15 Haziran 2012 Cuma

THE PIONEERS OF THE SUPERSTUDIO


  Adolfo Natalini  is an Italian architect, author and designer, who was born in Pistoia, in 1941. He is also
 one of the founders of the legendary 60s architecture firm Superstudio, which was one of major part of the Radical architecture movement of the late 1960s. Sede della Cassa Rurale e Artigiana dell'Alta Brianza (Sede Bcc dell'Alta Brianza) is an office building, designed by him. After dissolution of the group, he dedicated himself to designing furniture and objects inspired by classical forms.Since 1973 he is professor at the faculty of Architecture of Florence University. His oeuvre, that ranges from urban planning to furniture design, is diverse and thought-provoking. In the Netherlands he gained notoriety for his 'traditionalist' design for a building complex on the main square in the town of Groningen - a project which received massive popular support from the inhabitants in a public referendum, much to the discontent of a number of Dutch architectural critics. The complex was completed in 1996. Several projects by Natalini Architetti are currently under construction in the Netherlands. Adolfo Natalini is responsible for the architectural vision of the Muzenplein and the Clioplein in The Resident. Het designed 165 apartments (Andante, Adagio, Sonata, Allegro Odeon and Parnassus) and shops encircling the horseshoe-shaped heart of the Resident and the Clioplein.


Cristiano Toraldo di Francia was born in Florence in 1941. After attending the High School he enrolled at the University where he graduated in Architecture.In December 1966 he founded the Superstudio with his colleague, Adolfo Natalini and participated in the first exhibition of Superarchitecture, which was published by Domus Architectural Design and was repeated in April 2007 in Milan at Galleria Carla Sozzoni. His research work and re-establishment of the language of architecture has been documented by numerous international publications and has been presented in major museums and art exhibitions. In 1972 Superstudio is invited to the exhibition "Italy: The New Domestic Landscape" at the MOMA in New York.  After this experiences, in 1980 he continued his career on his own. Toraldo di Francia has always worked in different fields of design, from industrial design to architecture. He designed among others for Anonima Castelli, Zanotta, Poltronova, Flos, Calzolari, Giovannetti, Breda, the palace, Pica; for industry we can mention series of table "Quaderna" for Zanotta, the Integrated System for Anonima Castelli wall, the body and interior for the train "Circumvesuviana" train to Breda, then the modular seating "Franny" for Fasem, the sessions "Circus" for Calzolari The ventilated wall tiles "Earth" to the palace, the Dolfi ceramics, silverware for Pampaloni, system installations for pharmacies to Ataena. He participated in national and international design competitions.In 1974 he was invited by the Faculty of Architecture Australia to take part in the National Congress of itinerant students, during which he lectures in several cities. Since 1974 he teaches and lectures at various universities in Europe, Japan and the United States (Paris La Villette, Architectural Association, Nihon University, the Berlage Institute , Rietveld Academy, Cornell University, Syracuse University, Rhode Island School of Design, Kent State University, San Luis Obispo Polytechnic,Polytechnic Pomona, California State University). In 1992 he was invited to take part in the founding of the first Faculty of Architecture of the Marches for the University of Camerino, Ascoli Piceno in the seat, for which he is currently Associate Professor of Architectural Design.




-Hidden Architecture, Superstudio. Design Quarterly, No.  78/79, Conceptual Architecture (1970), pp. 54-58.

-Superstudio. 8 Feb. 2012. <http://designmuseum.org/design/superstudio>




THE CONTINUOUS MONUMENT: AN ARCHITECTURAL MODEL FOR TOTAL URBANIZATION


Superstudio’s continuous monument and the Twelve Ideal Cities used negative utapia with critical intent. This all metaphors were employed to broaden the discussion about architecture. Superstudio’s involment was manifestly didactic; to analyze and annihilate the discipline of architecture by using “popular” means of illustration and consumer literature. Between 1969 and 1970, they elaborated an extreme line of thought on the possibilities of architecture as the instrument for attaining knowledge and action through the means of an architectural model of total urbanisation. This work appears in the third cataloogue: THE CONTINUOUS MONUMENT


The architects from Superstudio movement were trying to understand the order on the earth with the help of architecture. There is a "modeate utopia" to imagine a near future in which all architecture will be created with a single act, from a single design capable of clarifying once and for all the motives which have induced man to build dolmens, menhirs, pyramids and lastly to trace a white line in desert.

There are several tangible signs for understanding the earth like The Great Wall of China, motorways, paralells and meridians. They believe in a future of "rediscovered architecture" in a future which architecture will regain its full power, abandoning all chaos of design and appearing as the only alternative to nature.
The continuous movement is a form of architecture all  equally emerging from a single continuous environment; the world rendered uniform by technology, culture and all the other inevitable forms of imperialism.

We belong to a long history of black stones, rocks fallen from the sky or erected in the earth: meteorites, dolmens, obelisks. Architecture is the centre of the relationships of technology, utilitarianism and sacredness.A square block of stone placed on the earth is a primary act but because of this square block architecture becomes a closed, immobile object that leads nowhere but to itself and to the use of reason.
For example they adapted this to New York by passing a superstructure over the Hudson and the point of peninsula joining Brooklyn and New Jersey. A bunch of skyscprapers preserved in memory of a time when cities were built with no single plan.
The grid is, above all, a conceptual speculation…in its indifference to topography, to what exists, it claims the superiority of mental construction over reality”  - Rem Koolhaas, Delerious New York

The grid is fundamentally a symbol of fabrication – an artificial structure that holds its own determinacy and potentiality. It can be thought of as denoting social convention and conservatism – The denizens of a given society (OneState, Diaspar, or Middle-Class North America for example) being ‘squares’ in a picnic-blanket grid of social strictures that expands into notions of the (social, political, electrical) power grid we are in reality both bound by and woefully dependent on. Living ‘off-grid’ then, implies the kind of transcendental lifestyle seen as both virtuously and threateningly subversive, encompassed by a range of figures from Thoreau to the Unibomber. In the quote above though, Koolhaas is referring specifically to the grid plan characteristic of modern cities. The structured, hierarchic system of blocks supersedes the natural landscape that lies beneath it, in a way that frames the grid as already unreal. The grid is set up as a kind of game-board on which the metropolis plays its own development. The city grid becomes the game-board of urbanism.



In an endless speculation of design action and user reaction, this imagined interplay frames the grid as a place of strategy and competition, in line with an array of parameters (economic, social, political etc.) that define the grid itself as a quintessential game space. This brings us to what is arguably the most iconic gridscape in recent science fiction:



Tron’s light cycle arena enables something like an object-lesson on the dynamics of interaction in strategic situations – a hugely oversimplified, albeit relevant sketch of game theory. Simply put, the grid becomes a not only a mental construct, but a structure with innate theory and parameters as well – all visibly demarcated in its ruled and intersecting lines.

In this light, the grid takes on a more autonomous expression – as a thing or entity unto itself – coming to delineate meaning through its own geometrical language. This is another way of saying the grid becomes weirder. When juxtaposed with the banal and familiar, the grid seems auratic, even sentient, as is the case in the final scenes of 2001 A Space Odyssey:



The backlit grid is ideologically opposed to the surroundings it upholds; densely traditional neoclassical designs – the furnature, the paintings, the ornament etc. – become objectified and suspended as mere incidentals in a far more abstract and alien environment. Kubrick has the protagonist traverse the area as an astronaut, taking advantage of the suit’s visually and aurally hermetic perspective, while further adding to the sense of this place as being somehow outside or beyond comprehension. The grid essentially sets the room up as a frontier populated by the trappings of domesticity and tradition – a disruptive, incongruent depiction that works to interrogate and subvert ideas of convention and normality. The grid itself is the prototype for understanding the arbitrariness of the normal when juxtaposed upon a surface of total possibility.

This brings us to what is likely the most abstract manifestation of the grid – and one that was at first comprised a fictional environment before drifting into the banality of the (hyper)real: Cyberspace. Coined by William Gibson, and popularized in his 1984 novel Neuromancer, the word is now ubiquitous (probably to the point of cliché) as a synonym for the internet.

Beyond the descriptions of it being a “consensual hallucination” of “disembodied consciousness”, Cyberspace to Gibson is structurally characterized by its now-infamous description as a “grid-space” or “matrix” full of “bright lattices of logic unfolding across that colourless void” – outlining an abstract space as imagined through an iconography of the grid. Gibson goes so far as to evoke, in full circle, images of the urban grid in his conception the internet, colliding and equating the two geographies:

“Lines of light ranged in the non-space of the mind, clusters and constellations of data. Like city lights, receding…”

+

Its funny the way that tangents work; while perhaps speaking more to the meanings of the grid in general, I think these extrapolations enable a re-conception of Superstudio’s provocative work as well, where the Continuous Monument can begin to be understood through associations of the grid in its many permutations, fictional and otherwise.

*Lang Peter, Superstudio, Life without Objects, 2003, Skira Editore
*Byvanck Valentijn, Superstudio, The Middleburg Lectures,2005,Zeeuws Museum


SUPERSTUDIO



“For those who, like ourselves, are convinced that architecture is one of
the few ways to realize cosmic order on earth, to put things to order and
above all to affirm humanity’s capacity for acting according to reason,
it is a “moderate utopia” to imagine a near future in which all architecture will be created with a single act, from a single design capable of
clarifying once and for all the motives which have induced man to build
dolmens, menhirs, pyramids, and lastly (ultima ratio) a white line in the
desert.”
Superstudio,  The Continuous Monument: An Architectural
Model for Total Urbanization, 1969.

  Founded in Florence by a group of radical young architects in 1966, SUPERSTUDIO was at the heart of the architectural and design avant garde until its dissolution in the late 1970s. Through photo-collages, films and exhibitions, it critiqued the modernist doctrines that had dominated 20th century design thinking.

  "In the beginning we designed objects for production, designs to be turned into wood and steel, glass and brick or plastic - then we produced neutral and usable designs, then finally negative utopias, forewarning images of the horrors which architecture was laying in store for us with its scientific methods for the perpetuation of existing models." This was how Superstudio described its work in a catalogue the group produced to accompany the 1973 exhibition Fragments From A Personal Museum at the Neue Galerie in Graz, Austria.
Superstudio was then at the fulcrum of avant garde thinking in architecture and design. Ever since it first surfaced in 1966 at the Superarchitecture exhibition in the Italian town of Pistoia, Superstudio had been among the most vociferous of the radical design groups which were challenging the modernist orthodoxies that had dominated architectural thinking for decades.

  By questioning architecture's ability to change the world for the better and the boundless faith in technology expressed by earlier, more optimistic groups such as Archigram in the UK, Superstudio raised issues which have preoccupied successive generations of architects and designers from Studio Alchymia in late 1970s Italy and to the Memphis collective in the mid-1980s, to contemporary figures like Rem Koolhaas and Foreign Office Architects.
Superstudio was founded in 1966 by two radicals – Adolfo Natalini and Cristiano Toraldo di Francia - who had met while studying architecture at the University of Florence. Later they were joined by Alessandro and Roberto Magris and Piero Frassinelli. The group's relationship with Florence, where the five founders continued to live after graduation, was critical to its work. "It is the designer who must attempt to re-evaluate his role in the nightmare he helped to conceive, to retread the historical process which inverted the hopes of the modern movement," pronounced Toraldo di Francia. "And in Italy, Florence, a town where all such contradictions become most evident (the moment one draws the curtains of mythically misrepresented past) stands historically symbolic."


  Yet the central theme of Superstudio's agenda over the next 12 years would be its disillusionment with the modernist ideals that had dominated architectural and design thinking since the early 1900s. Once fresh and dynamic, by the late 1960s, modernism had hit intellectual stasis. Rather than blithely regarding architecture as a benevolent force, the members of Superstudio blamed it for having aggravated the world's social and environmental problems. Equally pessimistic about politics, the group developed visionary scenarios in the form of photo-montages, sketches, collages and storyboards of a new 'Anti-Design' culture in which everyone is given a sparse, but functional space to live in free from superfluous objects.


Superstudio was not alone in its concerns. The collective emerged in 1966 at the moment when the technocratic optimism of the first half of the 1960s was souring. The watershed was the beginning of the Cultural Revolution in China in 1966 when Mao Tse-tung gave Western intellectuals a new cause to believe in after a decade of disillusion since their faith in communism was shattered by Khrushchev’s exposure of Stalin's brutalities. Events in China made Western society seem spiritually barren at a time of growing concern about the Vietnam War. In the visual arts, radicals rebelled against the extrovert imagery of Pop Art in favour of the politically engaged work of Fluxus artists like Joseph Beuys and Nam June Paik. The rising tide of political frustration culminated in the 1968 student riots in Paris and copycat protests in London, Tokyo and Prague. Women formed fledgeling feminist movements such as the Women's Liberation Front in the US and Mouvement de Libération des Femmes in France. Decades of oppression against gay men and women erupted in a pitched battle in New York, when the police tried to close the Stonewall, a gay bar in the West Village and a politicised gay rights movement exploded.


Superstudio's response was to develop its 'Anti-Design' projects: themes from which were echoed in the work of other radical architects and designers, notably the members of Archizoom, a fellow Florentine group consisting of Andrea Branzi, Gilberto Corretti, Paolo Deganello, Dario and Lucia Bartolini and Massimo Morozzi. Both groups were founded in 1966 and their first important project was to express their theories about the crisis of modernism in the Superarchitecture exhibition in Pistoia, Italy. A year later, they refined the ideas aired in Superarchitecture in a joint follow-up show in Modena.

During this period, Superstudio still clung to the conventional wisdom that architecture could be a powerful – and positive – force for progress. By 1968, the group had dismissed this notion as improbably optimistic. The following year Superstudio unveiled The Continuous Monument project in which the apparently endless framework of a black-on-white grid - which was to become the group's best known motif - extends across the earth’s surface in a critique of what Superstudio saw as the absurdities of contemporary urban planning. The group created photo-collages to show the grid cloaking the Rocky Coast, Coketown and Manhattan.

                     Superstudio
In 1970, Superstudio then revived the grid – its "neutral surface" – in a collection of furniture manufactured by the Italian company Zanotta. Designed in stark, geometric forms and covered in the ABET plastic laminate traditionally associated with cheap cafés and 1950s coffee bars, its Quaderna tables, benches and seats were a wry, but functional commentary on political disillusionment.

During the early 1970s, Superstudio made a series of films intending to raise awareness of the potentially negative environmental impact of architecture at a time when such issues were seldom explored. In 1972 the group was offered an opportunity to articulate its theories to a broader public by participating in Italy: The New Domestic Landscape, an exhibition of contemporary Italian design at the Museum of Modern Art in New York. The radical work of Superstudio and Archizoom was shown alongside that of their more conventional compatriots such as Marco Zanuso and Richard Sapper.
During the same year, Superstudio set its sights on the heritage movement by developing a surreal proposal to flood Florence by blocking the Arno thereby submerging the city centre under water except for the dome of the cathedral in a parody of the conservative Save the Historic Centres campaign.

The group was given another prestigious international forum in 1973 when its work was surveyed in a retrospective exhibition – Fragments From A Personal Museum – at the Neue Galerie in Graz. By then, most of the members of Superstudio were teaching at the University of Florence, where they had met as students. The group remained active – albeit less energetically so – throughout the mid-1970s, only to fold in 1978 when the five founders concurred that they had lost momentum as a collaborative force and that they might be more effective by working independently.

Superstudio's thinking has proved more enduring than the group itself. Quaderna tables are still in production at Zanotta and Superstudio's collages and drawings have been acquired for the permanent collections of Centre Georges Pompidou in Paris and the Museum of Modern Art, New York. Moreover the group's once radical theories about architecture's environmental impact, the potentially negative consequences of technology and the inability of politics to untangle complex social problems are now considered to be core concerns by self-aware contemporary architects and designers.


 Quaderna tables 

*Superstudio Pratt Manhattan Gallery/Artist Space/Storefront for Art and Architecture, New York Felicity Scott
*designmuseum.org


The branch of the experimental architecture of 1960s and early 1970s are;


-Archigram: Group of English designers formed by Peter Cook, Ron Herron, Warren Chalk (1927–88), and others in 1960, influenced by Cedric Price (especially his Fun Palace of 1961), and disbanded in 1975. Archigram provided the precedents for the so-called High Tech style, and promoted its architectural ideas through seductive futuristic graphics by means of exhibitions and the magazine Archigram: buildings designed by the group resembled machines or machine-parts, and structures exhibited their services and structural elements picked out in strong colours. The group's vision of disposable, flexible, easily extended constructions was influential, although very few of its projects were realized (the capsule at Expo 70 in Osaka, Japan, was one). Richard Rogers's architecture derives from Archigram ideas, while Price's notions of expendability influenced Japanese Metabolism. Unrealized but influential projects include the Fulham Study (1963), Plug-in City (1964), Instant City (1968), the Inflatable Suit-Home (1968), and Urban Mark (1972). Herron's Imagination Building, London (1989), encapsulated something of Archigram's ethos.




ARCHIGRAM

>
Walking City in New York, 1964
Ron Herron, Archigram
Courtesy Ron Herron Archive


-Japanese Metabolist: In the 1960s a group of Japanese architects dreamed of future cities and produced exciting new ideas. The visions of Kurokawa Kisho, Kikutake Kiyonori, Maki Fumihiko, and other architects who had come under the influence of Tange Kenzo gave birth to an architectural movement that was called "Metabolism." The name, taken from the biological concept, came from an image of architecture and cities that shared the ability of living organisms to keep growing, reproducing, and transforming in response to their environments. Their ideas were magnificent and surprising, with concepts such as marine cities that spanned Tokyo Bay, and cities connected by highways in the sky where automobiles pass between clusters of high-rise buildings.
Metabolism emerged at a time when Japan had recovered from the devastation of war and entered a period of rapid economic growth. People felt that creating ideal cities would be a way to build better communities. This exhibition is the very first to make a comprehensive examination of Metabolism. Japan is now facing big decisions about its future. It is a perfect time to learn about the Metabolism movement and discover some of its many hints for architecture and cities.
The exhibition is organized in four sections, plus the Metabolism Lounge.
 
  Kurokawa Kisho,1970 


-Cedric Price: CEDRIC PRICE (1934-2003) was one of the most visionary architects of the late 20th century. Although he built very little, his lateral approach to architecture and to time-based urban interventions, has ensured that his work has an enduring influence on contemporary architects and artists, from Richard Rogers and Rem Koolhaas, to Rachel Whiteread. Price – or CP, as he was called – was born at Stone in Staffordshire in 1934 to an architect father, AJ Price, who worked for the firm which built the Odeon cinema chain.
In the early 1960s the UK experienced the onset of the first consumer society modelled after the US in which automation and communication technologies placed the individual in a new relationship to the community. The works of young architect Cedric Price reflect the emergence of the mass market and mass media, and demonstrate the influence of a technologically orientated architecture on the idea of social networks.

Based on central projects the dissertation processes the ideas and concepts of Cedric Price in the period 1960 to approx. 1980, to demonstrate the change from an object- to a process-oriented architecture concept, which prompted a rethinking in the planning and design methods of architecture: from an object-based approach to architecture to the concept of a demand-driven environment.

Assuming the technological approach taken by Cedric Price in his projects, the work examines the influence of system thinking and social organisation on the start of a sustained concept of architecture and demonstrates how the influence of information technologies, automation and the science of cybernetics in architecture produced new concepts of spatial organisation. Cedric Price saw the city and its architecture as part of a total system in which social, political and economic processes created a culture of permanent exchange. The idea of exchange and interaction divert the focus of architecture to the organisation of participative, open-ended processes.

 
Cedric Price, Fun Palace, axonometric section, circa 1964. Cedric Price Archives, Canadian Centre for Architecture, Montreal. 


-Haus- Rucker: in the late 1960's and early 1970's, haus rucker co, along with archigramand superstudio, propelled architecture towards a different kind of future. sharing their own aesthetics with the aesthetics of space travel, comic books, sci-fi, barbarella, dada, fluxus, and whole mess of other pop culture references; these groups changed the conceptual architectural landscape forever.
haus rucker co was formed by laurids ortner, günther zamp kelp and klaus pinter in vienna, in 1967. for 10 years, under the haus rucker co moniker, they produced prototypes, drawings, and forms for numerous major exhibitions such as documenta 5 in 1972. these pictures are from a super rare catalog of their show at the museum of contemporary crafts in 1969 in new york (yes, i just about fell over when i found it in a used book store in ny several years ago!). the design of the catalog is obviously meant to mirror an LP cover - and specifically a LIVE LP. the intention is clear - we are not stuffy academic architects; we are going to shape the future. although they made extensive spatial explorations with inflatable forms, i think their concerns were not solely architectural, but an attempt to expand and explore social interaction both inside and outside of designed spaces. many of their projects, such as the 1967 mind expander, were for two people to experience together; and the choice of invisibility of structure towards complete visibility of inhabitants is certainly pointed.

The booklet documents, amongst other things, their pneumacosm project, which was a predecessor of their oasis 7 for documenta. the proposal for ny was to create a multitude of clear pneumatic "dwelling units" on the outside of existing buildings in the downtown nyc landscape. i think that along with the notion of adding space to finite structures is the idea of people living in clear view of each other - keeping the inside inside, but also bringing the inside outside, and changing the way we define both terms... one more beautiful 60's utopian dream...
 
In 1972, the Austrian architecture collective Haus-Rucker installed Oasis Nr 7 at Documenta 5. 
                       
                                                    

-Coop Himmelblau:  is a cooperative architectural design firm primarily located in Vienna, Austria and which now also maintains offices in Los Angeles, United States and Guadalajara, Mexico. In German, "coop" has a similar meaning to the English "co-op." "Himmel" means sky or heaven in German, and "blau" means "blue" while "bau" means "building." So, the name can be interpreted as "Blue Heaven Cooperative" or "Sky Building Cooperative"
Coop Himmelblau was founded by Wolf Prix, Helmut Swiczinsky and Michael Holzer and gained international acclaim alongside Peter Eisenman, Zaha Hadid, Frank Gehry with the 1988 exhibition, "Deconstructivist Architecture" at the Museum of Modern Art. Their work ranges from commercial buildings to residential projects. 
BMW Headquarters, Munich, Germany  

14 Haziran 2012 Perşembe

Experimental Architecture of 1960’s and early 1970’s


 It is stated in this study that “experimentation” was a tool for the projects  and works in architecture of 1960s  and early 1970s that achieved the “expansion of the vocabulary of architecture” in the sense of architectural programming, which was left obscure  under the approach that considered the period mostly as the intense use  of technology and experiment on it. Therefore, as opposed to the inadequate definition of “Experimental Architecture” of 1960s, and “Radical Architecture” of early 1970s, “experimentation” in architecture is put forward in this study as pushing the boundaries “radically” by integrating sources out of architecture rather than suggesting the technological tools revising the architectural definitions within the “same” contexts. These sources are the tools offered by the emerging technology such as the “open-ended”, “intelligent”, and “flexible” structures, the possibility of “special transparent polymer of limitless stability”, “a system of electrodes inserted into various points of the cerebral masses” or the “free-air type thermostatic devices”.  Inevitably, the consideration of the integration of a “free-air type thermostatic devices” within architectural space challenged and changed its programmatic configuration. Since these devices brought the possibility of temporary activities and their motion, rather than fixed activities within a space, along with their actual body, the flexibility of the program was aimed to be achieved with such experiments in emerging technology. This was not only related with the emerging technology but also related with the change in architectural thinking that considered such technology as a tool to change the conventions about Modern Architecture.  For instance, the implication of this criticism in Archigram can be read from the use of two terms that point out the contradiction inherent in programming: “control and choice”. What they suggested for this dilemma was the experimentation of “metamorphosis”, which they explained as “change of mood: change of need: change of personality: change of place”. They described choice as the “freedom; of personality, enclosure, involvement, facility, movement”. Thus, the programmatic situations of the “metamorphosis” can be pointed out as the capsules in motion, attached pylons, independent enclosures, cabins, and information drums.  The term “experimentation” was used in the title of an international forum on “Theory and Experimentation in  Architecture”, held at The Royal Academy of Arts in London in 1992, in which the architects whose works were labelled as “experimentalist” were invited. By establishing a relation between theory and architecture under the issue of “experimentation”, this forum differentiated the use of “experiment” from its other uses in architecture by implying a critical position.  The use of the term “experimentation” in this study also aims to highlight a criticism. This criticism was led by the experimental attempts in late 1960s and 1970s that discusses the boundaries of architecture in relation to interdisciplinarity and technology. Thus, such an examination is considered to understand how “experimentation” in architecture is pursued. In order to achieve this aim, it is possible to make a claim that “experimentation” in architecture is a shift to another level of experimenting after the shift entitled as "Post-Positivism" in philosophy and natural sciences discussed in the first part of this chapter, which also influenced architecture, thus it revealed a shift in architectural “program”.  This shift emerges as the significant changes in the consideration of space related to the “experimentation”, such as the shift from the distribution ofspaces in a dwelling unit as living room, kitchen, bathroom, bedroom in the very basic sense; to the sleeping capsules, disposable plug-in eating units, sleeping bags, and balloon units inserted into any existing building in a city. Consequently, not only the distribution of spaces is challenged but also the way of living is questioned and conventional architectural thinking depending on these social conditions was also re-evaluated. Although criticizing the programmatical aspect  of the experimentation in 1960s, the following assessment by Peggy Deamer strengthens the suggestion of this experimentation as more than technological insertions by perceiving the architecture of 1960s not only as futuristic urban machines but also as comments and critiques on everyday life programs:
   The work of “visionary” architects in Europe during the 1960s – for example, Archigram in England; Hans Hollein, Coop Himmelblau, Raimund Abraham and Friedrich St. Florian in Austria; Superstudio and Archizoom in Italy – is generally  known for its futuristic and often monumental urban machines. But in actuality, this work was fundamentally lodged in a utopian image of the body, one animated by visions of the future yet bound by the concerns of the everyday. The particular formulation of this body – as technologically advanced but programmatically primitive – defined a “new man” who was ideologically committed to seeing the self as the safeguard of the values of ordinary life and the defence against the co-opting of the everyday. This formulation suggested that the life of this new man could never be aestheticized nor abstracted and could never be technologically sanitized.
Deamer, Peggy. “The Everyday and The Utopian.” In Architecture of the Everyday,  edited by Steven Harris and Deborah Berke, Princeton Publications, New York, 1997, p. 195. 
Architecture that questions concepts and limitations and is committed to experimentation with form, materials, technology, constructional methodology, and even social structure. It was the title of a book by Peter Cook (1971), who identified certain architects, including Friedman, Goff, Otto, Price, the Smithsons, Soleri, and Tange, and groups, such as Archigram, Haus-Rucker Co., and the Metabolists, as involved in Experimental architecture.Robert Smithson: Spiral Jetty, 1970 

Robert Smithson: Spiral Jetty, 1970
Ant Farm: House of the Century, 1971–73
Ant Farm: House of the Century, 1971–73








*A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF NATURAL AND APPLIED SCIENCES 
OF MIDDLE EAST TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY BY BAHAR BEŞLİOĞLU, JUNE 2008