Case File: Architecture - Can we no longer be radical?

CASE FILE: ARCHITECTURE Nicholas Zembashi

CASE FILE: ARCHITECTURE

Can we no longer be radical?

You want my confession first?

I don’t know about Heaven, but I do believe in angels.

The Angel of History faces the past, while the storm irresistibly propels him into the future, to which his back is turned.

Meanwhile, the pile of debris grows skywards. This storm is * what we call Progress.

November 11th I want to believe in heaven. Yet I’m confronted by pain and fear. I believe in death. There’s an army of bodies under this city...criminals, people who ran out of time and friends, and the architects; those mortals-turned-Gods by history; yes their bodies end up here too. Next time they dig up this city, they’ll find me on the bottom with the rest of them. There won’t be anyone left to say I was different.

I can feel the dead down in there, just below my feet, reaching up to welcome me as one of their own.

It was an easy mistake to make. All the cold investigations in the city are collected and delivered over here to us at the Association. Why? Because we think we are so avant-garde? We repeatedly call each of the witnesses to see if they have anything to add to their original statements.

Theoreticians, Philosophers, Professors and Practitioners, hell all the celebrities of the Profession.

And if they can? We send the file to the original precinct for follow-up. Don’t get your hopes up though. I’ll let you in on a secret; this is the Cold Case office. Once you’ve been through the file and come up empty, you bring it here; and this particular file? - well it’s what some refer to as ‘the penultimate lost case’ but I beg to differ! I’ll get to the bottom of this eventually even if it kills me. I’m damned anyway.

How am I supposed to solve the unsolvable murder mystery and redeem myself? I’m thinking about the one loose end I haven’t tied up; the body, Architecture. Laying there, the centrepiece of our morgue and it’s been in that state for a very long while. Embalmed, cleansed, almost immortalised you’d think its alive, attached to all kinds of life-support machines. Every organ, every strand of hair, every inch of skin, nerve, artery, bone, all painstakingly documented and monitored. Sacred relics in the holiest of vessels obsessively studied, re-visited and reviewed; the constant autopsy. Has it provided any answers? One fact is certain; the case has never been closed. This body may never be buried. Yet I can’t help myself from sensing the reeking conspiracy despite the ceaseless embellishment of the corpse. We cling on to it for security, reassurance.

“Architecture has died. It died with Le Corbusier at La Tourette.” 1 Pier Vittorio’s confession was rather perplexing. Well, for one it provides us with a place and a time. Yet the culprit is roaming free and evidence tells me that the case has been running for far longer. This was a cold blooded murder all right; slow and painful. The more I think of it, it all ultimately boils down to the death of radical Architecture.

Its past may be our salvation. We end up with an endless manipulation and compilation of the grammar and syntax of the architectural sign;2 now place this collection in our Columbarium for all of the bereaved students of architecture to mourn. Our Archive is barely able to fit the mounts of data tied to the matter. From thousand-page multi-volume Vitruvian writings to a mere sheet of five coherent and concise Le Corbusean rules, yet the case is as vague and unclear as it may have ever been.

‘So what now?’ I ask myself. It is disturbingly depressing when you get some witnesses stating that everything radical that could be has been. ‘Bullshit!’ I would say, striking my fist on the interrogation table. Such clich1és. Ignoring information because of its complicatedness and cowardly blaming the past for robbing us of our ability to be radical is utterly pathetic. Yes, you can say and write stuff and support stuff with an argument backed up by more stuff, all picked out of that body. Nobody cares to question them anymore in an age of ‘information overkill’ and the dead-end may evidently be our dealings with a wider audience. Have we lost our ability to shock, to be radical?

One way or another these questions are all I have to crack this mystery. Ultimately I must uncover the killer! That retch who has cast darkness upon my city and has deprived Architecture of its life and radicalness. I’ve long had my suspicions, but first I need to understand death. My city reeks of it. Its Architecture is infected.3

*

Benjamin, W., ‘Theses on the Philosophy of History’, Illuminations (USA, Schocken Books, 2007), pp.257-258

1 Aureli, P. V., ‘La Tourette’, First Year History and Theory Studies Lecture, Archiettcural Association, April 2013 2 Tschumi, B., ‘The Architectural Paradox’, Architecture and Disjunction, (Cambridge, Massachusetts, MIT Press, 1996), p.36 3

Koolhaas, R., ‘Junkspace’, Obsolescence October, v. 100 (Cambridge, Massachusetts, MIT Press, Spring, 2002), p.182

Item 1

The crime scene Is this where radical Architecture died?

Item 2

any answers? - The constant autopsy.

History is yet another tool at our disposal for posing arguments and raising questions. Do not expect answers!

November 15th It occurs to me that we may, in actual fact, be caught up in a state of Limbo. I’m surrounded by lifeless masses of stone,4 neither dead or alive, in permanent transition. Buildings are often with one foot inside and one foot outside of time, while the nature/culture threshold repeats and renews itself in each of the mementos humans leave on the earth, sometimes as documents, sometimes as monuments.5 We are rocking back and forth between past and present, never knowing when to stop, in a psychedelic state of confusion and denial. It isn’t hard to find examples; we’ve got more of them than we ever had and we are stupid enough to encourage their proliferation.

I identified one such state while on a case in Berlin. The bombed Kaiser Wilhelm Memorial Church is frozen in time next to its renewed edition, entirely like that in Coventry. Monuments to memory, intertwined with legacy. That’s when it hit me. Aufheben; the Hegelian use of the term which alludes to preservation. Architecture is no longer a rotting body because of our obsession with ‘keeping it alive’. It is able to collapse, to erode and decay and yet we visit ruins rather than living in them, we stabilise them to stop them from decaying too much; they become monuments in themselves.6 In no way have I ever opposed commemoration but we have raised ‘remembrance’ to a new apotheosis of the ‘ridiculous’. My city is chocking in listed buildings and ‘grand’ palaces of absurdity, where everything has become an UNESCO world heritage site, where every dig-up strikes an archaeological ruin and where most museums continue to act as ‘pedestals’ upon which we glorify artefacts. Yet we have surpassed Limbo in a plethora of cases, since a lot of these zombies do eventually die.

Aufheben, come to think of it, has its other contradictory connotations of elevation and eventual cancellation. Life is preserved and at the same time cancelled.7 Unfortunately the majority of victims suffer an undignified death precisely because the killer avoids total annihilation. We live in a kindergarten grotesque…where Junkspace thrives on design, and where design dies in Junkspace. There is no form, only proliferation. Regurgitation is the new creativity; instead of creation, we honour, cherish, and embrace manipulation.8 Re-using, re-contextualising and re-inhabiting something which is simultaneously preserved, even if its only to the extent of the facade, has become a common case of homicide in our murderous era of Junkspace. This is how from Limbo we plunge into death.

The meaning of the building is no longer frozen in time, the form is bastardised and re-adapted.

Following from my inspections on the Cathedrals, I’ve witnessed the wrath of death when the holy Sacristy of a Church becomes a house’s master-bedroom or the entire building turns into a Tesco Express.9 My daily walk to work becomes a dangerous confrontation with such monstrosities.

Ironically, the journey strikes its climax at our very Association, one of countless dead pieces littered around the city, integrated to form a cacophonous whole. My city is infested with disease as all of its wounds were unforgivably left to fester in the name of preservation and its perverted outcomes, in the name of the past and of history.

“So what of history?” they tell me. Architecture used to be a brainless vegetable in a coma which we would resort to with questions and leave thinking we had answers. What poor disillusioned souls are those which continue to have such notions. I witness many in the field, still working to mend something that has long been broken. Thank goodness most of us have gone beyond the cowardly worship of the past.10 The past can be remarkably valuable only as a tool whereby the quest for solutions is inverted to one aiming at unravelling problems relevant to a current scenario. At least this is what I tell myself when I spend hours down in the Archive. The task at hand is what can be said about the present, the radical and indeed the avant-garde.

4

Giedion, S., Part I History A part of Life, Space, Time and Architecture: The Growth of a New Tradition, (United States, Harvard University Press, 2009), p.5 5 de Duve, T., Kant after Duchamp “An October Book”, (Cambridge, Massachusetts, MIT Press, 1997) p. 7 6 Murphy, D., The Architecture of Failure, (Winchester, Zero Books, 2012), p.1 7 Benjamin, W., ‘Theses on the Philosophy of History’, Illuminations (USA, Schocken Books, 2007), p.263: Bernard Tschumi seems to agree with Benjamin when he realises that “for the first time architecture may never be…it is both a being and nonbeing…a final nihilistic statement that might provide modern architectural history with its ultimate punchline, its self-annihilation”, while Rem Koolhaas also testifies to Architecture disappearing in the twentieth century.

8 Koolhaas, R., ‘Junkspace’, Obsolescence October, v. 100 (Cambridge, Massachusetts, MIT Press, Spring, 2002), p.177 9 At least the former pair of cases were spared their Legacy as opposed to the latter (including the Former Bournemouth Church) which have more or less been erased from history.

10 A notion that preceded modernism and has successfully been averted from its re-establishment during history’s revenge with Post-modernism, highlighted by the Futurists in their Manifesto of 1919, which I will contradict in the following paragraphs.

Item 3

Kaiser Wilhelm Memorial Church, Berlin.

Monuments, museums, ruins; buildings frozen in time, potent with Legacy and caught in Limbo.

Item 4

Junkspace turns everything it touches into a black-hole; buildings are decontextualised and remain devoid of their original function or meaning.

November 20th For us to make the continuum of history explode,11 so that everything must be revolutionary12 is such absolute nonsense that the only explosion this provokes is my laughter. If you ask me, these selfproclaimed, committed emissaries of a humanity as it will or should be13 go a tad too far by dwelling in such thoughts. If anything new is to emerge, we must use history, or at least consider it.

“Could anything be new if there hadn’t been something old, anyhow?” I ask during interrogations. The historical conditions which make it possible to ‘say something about it’ and for many people to say different things about it, the conditions under which such a thing inscribes itself into a network of relations with other objects, so that it can establish with them relations of resemblance, nearness, distance, difference, transformation - these conditions, as is clear, are numerous and imposing. All of which means that one cannot simply talk about any old thing in any old time period: it is not easy to do something new; it is not enough just to open one’s eyes, to pay attention, or to become aware so that new objects light up and emerge from the surface of the ground in their first clarity.14 Only by bearing this in mind can the foundations of something be shaken or destroyed to make way for another, and where the becoming-architecture occurs through negation and breaks the consensus.15 If this is ‘avant-garde’ then still, despite having built more than all previous generations have in total, “somehow we do not register on the same scales. We do not leave Pyramids”.16 This is the most gripping bit of text I’ve noted from Rem’s confession. I can’t stop myself from interpreting it as a remark on an age of de-radicalism and of stagnation. Junkspace lies in the realm of death and mutation, not evolution. When change has been divorced from the idea of improvement there is no progress17. I must remember that I recorded these statements more than a decade ago and as much as they may be relevant they are becoming history themselves. Nevertheless, we are still stuck in transition, with limbo and death all around us, and we have to snap out of it at some point.

I do want to see new buildings being of their time 18 once again. Perhaps what is seen as alive is merely an illusion. The fact is that the poor architecture that manages to get built is a reflection of our depressing political situation,19 all of which manifests in an illusion of the alive, the perfect pseudo-avant-garde landscape, stretching beyond the horizon of my city.

I have to confess that it is more than once that I’ve succumbed to the treacherous ‘spirit of this time’ and its deceptions. I’ve tamed it though. Its an awful tendency which hacks into our subconscious forcing us to recognise only the greatness in the world. Doing so in an inglorious and unheroic way, it avoids, in our arrogance, the actual littleness of things. The age of the Starchitects has stimulated this spirit despite the fact that these “ ‘Gods’ will soon die of their temporality, yet the supreme meaning never dies. It rises up rejuvenated and anew. The image of God has a shadow.

The supreme meaning is real and casts a shadow 20. Such a supreme meaning is Architecture’s purest radical potential.

Never mind, our beloved Starchietcts continue to pose as Gods, as triumphant victors over ‘Golden Emirates’, those who built the biggest, the tallest, the most expensive, the prettiest of them all. The ‘heroes’ and ‘geniuses’, who instead of leaving their Pyramids’ to spite Rem, in what are deserts after all Goddamn it, leave monstrosities which are as immortal as the shadows they cast. Unavoidable, near-permanent, stand-by and inevitable financial collapse are averted by their larger-than-life Olympics, World Cups, and International Expos. It is the illusion of life and of the Architect, which may be responsible for maintaining the status quo. We have killed the Superman ages ago. We are beyond Doomsday, in the realm of the pseudo-new. The Architect himself may be the murderer and I’ll find my proof.

11 Benjamin, W., ‘Theses on the Philosophy of History’, Illuminations (USA, Schocken Books, 2007), p. 261 12

The Futurists think that Architecture cannot be subject to any law of historical continuity. Adrian Forty seems to agree that this was indeed an anti-historical attitude of the early twentieth-century with which the avant-garde movements were full of.

13 de Duve, T., Kant after Duchamp “An October Book”, (Cambridge, Massachusetts, MIT Press, 1997) p. 19 14 Foucault, M., in Barkan, L., Unearthing the Past: Archaeology and Aesthetics in the Making of Renaissance Culture, (Yale University Press, 1999) 15 de Duve, T., Kant after Duchamp “An October Book”, (Cambridge, Massachusetts, MIT Press, 1997) pp. 19-20 16 Koolhaas, R., ‘Junkspace’, Obsolescence October, v. 100 (Cambridge, Massachusetts, MIT Press, Spring, 2002), p. 175 17 Ibid, p. 178 18 Forty, A., ‘History’, Words and Buildings: A Vocabulary of Modern Architecture, (Thames and Hudson Ltd., 2004), p.201 19 Murphy, D., The Architecture of Failure, (Winchester, Zero Books, 2012), p.139 20 Jung, C.G., Shamdasani, S., The Red Book Liber Novus: A Reader’s Edition, (New York, W.W. Norton & Company, 2009), pp.120-121

Item 5

We are beyond the death of the Superman, beyond Doomsday, in the realm of the pseudonew. Has he died for the sake of humanity or has humanity allowed him to perish in vein?

Item 6

While Junkspace plagues my city the superstars of the Profession push beyond the boundaries of the absurd thinking that they are all so avant-garde.

December 6th

I recently came to realise, and found it even harder to accept, that this generation may very well witness the death of the Starchitects, who have come to define our pseudo-radical era. Most of my colleagues will have to face the post-starchitect world and the legacy of their firms. The feeling of an inescapable expectation to live up to them, constantly creeps up on those working at the Association. A place which had fancied itself avant-garde a few decades ago. I couldn’t care less. The heroic architect, the image of the genius practitioner, has very likely condemned architecture rather than awaken its radical side.

It is our incorruptible image of the ideal and the temperament of the profession open to emotional novelty and the breadth of sympathy,21 that cover our eyes. The branding of major names and the immortalising of those who came to past are extensively propagated by the media, like tidal waves, crushing the seemingly ‘insignificant’ populace of my city. We look back at figures like Raymond Hood, the radical jokes of architecture, creating more problems by trying to solve just one and justifying it all with an audacious stratagem of self-induced schizophrenia22 It appears to me with grave clarity, that we have gone far beyond the age of the hero, of the Fountainheads, beyond proportion and beyond the golden rules. Some of us in perpetual waiting for the reawakening of radicalism and others claiming to have solved this crisis. Bullocks!

Even present personas who think of themselves as radical may be retroactively seen as preaching nonsense. Patrick Schumacher’s oh so provocative move to declare a new style for ‘avant-garde’ practise - ‘parametricism’, claims to finally close the traditional period of uncertainty that was engendered by the crisis of modernism with the ability of the digital tools to generate dazzling complexity. It’s more complexity seen as its own end, as if it were somehow necessarily better.23 Perhaps our generation isn’t as glorious as we anticipate it to be. It is always dangerous to assume one’s own time has an exceptional importance24 when it may very well not. We all are a joke, humanity and architects, to even grasp any notion of greatness in a river of time estimated to be so vast that the history of civilised mankind would fill one-fifth of the last second of the last-hour.25 All architects are collectively killing radicalism. Okay I’ll play good cop and go easy on the Starchitects for now. But not so fast! Its the entire Profession that may be in on this. They can get away with it individually, but the Profession can be tried for murder. It’s a big ‘gangster ring’ that ought to be busted. The ARB Godfather lays the rules for the major cartels of Foster, Zaha and Rogers to implement as absolute. Giving laws, bettering, making things easier for them to control, has all become wrong and evil.26 The capitalist world has rendered architecture a commodity and the profession has gained legal power to command its own disciples. Woe betide he who has a degree not certified by the ARB; he who is unable to catch up with all that is ‘cutting-edge’. For the architect, of course, has to specialise in every godforsaken invention out there. Everything is a tool. No wonder everyone has a claim to the Profession. So many technicalities subvert democratic opinion and the profession becomes the unchallenged, all-embracing ruler.

Architecture is paralysed in permanent intensive care27 and young architects are literally enslaved by those ‘cartels’ seen as the virtuous nobility of the Profession, becoming increasingly synonymous with ‘overwork’ and ‘underpay’. Even if I don’t get my warrant to search the hell out of their establishments they will destroy themselves eventually. The Profession’s attempt to avoid gridlock is futile. Congestion and Paralysis are both results of escalation in any sector of production.28 So is the culprit too powerful to arrest? Time will tell. For now I have the perverted notion of the future to rule out.

21 Saint, A.,‘The Architect as Hero and Genius’, New Image of the Architect, (Yale University Press, 1985), p.1 22 Koolhaas, R., ‘The Talents of Raymond Hood’, Delirious New York: An Retroactive Manifesto, (Italy, The Monacelli Press, 1994), p.174 23 Murphy, D., The Architecture of Failure, (Winchester, Zero Books, 2012), pp.133-134 24

Giedion, S., ‘Part I: History A part of Life’, Space, Time and Architecture: The Growth of a New Tradition, (United States, Harvard University Press, 2009), p.8 25 Benjamin, W., ‘Theses on the Philosophy of History’, Illuminations (USA, Schocken Books, 2007), p. 263 26 Jung, C.G., Shamdasani, S., The Red Book Liber Novus A Reader’s Edition, (New York, W.W. Norton & Company, 2009), p.126 27 Illich, I., ‘Disabling Professions’, Disabling Professions, (Marion Boyars Publishers, 1977) p.27 28 Ibid, p.30

Item 7

We may be beyond the Vitruvian man and proportion, yet the power now lies with the Profession and not the past texts. They impose their own rules.

December 13th I fear and embrace the inevitable. Let the system implode. Bring it on! The world will thank us in the long-run. Yet the idea of a manifesto today, of a radical document that would have traditionally paved the way for the new seems to appear dated.29 One single thought has been looming over my investigation, that of our sickening obsession with the future.

We are in the virtual tele-age of Mr. and Ms. Everyone.30 The audience are no longer Architects, related professions, governments, the church, nor the nation. We are facing a whole world, all ‘tuned in’ simultaneously. If history is meant to extend our dimension of thought31 then modern technology has mutated it into a new Junkspace. It is no longer tangible, physical trash, but an infinite conglomeration of simulated, digital space. The temporal dimension becomes an important aspect of the past and future. The virtual is a real part of any entity that corresponds to its potential for flux, for change. All of this seen in the context of the radically new; the event that shakes reality.32 In my reality, society is surveyed, sampled, patterns observed, population growth monitored, probabilities of life, death and wealth calculated and every aspect of time quantified. All to predict and plan to utmost precision. The constant autopsy of the past has been reversed into an incessant web of present surveillance and future prophecy.33 It all hypes expectations to absurdity. Everyone expects everything to eventually be invented. Humanity sees itself as ‘God’, never mind the architect.

I expect innovation to shock, yet my concern is impact-ability. This is what renders a provocative manifesto unlikely. How long can we shock and how many?

Anything radical may evidently lie in the past. Si-fi has eradicated our ability to resist anticipation when the motor of contradiction has been exhausted.34 Provoking any lasting reaction from a vacuous and passive world is almost entirely impossible, spiralling us out of death, through Limbo to violently crush ‘wow-factor’ with every passing micro-second. I feel the powerlessness of anything avant-garde to elicit indignation from a society that is too liberal but still not free enough, too eager to mask conflict behind pluralism and too anxious to clothe its consent for cultural illiteracy in the rags of dissidence.35 After I gathered my final bits of evidence and notes form my witnesses I headed back to the Association. The Sex Pistols’ hit was resonating from the nearby bar. All I could make of it was that their is indeed no Future. I’m positive about it. There shouldn’t be. Why invent what is yet to happen?

Why preconceive and waste speculation upon the aftermath of your actions? I can only be certain about two things. For one, the future is humanity’s fabricated Malificent which freezes both past and present. The other; well, God Save [us from] The King! Prince Charles’ so ‘morally correct’ views on architecture are certainly something no one looks forward to. In the end do we even need to kill ourselves over attempts to be radical? I have; over this hollow case. This was never promising. I did say that we are, after all, the Cold Case office. For now I am compelled to send this damnable document back unresolved, yet again. It’s time.

I’m leaving everything with you to do with what you will. No more tricks, no more lies, only truth; and the truth is you made me understand that I was wrong. That the verdict on this case is not mine to make. Because this world, the world that I’m a part of, that I helped shaped, will end tonight; and tomorrow a different world will begin, a different architect will shape and this choice belongs to them. Only truth; there is no solution to this case, there is only death. The time has come for me to meet my maker and to repay him in kind for all that he’s done. I’m finished. I’m glad of it. I fell in love with Architecture when I no longer believed I could and I leave this world with hope, that whatever happens, however fatal the disease, Architecture will live, in whatever way possible. The disease may, in all probability, be incurable but nonetheless, somehow, treatable!

Architecture or Revolution?36 I choose Architecture!

29 E. Blake, “After the Avant-gardes”, Fulcrum - The Next Generation Issue 73, (Architectural Association London, Bedford Press, October 14th 2013) 30 de Duve, T., Kant after Duchamp “An October Book”, (Cambridge, Massachusetts, MIT Press, 1997) p.31 31

One of the functions of history is to help us live in a wider sense, in wider dimensions, according to Giedion, in ‘Part I: History A part of Life’, Space, Time and Architecture: The Growth of a New Tradition, p.8.

32 Deleuze, G., Difference and Repetition, (London, Athlone Press, 1994) p.266 33 Arguably, the concept of the future preoccupies architecture on various levels, especially how the practise strives to improve its skills of ‘projection’ from paper to reality. The transition from concept to life makes architects, apparently, inseparable from their ties to the future, however, as Le Corbusier had stated in Towards an Architecture, they cannot be too far ahead of their moments.

34 de Duve, T., Kant after Duchamp “An October Book”, (Cambridge, Massachusetts, MIT Press, 1997) 35 Ibid, p.29 36 Le Corbusier, Towards a New Architecture, (New York, Dover Publications Inc., 1986) p.289. By making Architecture we are already radical and so, if there is an enthusiasm for building, Revolution can be avoided. We should not be radical for its own sake.

Item 8

How could art ever be the same? Was Douchamp’s urinal a joke or test? It could have been both.

Item 9

Those, such as Marina Abramovich, who have turned to bodies and space in attempt to provoke wit their art, cause turbo-shocks, with an inevitable numbing after-effect; that which kills the former in blitz ferocity

Item 10

There’s No Future for me ... there’s no Future for you. There shouldn’t be any Future for us.

Maybe we should cease striving to be radical and just make Architecture.

THE EVIDENCE

(bibliography)

I. Written Evidence: - Tschumi, B., ‘The Architectural Paradox’, Architecture and Disjunction, (Cambridge, Massachusetts, MIT Press, 1996) - Koolhaas, R., ‘Junkspace’, Obsolescence October, v. 100 (Cambridge, Massachusetts, MIT Press, Spring, 2002) - Murphy, D., The Architecture of Failure, (Winchester, Zero Books, 2012) - Benjamin, W., ‘Theses on the Philosophy of History’, Illuminations (USA, Schocken Books, 2007) -The Futurist Manifesto, 1919 - Foucault, M., Barkan, L., Unearthing the Past: Archaeology and Aesthetics in the Making of Renaissance Culture, (Yale University Press, 1999) - de Duve, T., Kant after Duchamp “An October Book”, (Cambridge, Massachusetts, MIT Press, 1997) - Jung, C.G., Shamdasani, S., The Red Book Liber Novus A Reader’s Edition, (New York, W.W. Norton & Company, 2009) - Forty, A., ‘History’, Words and Buildings: A Vocabulary of Modern Architecture, (Thames and Hudson Ltd., 2004) - Gideon, S., ‘History A Part of Life’, Space, Time and Architecture: e Growth of a New Tradition, (Harvard University Press, 2008) - Saint, A.,‘The Architect as Hero and Genius’, New Image of the Architect, (Yale University Press, 1985) - Illich, I., ‘Disabling Professions’, Disabling Professions, (Marion Boyars Publishers, 1977) - Jung, C.G., Shamdasani, S., The Red Book Liber Novus: A Reader’s Edition, (New York, W.W. Norton & Company, 2009) - E. Blake, “After the Avant-gardes”, Fulcrum - The Next Generation Issue 73, (Architectural Association London, Bedford Press, October 14th 2013) - Deleuze, G., Difference and Repetition, (London, Athlone Press, 1994) - Le Corbusier, Towards a New Architecture, (New York, Dover Publications Inc., 1986)

II. Photographic/Visual Evidence: Item 1: Photoshop Manipulation, by Nicholas Zembashi Item 2: Film Still, Sin City, 2005, Directed by Robert Rodriguez & Frank Miller, Written by Frank Miller Item 3: Kaiser Wilhelm Memorial Church, Berlin, 2010, ‘Two Churches’, Snapshots from Berlin blog, September 6th 2013, http://snapshotsfromberlin.com/tag/churches/ Item 4: Tesco Express, former Bournemouth Church, Phillips A.,‘Tesco Opens New Express Store in Bournemouth Church’, Buiseness Review Europe, November 12th 2010, http://www.businessrevieweurope.eu/news_archive/ tags/tesco/tesco-opens-new-express-store-bournemouth-church Item 5: Jurgen D., Breeding B., ‘The Death of Superman’, Superman, v. 2, #75 (USA, DC Comics, 1992) Item 6: Kidd C, Taylor D., Batman: Death by Design, (USA, DC Comics, 2012), p.82 Item 7: Moore A.,Gibbons D., Watchmen, (USA, DC Comics, 1987) Item 8: Marcel Douchamp, Urinal, 1917: Rogers I., ‘Humour in the Work of Marcel Duchamp’, Grey Not Grey blog, May 27th 2012, http://www.greynotgrey.com/blog/2012/05/27/humour-in-the-work-of-marcel-duchamp/ Item 9: Marina Abramovich, In Imponderabilia (1977, reenacted in 2010), Guijarro I, ‘LINKING YOU IN EYES by Marina Abramovich. “The Artist is Present” in MoMa’, WAY TO GO *Art&Design* blog, February 23rd 2013, http://iranzuguijarroplaza.wordpress.com/2013/02/21/linking-you-in-eyes-by-marina-abramovich-the-artist-ispresent-in-moma/ Item 10: Jamie Reid, God Save The Queen, Silk Screen, 1977

III. Film: - Max Payne, 2008, directed by John Moore, written by Beau Thorne & Sam Lake - Sin City, 2005, directed by Robert Rodriguez & Frank Miller, written by Frank Miller - V for Vendetta, 2005, directed by James McTeigue, written by Andy Wachowski and others - The Spirit, 2008, directed by Frank Miller, written by Frank Miller & Will Esner

History & Theory Studies AA Second Year tutor Zaynab Dena Ziari