1

DESPOTIC RESONANCE AND CASUISTIC DISTINCTIONSLilly Hein-Hartmann

A R C O 1 3

Des

potic

Res

onan

ce a

nd C

asui

stic

Dis

tinct

ions

: by

Lilly

Hei

n-H

artm

ann

3

DESPOTIC RESONANCE AND CASUISTIC DISTINCTIONS1

Lilly Hein-Hartmann

‘A creative re-imagining of our profession is urgently required’.2

Learning from the work of sociologists, in particular, the work of Bourdieu on the field of cultural production, this essay highlights the all too easily accepted inescapable subversion of architects to the polity or otherwise, the notion that the architect is at the total mercy of the bourgeoisie clientele, and tries to understand the acquiescence within the profession to superficial ethics, such as when aesthetics alone is seen to be an emancipator and the production of architecture as a ‘pretty building’ is the resultant finial purpose, for example, ‘when “honesty” in structure and detail somehow fills a moral purpose’.3 It is this learned understanding of ethics within the architectural community that aids in the maintenance of the perfunctory autonomy that the field itself strives to conserve in order for self-preservation. However, it may be this battle for autonomy that might cause the field to be without value; it is the false ethics that are de-valuing the field because the populous is slowly growing more aware of how separate and inappropriately extraneous architects are to them.4 Currently there is abundant unease within the field of architecture which has even some of the most prominent architects and professors fearful of the dawning of ‘the end of the species’.5 The further construction industry (i.e. housing) that affects all of the general populous but the current role (and as will be proven, traditional role)6 of the architect has no conceivable authority or cause to make a positive change because of the position it holds in the field of restricted production. The final chapters consider housing stock and proffer the possibility of architect-lead self-build strategies to aid the recovery of the dying market, to establish a new role for the architect as a political virtuoso. The guise of the architect is under scrutiny because without adapting and proving that architects can be valuable to society on the whole i.e. in the field of large scale production, the field will become obsolescent.7

1 ‘Despotic Resonance’ refers to the effects of the autocracy on architecture while ‘Casuistic Distinctions’ refers to the slightly moral disingenuous acts of those within the Hierarchy power play.2 Robin Cross, ‘Architecture and Philanthropy’, Architects’ Journal, 13th January 2011, 233, no1, pp. 40-41.3 Jeremy Till, Architecture Depends, (USA: MIT Press, 2009), p. 172.4 Jody Brown, ‘Ten Reasons Why Architects Probably Won’t Fix It’, ArchDaily, (2011) <http://www.archdaily.com/174185/10-reasons-architects-probably-won%E2%80%99t-fix-it/> [accessed 28th December 2012] (para. 2 of 10). Also, Kelly Minner, ‘What will the architecture profession look like in 2025?’ 08 Mar 2011) ArchDaily, <http://www.archdaily.com/118441> [accessed 18th February 2013].5 Stephen Hodder, pers. comm., ‘State of the Profession Symposium: Survival of the Species’, School of Architec-ture, Design and Environment / Plymouth University, Roland Levinsky Building, Room 206 /207, 13/02/2013,17:00-18:00.6 Peter Malpass, Professor of Housing and Urban Studies at UWE pers. com., via email (see appendix F). 7 Stephen Hodder, pers. comm., ‘State of the Profession Symposium: Survival of the Species’, School of Architec-ture, Design and Environment / Plymouth University, Roland Levinsky Building, Room 206 /207, 13/02/2013,17:00-18:00.

THE SUBALTERN STUDENT OF ARCHITECTURE: Grace Quah

A piece of written discourse on the hegemony of the [Powerful] in the socio-architectural field in relation to the mass-built environment and effects concerning the [ground substance matrix]8.

Translation: This is an essay discussing the politics of architecture and the anonymous, in relation to the housing market and the effects upon the people who inhabit and make up ‘place’.9

Introduction

The field of architecture has long been treated as autonomous by those that deal with the theory and practice of architecture. The first section of this essay examines the perceived autonomy of architectural theory and practice by studying how architects may become autonomous by observing the interplay of power in the field. Placing the architectural field within the field of cultural production assesses the relationship between culture and social power relations. I aim to highlight the ‘structuralist constructivist’ position of the architect; the constitutive and socially conditioned predisposition of architects and the struggles that pertain to the field to characterise architectural production in capitalist society,10 to ultimately show that they are not and never will be autonomous.

Within the second chapter of this essay, I wish to highlight the lack of interaction between the sociological and political fields and the field of architecture, with particular reference to social and to-be privately owned state-funded housing. This chapter aims to take a practical approach into the political field. The final part of this essay will set about some actions of individual agents within the field; forward- thinking architects who challenge the historical, political role. I aim to draw attention to what experts may deem as constructional-positive critical responses to social crises - the magnitude of which is such that the field of architecture should be extensively involved in its resolution.

Together, these three sections align with Bourdieu’s three-stage sociological method.11 Bourdieu argued that economics were a product of the social and not a mechanism separate from or resulting in the social. From this belief, he created his three-stage sociological method that if followed would provide a reliable sociological report; 1.The

8 ‘Ground substance matrix’ is traditionally a medical term for the amorphous, gelatinous non-cellular components of matrix. Interpreted for the use of architectural description, this is all that encompasses a project- a mix of social, political, historical and sociological contexts. Here, it is taken to mean the sociological contexts especially. 9 A translation was needed; the demonstration is to draw attention to the high use of closed language within the closed profession.10 Paul Jones, The Sociology of Architecture, (Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 2011) p. 7.11 Helena Webster, Bourdieu for Architects, ed. by Adam Sharr, Thinkers for Architects Series: V, (Oxon: Routledge, 2011), p. 87.

5

structure of the field 2.The relationship of the field to the field of politics/power. 3. The actions of the individual agents of the field.

By analysing the field in this way, my aim is to provide a basis for stimulating new political discourse in architecture to set a possible new role for the architect as a political expert in favour of working within the field of large scale production and hence grasp a greater, more meaningful role in society.

Die Mauer im Kopf

The Mauer im Kopf or ‘wall in the head’ is a common phrase used to describe the segregation of ‘West-Germans’ and ‘East-Germans’ in Berlin decades after the demolition of the Berlin Wall. The traditional, relatively simple tastes and working class mind-set of post-communist rule of the East confuses the free-market and ‘modern’ capitalist sense of the West.12 Both parties are accustomed to different existences, each is ignorant of the other, but if they increase interaction, their social capital rises, and benefits are seen on both sides. I use this analogy because Architects have a similar Mauer im Kopf when the commonality external to the production of a building becomes involved. Circumambient to architects, the wall exists as a thickset, impermeable glass wall.

To presume that the theories and practices of architecture ever were, are or will be autonomous (as introduced by many critics of sociological background), one has to catechize how architecture becomes autonomous in the case of the individual. The answer may lie in a number of contextual conditions: upbringing of the individual, i.e. the values learnt in childhood and belonging to a certain class 13 followed by education14 and the structure of architectural education in general; the autonomy of the studio;15 the distinction between theory and practice;16 (see Figure (i)) and power-plays in the field concerning exchanging of symbolic, cultural and economic capital and relations to power external to the field.

12 The Wall is said to be a learned set of perceptions, rituals and codes by a group of individuals cut off from the rest of society, and is used by Lynsey Hanley to describe those who reside in council estates and are separate due to lack of social capital, Lynsey Hanley, Estates: An Intimate History, (London: Granta Publications, 2012), pp. 148-149.13 Gary Stevens, The Favoured Circle: The Social Foundations of Architectural Distinction, (London: The MIT Press, 1998; Massachusetts: The MIT Press, 1998), pp. 193-194.14 Helena Webster, Bourdieu for Architects, ed. by Adam Sharr, Thinkers for Architects Series: V, (Oxon: Routledge, 2011), p. 32-50.15 Gary Stevens, The Favoured Circle: The Social Foundations of Architectural Distinction, (London: The MIT Press, 1998; Massachusetts: The MIT Press, 1998), pp. 196-198.16 Ibid. pp. 20-23.

The

Brit

ish

pupi

llage

mod

el. A

s yo

u ca

n se

e, e

duca

tion,

whe

re th

eory

resi

des,

is d

istin

guis

hed

from

pra

ctic

e an

d th

e tw

o on

ly m

eet a

t the

pro

duct

and

no

t in

the

desi

gn: b

y Li

lly H

ein-

Har

tman

n

7

In some respects, the architectural field is autonomous; certain codes, rituals, and language learnt, and indeed promoted throughout the discipline and in the education thereof, can only be practised by those within the field and who thus define themselves as a group.17 Students about to be admitted into their undergraduate degree may possess little opinion of great architects such as Wright, Koolhaas or Gehry, yet all leave the establishment well-informed and outraged at the ignorance of the common man. This elevates their self-worth, leading to the perception of the public as benighted. The trend continues with increased intake of articulate knowledge, so that those at the higher rungs of architectural distinction are least sociological (See appendix A). Till denotes architectural education as a self-perpetuating system that systematically avoids the stasis18 of its own sociology by purposefully blurring the differentiation of innovative new thinking with innovative new making: ‘The end-of-year exhibitions are often dazzling, quite literally, such is the shininess and freshness of the surface that one is seduced into believing that something genuinely new is happening. But scratch the veneer and one finds a void, a political and ethical void in which the underlying processes and their social detachments are left unexamined.’ 19 Bourdieu claimed that institutions readily discard radical innovative habits of the emerging cultural producers ‘in favour of slow revolution’. 20 This is reflected in the inordinate length of architecture courses at universities around the world; the course is seven years long so that those in power have more control of the functioning of the field so that they can sustain their claim to legitimacy in the field.

It is the acceptance within architectural education (which Bourdieu, concerning general education, has proven to be controlled by the dominant21) that the wider social context be ignored that devalues the profession in the eyes of students22 by sending them a clear message that it is not within the role of the architect to consider deeper issues of social and economic injustice.23 The field is autonomous in the sense that it chooses to focus on internal concerns more than external influences, yet it is not inherently independent.Architectural theory, the very study of the meaning of architecture, is considered as something different to architectural practice. This view is aided by the fact that theory applies and stimulates an internal delineation and categorisation, and criticism by those in the field neglects the architect’s disseminate relationship with society. This actually may cause architects to dumb-down their critical stances or to be satisfied with enclosing their work relative to aesthetics and framing their work in relation to others in the field with higher

17 Helena Webster, Bourdieu for Architects, 2011), pp. 30-31. 18 Jeremy Till, Architecture Depends, (USA: MIT Press, 2009), pp. 7-25.19 Ibid. pp. 7-16.

20 Helena Webster, Bourdieu for Architects, 2011 pp. 74-79.21 Pierre Bourdieu and Jean-Claude Passeron, The Interiors: French Students and Their Relation to Cul-ture, (USA: University of Chicago, 1979), pp-112-118.22 Gary Stevens, The Favoured Circle: The Social Foundations of Architectural Distinction, (London: The MIT Press, 1998; Massachusetts: The MIT Press, 1998), pp. 42-51.23 Ibid. pp. 98-100.

Dia

gram

(ii)

The

Fiel

d of

Cul

tura

l Pro

duct

ion

in th

e fie

ld o

f Pow

er a

nd in

Soc

ial S

pace

.: by

Lill

y H

ein-

Har

tman

n

9

cultural distinction than themselves.24 Hence, architects are confined to realms that have already been well-trodden.25 Are architects to seriously believe that ‘the manipulation of form’ is the cardinal purpose of the architect?26 However, this group of architectural theorists is inextricably linked with power fluxes between fields that not only dictate to inform the architectural field but also from those fields that are informed and dictated by the field (the architectural subordinates, namely those associated with the field of large scale production). See diagram (ii).

The smaller fields sit within (and dominate using semi-autonomy) the larger fields, the four axes indicate how much and what type of capital a person within a certain field has. Pierre Bourdieu’s theories provide a framework for this paper, that aids the act of analysing the architectural profession and the socially dominant elite without reducing the economic explanations and excessively culturalised approaches. When one articulates the field as a ‘social space’27 that is the resulting combination of multiple allegorical and material labours, the conjecture of architects as free artists involved in a social process by autonomy and neutrality must be banished28 despite the best of efforts from within the realm to be autonomous.

Conceptualising the profession as field instead of a profession, we lose the flat and broad opinions of practice that are hinted at by the obfuscating all under-one-roof term ‘profession’, which actually suggests a coherence ‘within the category of ‘architects’ that is ‘not evident in practice.’29 Awareness of the internal powers and struggle of prominence in the hierarchy that in essence defines and frames architectural production makes us appreciate the intricate relationship between symbolic–capital and material–capital struggle in social contexts and can high-light how value is attributed or denied to objects, practices and those people associated with them, at a given time.30 As Magali Larson has written:

‘…architecture is never, and cannot be, an autonomous field; for buildings cannot be mere drawings… buildings must be realized … architects must build for someone’.31

24 Gary Stevens, The Favoured Circle: The Social Foundations of Architectural Distinction, (London: The MIT Press, 1998; Massachusetts: The MIT Press, 1998), pp.98-99. 25 Paul Jones, The Sociology of Architecture, (Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 2011), p. 17.

26 Jeremy Till, Architecture Depends, (USA: MIT Press, 2009), pp. 45-61.27 Helena Webster, Bourdieu for Architects, p. 97.28 Paul Jones, The Sociology of Architecture, (Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 2011), p. 12.29 Paul Jones, The Sociology of Architecture, (Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 2011), p. 14.30 Webster, H., Bourdieu for Architects, Thinkers for Architects Series: V, Sharr, A., ed. (Oxon: Routledge, 2011), pp.-65-66, p.77.

31 Magali Sarfatti Larson, ‘Grounding the Postmodern: A Story of Empirical Research on Fuzzy Concepts’, in R. Friedland and R. Mohr (eds.), Matters of Culture: Cultural Sociology in Practice. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004) p. 324.

Obtaining the right to be a part of the field and hence to call oneself an ‘architect’ gives some distinction and status. However, the parameters in which different ‘architects’ may operate may be so far removed from one another that they may almost be said to be different occupations entirely.

The mass part of the field is occupied by those whose work consists overwhelmingly of functional and domestic projects that cannot win the accolades of those that share their field and be appreciated by critics and the wider public. They are, to some extent, anonymous designers and some within the higher ranks of the profession would deny them the title of architect altogether. Competition in the field does not only relate to the position of the player in the game but also defines what the rules and what the modes of contest are and what the end result is, i.e. what goal architects should aspire to reach for example, the aspiration to design for cultural celebrities32 or to reach high levels of aesthetical ‘wow-factor’.33

This is set forward only by the powerful in each field. Cultural goods and beliefs do not have an inherent value that results in their being highly regarded; worth is attached to them by those with architectural authority – those that already hold the highest of plaudits among their colleagues.34 For architects to gain recognition within the field and hence ascend the ranks, they must abide by the aesthetics that pertain at the time, to agree to condition what aesthetics are noteworthy. The ‘powerful’ within the field have a high impact upon shaping the field, but they are slightly moulded by the field itself. The work of a cultural producer such as an architect is inevitably the product of dialectic between how necessary the piece of work seems and the external social pressures that direct the work. The artist is unsure of how the audience will receive his work and so he manipulates it until he thinks that it is a just compromise between his own intentions for the work and his perceptions of what the audience may prefer.35 This interaction usually only occurs at the bohemian avant-garde stage, which means that architects slowly grow more anti-social the higher into the field the pursuit takes them, (see Appendix A). Thus, architecture cannot all be autonomous on an artistic level because art is the direct result of the social construct of the day, the feeling of the era, the result of information gathering of contextual issues. Art informs and is informed by the place and time in which it is made; its historical context.

One of Bourdieu’s key areas of interest was the distinction between the Field of Large-Scale Production (FLP) and the Field of Restricted Production (FRP). The FRP is said to be an ‘autonomous’ field (I will explain later that this is not necessarily the case) in which

32 Vanessa Quirck, ‘After The Meltdown: Where does Architecture Go From Here?’ ArchDaily, (2012) <http://www.archdaily.com/226248/after-the-meltdown-where-does-architecture-go-from-here/> [accessed 30th December 2012] (para. 2-4 of 27).33 Jody Brown, ‘Ten Reasons Why Architects Probably Won’t Fix It’, ArchDaily, (2011) <http://www.archdaily.com/174185/10-reasons-architects-probably-won%E2%80%99t-fix-it/> [accessed 28th December 2012] (para. 5 of 10).34 Helena Webster, Bourdieu for Architects, 2011 p. 77.35 Helena Webster, Bourdieu for Architects, 2011, pp. 64-65.

11

consumers are well educated in matters of taste and share an understanding of aesthetic appreciation’ with like-wise well-educated producers. This is directly opposed to the FLP where less well-educated producers cater for the popular and largely un-educated (with regard to matters of taste) market.36 It really goes without saying that the architects who occupy the field of restricted production have a far greater capacity to set forth capitals worth competing for. The symbolic capital (which is the internal valued economy) is placed as the highest form of capital within FRP. The architects who claim cultural validity claim ‘superiority’ and aim to distinguish themselves because their cultural values are disparate and exceptional and secondly, unique and original and therefore valuable.37

This in itself suggests one reason why architects do not wish to enter the FLP; the promise of symbolic gain followed shortly by fortune should the architect successfully permeate the barrier to the FRP, keeps most architects at bay.

36 Helena Webster, Bourdieu for Architects, 2011, p. 43.37 Helena Webster, Bourdieu for Architects, 2011 p.77-78.

(iii)

Arc

hite

cts/

Arc

hite

ctur

e st

uden

ts th

inki

ng d

iffer

ently

and

taki

ng s

teps

into

eco

nom

ics

and

soci

olog

y.: b

y Li

lly H

ein-

Har

tman

n

13

Housing is not a part of our profession (It should be)

In this chapter I aim to explore the field of architecture in relation to politics, the most obvious ground where architecture and politics could merge is housing in the UK. I aim to show that currently, architecture is not part of the housing debate, despite calls for it to be so, as Crawford writes:

‘Most architects as individuals are deeply concerned about issues of social and economic justice…as a profession they have steadily moved away from engage-ment with any social issues, even those that fall within their realm of professional competence, such as homelessness, the growing crisis in affordable and appropri-ate housing....’38

The notion of home is universally understood, being seen in conjunction with creating our own self-identity, a place where we are most ‘ourselves’. However, every second minute, a household39 is endangered with eviction.40 In 2010, the year that the Coalition Government came to power, 1.8 million Households were on the waiting list for social housing.41 In 2011, the figure increased to 4 million households,42 which is approximately equivalent to the entirety of households in London.43 Immediately, 56,000 households are categorized as homeless44 in the UK, many of which are working-class families placed out of the property market due to mortgage arrears and rent arrears.45 The number of people sleeping on the streets is reported to have increased by 23% since 2011.46 Furthermore, this increase in homelessness occurred after the cuts in housing benefits and the radical planning reform

38 Paul Jones, The Sociology of Architecture, (Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 2011), p. 21.39 A ‘household’ can be persons who are either relatives or non-relatives living together. The term is also used for the possessions and dwelling of the group. In this essay, however, the term is used in the former sense. Stuart Lowe, The Housing Debate, (Bristol: The Policy Press, University of Bristol, 2011), p. 20.40 Shelter England, ‘Save the Housing Safety Net’, Shelter, <http://england.shelter.org.uk/campaigns/save_the_housing_safety_net> [accessed on 29/01/13]. 41 ‘Is Britain Full?’, presented by John Ware, Produced by Leo Telling, Panorama (19/04/2010), BBC TWO , 20:30-21:04 <https://bob.plymouth.ac.uk/programme.php?archive=7036&view=flash_player> [accessed on 31/01/13].42 Stuart Lowe, The Housing Debate, (Bristol: The Policy Press, University of Bristol, 2011), p. 129.43 The Office for National Statistics, ‘All UK Cities Data080132_tcn-77-201017’, Gov. Last updated 06/03/12, <http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/search/index.html?pageSize=50&sortBy=none&sortDirection=none&newquery=Homeless+england> [accessed 03/02/2013].44 ‘Homelessness takes many different forms – from the literal sense ‘being without a roof through to overcrowd-ing and being forced to share unsatisfactory accommodation of a poor and unhealthy standard…’ Lowe notes that there is a genuine flux of people entering to and being removed from a state of homelessness, bringing into being an impossibility of knowing exactly how many people are homeless and sleeping rough. Stuart Lowe, The Housing Debate, (Bristol: The Policy Press, University of Bristol, 2011), p. 18.45 The Office for National Statistics, ‘Households accepted as Homeless (by reason)’, Gov. Last updated (03/03/2011) <http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/search/index.html?pageSize=50&sortBy=none&sortDirection=none&newquery=Homeless+england> [accessed 03/02/2013]46 ‘Britain’s Hidden Housing Crisis’, Steve Mackintosh, (narrator), Rachel Crellin, Fiona Campell, (prods.), Pano-rama, BBC ONE 13/12/2012 21:00-22:00 [Online] <http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01pc1qb> [accessed 22/12/2012].

which included the Localism Act of 2011.

Some may argue that the impartial but nebulous notion of ‘social exclusion’47 in restructuring of the welfare state detracts attention ‘from the overall rise in inequality, general unemployment and family breakdown that is affecting all social classes…focus is placed on the more spectacular forms of poverty requiring emergency aid.’48 This noted, the housing crisis affects all; landlords and tenants, first time buyers and the kin of first time buyers, as well as the elderly. For clarification, housing affects all those in houses and all those who are not, i.e. from the homeless to the architect by definition of being mere mortals, neither of which can afford to design their own home.

Recent decades have seen housing being squeezed from any welfare portfolio of the UK government through a series of ‘systematic transfers’ from homes owned by the state, i.e. paid with tax payer’s money, to private ownership as a result of colossal cuts in government subsidisation of house building.

In order to understand the current housing climate and therefore to understand why architects are needed here to take a moral stance, one must take recent context into account and this would begin with the system favoured by recent governments in the UK as the ‘Home-Owning System’, first implemented by the Thatcher Government and the Right-to-Buy policy of the 1980’s.49 The Labour opposition during the 1980s promised to end the sale of council houses and aid local authorities in ambitious renovation and house building plans. In the 1990s, however, they gradually dropped the socialist housing schemes, opting instead to tailor policies to existing home owners.50

The segregation between accommodation for public and private rental is large, with unsubsidised and fully commercial pricing being used for private rental and accommodation for public rental being a ‘residual state-run bureaucracy for low-income households’. Owner-occupation dominates and even the poor are subdued into buying. 51 The recent report by The Joseph Rowntree Foundation made clear that the Government should ‘switch the emphasis of housing subsidies away from a reliance on Housing Benefit towards housing

47 ‘Social exclusion’ is said to occur when rights, opportunities or resources (healthcare, housing, education, em-ployment and civic engagement for example) are systematically closed to a community or individual. Mike Savage, Alan Warde, Kevin Ward, Urban Sociology, Capitalism and Modernity, ed. by Graham Allan, 2nd edn, Series: Sociology For A Changing World, (Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, 2003), p. 35.48 Ibid. p. 97.49 This radical policy agenda allowed those who rented council houses to buy the house at a reduced price, which coheres with the British value of owning one’s own home, ‘a man’s home is his castle’. Although this was initially valued by the former tenants, it quickly became apparent that the burden of debt for a house, necessarily in a (more often than not) undesirable location (an estate) and hence, would always be below market for the same quality of house in another area. Joe Moran, Reading the Everyday, (England: Routledge, 2005; USA: Routledge, 2005), pp. 149-150. Lynsey Hanley, Estates: An Intimate History, (London: Granta Publications, 2007), p. 4. Helena Webster, Bourdieu for Architects, ed. by Adam Sharr, Thinkers for Architects Series: V, (Oxon: Routledge, 2011), pp. 54-55.50 Joe Moran, Reading the Everyday, (Oxon: Routledge; USA:Routledge; Canada:Routledge, 2005), p. 149.51 Stuart Lowe, The Housing Debate, (Bristol: The Policy Press, University of Bristol, 2011), p. 30.

15

supply, as part of a new model for financing new affordable housing.’52 By privatising all housing types, the government is putting the responsibility at arms-length.

The Coalition Government cut 60% of spending to the social housing programme in 2010, new social housing tenants (i.e. tenants who were equally less well-off) were asked to fill the gap. The average rent for a three-bedroom council house went up from £85 per week to an earth-shattering £250 per week –three times the amount that the previous tenants had to pay.53 With the Localism Act of 2011 now in play, within the decade every family on low income and living in a social home will have to relocate due to the scrapping of ‘lifetime-tenancy agreements’ and the new act of ‘fixed term, secure tenancies’ (that are in effect the same tenancies as offered by Private Registered Housing Providers) that have recently replaced them.54 This inevitably means that social housing as we are familiar with it today will simply not exist in ten years’ time with the most affordable housing set to triple in price, leaving the poor extremely vulnerable.55

52 Mark Stevens, Peter Williams, ‘Tackling Housing Market Volatility In The UK: A Progress Report’, Joseph Rowntree Foundation Publications, (10th September 2012) http://www.jrf.org.uk/publications/housing-market-volatility-progress?gclid=CKmHt5bKqrUCFe_HtAodhB0A0Q [accessed 2nd January 2013] (para. 9 of 85). 53 Mark Stevens, Peter Williams, ‘Tackling Housing Market Volatility In The UK: A Progress Report’, p. 5. (para. 28 of 85), Randeep Ramesh, ‘Spending Review 2010: Social Housing’, The Housing Review, The Guard-ian, (20/10/10) <http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/oct/20/spending-review-2010-key-points> [ac-cessed 20th December 2012] 54 Catherine Hand, ‘The Localism Act: An Update and the Localism Act 2011’, Trowers and Hamlins Solicitors LLP, London (25/07/10) < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ytIpwdeW_Zc> [accessed 20th December 2012]55 54% of the UK population is in poverty. Poverty is defined by the Office for National Statistics as ‘if a person has a disposable income of less than 60% of the median yearly disposable income (which was £8,800 in 2010).

(iv) ‘

The

Pol

itica

l –P

lay

in a

rchi

tect

ure’

, ada

pted

from

The

Fie

ld o

f Cul

tura

l Pro

duct

ion

in th

e fie

ld o

f Pow

er a

nd in

Soc

ial S

pace

.: by

Lill

y H

ein-

Har

tman

n

17

(v) ‘An A

lternative Route to C

hanging the Role of the A

rchitect and Housing Forever’. Yellow

arrows indicate alternative route, orange arrow

s show direct

change coming from

the FRP

: by Lilly Hein-H

artmann

Mass-Community Architect-aided Architecture

Let us now move on to what may possibly be an operable solution. In the final chapter I aim to study the successful works of architects who have embraced community and have broken down ‘the wall’ to create architecture for the people by the people. By admitting that the feats were thought-provoking and political of the time, yet understanding that the solutions proffered in the past were not taken seriously by government or even by architects themselves as a viable solution, we can see the alternative would be a collaboration of architectural firms with local and high-government, the likes of which never to have been previously expected due to the field’s grasp on the small-scale-only notion. Taking statistics into account, we can see that there some means already in place that would allow for such a controversial building-reform – the large amount of dedicated workers (dedicated because they would be building their own home) is but one factor.

Working with Britain

‘Everyone should have the opportunity to work and to thrive in their job. Work is good for people, providing income, social contact, and improving well-being. People who are out of work should be actively supported back to a job wherever possible.’ 56 5.02 million Individuals aged 16-64 are unemployed; there are 3.7 million workless households in the UK, which is equivalent to 17.5% of UK households.57 In workless households, 1.45m people are unable to work due to sickness.58 This noted, there are a remaining 2.25 million people in workless households that could potentially work. 1.03m individuals are workless due to unemployment and 1.22m people opt not to work due to parenting or caring for the house.59 The latter group could work part-time if the results were rewarding. 45% of families living in council owned housing or housing association funded housing are workless.60 This could conceivably contribute an incredible workforce (2.25 million people in workless households) able to inaugurate construction of houses which are severely needed in communities. The state still owns land that could be used to build at least half of the homes needed; however, the Coalition Government is pending to sell and even give away a portion of state owned land to developers in the hope that they will build.61

56 ‘Building Bridges to Work: New Term Approaches to Tackling Long-term Worklessness’, The Department for Work and Pensions, on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office (London: The Stationery Office Ltd, 2010), p6. 57 Office For National Statistics, ‘Workless households down by 153,000 to 3.7 million’, Gov. (29/08/2012) <http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171776_277462.pdf> [accessed 04/02/2013] (para. 1 of 16) 58 Ibid., (para. 5 of 16)59 Ibid., (para 6 of 16)60 Ibid., (para. 9 of 16)61 ‘Bringing Surplus Sector Land Back Into Use’, Gov.UK, Inside Government, (01/01/2013) <https://www.gov.uk/government/policies/increasing-the-number-of-available-homes/supporting-pages/bringing-surplus-public-sector-land-back-into-use> [accessed 9th January 2013].

19

The Coalition of H

ousuing: by Lilly Hein-H

artmann

‘The Coalition and Housing’, author’s own. Cartoon demonstrating the percieved situation in the housing market.

‘Work benefits everyone. It helps people provide for their families, develop self-worth and well-being, build social contacts that forge strong communities and to contribute to the economy.’ 62

Since 2010, the percentage of workless households has fallen but is still higher than the average percentage of unemployment in the last decade. What might prove to be a huge incentive for single parents and those who are unemployed to get back into work would be an opportunity to be employed in aiding the construction of their own home, so reducing unemployment and helping to resurrect the nation from the housing crisis. So, thus far, we have established that architects are surrounded by ‘the wall in the head’, closed off from society not only through rituals and habitus but by having to belong to the field of restricted production. There is a greater need for the architect in society than as aesthetical designer, there is a moral-social role to play yet architects are reluctant to play it in the housing market, and we have established a yearning in the market for the need of a political advocate on behalf of the people, preferable someone who already possesses the skills to help. (See Appendix D for more on successful community architecture).‘Involving people in the housing process is a necessary precondition for a sustainable housing process…This is in contrast with the overwhelming preponderance of mass housing in Britain that leaves the occupant in a passive role.’63

The bland economically driven utilitarianism view towards building, dominated by the production and assembly process, was a direct focus of the Functionalist movement of the 1950s and 1960s, despite the nude-white aesthetics being derived from (the previously) aesthetically liberating Modernist values. Characteristic of the era were the prefabricated tower blocks that materialized in every town and city to help overcome the housing shortage. The ‘international style’ was anonymous; the constructions omitted the definitive vitality of cities as large-scale planning was forced upon citizens. The repercussions were a desperate call for complexity, liveability and independence of housing.64

The work of Walter Segal has been influential; his plans for affordable inexpensive housing constructed by self-build communities became an icon of the 1960s. It was initiated by

62 ‘Building Bridges to Work: New Term Approaches to Tackling Long-term Worklessness’, The Department for Work and Pensions, on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office (London: The Stationery Office Ltd, 2010), p. 6.63 Jon Broome, ‘Mass housing cannot be sustained’, in Architecture & Participation, ed. by Peter B. Jones, Doina Petrescu and Jeremy Till (Oxon, UK: Taylor & Francis, 2005; New York: Taylor & Francis, 2005), p. 65.64 Peter Blundell Jones, ‘Sixty-eight and after’, in Architecture & Participation, ed. by Peter B. Jones, Doina Petrescu and Jeremy Till (Oxon, UK: Taylor & Francis, 2005; New York: Taylor & Francis, 2005), pp. 127-128.

21

the architect’s own desire to build a temporary home for himself and his family during re-construction work on their family home, Highgate. The small house was built for the tiny sum of £850. The sum reflects the architect’s dedication to build a family home for the cheapest price possible. The strategic design was based around the material sizes readily available, which he then used uncut for later resale. He used a timber frame system in which there was little or no foundation. The Borough of Lewisham adopted Segal’s building method as a way of combatting insufficient social housing in the area; they provided the site and materials. The volunteers were the local residents poised on the frozen state-housing waiting list.

The social rewards gained from community projects were substantial once Segal had looked beyond the traditional limits of architecture. The result was a sense of achievement and satisfaction previously not experienced in conventional practice that is, increasingly hemmed by abstruse bureaucratic obstacles.65

65 Peter Blundell Jones, ‘Sixty-eight and after’, in Architecture & Participation, ed. by Peter B. Jones, Doina Petrescu and Jeremy Till (Oxon, UK: Taylor & Francis, 2005; New York: Taylor & Francis, 2005), p. 131.

Ladd

er o

f Par

ticip

atio

n, a

dapt

ed fr

om d

iagr

am o

f the

sam

e na

me

in A

rchi

tect

ure

& P

artic

ipat

ion:

by

Lilly

Hei

n-H

artm

ann

23

Barratt Houses are not Best

A short article in this year’s January edition of Building Design magazine, a short article titled ‘A Revival could see Housing back where it Belongs’ highlighted the optimism and cheer of the journalist who essentially wrote that there is life in the housing market by indication of a doubling in profits for Barratt Developments, and that architects are all likely to reap the benefits soon of employment within the sector (see Appendix D). However, it is disturbing that the profession relies on statistics given by developers without questioning how this occurred. Due to the lack of integration from the field into the ‘real world’ (or rather, the field of large-scale production) Paul Barker brings to attention who actually has contributed more to the general landscape:

‘When the…history of our times comes to be written, he [Lawrie Barratt, founder of Barratt Developments] will get more space than Norman Foster. You can search out Foster masterpieces here and there. But Barratt houses are everywhere.’66

Barker highlights the lack of influence that the field currently has on the exterior community. Architects have the design and technical knowledge to help create tens of thousands of new affordable homes that are of good quality and could provide millions of potential clients with dwellings, if only the profession would allow credible architects to take on the challenge in the field of large-scale production – because essentially, that is what is holding progression back.

In 2010, David Pretty, former Chief Executive of Barratt Developments, conveyed his inclination of the condition of the property market in apocryphal cynical tones, ‘Whoever is in power will have to deal with the consequences; higher house prices, high rent, etc... I don’t want to sound too grim about it but it is a pretty grim outlook.’67

Profuse numbers of developments were stalled, ‘Numerous projects across the country have sat shovel ready waiting for a more favourable market to emerge.’68 The Coalition Government stated that one of its aims to aid the crippled market was to rectify the situation that ‘lenders couldn’t lend, builders couldn’t build and buyers’ couldn’t buy.’ The developers could build but purposefully chose not to in order to maintain house prices.

Some speculate that the builders were not willing to build the homes unless they could sell them for (particularly) inflated prices. Therefore, a deadlock existed between the developers, the government and the buyer. Whoever would give in first would have to pick up the bill. The developers strangled the market, they simply held on to their motives, watching stock

66 Paul Barker, (1998) ‘observations’, New Statesmen, 6th March: 54 cit., in, Joe Moran, Reading the Everyday, (England: Routledge, 2005; USA: Routledge, 2005), p 145.67 ‘Britain Builds’, presented by John Ware, Leo Telling, (prod), Panorama, 19/04/2010, BBC TWO , 20:30-21:0468 ‘A Revival Could See Housing Back Where It Belongs’, Building Design, 2044 (1/18/2013), 2-2 (p.2.)

deteriorate and house prices soar in the meantime.69 If they flooded the market now with homes, they would have seen a colossal drop in profits. As the years dragged on from 2008, the increased lack of houses has further increased demand causing desperation for those waiting to get on the property ladder so much so that the next solution, offered by the government, may seem enticing.70

Finally, when the market could take no more (2011-2012), the government presented lower deposits as an option. This time the buyer could pay a deposit on a house as little as 5% of the mortgage through the ‘New-Buy Guarantee Scheme’.71 The danger in this is that the consumer is left 95% of the loan-to-value-mortgage to pay - a substantial amount of debt which is unlikely to be paid off by the age of retirement. Due to the contemporary role of housing as a collateral security net72 and the fact that people counterbalance having repaid the mortgage before they retire due to the understood predicted lack of money available in their pension73, the unlikelihood that the mortgage will be paid off by retirement could cause larger proportions of elderly who are in more severe poverty within our generation. The really disgraceful notion, however, is that the uninformed populace are grateful for the opportunity to buy a house regardless of the 95% mortgage, they will likely realise the significance of the colossal debt after signing and burden that it brings.74 Our generation of architects could offer an alternative solution that will forever help further generations and stop this consumerist debt-cycle.

Hence, when Barratt Developments announced that profits have doubled since 2011,75 I for one found it hard to see this as a ‘thawing in the market’, knowing that it came from millions of people facing debt-ridden contracts, the people who are most vulnerable in our capitalist society, who consequently may have a very icy future. If anything, the article in Building Design highlights the profession’s slavishness to where money can be made – which to a certain degree, is normal for a business to survive, (I am not arguing that architects should work for free, merely that they should be critical). It is the obvious lack of enthusiasm to question the morals underpinning development and why the housing sector has doubled

69 Peter Malpass, pers. comms. 7th January 2013.70 Wendy Wilson, ‘Housing Supply and Demand’, Parliament, UK, <http://www.parliament.uk/documents/commons/lib/research/key_issues/Key-Issues-Housing-supply-and-demand.pdf> [accessed 6th January 2013], p. 76-77.71 ‘Policy: Increasing the number of available homes’, Inside Government, <https://www.gov.uk/gov-ernment/policies/increasing-the-number-of-available-homes/supporting-pages/newbuy-guarantee-scheme> [accessed 8th December 2012] (para. 1-5 of 7).72 Stuart Lowe, The Housing Debate, (Bristol: The Policy Press, University of Bristol, 2011), pp. 15-30.73 Ibid. p. 19. 74 Helena Webster, Bourdieu for Architects, ed. by Adam Sharr, Thinkers for Architects Series: V, (Oxon: Routledge, 2011), p. 80. 75 At a time when the radical new housing reform implemented by the Coalition Government in 2011, containing the reduction in housing benefits, Localism Act and new incentives for low-earning renters to purchase a house or move into renting homes in the private-sector. Hal Pawson and David Mullins, After Council Housing: Britain’s New Social Landlords (Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan, 2010), p. 16, 29, 34, 99, 225.

25

in profits without any control from the architect, when we should be putting ourselves in positions where we can contribute and improve our environment, that is unnerving; should not housing always be a prime focus of the architectural field? If you are a sociologically minded architect, the answer will always be ‘yes’. The lack of architects who are willing to challenge the issue in times of austerity is upsetting;

‘It has been thirty years since housing was last a central focus of architectural discourse in this country, but there is reason to hope that it might reclaim that position soon. Certainly, there is no greater opportunity for British architects than housing at the present moment, and no challenge more deserving of their attention.’ It seems that only when the housing sector is predicted to be more affluent that the approach from architects by architects is favoured.

When architects have the ability to achieve so much more in society, Barratt and all that similar development firms stand for, should not be the only option for government and people in budget housing, when quite frankly, architect-led community builds can do it so much better.

‘Arch

itects

can b

e Her

oes’

and ‘

Peop

le Ch

eerin

g’: b

y Li

lly H

ein-

Har

tman

n

27

Conclusion

Through the establishment of architecture as a field with many sub-fields and by looking more closely at the relationship of architecture to fields of power and individuals within these fields, and the effects upon the ordinary people (the entirety of which can be called the ground-substance matrix), the result of this appetiser study has been an amalgamation of concerns affecting architectural, political and social debate, which provides a glimpse of a more real discourse, grounded in more liberal and social ideas.

If architects applied themselves to learning through collaboration with inhabitants and also through employment with our government and other deeply rooted social clients, within our lifetime ‘[…] we would increase the quality of our built environment and instil values that establish architecture as an irreplaceable cultural currency. [...] If we can imagine that we wouldn’t stop being architects by taking jobs wherever we can influence decisions related to buildings, our influence would grow exponentially.’76

This text was not only meant to express the duty of the architect to right the wrongs of the construction industry, which historically pushed academics into a theoretical sphere and computations of ‘new’ ideals, but was meant to offer a practical solution. The new role of the architect, should they wish to truly make a contribution on a scale larger than pocket projects, may mean a blurring of political power and cultural production. The future role of the architect may not be as an architect in the conventional sense, if those within the ‘favoured circle’ can be enlightened to change.

If the sagacity of political and sociological thinking finds its way into the higher ranks of the architectural profession and education, then the ground substance matrix would stand to gain more from architects than ever before. In short, I implore architects and those who occupy visceral fields to think with epistemological and anthropological reason, and make a stand for a more technocratic and participatory society.

76 Danielle Etzler, ‘State of our Profession’, Harvard Design Magazine, 34, (2011)., cited in, Federico Negro, ‘Practice 2.0:Dear Architecture School, Please tell us it’s okay to do this’, ArchDaily, (2011) <http://www.archdaily.com/139540/practice-2-0-dear-architecture-school-please-tell-us-it-is-ok-to-do-this/> [accessed 2nd January 2013] (para. 6 of 12)

Appendix A

[Autonomy]2 = [Cultural Capital + Higher Field]

The higher one progresses in a cultural field, the more closed off from society they become, thus the least sociological thinking can be found in the upper tiers of hierarchy in the Field of Restricted Production (FRP), as these extracts show.

‘A few days after the Savoies had moved into their famous house the roof of the living room started leaking. They became very upset and immediately called Le Corbusier.

Upon arrival he was taken at once to inspect the damage and suggest a solution. He stayed for a few seconds staring at the water, and then looked at the ceiling, then again down at the water. He turned to the Savoies finally and asked for a piece of paper. Mr Savoie came back in a minute producing a clear white sheet of paper. He handed it to Le Corbusier. Corbu placed it by an adjacent table, folded it carefully and made a paper boat.

He walked to the middle of the room, bent down and placed the boat in the water, said “au revoirs” and left.

A client of Frank Lloyd once called him to tell him his living room was leaking: “The roof is leaking on my head right above my armchair, what should I do?” Wright replied: “Move the chair”.’77

‘Rare is the building not designed by an architect that represents the supreme values of a civilisation. This has been true for temples, palaces, libraries, and city halls […] museums, university structures, government buildings, and corporate headquarters more recently. The design of the great seminal monumental buildings is the unique province of architecture, its “natural market.” No other profession was able to compete effectively for this market in the past, or is able now.’78

77 A.C. Antoniades, ‘Architecture from Inside Lens (sic),’ Architecture + Urbanism, July 1979, 8, 17.cited in Gary Stevens, The Favoured Circle: The Social Foundations of Architectural Distinction, (London: The MIT PRESS, 1998; Massachusetts: The MIT Press, 1998), p. 84.78 Gutmen. R., ‘Architects and Power: The Natural Market for Architecture’, cit., Professionals and Urban Form, ed. Blau., J.S., La Gory, M., (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1983), 208-233. cit., Gary Stevens, The Favoured Circle: The Social Foundations of Architectural Distinction, (London: The MIT Press, 1998; Massachusetts: The MIT Press, 1998), p. 86.

29

(X) ‘Le C

orb’ : by Lilly Hein-H

artmann

‘Wright’’ : by Lilly H

ein-Hartm

ann

Bibliography

Please note; this paper is heavily looking towards the future and this I believe is rooted heavily in sociology and politics, hence the bibliography being weighted towards political papers and books rather than architectural journals. Books

Bourdieu, P., and Passeron, J.C., The Interiors: French Students and Their Relation to Culture, (USA: University of Chicago, 1979).Friedland, R., and Mohr, R., (eds), Matters of Culture: Cultural Sociology in Practice. (Cam-bridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004).Hanley, L., Estates: An Intimate History, (London: Granta Publications, 2012).Jones, P., The Sociology of Architecture, (Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 2011). Jones, P.B., Petrescu, D., and Till, J., eds., Architecture & Participation (Oxon, UK: Taylor & Francis, 2005; New York: Taylor & Francis, 2005).Lowe, S., The Housing Debate, (Bristol: The Policy Press, University of Bristol, 2011).Moran, J., Reading the Everyday (Oxon: Routledge; USA:Routledge; Canada:Routledge, 2005).Pawson, H., and Mullins, D., After Council Housing: Britain’s New Social Landlords (Hamp-shire: Palgrave Macmillan, 2010).Savage, M., Warde, A., Ward, K., Urban Sociology, Capitalism and Modernity, 2nd edn, Series: Sociology for a Changing World, ed., Allan, G., (Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmil-lan, 2003).Stevens, G., The Favoured Circle: The Social Foundations of Architectural Distinction, (London: The MIT Press, 1998; Massachusetts: The MIT Press, 1998).Till, J., Architecture Depends, (USA: MIT Press, 2009).Webster, H., Bourdieu for Architects, Thinkers for Architects Series: V, Sharr, A., ed. (Oxon: Routledge, 2011).

Journals

Architecture Journals usually focus on the work of a few prominent architects, and the field of small-scale production, this essay was more centered outside of the architectural field for answers to the problem of large scale production.Anon., ‘A Revival Could See Housing Back Where It Belongs’, Building Design, 2044, (2013), 1-4 (p.2).Cross, R., ‘Architecture and Philanthropy’, Architects’ Journal, 233 (2011), 40-41 (p.40).

31

Online Articles

Anon., ‘Rural Studio’, Rural Studio, < http://apps.cadc.auburn.edu/rural-studio/ > [accessed 18th February 2013].Anon., ‘About Architecture for Humanity’, Architecture for Humanity, < http://architecture-forhumanity.org/about > [accessed 18th February 2013].Anon., ‘Spirit; From Blue Prints Comes Belief’, DBB < http://www.designbuildbluff.org/?q=node/15 > [accessed 18th February 2013]Brown, Jody, ‘Ten Reasons Why Architects Probably Won’t Fix It’, ArchDaily, (2011) <http://www.archdaily.com/174185/10-reasons-architects-probably-won%E2%80%99t-fix-it/> [ac-cessed 28th December 2012].Minner, Kelly, ‘What will the architecture profession look like in 2025?’ 08 Mar 2011) Arch-Daily, <http://www.archdaily.com/118441> [accessed 18th February 2013].Quirck, Vanessa, ‘After The Meltdown: Where does Architecture Go From Here?’ ArchDaily, (2012) <http://www.archdaily.com/226248/after-the-meltdown-where-does-architecture-go-from-here/> [accessed 30th December 2012].Ramesh, R., ‘Spending Review 2010: Social Housing’, The Housing Review, The Guardian, (20/10/10) <http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/oct/20/spending-review-2010-key-points> [accessed 20th December 2012].Shelter England, ‘Save the Housing Safety Net’, Shelter: The Housing and Homeless Char-ity, <http://england.shelter.org.uk/campaigns/save_the_housing_safety_net> [accessed 29th January 2013].Shelter England, ‘The Rent Trap’, Shelter: The Housing and Homeless Charity, <http://eng-land.shelter.org.uk/campaigns/renttrap> [accessed 2nd February 2013].Kumar Saha, M., ‘Top 10 Architects who Changed the Modern World’, Success Stories, 1st April 2012, <http://www.successstories.co.in/top-10-architects-who-changed-the-modern-world/> [ac-cessed 18th February 2013].

Online Statistics, Government Documents and Research Reports

Home, R., ‘Land ownership in the United Kingdom: Trends, preferences and future Chal-lenges’, Land Use Policy, 26 (2009) <http://www.bis.gov.uk/assets/foresight/docs/land-use/jlup/12_land_ownership_in_the_united_kingdom_-_trends_preferences_and_future.pdf> [accessed 5th February 2013].Office for National Statistics, ‘All UK Cities Data080132_tcn-77-201017’, Gov. Last updated (6th March 2012) <http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/search/index.html?pageSize=50&sortBy=none&sortDirection=none&newquery=Homeless+england> [accessed 03/02/2013].Office for National Statistics, ‘Households accepted as Homeless (by reason)’, Gov. Last updated 03/03/2011, <http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/search/index.html?pageSize=50&sortBy=none&sortDirection=none&newquery=Homeless+england> [accessed 03/02/2013].Office For National Statistics, ‘Workless households down by 153,000 to 3.7 million’, Gov.

(29th August 2012) <http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171776_277462.pdf> [accessed 4th February 2013]. The Department for Work and Pensions , ‘Building Bridges to Work: New Term Approaches to Tackling Long-term Worklessness’, on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office (London: The Stationery Office Ltd, 2010) <http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/building-bridges-to-work.pdf > [accessed 3rd January 2013].Stevens, M., Williams, P., ‘Tackling Housing Market Volatility In The UK: A Progress Report’, Joseph Rowntree Foundation Publications, (10th September 2012) <http://www.jrf.org.uk/publications/housing-market-volatility-progress?gclid=CKmHt5bKqrUCFe_HtAodhB0A0Q> [accessed 2nd January 2013].

Media

‘Britain’s Hidden Housing Crisis’, Steve Mackintosh, (narr)., Rachel Crellin, Fiona Campell, (prods)., Panorama, BBC ONE 13/12/2012 21:00-22:00.‘Is Britain Full?’, presented by John Ware, Produced by Leo Telling, Panorama (19/04/2010), BBC TWO , 20:30-21:04 <https://bob.plymouth.ac.uk/programme.php?archive=7036&view=flash_player> [accessed on 31/01/13].Catherine Hand, ‘The Localism Act: An Update and the Localism Act 2011’, Trowers and Hamlins Solicitors LLP, London (25/07/10) <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ytIpwdeW_Zc> [accessed 20th December 2012].

List of Illustrations

Front Cover Author’s Own

‘The British pupilage model’, p. 16. Stevens, G., The Favoured Circle: The Social Foundations of Architectural Distinction, (London: The MIT Press, 1998; Massachusetts: The MIT Press, 1998), p. 175.

‘The Field of Cultural Production in the field of Power and in Social Space’, p. 22. Author’s own adaptation after the diagram of the same name in Bourdieu, P., Les regles de l’art cited. Helena Webster, Bourdieu for Architects, ed. by Adam Sharr, Thinkers for Architects Series: V, (Oxon: Routledge, 2011), p. 97.

‘Architects/Architecture students’, p, 30. Author’s own.

‘The Political –Play in architecture’, adapted from The Field of Cultural Production in the field of Power and in Social Space, p. 40. Author’s own.

‘An Alternative Route to Changing the Role of the Architect and Housing Forever’, p. 41.

33

Author’s own.

‘The Coalition and Housing’, p. 45. Author’s own.

‘Ladder of Participation’, p. 51. Author’s own adaptation after the diagram of the same name, Jones, P.B., Petrescu, D., and Till, J., eds., Architecture & Participation (Oxon, UK: Taylor & Francis, 2005; New York: Taylor & Francis, 2005), p. 65.

‘Architects can be Heroes’, p. 60. Author’s own.

‘People Cheering’, p. 61. Author’s own.

‘Le Corb’, p. 64. Author’s own.

‘Wright’, p. 66. Author’s own.

35

DISCUSSION

For general enquiries about the School please contact us directly:

School of Architecture, Design and EnvironmentFaculty of ArtsUniversity of Plymouth Drake Circus Plymouth PL4 8AA

Telephone: +44(0)1752 585150email: l.c.saunders@plymouth.ac.uk

ARCO: Journal is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 2.0 UK: England & Wales License