(MArch) Dissertation Foolosophy Of The Folly

FOOLOSOPHY OF THE FOLLY: An exploration into the ambiguous architecture which constitutes The Folly

_____________________________________________________________________ JOSEPH CHANDLER 8805 words

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would to acknowledge the following people who have supported me in my foolish quest. Firstly, I would like to give thanks to my supervisor Sebastian Messer, for supporting me through this entire undertaking. To my friends and family for their supporting encouragement. I would like to thank Amy Lord for giving me the opportunity to collaborate with her in producing Experiments in Happiness. I would also like to thank Katy Jacka, Liz Morgan and all my peers who offered up their time and effort in helping me realise my ambitions for the project. Finally, I would like to thank the workshop technicians who aided me in the construction of the ‘Silent Bar’.

CONTENTS

PREFACE

3

____________________________________________________________________________________________________

ETYMOLOGY OF FOLLY

4

___________________________________________________________________________________________________

INTRODUCTION TO THE FOLLY I

HISTORIC CONTEXT: PRE 20TH CENTURY

II

MODERN CONTEXT: POST 19TH CENTURY

5-18

___________________________________________________________________________________________________

THE SHIFT: FROM THE FOLLY TO THE PAVILION I

REASON FOR CHANGE

II

PAVILION ETYMOLOGY

III

NEW CONTEXT OF THE CITY

IV

ART, SCULPTURE & ARCHITECTURE

V

PAVILION AS PROTAGONIST

VI

“--------” AS PROPAGANDA

VII

“--------” AS PROFESSOR

19-30

___________________________________________________________________________________________________

THE CREATIVE COMPLEX I

ARTIST/ARCHITECT RELATIONS

II

PAVILION AS CREATIVE PLATORM

31-49

___________________________________________________________________________________________________

CONCLUSION: THE BEGINNING OF THE END I

THE FOLLY

II

THE PAVILION

50-52

3

PREFACE

How does one introduce or even try to define the ambiguous architectural oddity that constitutes the folly, without coming across as foolish? The paper is an alternative route, a diversion and exploration into madness, assuming the role of the architectural detective, turning over the rock to see what’s underneath, in an attempt to better understand who, how, why and when these, frivolous follies and polymorphic pavilions decided to ‘pop-up’. The investigation into the folly, deciphers some of the cryptic messages, wicked trickery and rich potentials which it harbours in its ambiguity. It follows the architectural lineage of the folly and how, throughout its lifetime, it has offered up different meanings for the different societies which have bared witness. The paper examines the folly from its birth in the 16th century to its present-day position, and how it has morphed and changed to offer us something more than just a functional architectural service. The paper aims to remove the mask, lift the veil and open your eyes to the cornucopia of forms, functions and faces this architectural actor has assumed. The investigation into these understudied entities aims to illuminate the subject and reveal the qualities that these foolish forms of architecture encapsulate. However small, temporary or purposeless they may come across, these alternative artefacts possess an architectural ‘other’, which offers new perspectives and possibilities to potentially liberate the current conventions of the architectural profession.

4

ETYMOLOGY OF FOLLY

In order to properly introduce the subject of the folly, it is essential to start at the beginning and look back to the etymological development of this unusual word, as historically, the numerous literary connotations have become one of the follies major defining features. The homophone ‘Folly’ has morphed and evolved over time to adopt a conglomerate of different meanings. The oldest use of the word can be dated back to 12th century, which was derived from the Old French word ‘Folie’, meaning madness, stupidity. This theme continued into the early 13th century in Middle English, meaning “mental weakness; unwise conduct” also “wickedness, lewdness and madness”. (Harper, 2010) The modern French definition refers to ‘delight’ and ‘favourite dwelling’ (Farrow, 2014) Although we can find earlier examples of built follies, the earliest appearance of the word in referral to the built structures which we know today, was in the 1650’s defining the folly as a “costly structure considered to have shown folly in the builder” (Harper, 2010). Referencing the old French term ‘Folie’ in regard to the foolish endeavour of the builder, designer or patron who had spent such a vast sum of money on such a foolish undertaking. In tracing the linage of the word, it should be noted that the etymological meaning of ‘folly’, referring to a certain kind of foolishness or madness, has directly impacted the conceptual approach of their creators. It is these mysterious meanings, which are fundamental characteristics present in human life, that underpin the physical and metaphysical aspects of these built edifices.

5

INTRODUCTION TO THE FOLLY _____________________________________________________________________ HISTORIC CONTEXT: PRE 20TH CENTURY

In order to tackle the challenge of defining a folly, it must be broken down into its endless linguistic, architectural, theatrical, and critical counter-parts.

The task of pinpointing an exact date of the origin of the folly is extremely difficult, the best chance is to trace it back to a period in time, where a cultural shift was in motion. A time where societal norms where being drastically reconfigured and scrutinised through employment of a newly found age of reason. A movement which spanned the from (1685-1815) coined the ‘Long 18th century’. This period was best known as the Enlightenment period, which saw the rise of the architectural folly. One of the earliest examples of a constructed folly, which actually predates this period, was the Freston Tower, in Suffolk, said to be constructed as early as 1549 (Headley & Meulenkamp, 1999). The folly with its foolish connotations as we know it today, was first used in a literary context in Erasmus’s ‘In Praise of folly’ published in 1511. ‘His sharp satire on the conditions of his times uses the voice of the folly as a vehicle of critique and speculation on an alternative society (Chun, Hirsch & Misselwitz, 2013). These early notions which Erasmus voiced such as satire, speculation and critique on society, have woven their way into the diverse repertoire of potentials which the folly possesses. The prominence of the architectural folly was not truly ascertained however, until it was held up against the unrelenting forces founded in the age of reason. ‘The folly as both architectural design and figure of unreason, received its precise definition during the Enlightenment’ (Archer & Vidler, 1983). The folly as figure of unreason, firmly placed it in contention with the current perceptions of the period, taking on the form of the outsider, adopting the opposing role of the antagonist. It was during this period that the folly established itself within human consciousness. ‘The cultural role of the folly, was not realised until an age of reason had discovered its marvellous properties’ (Archer & Vidler, 1983). The folly can be said to have been born out of the Enlightenment period as part of a reaction to the sensibilities of the time, asserting itself as the rebellious teen, a sort of “necessary evil” to challenge the new

6

cultural ideals. The folly became the critical tool, a ‘unit of architectural language’, used by its creators to play the role of the societal commentator. ‘The folly provided an alternative to the Enlightenment preoccupation with classification; in so doing, it probed the limits of reason’s response to stimuli’ (Clingham, 1998). It is the ability of the folly to provide an alternative which has been one of its most crucial features, unable to be pinned down or categorised, the folly maintains through its ambiguity, an authenticity, which is able to subtly prompt people to question societal norms, challenge perceptions and ask the question about what does it mean to be human. ‘Follies are both a madness and a kind of building, a mad kind of building, that undermines classification’ (Clingham, 1998).

During this period, Wealthy patron—usually young men of aristocracy—were setting off on their cultural and aesthetic educational escapades known as ‘The Grand Tour’.

The grand tour was when young men went to travel the countries of Europe as a means to expand their knowledge and experience the many delights to be found in European cities. It was during these travels that they would be exposed to the rich abundance of art, architecture and culture. On their return, many cultural relics would be purchased or consigned to memory and brought back to England. These beautiful artefacts where symbolic expressions of the vast knowledge attained during their travels and demonstrated to their counterparts, a well-educated taste and appreciation of the arts (Knowels, 2013). The narratives which were encapsulated by the ruins of places such as Ancient Rome were the inspiration to the British Landscape architects of the time, expressing an ‘evocative decline’, which ‘Corresponded to the cultural aspirations of the owners of some of England’s Country Houses’ (Coates, 2010).

Unearthing the ancient Arcadian idles of ‘A vision of pastoral bliss, where man and nature lived in harmony’ (BBC 4, 2017). Artefacts reminiscent of the grand tours began to be reassembled in the British Landscape gardens of the privately owned estates of the upper classes.

It was within this new context, that the folly assumed the role of the narrative object of pleasure, carefully nestled amongst its new picturesque setting of the garden. Bernard Tschumi alludes to the reciprocal nature of the folly situated in the landscape garden, expressing the Arcadian ideals which were present in William Kent’s park at Stowe, ‘displaying a subtle dialect between organised landscape and architectural element’ Stating that these small built entities acted as symbolic signs of order ‘a necessary counterpart to the sensuality of the

Freston Tower - Suffolk, 1549

9

winding streams…. conversely without the traces of sensuality –trees, hedges, valleys—only symbols would remain, in a silent and frozen fashion’ (Tschumi, 1996). The folly in this sense is being used as a representation or ‘mock’ article, curated by the designer in order to enhance the natural landscape which surrounds it. These precisely positioned objects ‘could be rediscovered by the visitor or the owner every time he took a stroll in the garden, as if stumbling across a piece of antiquity’ (Coates, 2010). Thus, evoking the sense of that Arcadian ideal, a unique momentary harmony, between man and nature. Clingham, however, highlights the contradiction which is happening during these moments of wonderment, ‘The paradox here -- the central one in follies -- is the fact that the viewers “memory” is being “refreshed” by a relatively new object......The sham ruin represents....a contemporary vision of the past rather than evidence from the past itself’ (Clingham, 1998). This ‘central paradox’ embodied by the folly of a falsifying perception is another key mechanism which is used, a form of illusion and a certain trickery of the eye, relating back to its early etymological definition of wickedness in its ability to fool the viewer. The folly possesses the power to draw the viewers’ attention, an eye catcher which provokes through its mysterious quality an intrigue and a yearning to be explored further. ‘There is rarely pleasure without seduction, or seduction without illusion’ (Tschumi, 1996).

A defining aspect of the folly is the notion of pleasure. Situated in the landscape garden, these small, often costly objects aim to encase the memory and memorabilia representative of the beauty and pleasure derived from the ruins of antiquity, experienced during the grand tour. A fanatical charity group known as ‘The Folly Fellowship’ define the folly as being ‘Built for pleasure before purpose’ (Folly Fellowship Homepage, 2017) Often described as ‘purposeless’, ‘useless’, or ‘whimsical’ the folly took up a unique position, relieving the focus of function, to the larger more ‘serious’ forms of architecture, it allowed itself to cleverly slip by unnoticed and was free to explore the ‘other’ more unspeakable or in some cases, deviant human subjects of, playfulness, eroticism, whimsy, foolery and liberation, which at the time were ‘not allowed in a polite society’ (Archer & Vidler, 1983).

If we are to save ourselves the exhaustion of attempting to rigorously define this architectural ambiguity, Stuart Barton applies a succinct definition about what the folly represents ‘The buildings which have come to be known as follies do nothing more than reflect human

10

nature and taste’ (Barton, 1972). Human nature in all its chaotic, mad, satirical, playful, lewd, foolish, pleasurable, purposeless, whimsical, wickedness, and taste in relation to the societal and aesthetical conventions of the time.

3 3 3

In order to illustrate one example of what a historic folly may consttute, here is a case study and brief analysis of one of Britain’s purest follies, Rushton Triangular Lodge, (159397) - Sir Thomas Tresham The folly situated in the gardens of Ruston Hall, Kettering has been described as one of the most authentic examples of what a folly represents. Sir Thomas Tresham was the creator of the folly in 1595. ‘With Tresham, building loses all pretence of function; it is about expressing an idea, an obsession.’ (Headley & Meulenkamp, 1999) Common in nearly all follies the built artefact houses hidden messages, symbolic meanings and personal and universal narratives. It is a credit to Sir Thomas Tresham who clearly demonstrated a folly within himself embodying and designing the dictionary definition of folly, a “costly structure considered to have shown folly in the builder”. (Harper, 2010) It was the foolish undertaking and unrelenting obsession of the builder which has resulted in this fine example of a folly. Architectural critic Nikolas Pesvner considered it to be of great architectural significance stating that ‘It is a testament of faith, to be treated with respect.’ (Bailey et al., 1961) The design of the folly can be attributed to the religious musing of Tresham himself and was a culmination of those religious obsessions. Designed as a gesamtkunstwerk, the folly is a homage to the holy trinity. Every individual element of the lodge nearly always relates back to the number 3 in some manner, representative of the holy trinity. Designed with a triangular plan the brick lodge has three walls measuring 33 feet, three storey high, each storey with three windows, topped with 3 gables to each wall which are each capped with a 3-sided obelisk, with a 3 sided central chimney and 3 sets of 3 gargoyles. Treshams obsession with the number three runs even deeper, expressed in the carvings and quotations inscribed onto the building. 3 Latin texts can be seen, one inscribed on each wall, all 33 letters long.

The carving TRES. TESTI MONIVM. DANT, situated above the entrance is a biblical

Sir Thomas Tresham: Rushton Triangular Lodge - Northamptonshire, England

13

quotation (John 1:5-7) ‘For there are three that bear record (in heaven) (Headley & Meulenkamp, 1999). The ‘TRES’—French for three—also acted as a play on words relating to ‘TRESham’ himself, apparently the nickname given to him by his wife. It has been thought that Tresham was a keen mathematician as a bewildering number of numerical references to historic religious events are hidden within the design. The date 1641 and 1626 can be seen on one of the gables, these dates did not seem to represent any biblical event, however, if you subtract 1593—the year that construction began on the lodge—from each date, you are left with (AD)33 and (AD)48 the presumed dates of Jesus’s and Mary’s deaths, numbers which are also both divisible by three. (Scriblerus, 2002) The dates AD3898 and AD3509 are seen on the second gable, significant religious events in the Old Testament. Finally, the number 5555 can be seen over the entrance. It was discovered that if you subtract the date of the Creation 3962BC you are left with AD1593. (Headley & Meulenkamp, 1999) Relating back to Anthony Vidler’s description of the folly suggesting its ‘perverse discipline, a logic, and reason within itself’ (Archer & Vidler, 1983) that It can be attributed to Tresham’s obsessive nature and reason for his incorporation of the extensive number of referential design considerations and mysterious, hidden numerical and biblical meanings which are so expressive of the characteristics of the folly.

_____________________________________________________________________ MODERN CONTEXT: POST 19TH CENTURY

Having looked back to the earliest examples of the folly and its multitude of interpretations and implementations, in this section we look at how the folly implanted itself in the new age of modernism and metropolitan living and how the meanings and values upheld by the historic folly, were reordered and restructured to the new context of the 20th century. ‘A folly or fantasy must change and evoke different meanings if it is to be dynamic over a period of time.’ Rudolph (1983, quoted in Archer & Vidler, 1983).

Swiss architect, Bernard Tschumi, was the pioneer in championing the resurgence of the folly, when he sent ripples through the architectural world in 1984 following his success in producing the winning proposal for the competition to redesign the Parc de la Villette.

14

A 125-acre public park in North-East quarter of Paris (Hatipoglu, 2014). It was comprised of a series of 35 individual follies laid out over a grid system at 120 metre intervals, which spanned the length and breadth of the park. Tshcumi describes the follies within his proposal as ‘architectural and social laboratories’ (Hardingham, Rattenbury and Tschumi, 2012). The project was in direct relation to ‘Tschumi’s own writings and theorising on space, movement and event, and those of the wider architectural debate on deconstructivism’ in the 1980’s (Hardingham, Rattenbury and Tschumi, 2012). The realisation of this pivotal project explored the theoretical concepts which Tschumi was developing by physically constructing ‘the built diagram’. ‘A public space of experiment where theoretical issues, incompletely explored in text and drawings, could be tested with real materials, real spaces and real actors.’ (Hardingham, Rattenbury and Tschumi, 2012). It acted as an analytical enquiry of those ideas which have previously been confined to paper. A key concept explored in the project was in connection to Jacque Derrida’s philosophies of deconstructionism, an ‘undoing of things’ to discover the contradictory meaning and irregularities inherent in a text or a structure. This expresses the attributes associated with the historic folly, as the critical commentator, extrapolating and reflecting the misconceptions of society in the guise of reason. In Derrida’s text, “Point De Folie”, he expresses the same notions representative of the physical artefact, ‘of a calculated provocation and charged invitation to reflect and think otherwise (Chun, Hirsch & Misselwitz, 2013).

The modern folly could be conceived as the resurrection or second coming of contestation, whereby people like Tshcumi, were using the etymological meaning of the word ‘folie’ pertaining to madness, as the antagonist illustrating the contradictions to be found in the overwhelming rationalism of the modern architectural movement, which was the commanding force during this period. ‘In a more recent history, the term folly re-entered cultural practice as a form of critique against modernist rationality’ (Chun, Hirsch & Misselwitz, 2013).

Tschumi describes the setting of his project saying “La Villette is a piece of the city, variegated space of cultural places. It is a new type of park—a park of ‘culture,’ not ‘nature” (Tschumi, 2005) Thus denoting the modern shift from the sensual setting of the 18th century landscape garden to the culturally diverse landscape of the urban realm. The arts commentator Simon Pugh refers to William Kent’s landscape garden at Rousham House, describing the difficulties which the folly may face in the new urban landscape, stating that

Bernard Tschumi Architects - Parc de la Villette Paris (1982-1998)

17

the folly ‘is a highly tuned spatial instrument for bodily and perceptual awareness that would be hard to match in the confusing and overloaded context of the city.’ (Coates, 2010) Whereas the folly in relation to the garden acted as a ‘spatial instrument’ carefully and strategically guiding the visitor on an individual voyage of discovery, the new chaotic context of the city, propelled the folly into uncharted territory and posed the challenge of designing in close proximity to the dizzying structured/unstructured environment of the concrete jungle.

However, ‘Tschumi aptly utilized the dualistic meaning of the homophone “folly,” meaning whimsical structure, and “folie,” meaning madness, to go beyond the historical context of urban cities’ (Eui-Yound, Uoo Sang and JinBok, no date). This maybe one of the first times, that although still situated in the urban park, the folly had been brought one step closer to its new urban setting, which constituted the landscape of the city. This contextual jump leads us to the new concepts associated with what has been coined the ‘Urban Folly’.

Around the world architects are beginning to realise the potentials that these small, functionless, and playful structures epitomize. The German architect and curator Nikolaus Hirsch, a folly enthusiast and the General Artistic Director of the “Gwangju Folly II’ Biennale, eludes to this power suggesting follies possess ‘an intelligent madness’…., in which the ‘suspension’ of reason and function opens the door to imagination and experimentation: a ‘foolishness’ that has in its possession the elusive power of ambivalence, and therefore freedom.’ Hirsch (2014, quoted in Farrow, 2014) The Gwangju Biennale in South Korea was set up as an urban regeneration scheme with a twist. It proposed a new and daring approach to regeneration, through the concepts of Novelty and Contextualism, assuming the form of the folly. Their definition of the ‘modern folly’ ‘is an unstructured mechanism that transcends the structured urban space in which it is situated.’ (Eui-Yound, Uoo Sang and JinBok, 2016).

To then continue and suggest the regenerative qualities which folly can have on cities, stating that ‘Many cities set up follies in order to revitalize their cultural scenes through small facilities placed in special spots throughout the city.’ (H. Sang, 2011). The historic, foolish, satirical and extravagant nature of the folly has not been lost within its new urban context, as Moskow & Linn describe them in paradoxical terms, suggesting they are, ‘Straddling the gap between fantasy & reality, as well as art and architecture’ (Moskow & Linn, 2010), whilst commenting on their humanistic agendas, denoting their ‘focus on everyday human

18

activities while offering practical, sometimes humorous and ironic, means to improve the lives of city dwellers while enriching and enlivening the urban fabric’ (Moskow & Linn, 2010) This maybe expressed as one of the turning points differentiating the modern folly from it historical predecessor, ‘as tiny or ephemeral as these follies may be—they all share the possibility of becoming critical tools to test out the transformative potential of public space’. (Chun, Hirsch & Misselwitz, 2013) Thus taking on the role of the protagonist, exploring new concepts, in a more responsible role of “improving the lives of city dwellers”. Adopting an idiosyncratic approach, by utilising its playful, practical and humorous characteristics, as a mechanism to appeal to the modern metropolitan. It offers the inhabitants of the city ‘a provocation, a frivolous diversion or strategic place of madness and satire freed from the constraints of societal norms.’ (Hirsch, 2013). It should be reiterated that it is the alternative offering which the folly is able to project which remains a constant unrelenting feature of these small structures. In comparison to the historic garden follies of the 18th century (Enlightenment Period) which offered a focal point for the eye, to enhance its natural surroundings, the urban folly offers a respite, a rupture in routine, which transcends the socio-economic and functional constraints of modern living, and evokes in its nonchalance a beauty in the purposelessness of pleasure, which seeks to break the mechanical speed of modern metropolitan living. ‘To build follies is to introduce, through an injection of architectural fancy, a glitch in the homogenous field of alienated neoliberal rationality that is the contemporary city’ (Grima, 2014).

19

THE SHIFT: From The Folly to The Pavilion

This section of the thesis looks at locating the different events which have led to the shift from the historic context of the folly to the rise of its present-day counterpart, the pavilion

_____________________________________________________________________ REASONS FOR CHANGE

As humanity engaged in the new developments of the modern industrial era of the 20th century, the DNA of the folly began its metamorphosis into its new ephemeral form, known as the Pavilion. Since its inception the pavilion has been presented as one of the many configurations of the folly, the historical archetype now redundant, given the accepted use of ‘pavilion’ as the preferred terminology of the day. Similar to its predecessor, the pavilion still embodies a socially conscious, politically reactionary position and in lieu of the acute sensibilities to its surroundings, the need for transformation was set in motion due to the changing metaphysical landscape of the 20th century. It can be said that the major driving force for transformation was due to the rise of the industrial revolution. ‘With modernity came an entirely different species of pavilion’ (Robinson, 2013) The modern era, powered by the technological advancements made during the industrial revolution presented a new fast paced way of living with the introduction of telecommunications, high speed travel, mechanisation and mass-production. These new developments brought with them new pressures and questions for the pavilion, questions which the picturesque, nostalgia and permanence vested in the 18th century folly, made it insufficient in providing a quick enough response. ‘If in Britain we saw the use of narrative begin as a countryside sensibility in the 18th century, by the 20th century it was more strongly embedded as an urban experience’ (Coates, 2010). The historic shift did more than change the appearance and terminology of the folly, it changed its locality from the idyllic picturesque rural

20

of the British Landscape gardens to the relentless, estranged setting of the modern city.

_____________________________________________________________________ PAVILION ETYMOLOGY

The etymology of the modern French word pavilion, comes from the Latin term Papilio meaning butterfly. During the ancient Roman Empire, the term Papilio, was attributed to the temporal tent-like structures which had the ability to be erected quickly during military campaigns and gatherings. It has been suggested that it was attributed this name, as the canopies were seen to flutter in the wind, mimicking the delicate beating of a butterflies wings. (Robinson, 2013) Although still a form of folly, this is one of the major definable feature of the pavilion which distinguishes itself in the expanded field of folly types. The temporality of its existence. Whereas the historic folly was often constructed using heavy materials as a permanent feature, carefully positioned and situated as part of the natural landscape, the pavilion, from its very beginning, expressed a nomadic dynamism, able to be deployed, set down and re-erected in an entirely new context, suggesting a lighter touch on the landscape giving it an ephemeral quality. This made it the perfect artefact to parallel and react to the unrelenting morphisms of the modern city and its inhabitants.

_____________________________________________________________________ NEW CONTEXT OF THE CITY

In the new context of the modern metropolis the pavilion has masked itself under many guises. One of the most well-known appearances of the pavilion was during the Great Exhibitions, World Fairs and Expo’s. ‘Inseparable from a new culture of exhibition, of spectator and spectacle – of the kind that turned all and sundry into consumer.’ (Robinson, 2013) Attuned to the freedom inherent in follies, these ‘lightly programmed’ entities where used as tools to promote and project an image. In present society, there is currently an encyclopaedia of different exhibiting platforms such as The Serpentine Pavilions, The Venice Biennale, Burning Man Festival, MoMA PS1, Gwangju Biennale and an expansive number of ‘design

21

weeks’ situated around the globe. As well as these curated contexts, the temporary appeal of the pavilion made it the ideal candidate for the modern city stage. Able to re-appropriate space with precipitate speed, inhabiting the left-over, resultant, after-thought space to enliven the cityscape. Similar to that of the Nomadic traveller, the pavilion never stays in one place for too long, a dynamic contraption which strives to remain one step ahead of the crowd.

_____________________________________________________________________ ART, SCULPTURE, ARCHITECTURE?

This newly established context of the curated exhibition projects the pavilion further into that liminal state, ‘Straddling the gap between fantasy and reality, as well as art and architecture’ (Moskow & Linn, 2010), providing an open platform, for a more interdisciplinary approach to architecture, with the intermingling of different fields of creative professions such as, architecture, art, product design, lighting design, sculpture etc. The intermingling and blurring effect of the exhibition is evidenced in the Serpentine Pavilions in London, whereby the visiting architects are all referred to as artists. This opens up the architectural pavilion to the ‘expanded field’ described by Rosalind Krauss in her seminal paper titled ‘Sculpture in The Expanded Field’ (1979) and more recently in Berman and Burnham’s recent exhibition titled ‘Expanded Field: Architecture Installation Beyond Art’ (2016). Both publications challenge conventions of what can be defined as art (sculpture) and what can be defined as architecture. Describing the architectural pavilion in relation to the unique abilities of the chameleon, able to ‘veil their figuration behind matters appropriated from their context[...] acting as an attractor that absorbs, de-familiarises and redisplays the attributes of its surrounding environment’ (Berman & Burnham, 2016). A similar trait seen to be expressed in the historic folly as commentator, able to draw from its social, political, physical and metaphysical landscapes and project its own views regarding the way we go about our quotidian lives. Situated between architecture and sculpture, temporary and permanent, Berman & Burnham describe the architecture pavilion as inhabitable sculptures, functional containers of cultural forms. (Berman & Burnham, 2016).

22

PAVILION AS PROTAGONIST

The modern notion of the pavilion as spectacle as part of the large exhibition, also allows for architects to seize the opportunity to make more direct architectural statements, taking greater leaps in challenging what can be considered architecture. Similar to the process whereby architects produce physical models or sculptors produce maquette’s, the pavilion constitutes a relatively inexpensive, quick approach to test and express concepts being developed as a built form, free of a certain kind of seriousness which often accompanies the designing and building of the ‘real article’. If the 18th century folly can be viewed as the antagonist of its time which was used as a critical tool to contest the current thinking of the era, thus the modern-day equivalent, the pavilion, is the protagonist implemented as the critical tool to test architectural theory and new societal constructs. The notion of test and (con)test seems an underlying character of the folly from its origin in reaction to the ideas associated with the age or reason, to its present-day position associated with the testing of architectural concepts, often driven by a socio-political venture. ‘Designers who make temporary follies in cities are not intent of presaging a built architecture…., but seek to make visible the ritual life of citizens, crystallising it in the theatrical freeze frames’ (Tagliabue, 2015).

_____________________________________________________________________ PAVILION AS PROPAGANDA

The notion of using pavilions as propaganda for commercial enterprises is not a new concept. ‘They have played a role in the growth of international trade since the French Industrial Expositions of 1844 took place in Paris and the first world expo in 1851, titles ‘The Great Exhibition’ (Hollwich, 2015). These expo’s were designed to unite people in order to showcase new inventions, ideas, products and brand identities (Hollwich, 2015). Pia Ednie-Brown, professor at the RMIT School of Architecture suggests how ‘modernity absorbed and commoditised the eccentricity of the folly, “where the realm of the folly was the great exposition, the world exhibition, the trade fair….in this world of marketable objects, the folly became subject to the liberty of fabrication’ (Ednie-Brown, 2015). Now there is

23

a well-established catalogue of modern examples using the pavilion as propaganda, utilised by large multinational retail companies. Once used in the Ancient Roman empire’s military campaigns, these small structures are now being used for the modern-day public relation campaigns set out by multinational retail companies. However, in the new context of the modern metropolis, the pavilion is as much about an image or projection as the built artefact.

With the new power of social media becoming more and more prolific, a pavilions success as promotor can be measured in its ‘Tweetability’ ‘Consumption of architecture today is very different[…]thanks to social media[...]the “tweetability” of a project is a form of currency for brands striving for consumer attention’ (Hollwich, 2015). This idea was encapsulated in HWKN’s - Uniqlo cubes in 2011, where by 6 pop-up cubes where transported to different temporary locations around New York City, bringing with it the image of the company and the opportunity to be documented and shared across a variety of social media platforms, therefore, broadening the reach of the pavilion from it physical, temporary position in the city, to a global presence, archived in the individual databases of the world wide web.

Anthony Vidler was quick to identify the characteristic change of the modern folly suggesting in 1983 that, ‘What in the first place had been the role of the folly to protect a form—now became the requirement to project an image’ (Archer & Vidler, 1983).

It may be fair to say that the pavilion in comparison to its predecessor—the folly—has become more of a physical tool controlled by its maker, embodying a pre-conceived design approach, exploring design questions and imperatives put in place by the architect. The majority of these new edifices present themselves with purpose, be it educator, promotor, creative explorer, observer or any other of its many forms. Can it be said that the pavilion like the folly is ‘built for pleasure before purpose?’ (Folly Fellowship Homepage, 2017). Has pleasure become the second port of call? Has it lost the authentic madness which was so evident in the original folly? Nikolas Hirsch says of the folly, ‘it is the light touch of ‘madness’ that distinguishes it from its more serious sister, the pavilion’ Hirsch (2014 quoted in Farrow, 2014).

This seriousness, although not always present, dilutes the eccentricity skilfully harnessed by the narrative objects of the 18th century. ‘While today’s architectural folie might superficially possess a semblance of logic, it cannot be the logic of known orders and human-centred or hierarchical values, but a “logic” of another kind’ Eisenman & Robertson (1983, quoted in,

24

Archer & Vidler, 1983). It is the ‘otherness’ inherent in both of these architectural ambiguities which remains the folly’s and pavilions defining quality, managing to remain authentic in the face of a fickle modern society. It has, perversely, exhibited a discipline, a logic, a reason in itself, which, because withdrawn from the world, remains in a sense pure (Archer & Vidler, 1983).

What the modern-day pavilion does achieve through its transient qualities is an unattested creative platform for change. Small interventions which can house big questions, narrative objects which are able to freely challenge conventions, uninterrupted by the burdening requirements of a functional building type. Due to the liminal position these small built artefacts assume and its ambiguous and undefinable nature, the pavilion presents itself to new possibilities, for new relationships to be explored. This is most commonly seen in its ability to unite the creative industries giving birth to collaborative projects between designers, artists, makers, computer programmers, writers and cinematographers to name but a few. It is not just the creative industries, which the pavilion encapsulates, but a number of disciplines outside the profession, drawing from a much wider set of influences, to collaborate and explore the ‘other’ architectural ideas of what it possible. ‘Architecture will save its peculiar nature, but only whenever it questions itself, wherever it denies or disrupts the form that a conservative society expect of it’ (Tschumi, 1996).

_____________________________________________________________________ PAVILION AS PROFESSOR

The Pavilion in its new role as propagandist and promotor adopted another trait similar to its predecessor, the social commentator, namely the historic folly. The pavilion became the more astute didactic professor, with an agenda to educate its viewers about global subject matter, much greater than itself. To name one example from the many was Thomas Heatherwicks 2010 seed pavilion in Shanghi. Heatherwick’s position in the architectural world is an interesting one, as he did not train as an architect but as a designer/maker whose influence on the current architectural world cannot be overlooked. Heatherwick Studio has established itself as a leading global design practice referring to themselves as ‘problem

UNIQLO Cubes

27

solvers’, having created internationally acclaimed architectural projects, such as The Learning Hub in Singapore, The Bund Finance Centre in collaboration with Foster and Partners, The Olympic Velodrome in London and currently the Apple Headquarters In San Francisco’s Silicone Valley to name a few. In 2010 Thomas Heatherwick was selected to represent the UK on the world stage at the Shanghi Expo in China. The theme of the exhibition was ‘the future of cities’. Immediately this begins to define the building as a pavilion, as the conceptual design of the structure was conceived out of a brief, be it a very open ended one. In an online debate chaired by the architect Sean Griffiths, co-founder of FAT architects, titled ‘The Artist as Maverick Architect’ (2016) at the Royal Academy of Arts, the subject was discussed about the nuances shared by architects and artists and what differentiates them. ‘The brief is a crucial difference between artist and architect’ Dillion (2016, quoted in, Griffiths et al., 2016). ‘Fundamentally I think all architecture responds to brief, even if it’s self-generated one’ Bronstein (2016, quoted in, Griffiths et al., 2016). Across the panel of artists, architects and curators this seemed to be the major factor which separated the two disciplines.

The folly in contrast may be the only exception as it has freed itself from the constraints associated with major architectural works. The pavilion is however able to promote the cross contamination between different creative collaborators. The Shanghi Pavilion therefore relates more closely to a building rather than a work of art, even if it was created by a ‘problem solver’ rather than architect. The pavilion itself however does embody an extremely expressive sculptural form, what Berman and Burnham might categorise as a ‘inhabitable sculpture’.

Each individual country is allocated a fixed area within which the pavilion may sit. Whereas most of the other visiting countries utilised almost all of the allocated floor area to situate their pavilions, Heatherwick used only a 5th of the space, creating a folded origami like landscape within which the ‘object’ was placed, creating an object in a landscape more attuned to the idea of the folly in the garden. The pavilion itself was designed as a square form with rounded edges constructed using 60,000 individual fibre optic rods, which acted as the building’s façade and exhibiting cabinet to showcase a collection of 250,000 seeds within the core of the object. The concept of showcasing seeds was inspired by the seed collection at Kew Gardens, and presented itself as a worthy cause, relating to the theme of the preservation of nature, a poignant notion in relation to the burgeoning number of cities and their associated effects on

28

the planet. The mass of rods gave the pavilion an unusual ‘hairy’ appearance with no definable edges, which in turn aesthetically created intrigue. The notion of the façade, cleverly concealing its function, creating a spectacle to draw people in and play with their perceptions of what was housed inside ‘Inseparable from a new culture of exhibition, of spectator and spectacle – of the kind that turned all sundry into consumer.’ (Robinson, 2013). Lights travel through the transparent light responsive material to illuminate the ends of each rod where the seeds were on display, creating a ‘cathedral of seeds’. The pavilion manages to encompass a number of different standpoints, one aspect is—pavilion as professor—acting as a tool to educate and enlighten the visitor about the subject of preservation and fragility of the natural world. The second aspect is Pavilion as Prototype, adopting a new conceptual approach through the testing of new and innovative materials to create a building envelope. In its third act—pavilion as protagonist—the pavilion adopts the role of the advocate, illustrating in illustrious fashion the importance of conservation in the face of expanding city. Although the pavilion may be small and temporary, it has the ability to present the public with larger questions about worldly subjects.

Heatherwick’s pavilion showcases the ability of these small built-structures to create something which is ‘other’ than just functional architecture. It adopts an alternative approach to conventional design, one which masks / illuminates, displays / conceals, educates and proliferates. Exploring new ideas and concepts, presenting us with questions and challenging conventions in regard to the way in which we live our lives.

Heatherwick Studio - UK Pavilion for Shanghai World Expo, 2010

31

THE CREATIVE COMPLEX _____________________________________________________________________ ARTIST/ARCHITECT RELATIONS

The final section of this essay will look at the current trend which has been gaining traction in the architectural profession, made possible by the pavilion. The collaboration between Artist and Architect presents itself as an interesting one, raising questions about what can be considered art and what can be considered architecture, that middle ground which the pavilion is able to successfully encapsulate. How do the influences of an artist’s input on an architectural brief lead to new interpretations on small scale and large scale architectural project? Does it offer a fresh perspective, a gratuitous approach to the often over-laden functional requirements of a brief? How are these small-scale temporary interventions in the city being used to develop and enrich the urban fabric?

The pairing of architects and artists is not a new concept. Architects have always turned to the arts as inspiration for their work and visa-versa. In a bygone era when architects were referred to as master builders, as they were responsible for the entire undertaking of the project, these architects could just as easily fall under the title of artist as well as architect, the likes of Alberti, Bernini, Borromini, Gaudi… as lots of them first trained as apprentices in craftsmanship, sculpture or art, before establishing themselves in the architectural world. In the modern era architects have been known to draw inspiration from their creative cousins, such as the influence of people like Kazimier Malevich, the Russian Suprematist whose artworks influenced and inspired the deconstructivist forms of Zaha Hadid’s architecture. The De Stiji art movement in Holland in the early 1900’s, which spanned art, architecture and sculpture, producing buildings such as the Schroder house, a threedimensional representation of a Mondrian painting. The Bauhaus movement where architect’s, artists and designers were located under one roof to allow the creative practices to entwine. There are also those architects who created buildings, which in their own right, could be considered inhabitable artworks, designing everything from the overall conceptual approach to the project right down to the door handles, cutlery and seating, people such as

32

Aalto, Lloyd-Wright, Scarpa and Van der Rohe…. In comparison to the present-day position in architecture, it was either the master builder—who was responsible for the total work of art—or the movements during the 1900’s, when architects were turning to art as a form of inspiration for their work. Both architecture and art are becoming much more intrinsically linked, with artists producing buildings and architects being labelled artists.

_____________________________________________________________________ PAVILION AS CREATIVE PLATFORM

Historically, in the creation of follies, it was the collaboration between wealthy patron/ noblemen and architect/designer/builder confined to the private estates of the upper classes, however its seems that the demographic has changed to a conversation between artist/architect and the public realm. More recently pavilions or small-scale interventions have become the creative platforms to empower both architects and artists, with more and more competitions, exhibitions and biennales being held for the production of, memorials, pavilions, follies, buildings, pop-ups and events. One of the most notable recent events was when architecture studio ASSEMBLE were named the 2015 Turner Prize winners, the first time since its inception in 1984 that it has been awarded to an architecture studio. Raising the question: can architecture now be defined as art or does it all just fall under one category, design?

The new urban context of these temporary pavilions or interventions, the rise of ‘Meanwhile projects’—temporary or ‘pop up’ projects that inhabit spaces in the city which are in a state of limbo—Is becoming increasingly common in the architectural world. ‘Popups and pavilions allow architecture to occupy spaces that otherwise would be off limits…. welcome quests, as they are an architectural moment only for an agreed period of time’ (Hollwich, 2015). Small urban interventions have become increasingly useful as tools to enliven abandoned, disused, grey areas within the city, as like a travelling circus they are in town for a limited time only with a quick turn-around period and can be erected quickly on any site which is suited to house them. They also offer a relatively inexpensive and temporal approach and are able to transcend the legislative constrains associated with a major, more permanent, building proposal. ‘Depending on the project and as long as there is a safety strategy

Kazimir Malevich - Suprematist Composition

Painting - Vitra Fire Station

Vitra Fire Station

Gerrit Rietveld - Schroder House

Carlo Scarpa - Brion-Vega Cemetery

43

developed, a temporal building does not have to necessarily have to comply with all building codes’ (Hollwich, 2015). This is the appeal of the temporary pavilion as people feel at ease knowing that its momentary existence means that whether it is a welcome intervention or a failure, it will be making way for potential new developments in the future. ‘An increasing number of developers and landowners are beginning to grasp the importance about the design process as being sequential, a series of temporal events, rather than an end-state solution’ (Bishop, 2015). See Section 1 of the appendices, outlining the artists/architect project undertaken by myself, my peers and local artists to create a two-day temporary event/intervention in an abandoned office building in the city of Newcastle, which had been earmarked for development. The increasingly common appearance of pop up architectures in the city is a reflection of the diverse qualities which the pavilion possesses, to react to the constant and instant cannon of change witnessed in the urban fabric of modern day living.

The Serpentine Pavilion is a prime example of the notion of the pavilion as promoter, prototype, and profit. Visiting architects which have previously never designed in England are asked to create a pavilion in the grounds of the Gallery, referred to as an ‘International site for architectural experimentation’, on the Serpentine Galleries website.

The international architects whom are invited to design here are given the opportunity to showcase, experiment and display their own personal architectural ethos and thinking.

Although these structures are temporary—on site for only three months—the legacy they leave is a much more permanent one. For example, the 2016 Serpentine Pavilion designed by ‘starchitect’ Bjarke Ingles’s firm BIG, coined ‘the unzipped wall’. The design which was comprised of a series of tessellated white box frames assembled in two curving sculptural walls which joined at the apex. Having come to the end of its temporary lease in London, it was brought by the Canadian developer Westbank, a major sponsor of the project and was set to be re-erected in their home city of downtown Vancouver (Howarth, 2017). This tactical move which was preconceived by both Ingles and their sponsor prior to the event, is more suggestive as a commercial venture in producing a piece of sculpture for a client. The pavilion had become a status symbol for the company due to its international acclaim, which it gained during its three months that it was sat at the Serpentine’s high table. In this sense, the pavilion is falling into realm of practical architecture, with a concealed commercial agenda, in

44

opposition to those early examples of follies in their whimsical and foolish undertakings of patrons, architects and builders which created them.

3 3 3

Moving on from the context of the curated exhibitions and Expo’s, the pavilion finds itself assuming an important role in the aspect of shaping cities, be it in the form of a smallscale regeneration project with the aim to slow the effect of gentrification, to act as a placemaker by revitalising an otherwise uneventful area of the city. To act as a spectacle, in contrast to its surrounding environment which creates intrigue, drawing people to a specific area of the city. The notion of spectacle and spectator has been a historic constant in the lineage of the folly, acting as markers in the landscape to entice and astonish. The pavilion, in its modern urban situation, still acts as the place maker or marker in the landscape, adopting The Situationist’s ideal of creating the situation or similarly to how Tschumi refers to architecture in terms of program and event, a type of architectural stage set. The notion of performance and event is directly associated with the word folly, referring to a type of theatrical revue.

This etymological definition aptly references a key characteristic of the pavilion associated with the temporary event. A modern example of this was the project ‘folly for a flyover’ by Turner Prize winners Assemble, where they utilised the derelict under croft space, located beneath a motorway in London’s East End, to give new life to a left-over space of the city.

The architects described the proposal by creating a ‘new ‘fairy tale’ for the site’ which told the tale of a ‘stubborn landlord who refused to move to make way for the motorway, which was subsequently built around him, leaving him with his pitched roof stuck between the East and Westbound lanes’ (ASSEMBLE, 2017). The modern folly provided a performance space to house numerous activities; by day as a café and by night an events space with cinema screenings, performances and plays. After completing its summer lease the structure was disassembled and reassembled to form part of a ‘new play and planting facility for a local school’.

This idiosyncratic approach to a space which is otherwise deemed unusable in the eyes of the developer, created a form of temporary cultural loci within the city. Due to the successful reception of the project it persuaded the London Legacy Development Corporation to invest

The Serpentine Pavilion - London’s Serpentine Gallery, 2016

ASSEMBLE - Folly for a Fly-over

49

in permanent infrastructure which has allowed the site to continue as a public space (ASSEMBLE, 2017). This demonstrates the transformative potentials these small interventions can have, able to persuade and illustrate to larger government corporations, that it is possible to regenerate and rethink spaces, to create intrigue and enhance the urban landscape, without vast sums of money or drastic change.

50

CONCLUSION: The Beginning of The End

One could make the attempt to summarise with finite assertiveness the content of this paper, the subject and its purpose, but to do so would be an act of sheer folly. The defining aspect of the folly—if such a monastic feature even exists—is in its ambiguity, its ability to avoid becoming the victim of a society fixated on categorising and defining in exactitude the reasons for its existence.

_____________________________________________________________________ THE FOLLY

From its humble beginnings nestled amongst the trees, hedges and winding rivers— the landscape gardens of wealthy patrons—the folly has been on a long and eventful journey.

A grand tour which stretches from its 16th century beginnings as the figure of unreason, contesting and reacting to the sensibilities found in the Age of Reason, to its prominence in the picturesque landscape gardens of the 18th century, expressing Arcadian ideals, evoking memories of antiquity and embracing madness, wickedness and trickery. The folly managed to free itself from the constraints of architecture; those of function and purpose, seizing the opportunity to investigate the alternate ‘other’, one which is able to speak the unspeakable, talk to us about our place in nature and allow us to enjoy the beauty and pleasure found in the pastoral landscape. In the modern context, the folly has now acquired a different role, however, this historic artefact is still having an impact today. The historic folly has left behind a legacy, a number of intriguing artefacts embellished with engrossing tales, amusing quips and madcap narratives. The folly expresses an architectural openness and encapsulates a freespirited approach to design. It was and is the social commentator, the trickster, the narrative object, the eye-catcher, the antagonist, the status symbol, the memory, the mock-article, the satirist, the whimsical, the purposeless; a damned fool to be sure. Having adopted and utilized all these different roles the folly transformed over time, passing on its vast knowledge to its

51

younger sibling, giving rise to the modern-day pavilion.

_____________________________________________________________________ THE PAVILION

The pavilion has greater responsibility, to represent entire countries on the international stage, in the context of the world fairs, expositions and biennales. Therefore, the pavilion can be seen to be a form of architectural experimentation. A small structure which is more concerned with asking the question rather than finding the answer. It has provided the profession with a critical form of design inquiry, through its ‘suspension’ of reason and function it has opened the door to imagination and experimentation (Hirsch, 2014) and has enabled the testing of new ideas and prototyping concepts, free to explore alternative design approaches, without hesitation or scrutiny from the more serious forms of architecture. Due to the pavilions ephemeral nature, it has meant that ideas can be tested quickly and inexpensively. The pavilion, having learnt from its forefather, the folly, has distanced itself from function and in doing so, embodied the middle ground between art and architecture; a liminal space which has allowed for the interdisciplinary merging of the two creative professions. The pavilion is able to freely explore this new relationship which has proved fruitful in widening the breadth of the profession, producing new and contemporary forms of architecture. The pavilion’s dynamic ability has also been identified by artists, architects and even business’s as they have become acutely aware of the potential these small structures possess. As a result, the pavilion was commandeered and brought to the chaotic landscape of the city. These temporary buildings were being used for a multitude of different purposes, becoming a diverse tool, utilized as promotor, educator, provoker, place-maker, protagonist, performer or prototype. The constantly changing context of the city posed new challenges for the pavilion, be that the influence of technology, politics, aesthetics, mechanisation or a fickle society. The modern-day pavilion is the diverse and multifaceted entity, able to re-address the way in which we view the city, employing an idiosyncratic approach to the development of non-places, concerned with creating the spectacle as a means to regenerate and enliven previously abandoned spaces.

From the folly in the garden, to the pavilion in the city this unique artefact has

52

remained ahead of its time, demonstrated in its ability to adapt, react and change when necessary. It has asked us to challenge perceptions, test ideas and sometimes do something for the sheer joy of it. The importance of these small structures has often been overlooked and more “serious� research is needed in order to unlock the potential of these incomparable and ineffable structures.

Bibliography Audio Recordings Griffiths, S. et al. (2016) Mavericks: The Artist as Maverick Architect. London: The Royal Academy of Art. Available at: https://soundcloud.com/royalacademy/mavericks-the-artist-as-maverickarchitect (Accessed: 29 December 2017).

Rodger, J. (2017) https://soundcloud.com/user-874936863/art-is-architecture-is-art. Glasgow: MASS: Mackintosh Architects Student Society. Available at: https://soundcloud.com/user-874936863/artis-architecture-is-art (Accessed: 30 December 2017).

Books Archer, B. and Vidler, A. (1983) Follies - architecture for the late-twentieth-century landscape. New York: Rizzoli.

Bailey, B. et al. (1961) Northamptonshire: Buildings of England Series (Pevsner Architectural Guides).

1st edn. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.

Barton, S. (1972). Monumental follies. Worthing: Lyle Publications.

Berman, I. and Burnham, D. (2016) Expanded Field: Architectural Installation Beyond Art. 151 Grand Street, 5th FL, New York, USA: Applied Research and Design Publishing.

Clingham, G. (1998). Questioning history. Lewisburg, PA: Bucknell University Press.

Coates, N. (1984) Arkalbion. London.

Coates, N. (2010). Narrative Architecture: Architectural Design Primers Series. The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex, P019 8SQ, United Kingdom: John Wiley & Sons.

Erasmus, D. (2014) In Praise of Folly. South Carolina: CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform.

Hardingham, S., Rattenbury, K. and Tschumi, B. (2012) Bernard Tschumi - Parc de la Villette.

Abingdon [u.a.]: Routledge.

Headley, G. and Meulenkamp, W. (1999) Follies. London: Aurum.

Hirsch, N., Misselwitz, P., Young Chun, E., Adajania, N., Basar, S., Berardi, F., Bergdoll, B., Osten, M., Scott, F. and Ursprung, P. (2013). Folly II. Ostfildern: Hatje Cantz.

Huizinga, J. (1971) Homo Ludens: A Study of the Play-Element in Culture. Boston, USA: Beacon Press.

Isozaki, A., Price, C. and Taki, K. (1991) Osaka Follies. London: E. G. Bond Ltd: Architectural Association.

Jodidio, P. (2016) The New Pavilions. London: Thames & Hudson Ltd.

Kaijima, M., Kuroda, J. and Tsukamoto, Y. (2010). Made in Tokyo. Tokyo, Japan: Kajima Inst. Publ.

Moskow, K. and Linn, R. (2010). Small scale. New York: Princeton Architectural Press.

Moskow, K. and Linn, R. (2012). Contemporary follies. New York: Monacelli Press.

Sadler, S. (1999). The Situationist City. Cambridge: The MIT Press.

Tschumi, B. (1996). Architecture and Disjunction. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.

Tschumi, B. (2005) "Supercrit #4: Bernard Tschumi presents Parc de la Villette."

Vidler, A. (1994). Architectural Uncanny. M.I.T.P.

Dissertations Flood, N. (2013) Collaboratively Designing Dublin: Understanding Designing Dublin: Learning to Learn as a strategy for collaboratively developing Dublin. Ph.D. Trinity College, University of Dublin

Documentaries BBC 4 (2017) In Search of Arcadia. Available at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b090c4f6/insearch-of-arcadia?suggid=b090c4f6 (Accessed: 9 August 2017).

British Council (2017) British Pavilion: Phyllida Barlow. Available at: https://venicebiennale.britishcouncil.org/2017-exhibition/phyllida-barlow (Accessed: 30 December 2017).

Hosey, L. (2016) Why Architecture Isn't Art (And Shouldn't Be), ArchDaily. Available at: https://www.archdaily.com/783412/why-architecture-isnt-art-and-shouldnt-be (Accessed: 30 December 2017).

Interviews

Bill, F. (2017) "Discussion about working on Experiments in Happiness". Go Cafe, Northumbria University Campus, Newcastle.

Burroughs, E. (2017) "Discussion about working on Experiments in Happiness". Go Cafe, Northumbria University Campus, Newcastle.

Jacka, K. (2017) "Discussion about working on Experiments in Happiness". Go Cafe, Northumbria University Campus, Newcastle.

Lord, A. and Messer, S. (2017) "Discussion and Debrief about what we learnt, following the completion of Experiments in Happiness". Pink Lane Coffee Shop, Newcastle Upon Tyne.

Morgan, L. (2017) "Discussion about working on Experiments in Happiness". Go Cafe, Northumbria University Campus, Newcastle.

Journal Articles

Bishop, P. (2015) "From the Subversive to the Serious: Temporary Urbanism as a Positive Force", Architectural Design, 85(3), pp. 136-141. doi: 10.1002/ad.1913.

Crysler, C., Cairns, S. and Heynen, H. (2012) "Introduction – 1: Architectural Theory in an Expanded Field", The SAGE Handbook of Architectural Theory, pp. 1-22. doi: 10.4135/9781446201756.n1.

Debord, G. and Keehan, R. (1958). Contribution to a Situationist Definition of Play. Situationist International Online, [online] 3(3). Available at: http://www.cddc.vt.edu/sionline/si/play.html.

DeMerijn. (2013). Aldo van Eyck and the City as Playground. [online] Available at: http://merjinoudampsen.org/2013/03/27/aldo-van-eyck-and-the-city-as-playground/ [Accessed 29 Dec. 2017].

Derrida, J. (1986) "POINT DE FOLIE — MAINTENANT L'ARCHITECTURE. Bernard Tschumi: La Case Vide — La Villette", AA Files, No. 12(Summer 1986), pp. pp.65-75. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/29543519?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents (Accessed: 30 December 2017).

Ednie-Brown, P. (2015) "Architecture of the Occasion", Architectural Design, 85(3), pp. 100-105. doi: 10.1002/ad.1907. el-Dahdah, F. (1992). The Folly of S/M, recto verso. Assemblage, [online] (18), p.6. Available at: http://hhtp://www.jstor.org/stable/3171203 [Accessed 19 Oct. 2017].

Foucault, M. (1984) "Of Other Spaces: Utopias and Heterotopias", Architecture / Mouvement/ Continuite. Available at: http://web.mit.edu/allanmc/www/foucault1.pdf.

Guy, S. (2007) "Commentary", The Senses and Society, 2(2), pp. 247-252. doi: 10.2752/174589307x203128.

Harries, K. (1992). Context, Confrontation, Folly. Perspecta, [online] 27, p.619. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/1567173?Search=yes&resultItemClick=true&searchText=context,&s earchText=confrontation,&searchText=folly&searchUri=%2Faction%2FdoBasicSearch%3FQuery %3Dcontext%252C%2Bconfrontation%252C%2Bfolly&refreqid=search%3A49dbbbd250527299 d5d787e87c247297.

Hatipoglu, O. (2014). PERFORMING OBJECTS: FOLIES IN BERNARD TSCHUMI'S PARC DE LA VILLETTE. French Studies Bulletin, [online] 35(131), pp.23-25. Available at: https://academic.oup.com/fsb/article-abstract/35/131/23/612127/PERFORMING-OBJECTSFOLIES-IN-BERNARD-TSCHUMI-S?redirectedFrom=fulltext [Accessed 5 Sep. 2017].

Hollwich, M. (2015) "Lasting Impressions: Pop-Up Culture by HWKN", Architectural Design, 85(3), pp.

124-129. doi: 10.1002/ad.1911.

Hunt, J. (2008). Folly in the Garden. The Hopkins Review, [online] 1(2), pp.227-262. Available at: https://muse.jhu.edu/article/233498 [Accessed 19 Oct. 2017].

Hunter, M. (2010). Folly—The View from Nowhere. The Journal of Modern Craft, [online] 3(3), pp.365367. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.2752/174967810X12868890612484.

Knox, P. (2005) "Creating Ordinary Places: Slow Cities in a Fast World", Journal of Urban Design, 10(1), pp. 1-11. doi: 10.1080/13574800500062221.

Krauss, R. (1979) "Sculpture in the Expanded Field", October, 8, p. 30. doi: 10.2307/778224.

Lee, M. and Lee, D. (2016). An Interpretation of the Urban Folly in Gwangju, South Korea Through the Lens of Contextual Novelty. Architectural research, [online] 18(4), pp.157-164. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/317278235_An_Interpretation_of_the_Urban_Folly_in_ Gwangju_South_Korea_Through_the_Lens_of_Contextual_Novelty.

Merrifield, A. (2004) "The sentimental city: the lost urbanism of Pierre Mac Orlan and Guy Debord", International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 28(4), pp. 930-940. doi: 10.1111/j.0309-1317.2004.00561.x.

Philips, A. (2010). Pavilion Politics. Curating Architecture, (20), pp.105-115.

Pink, S. (2007) "Sensing CittĂ slow: Slow Living and the Constitution of the Sensory City", The Senses and Society, 2(1), pp. 59-77. doi: 10.2752/174589207779997027.

Pink, S. (2008) "Sense and sustainability: The case of the Slow City movement", Local Environment, 13(2), pp. 95-106. doi: 10.1080/13549830701581895.

Robinson, J. (2013) "Big Worlds under Little Tents", Open Arts Journal, (2). doi: 10.5456/issn.20503679/2013w01jr.

Simmel, G. (1903) The metropolis and mental life.

Tagliabue, B. (2015) "Barcelona Reset: Circuit of Ephemeral Architecture", Architectural Design, 85(3), pp. 64-71. doi: 10.1002/ad.1902.

Wrede, S. (1989). Emilio Ambasz, Steven Holl. New York: Museum of Modern Art. Yendo, M. (2002) "Detournement (Experimental Diversion); and, Project: UL9205", Oz, 24(1). doi: 10.4148/0888-7802.1372.

Websites About (no date). Available at: http://www.serpentinegalleries.org/about (Accessed: 29 December 2017).

ASSEMBLE (2017) Folly for a Flyover, ASSEMBLE. Available at: http://assemblestudio.co.uk/?page_id=5) (Accessed: 29 December 2017).

Barreneche, R. (2001) Architectural Follies: Of No Use but Delight, Nytimes.com. Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2001/05/17/living/architectural-follies-of-no-use-but-delight.html (Accessed: 30 December 2017).

Bronner, P. and Hillier, T. (2016) FleaFollyArchitects | Narrative Architecture, Fleafollyarchitects.com.

Available at: http://www.fleafollyarchitects.com (Accessed: 30 December 2017).

Burman, I. and Burnham, D. (2011) Architecture in the Expanded Field: Precedent Diagrams, CCA Wattis WBA3: ARCHITECTURE IN THE EXPANDED FIELD. Available at: https://wba3.wordpress.com/2011/11/27/architecture-in-the-expanded-field-precedent-diagrams/ (Accessed: 30 December 2017).

Eui-Young, C., Uoo Sang, Y. and JinBok, W. (no date) Concept, Gwangjufolly.org. Available at: http://gwangjufolly.org/en/folly-iii/concept/ (Accessed: 29 December 2017).

Farrow, C. (2014) Pure Folly: a new generation of artistic architecture DesignCurial, Designcurial.com. Available at: http://www.designcurial.com/news/pure-folly4294810 (Accessed: 29 December 2017).

Folly Fellowship Homepage (2017). Available at: http://www.follies.org.uk (Accessed: 29 December 2017).

Grima, J. (2014) Form Follows Folly, Frieze.com. Available at: https://frieze.com/article/form-followsfolly?language=de (Accessed: 29 December 2017).

H. Sang, S. (2011) Concept, Gwangjufolly.org. Available at: http://gwangjufolly.org/en/archive/gwangju-folly-i/concept/ (Accessed: 29 December 2017).

Harper, D. (2010) folly | Origin and meaning of folly by Online Etymology Dictionary, Etymonline.com.

Available at: https://www.etymonline.com/word/folly (Accessed: 29 December 2017).

Headley, G. (2011) "Follies of England: The Apollo Pavilion, Peterlee", The Dabbler. Available at: http://thedabbler.co.uk/2011/12/follies-of-england-the-apollo-pavilion-peterlee/ (Accessed: 30 December 2017).

Hirsch, N. (2013) Concept, Gwangjufolly.org. Available at: http://gwangjufolly.org/en/archive/gwangjufolly-ii/concept/ (Accessed: 29 December 2017).

Howarth, D. (2017) BIG's Serpentine Pavilion finds permanent home in Vancouver, Dezeen. Available at: https://www.dezeen.com/2017/03/28/big-bjarke-ingels-serpentine-gallery-pavilion-permanenthome-vancouver-canada/ (Accessed: 29 December 2017).

Howes, D. (2005) David Howes - Anthropology professor at Concordia University, David-howes.com.

Available at: http://www.david-howes.com/DH-research-sampler-arch-senses.htm (Accessed: 29 December 2017).

Knowles, R. (2013) The Grand Tour, Regency History. Available at: http://www.regencyhistory.net/2013/04/the-grand-tour.html (Accessed: 29 December 2017).

Parman, J. and Bender, R. (2017) Common Place Âť Inspired by DiderotĘźs habit of circulating manuscripts, Complace.j2parman.com. Available at: http://complace.j2parman.com (Accessed: 29 December 2017).

Ross, D. (2017) Follies in the English Landscape, Britain Express. Available at: http://www.britainexpress.com/History/follies.htm (Accessed: 30 December 2017).

Scriblerus (2002) "Sir Thomas Tresham's Triangular Lodge", Everything2. Available at: https://everything2.com/node/1241850 (Accessed: 29 December 2017).

Seltzer, L. (2010) The Purpose of Purposelessness (Part 1 of 4), Psychology Today. Available at: https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/evolution-the-self/201004/the-purpose-purposelessnesspart-1-4 (Accessed: 30 December 2017).

Van der Straeten, B. (2007) The Uncanny and the Architecture of Deconstruction by Anneleen Masschelein, Web.archive.org. Available at: http://web.archive.org/web/20070809053016/http://www.imageandnarrative.be:80/uncanny/bartv anderstraeten.htm (Accessed: 30 December 2017).

Image References

Bernard Tschumi Architects (no date) Bernard Tschumi Architects: Parc de la Villette Paris, 19821998. Available at: http://www.tschumi.com/projects/3/# (Accessed: 30 December 2017).

BIG Architects (2017) The Serpentine Pavilion at LondonĘźs Serpentine Gallery: 2010. Available at: http://urbanyvr.com/serpentine-pavilion-downtown-vancouver (Accessed: 30 December 2017).

Richters. C. (2014) Vitra Fire Station. Available at: https://www.archdaily.com/530641/zaha-hadid-onrussian-artist-kazimir-malevich/53d0f7c9c07a80459b0000a5-zaha-hadid-on-russian-artistkazimir-malevich-photo (Accessed: 30 December 2017).

Hadid, Z. (2014) Painting: Vitra Fire Station. Available at: https://www.archdaily.com/530641/zahahadid-on-russian-artist-kazimir-malevich/53d0f7d0c07a80a62600009e-zaha-hadid-on-russianartist-kazimir-malevich-photo (Accessed: 30 December 2017).

Hollwich Kushner (2011) UNIQLO Cubes. Available at: https://architizer.com/projects/uniqlo-cubes/ (Accessed: 30 December 2017).

Kois, C. (2011) Carlo Scarpa: Brion-Vega Cemetery. Available at: http://mondoblogo.blogspot.co.uk/2011/08/carlo-scarpas-cemetery.html (Accessed: 30 December 2017).

Malevich, K. (2014) Suprematist Composition - Kazimir Malevich. Available at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kazimir_Malevich#mediaviewer/File:Suprematist_Composition__Kazimir_Malevich.jpg (Accessed: 30 December 2017).

Mattioli, D. (2010) Heatherwick Studio: UK Pavilion for Shanghai World Expo 2010. Available at: https://www.archdaily.com/58591/uk-pavilion-for-shanghai-world-expo-2010-heatherwick-studio (Accessed: 30 December 2017).

Penarroyo, C. (2011) Bernard Tschumi Architects: Parc de la Villette. Available at: https://www.archdaily.com/92321/ad-classics-parc-de-la-villette-bernardtschumi/5037f5a728ba0d599b000690-ad-classics-parc-de-la-villette-bernard-tschumi-photo (Accessed: 30 December 2017).

Public Domain (2007). Freston Tower - Suffolk (1594). [image] Available at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freston_Tower#/media/File:Freston_Tower_Aug_2007.jpg (Accessed 31 Dec. 2017).

Public Domain (2016) Rushton Triangular Lodge - Northamptonshire, England.. Available at:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rushton_Triangular_Lodge#/media/File:Rushton_Triangular_Lod ge_-_Northamptonshire,_England_-_DSC09425.jpg (Accessed: 30 December 2017).

Vintiner, D. (2016) Folly for a Flyover by Assemble. Available at: https://www.architecturalreview.com/competitions/competition-walk-this-way-oakland/10014662.article (Accessed: 30 December 2017).

Wikimedia Commons (2010) Gerrit Rietveld: Rietveld Schroder House. Available at: https://www.archdaily.com/99698/ad-classics-rietveld-schroder-house-gerrit-rietveld (Accessed: 30 December 2017).