `Us' and `Them': Class, Mobility and Identification in a New Town,” Sociology 36, no. 1 (2002): pp. 171-193, https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038502036001009, 182. 34 Richard Sennett, The Uses of Disorder: Personal Identity and City Life (New York: Norton, 1970), 32. 31
[Fig. 15 – Collective Assembly] Aldo Rossi relates the nature of collective urban artefacts to art, not only because they are both “material constructions”, but because “although they are conditioned, they also condition”. Therefore, these “manifestations of social life”, also manifest social life; an evaluation spanning the typical dichotomy of space as a vessel for, or shaper of, social relationships.35 Sennett argues the right to alter public space should be guaranteed as a form of tactile democracy. Similarly, Henri Lefebvre’s right to the city not only accepts equal rights to the resources of the city, but also the right to alter its socio-material configuration, since a “city historically constructed’” is “no longer lived and is no longer understood practically”.36
Aldo Rossi, Aldo Rossi: The Architecture of the City (Cambridge, Massachusetts: The Institute for Architecture and Urban Studies and The Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1982), 32-33. 36 Henri Lefebvre, Eleonore Kofman, and Elizabeth Lebas, Writings on Cities (Oxford: Blackwell, 1996), 148. 35
[Fig. 16 – Assemblage] Pablo Sendra argues the collective right to reassemble space between buildings fosters “a closer relationship between people and things”,37 improving collective understanding of resource generation, management, and consumption. Assemblage in critical urbanism is an interpretation of interactions in a city as a symbiosis of interconnected elements and actors, including different infrastructures, humans, objects, or governmental structures. Assemblage, unlike new town zoning, which defines functions and imposes boundaries, should permeate a space with social potential. Colin McFarlane notes how assemblage can transform a “collective experience into a social consciousness”, that “distributes agency across the social and the material, and in doing so draws attention to the agency of the materials themselves as processes within assemblages”.38 Although Beanhill residents successfully campaigned for retrofit insulation, decreasing energy waste, current power structures prevent extending this approach citywide. Sendra’s proposition, disordering the city through appropriable resource distribution points, could disrupt linear narratives still prevailing within Milton Keynes’ infrastructures.
Pablo Sendra and Richard Sennett, Designing Disorder: Experiments and Disruptions in the City (London: VERSO BOOKS, 2020), 85. 38 Colin mcfarlane, “Assemblage and Critical Urbanism,” City 15, no. 2 (2011): pp. 204-224, https://doi.org/10.1080/13604813.2011.568715, 207, 221. 37
Conclusion – The Social Potential
[Fig. 17 – Domestic, Out] Sennett argues an open city is, “democratic not in the legal sense, but as a tactile experience”.39 In Benjamin Constants civil society, “people are both mutually engaged and disengaged, a city of solitudes as well as communalities”.40 In Beanhill, simultaneous campaigns for both the material conditions of the home, and community assets, align with this duality of tactile democracy.
Pablo Sendra and Richard Sennett, Designing Disorder: Experiments and Disruptions in the City (London: VERSO BOOKS, 2020), 35. 40 Pablo Sendra and Richard Sennett, Designing Disorder: Experiments and Disruptions in the City (London: VERSO BOOKS, 2020), 135. 39
[Fig. 18 – Tinggarden] Dolores Hayden’s non-sexist city imagines voluntary use of collective services, laundrettes, day-cares, dial-a-ride busses, stating “they would exist in addition to private dwelling units and private gardens”, affording residents rights to solitude, without absorbing too many activities into the family home.41 Tinggarden, Denmark, a new settlement completed in 1971, features communal kitchens and lounges as well as private equivalents.42 Scattering the domestic across the city enables more people to truly inhabit the city by altering its physical form.
Charles A. Jencks, Karl Kropf, and Dolores Hayden, “What Would a Non-Sexist City Be Like? Speculations on Housing, Urban Design and Human Work,” in Theories and Manifestoes of Contemporary Architecture (Chichester: Wiley-Academy, 2008), pp. 84-85. 42 “The Successful Experiment,” Tinggården - Communal building, accessed January 7, 2022, https://vandkunsten.com/en/projects/tinggaarden. 41
[Fig. 19 – Tactile Democracy Precedents] Such tactile democracy is demonstrated in participatory processes. In Milton Keynes, Eaglestone residents collaborated with community artists, building a question mark sculpture where they demanded a hospital be built. Vrijbucht self-build new town was created with an architect in residence, while Almere new town now has an online self-build portal. City in the Making (Stad in de Maak) encourages self-build appropriations, such as scaffolded community kitchens, while Hoogvliet new town encourages parasitic interventions to disrupt rigid zoning and nimbyism.43
The International New Town Institute, “Meeting Place, Midsummer Boulevard,” Meeting Place, Midsummer Boulevard (October 3, 2019). 43
[Fig. 20 – Three Scales] Milton Keynes’ retrofit could focus on processes enabling socio-material democracy, and disordering “as an act of social self-determination”, furthering the 2011 Localism Act.44 At the scale of the grid-square, dual spaces of solitude and communality intertwine with assemblage infrastructures and collective resource production. Surplus solar power is sold to the grid or exchanged for local needs. Distribution points for electricity and fresh water allow for ad hoc community activities. At room scale, as more domestic refuges are built across the city, space emerges inside the home for community activities. Room layouts may change to conserve energy, and extensions may be built to accommodate inclusive growth. At city scale, self-build centres offer education, recreation, resources, and waste redistribution. These centres replace certain functions of placeless chain stores, freeing-up city centre space for civic activities, community forums and social clubs. Through an assemblage of incomplete objects, porous passive territories, and the acceptance of nonlinear narratives, Milton Keynes’ retrofit can disorder barriers to social potential.
44
Colin Ward, Anarchy in Action (London: Freedom Press, 1996), 137.
List of Illustrations Fig. 1 – Juxtaposed Realities. By Author. Fig. 2 – Transport Obstacles. By Author. Fig. 3 – Passage Territories. By Author. Fig. 4 – Purity Ritual. By Author. Fig. 5 – Activity Centres. Milton Keynes Development Corporation, Facilities, Scan, January 6, 2022, https://www.academyofurbanism.org.uk/10-lessons-from-mk-a-personal-view/. Fig. 6. – Four Grid-Squares Analysis. By Author. Fig. 7. Community Artwashing. By Author. Fig. 8 – Incomplete Objects. By Author. Fig. 9 – Beanhill Timeline. By Author. Fig. 10 – The Neo-vernacular Turn. By Author. Fig. 11 – Beanhill Isolation. By Author. Fig. 12 – Nonlinear Narratives. By Author. Fig. 13 – Urban Contradictions. By Author. Fig. 14 – Views In. Rightmove PLC, Properties to buy in Milton Keynes, Photographs, December 29, 2021, https://www.rightmove.co.uk/. Fig. 15 – Collective Assembly. By Author. Fig. 16 – Assemblage. By Author. Fig. 17 – Domestic, Out. By Author. Fig. 18 – Tinggarden. By Author. Fig. 19 – Tactile Democracy Precedents. By Author. Fig. 20 – Three Scales. By Author.
Bibliography Aldridge, Meryl. “Only Demi-Paradise? Women in Garden Cities and New Towns.” Planning Perspectives 11, no. 1 (1996): 23–39. https://doi.org/10.1080/026654396364916. “Artwashing the Archive with Bow Arts.” Balfron Social Club, November 21, 2019. https://balfronsocialclub.org/. Clapson, Mark. A Social History of Milton Keynes: Middle England/Edge City. London: Frank Cass, 2004. Clapson, Mark. The Plan for Milton Keynes. Wavendon: Milton Keynes Development Corp., 1970. De Carlo, Giancarlo. “An Architecture of Participation.” Perspecta 17, 1980. Fox, James. Whole. Everyone Is an Artist BBC Sounds. BBC Wales: BBC Radio 4, November 27, 2021. Heraud, B.J. “Social Class and the New Towns.” Urban Studies 5, no. 1 (1968): 33–58. https://doi.org/10.1080/00420986820080031. Hillier, Bill. “Milton Keynes - Look Back To London.” The Architects' Journal 195, no. 15, April 15, 1992. Hobson, Jane. “New Towns, The Modernist Planning Project And Social Justice The Cases Of Milton Keynes, UK And 6th October, Egypt,” 1999. The International New Town Institute. “Utopian Radicalism.” A Festival of Creative Urban Living. Lecture presented at the Meeting Place, Midsummer Boulevard, October 3, 2019. Jacobs, Jane. The Death and Life of Great American Cities. London, UK: Jonathan Cape, 2020. Jencks, Charles A., Karl Kropf, and Dolores Hayden. “What Would a Non-Sexist City Be Like? Speculations on Housing, Urban Design and Human Work.” Essay. In Theories and Manifestoes of Contemporary Architecture, 84–85. Chichester: Wiley-Academy, 2008. Kester, Grant H. “Dialogical Aesthetics, Stephen Willats and the Audience as Rationale.” Essay. In Conversation Pieces: Community and Communication in Modern Art. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2014. Lefebvre, Henri, Eleonore Kofman, and Elizabeth Lebas. Writings on Cities. Oxford: Blackwell, 1996. Mars, Tim. “Little Los Angeles in Bucks.” The Architects' Journal 195, no. 15, April 15, 1992. MATRIX Feminist Design Cooperative. Making Space: Women and the Man-Made Environment. London: Pluto Press, 1984. McFarlane, Colin. “Assemblage and Critical Urbanism.” City 15, no. 2 (2011): 204–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/13604813.2011.568715. Ogilvy, A. A. “The Self-Contained New Town: Employment and Population.” The Town Planning Review 39, no. 1, April 1968. Planning Department, Oxford Brookes University. Transferrable Lessons from the New Towns. London: Department for Communities and Local Government: 2006.
Rossi, Aldo. Aldo Rossi: The Architecture of the City. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The Institute for Architecture and Urban Studies and The Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1982. Sendra, Pablo, and Richard Sennett. Designing Disorder: Experiments and Disruptions in the City. London: VERSO BOOKS, 2020. Sennett, Richard. The Uses of Disorder: Personal Identity and City Life. New York: Norton, 1970. Slater, Josephine Berry, and Anthony Iles. No Room to Move: Radical Art and the Regenerate City. London, UK: Mute Books, 2010. Southerton, Dale. “Boundaries of `Us' and `Them': Class, Mobility and Identification in a New Town.” Sociology 36, no. 1 (2002): 171–93. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038502036001009. “The Successful Experiment.” Tinggården - Communal building. Accessed January 7, 2022. https://vandkunsten.com/en/projects/tinggaarden. Walker, Derek, and Steen Eiler Rasmussen. The Architecture and Planning of Milton Keynes. London: The Architectural Press, 1982. Ward, Colin. Anarchy in Action. London: Freedom Press, 1996. Webber, Melvin M. “The Urban Place and the Non-Place Urban Realm.” Essay. In Explorations into Urban Structure. Philadelphia: Univ. of Pennsylvania Press, 1968. Young, Iris Marion. “Throwing like a Girl: A Phenomenology of Feminine Body Comportment Motility and Spatiality.” Human Studies 3, no. 1 (1980): 137–56. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02331805.