A Model for Britain by Josh Fenton

RUSKINIAN PROPRIETY A MODEL FOR BRITAIN_

LONDON SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE: CPT JOSH FENTON

RUSKINIAN PROPRIETY A MODEL FOR BRITAIN_ WORDS: 3295

The Fall From Ruskin’s Righteousness, To Where We Are Now

The Fall From Ruskin’s Righteousness

Sixty Years, seven-hundred and twenty months, two-hundred and forty changes of the seasons; which political analyst, business strategist or even mythical soothsayer would dare to state with authority what could happen across such a time period? Yet as architects we find ourselves in an interesting position, where though we may not be predicting the future, we play a significant role in shaping it. Often the lifespan of the building exceeds our own, and therefore stretches forward in time with a physical expression of our current societal tastes, attitudes, and ideals.1

Duly then, we have a significant responsibility, for what we uphold

and perpetuate in the practice of architecture. For Jeremy Till, it is not simply a responsibility to build with thought for the future, but also for the present; he sees architects as ideally placed to work on “the creation of empowering spatial, and hence social, relationships”.2 Roget’s Associative Thesaurus lists beside responsibility: liability, function, directorship, mandate and duty. These words bring to mind high aspirations, fastidious attention to the task, and the imperative of the task’s completion. This naturally leads us to question, are we are engaging with aspirational and propositional nature of architecture? Are we attending to the issues of exclusion and endorsement that surround the act of building? And most pressingly, do we grasp the critical nature of our relationship with the built environment?

John Ruskin had very clear ideas about what good architecture

should be and understood the importance of the virtues that shaped its production. Ruskin claimed to have no design ability; as such, his purely theoretical interest in architecture was derived from his idea that he could apply to social conditions, the same scrutiny he had applied to landscape painting.3

4

To Where We Are Now

His seminal text The Seven Lamps of Architecture was a manifesto of its time. For Ruskin, not only was architecture in a state of crisis, facing the influx of foreign forms and styles, but Britain was struggling to keep hold of its morals and virtues. Ruskin began his text, with an expression of his state of sobriety:

The aspect of the years that approach us is as solemn as it is full of mystery; and

the weight of evil against which we have to contend, is increasing […]. It is no time

for the idleness of metaphysics, or the entertainment of the arts. The blasphemies

of the earth are sounding louder, and its miseries heaped heavier every day [...]4

The rigour and religiosity of his approach toward the critique of architecture is clear, his words were not “idle” musings, but instead, a means of finding a path through the dark times ahead. Despite the cultural separation between Ruskin’s period, and our own much more secular times, the need for clear, driving impetus remains. We have moved from a virtue based system to one based on values. Architects have aligned themselves with the dominant values of the marketplace as a means of ensuring success.5 Whilst this approach aids self-preservation, it gives the impression that architects endorse the neoliberal ethic.6

In Seven Lamps, Ruskin explores the role of architecture under

the virtuous headings of: Sacrifice, Truth, Power, Beauty, Life, Memory and Obedience, continually drawing on his faith as a means of asserting their absolute truth. These virtues were not detached from one another, but instead, they were linked by themes beyond the noble. These themes relating to: politics, professionalism, sustainability, welfare and workmanship, allowed the text to go beyond simply the ennoblement of the maker. This manifesto that follows is founded on Ruskin’s approach to the political and professional progress of architecture.

5

The Fall From Ruskin’s Righteousness

Notes 1

Sofie Pelsmakers, The Environmental Design Pocketbook, 2nd edn., RIBA Publishing, London, 2017, p. 200. On average most buildings have a 60 year lifespan, despite the component parts having a much shorter life.

2 Nishat Awan, Tatjana Schneider and Jeremy Till, Spatial Agency: Other Ways of Doing Architecture, Routledge, London, 2011, p. 38 3 Kenneth Clark, Introduction. In, John Ruskin, Praeterita, 2nd edn., Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1985, p. xv 4 John Ruskin, The Seven Lamps of Architecture, General Books LLC, Breinigsville, 1849, p. 14 5 Awan, Schneider & Till, op. cit., p. 28 6 Anna Minton, Big Capital: Who is London For?, Penguin, London, 2017, p. 7

6

Po lit ics

Politics

Ruskin suggests in his chapter, ‘Lamp of Memory’, that the society we now have was given to us, not only by the generations preceding, but also, by God. Ruskin also underlines our temporary existence, writing that: “God has lent us the earth for our life […]. It belongs as much to those who are to come after us, […] and we have no right, by anything that we do or neglect, to […] deprive them of benefits which it was in our power to bequeath”.7 Ruskin is making a relevant political statement, albeit with a strong religious sentiment, positioning each generation as stewards of society.

8

Politics

To engage himself politically, Ruskin began writing - sometimes before concepts were fully developed, seeking to passionately convey his message, and “endeavour to right wrong and establish his rigid conception of the right”.8 His writings became so wide ranging and varied, that at one point he moved to narrate the ephemera of his mind within a series of pamphlets entitled: Fors Clavigera, beginning in 1871.9 These pamphlets were described as letters to the “Workmen and Labourers of Great Britain”, and through them Ruskin tackled social and political conditions, even challenging the papacy, a political institution of its time.10 Later, as the Slade Professor of Fine Art, he was able to use his lectures to further disseminate his message, reiterating continually that the “art of any country is the exponent of its social and political virtues”.11

9

Politics

Notes 7 8 9

10

11

Ruskin, op. cit., 176 John D. Hunt, The Wider Sea: A Life of John Ruskin, Phoenix, London, 1998, 372 Hunt, op. cit., 328. Ruskin wrote in his diary, near the beginning of the Fors series that his “head was too full of things and [didn’t] know which to write first”.

Ruskin, op. cit., 26. Ruskin wrote of how the Papist Temple was an example of the “abuse and fallacy” being committed against true Christian values.

Hunt, op. cit., 332

10

Find a seat at the table; If there isn’t one, craft one.

Proactively seek out opportunities to say NO. Create income rivers, not an income stream.

Politics

The claim that architects have helplessly lost their authority within the built environment, has been so often touted that it has lost all profundity.12 It was in fact a strategic withdrawal. Over the course of the last seventy years, societal and technological shifts have led many architects to reason that the best way to retain any form of control is to retract the scope of their responsibilities.

During the twentieth century, architecture was dominated by an

altruism which had the hope of defining a new accessible utopia.13 Eric Cesal notes that this ambition is particularly evident in Minoru Yamasaki’s 1956 Pruitt Igoe Public Housing scheme in Missouri. Here, several design and management problems manifested themselves in the development of “dangerous no-man’s lands” and, a situation where “vandalism and crime made a mockery of Yamasaki’s galleries and other aesthetic pretentions”.14 The widespread public uproar, and the eventual demolition of Pruitt-Igoe [Fig.1], (televised across America) created a cloud of uncertainty over the utopian modernist approach. The style of low cost housing projects was now seen as austere and brash, instead of streamlined and cutting edge as hoped for. Architects who had aspired to bring social reform through design, judged the public mood as a reflection of their failure, and as such thought there was no point doggedly pursuing it.

Jeremy Till observes that “architecture is immanently political”, yet

there is “a certain unease, in which the projection of personal [political] beliefs […] is seen to challenge the objective view professionals are meant to bring […]”.15 The continued veneration of architects such as Zaha Hadid is symptomatic of this way of thinking. Douglas Spencer critiques her projects as: “overtly representational functions of façade treatment” whereby “[a]nxieties are appeased through affect […]”.16

12

Politics

Fig.1 - Pruitt-Igoe Housing Projects, St. Louis Missouri by Minoru Yamasaki.

Fig.2 - Aylesbury Estate, Walworth, London. LB Southwark/Peter Trenton

13

Politics

Hadid seems to have preferred to operate in a state of indifference to wider concerns, instead, focussing on aesthetics, suggesting that “the ideas of social progress and man’s ability to consciously construct his social world seem discredited today. Grand designs […] are seen as nothing but grand pretensions […]”.17

Ruskin communicated throughout his works, with the air of a

secular preacher; as architects we need to regain this imperative.18 In line with this proactive approach we need to take, Nishat Awan stresses that engaging our ‘spatial agency’ is a current necessity. Freed from the fear of failure we can imagine architects working collectively to: “bypass, penetrate or hijack institutions or other organisational structures” as well as volunteering, “testifying at hearings, and participating in planning procedures, raising

“

we may feel disempowered currently, but nothing is barring us from participation at a higher political level

awareness about wider issues of planning and the distribution of resources and land, learning and listening to others […]”.19 London practitioners ASH (Architects for Social Housing) demonstrate

the tenacity described by Awan, successfully launching several counters to privately financed redevelopment of ex-council property and land [Fig. 3].

We may feel disempowered currently, but nothing is barring us

from participation at a higher political level, engaging ‘ordinary’ people in the planning process or acting as lobbyists for policy change. This is not to suggest that architects have all the answers to society’s issues; but, that they can once again utilise their diverse knowledge, to derive culturally, economically and environmentally sustainable solutions.20

14

"

ASH MODEL

Architects for social housing The solution to london’s Housing sHORTage?

Dem

olit

ion

pm

lo eve

Red

ent

or

M

an

ag

em

en

t

n

ntio

e Ret

Architects for (Management & REtention of )social housing

aFFORDABLE

What

Where

How

mAINTAINS cOMMUNITY fABRIC

- Conversations - Fee Neutral Proposals - Live Projects - sharing information - Anti-propoganda

Less Private Capital

west kensington & Gibbs Green 2016

112

Planned & designed

Residents & architects

1 - Infill - Roof Extension - Refurbishment

rEDUCES gOVERNMENT EXPENSE

Capco

327 NEw Homes

Planned & designed

7500 NEw Homes

ASH (Directed by Geraldine Denning & Simon Elmer) favours the model in which housing capacity is increased on existing council estates, rather than allowing the land to be redeveloped by private capital. The approach benefits London as a whole and the organic community fabric. In the example of West Kensington and Gibbs Green CAPCO sought to demolish the existing estate, and increase density by 886%.

Source: https://architectsforsocialhousing.wordpress.com/2016/08/08/west-ken-and-gibbs-green/ Fig. 3

Politics

Mel Dodd of muf, the socially minded art-architecture collective and founder of muf_aus, has worked to enhance the image of the architect beyond the producer of capitalized objet d’art. Dodd speaks of actively engaging the people on the periphery of the design process: “we swap places backwards and forwards”, the process “acknowledges some of the things that we have within our training that is special, but also acknowledges what other people have in their knowledge and experience”.21

Crucially, whilst seated at the table, architects will be able to broaden

the dialogue. In the case of Pruitt-Igoe, or its British contemporaries [fig.2], the buildings are held as responsible, negating the contribution made by political, social, financial and management failings, beyond the architectural remit. Wouter Vanstiphout notes that the building is a very costly and visible entity, whilst other issues are “so deeply complex that you cannot change them”.22 Seated amongst policy-makers architects can outline and define the limits of responsibility, and shift the discourse from oppositional antagonism to creative propositions.

Engaging with matters that are beyond the purely spatial, gives

architects the power to take another political course of action: the act of saying ‘no’. Given that they would no longer be beholden to clients to achieve immediate effect, and could be propositional within the urban realm without designing buildings, architects wouldn’t need to work with clients who hold conflicting values, or priorities.

To a certain degree, there is need for us to continually reiterate our

political position as architects – not in terms of parties or alliances, but our engagement with issues that affect the public. If we are not holding ourselves accountable, perhaps we should not shy away from the resultant guilt.

16

Politics

Notes 12 Eric J. Cesal, Down Detour Road: An Architect In Search of Practice, MIT Press London, 2010, p. 25. Cesal notes that we have gone from unlicensed “master masons” to registered architects wielding little power.

13 14

15 16

17

18

19

Cesal, op. cit., pp. 194- 196 Alexander Von Hoffman, ‘High Ambitions: The Past and Future of American Low Income Housing Policy’, Housing Policy Debate, vol. 7, no.3, Aug. 1996, p. 434 Awan, Schneider and Till, op. cit., p. 38 Douglas Spencer, The Architecture of Neoliberalism: How Contemporary Architecture Became an Instrument of Control and Compliance, Bloomsbury, London, 2016, p. 159 Zaha Hadid, ‘Another Beginning’ in Peter Noever, ed., The End of Architecture? Documents and Manifestos, Prestel, Munich, 1993, p. 26 Ruskin, op. cit., p. 24. An example of Ruskin’s preacherly style, on prioritising need: “[it is] deacons and ministers we want, not architects. I insist on this, I plead for this”.

Awan, Schneider & Till, op. cit., pp.80 - 81

20

Charles Landry, The Creative City: A Toolkit for Urban Innovators, Earthscan Publications, 2000), 20 21 Mel Dodd, “The Double Agent” in Future Practice: Conversations from the Edge of Architecture, Routledge, London, 2013, p. 78 22 Wouter Vanstiphout, “The Historian of The Present” in Future Practice: Conversations from the Edge of Architecture, Routledge, London, 2013, p. 99

17

pro fess ion

Profession

Within ‘The Lamp of Obedience’, Ruskin underlines the importance of craft and workmanship, suggesting that the principle of crafting was beyond basic work and occupation. Ruskin saw a direct correlation between the aptitude of the workforce in general and the quality of spaces we inhabit: “it is not enough to find men absolute subsistence; we should think of the manner of life which our demands necessitate […] it is far better to give work which is above the men, than to educate the men to be above their work”.23 Here Ruskin questions what it means to work, placing the practitioner in a position where his hard work is a benefit to all. His learning is deployed, not only to demonstrate stylistic range, but also to create spaces that come closer to the natural grandeur of the earth, aging and acquiring “that deep sense of voicefulness, of stern watching, of mysterious sympathy”.24

19

Profession

Ruskin sought practical application and therefore set up the Sheffield Guild of St George, which “Ruskin organised both to embody his utopian scheme for a new England and to initiate […] its visions”.25 Through the Guild there was consistent practical and constructive critique of the existing system.

In order supply the Guild with all it needed, he was prepared to finance the project on his own, with or without assistance from art institutions; he declared in Fors that he would regularly set aside “some small percentage of my income, to assist, as one of yourselves in what one and all we shall have to do”.26 This act served the purpose of ensuring the preservation of the exemplar aspects of contemporary craft and art for all.

20

Profession

Notes 23 24

Ruskin, op. cit., p. 201

Ruskin, op. cit., p. 177 25 Hunt, op. cit., p. 332 26 Hunt, op. cit., pp. 337 - 338

21

Cross your funding streams, not your fingers.

Get paid to hang around for the after-party.

Be less concerned with ownership, and more interested in space-ship

Profession

Aligning with Ruskin’s notion of the implicit value of work, Katherine Gibson an ‘economic geographer’ writing at the margins of architecture speaks of how the lives of buildings can be charted in terms of their economic diversity and development. Once it has been designed and built, and moves into the stage of habitation there are already several types of economic exchange at play. The occupier may then “modify buildings, change them, sell them, they put their own labour into them”.27 As Ruskin delves into the component parts of architecture, so too Gibson notes that at this scale we can start to identify the components of finance within a project, and how those involved are remunerated.

Currently architects wait for a client to provide a brief, which

potentially cements a negative power dynamic. As Dan Hill notes, there has been little progress in architects working on

“

when capital markets contract, the need for the commoditized architectural form also shrinks

their own projects, as developers or builders: revenue is generated through the construction percentage model, leaving architects in a perpetual cycle of “build and

sell, hit and run”.28 This approach exposes architects to changes in capital flows. As witnessed in 2008, when capital markets contract, the need for the commoditized architectural form also shrinks, leaving many architects without work.29 Even during economically optimistic times, policy changes can alter capital allocation within the private sector, and therefore, the types of briefs that architects receive.

23

"

Profession

This also exemplifies the degree to which private capital controls the growth of our cities, and can establish spaces of exclusion. Till notes that the city itself is taken under siege and cornered by construction speculators and rent tyrants, in what Rathenau calls “architectural negligence”.30 Adding to this, the sale of assets to meet local funding gaps, and our cities face growing monopolistic control by private entities. Instead of turning away from the established order, this manifesto imagines how we as architects will be able to engage with the capitalist system. Currently, architects are elevated when they demonstrate that they are “progressive, innovative, efficient, iconic […]”.31 However, what if an architect wants to make something for the sake of community? Something that has humble aspirations and a deluge of slack space? How, in the existing system would these projects be funded?

This manifesto rebuffs the approved RIBA fee bidding system, for

the adoption of a new system designed alongside this manifesto [Fig. 4]. The RIBA Appointment Documents and Plan of Work encourage practices to think methodically about where the value that they offer truly lies, instead of simply offering work on a flat percentage basis. However, though there is no industry standard, most practices find themselves using the 8 – 12% average, as a starting point for their calculations.32

Instead of the current correlative relationship between build cost

and architect’s fee the proposal for architects to formulate fee schedules based on the core programs that they typically deliver, with fees tiered according to client’s specification. Bespoke or specialist requirements are then added to the contract on a job by job basis. This approach begins to demonstrate to the clients that we understand the value we offer, as “people do not pay for services – they pay for the value those services create”.33

24

CCF MODEL

Fig. 4

community Contribution fund

NEW Job

Pass Ethical Assessment

NO

Decline Job/ Inform Client

NO

Decline Job/ Inform Client

YES Pass Community Social Impact Assessment

YES

T1

REfer to Tiered fee schedule

T2 T3

bespoke/ specialist Items required

yes

Private Residential Multi-unit Residential Commercial (Office) Interior Office Design

additional fee

no Fee Agreed < £50,000 0.3% 50,000< f > 100,000 100,000< f > 250,000 250,000< f > 500,000 500,000< f > 1m 1.5m< f > 2m 2.5%

YES Assess CCF Contribution

Client opt out of ccf

yes

Subtract contribution from architect’s fee

no Add funds to CCf Commence Job The flow diagram shows the processes occuring in an example small-medium sized practice as they implement the new job sourcing methodology and CCF. Source: Author’s own design.

Profession

Following an agreement on this initial term of appointment, the client can then be given an opportunity to opt out of what could be called a “Community Contribution Fund”. Depending on the characteristics of the client and project, this would operate on a sliding scale of 0.3-2.5%.

This may seem like a fantastical addition to the contract sum, given the fiscal efficiencies clients seek, but for small to medium sized practices operating on jobs with values of up to two million pounds this would mean a maximum outlay of six thousand pounds for the client. Furthermore, these funds can be used to improve the immediate surroundings of the site, meaning potentially increased profit, retention and occupancy. For clients who choose to opt out, architects can adjust their fee so that a contribution can still be made to the R&D fund; architects will therefore be able to display their belief in civic quality and spatial equity. The CCF is distinctly different to CIL and s106 payments collected by local councils; these funds typically get enmeshed in bureaucracy under the control of political entities.

The funds will be deployed impartially, and with community

focus. Architects will have the agency to purchase sites, and build-out projects to reshape the community into a more equitable arrangement.

As Landry notes the existence of finance can change the culture of practice, “imaginative activity would be made legitimate”.34 In contrast to digital and technology firms today, many architects are casual with R&D, dabbling with competitions and CPD’s as a way of investing in the research and development of our communities. CCF funds would mean that architects can use pilots and live work as a form of structured experimentation.

Potential issues do emerge, concerning the neutrality of architects

and the trivialisation of community work.35 One solution to these is utilisation of the power of the crowd.

26

Profession

Indi Johar - who is known for his desire to provoke architectural

change, implements the concept of the multitude in his everyday practice. Johar suggests that the multitude mind-set informs a rethink of “organising investment, talent, capabilities and possibilities with spaces and being able to create genuinely low cost and low governance but high value models”.36 Architects will be able to combine their CCF funds together to create joint projects, access larger sites, and have greater impact. Solutions involving innovative use of land and financing are already active, not only in the UK as in Indy Johar’s HUB project, but also internationally [Fig. 5].37 Perhaps due to the complexity involved in negotiating the finance sector as an architect, there isn’t yet mass innovation, the CCF model could change that.

27

Profession

Fig. 5 Jeanne Gang developed a financial model which allows residents and local people to buy and sell shares in the Cicero, Chicago based project. The land on which the project is built is held in trust so that the capital appreciation of the properties is only linked to sweat equity.

28

Profession

Notes 27

28

29 30 31 32

33 34 35

36

Katherine Gibson, ‘Diverse Economies, Space and Architecture: An Interview With Katherine Gibson’, in D. Petrescu & K. Trogal ed., The Social Reproduction of Architecture - Politics, Values and Actions in Contemporary Practice, Routledge, London, 2017, pp. 147- 149 Dan Hill, Introduction, In Future Practice: Conversations from the Edge of Architecture, Routledge, London, 2013, p. 9 Awan, Schneider and Till, op. cit., p.28 Awan, Schneider and Till, op. cit., 56 Awan, Schneider and Till, loc. cit., ‘Architect’s Fees’ Designing Buildings Wiki, accessed May 14, 2018, https://www.designingbuildings. co.uk/wiki/ Architect%27s_fees Cesal, op. cit., p. 127 Landry, op. cit., p. 215 Mel Dodd, “The Double Agent” in Future Practice: Conversations from the Edge of Architecture, Routledge, London, 2013, p. 79 Indy Johar, “The Civic Entrepreneur”, in Future Practice: Conversations from the Edge of Architecture, Routledge, London, 2013, p. 52

37 Jeanne Gang, “The Professional Generalist”, in Future Practice: Conversations from the Edge of Architecture, Routledge, London, 2013, p. 204.

29

Ruskinâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Righteous Virtues: Our Empathetic Values

Ruskin’s Righteous Virtues

We are linked together via social media platforms and the

accessibility of twenty-four hour live global news coverage. These entities allow us to live in, and experience multiple places simultaneously.38 This exposure should make it easier to understand the lived condition of the other. By embracing the two manifesto agendas, we will be able to quantifiably express our empathy.

In this way, imbuing the civic with quasi-religious importance bears a resemblance to the way in which Ruskin worked and practiced. We would be sharing in Ruskin’s goal to enhance the lived experience of all those who take part in society. Jeremy Rifkin has a notion of a “quality of life” society, which would produce: “personal economic opportunity, along with a sense of collective commitment to create a sustainable society for every citizen”.39 Similarly, the ideas within this manifesto don’t revolve around charity or paternalism, architects operating as citizens still receive financial benefit, but in conjunction with an inclusive and managed community.

By not dealing with the periphery of architecture, its politics and

professionalism, key decisions are being made by global financiers, and strategic consultants, who work in metrics, KPI’s and profit.40 We cannot expect this market to self-right itself; we must take active steps to slow the march of capital and its ruthless reworking of communities, and rebalance the priorities in our urban areas. If the majority of architects continue to be fixated by objects, instead of designing the frameworks within which we operate, we cannot guarantee that our ambitions will ever come to fruition.

31

Our Empathetic Values

Complete overhaul of the way in which we deliver architecture

cannot be immediate. To truly subvert an existing condition is a major task, and would therefore reduce the architectâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s output, at a time when the social need is still urgent. What has been presented here is a manifesto that allows architects to fabricate tools to work within and exploit current frameworks of political and capital operations. Demonstrating this level of Ruskinian faith and zeal for our communities would destabilise the current order, and re-frame the discourse from a state of inevitable decline and crises, to the opportunities for equity and balance.

Notes 38

39 40

Jeremy Rifkin, The Empathetic Society, The Race To Global Consciousness In A World In Crisis, Polity, Cambridge, 2009, p. 543 Jeremy Rifkin, op. cit., p. 552 Hyde, op. cit., pp.149-151. Hyde refers to the examples where PwC or McKinsey & Co., are engaged in the process of city making, as in the case of the planning of the KAEC in Saudi Arabia.

32

Bibliography

Alexander Von Hoffman, ‘High Ambitions: The Past and Future of American Low Income Housing Policy’,

Housing Policy Debate, vol. 7, no.3, Aug. 1996.

Awan, N., Schneider, T., & Till, J., Spatial Agency: Other Ways of Doing Architecture, Routledge, London, 2011.

Cesal, E. J., Down Detour Road: An Architect In Search of Practice, MIT Press London, 2010 Clark, K., Introduction. In, John Ruskin, Praeterita, 2nd edn., Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1985, Daley, K., The Rescue of Romanticism: Walter Pater and John Ruskin, Ohio University Press, Ohio, 2001.

Gibson, K., ‘Diverse Economies, Space and Architecture: An Interview With Katherine Gibson’, in D. Petrescu &

K. Trogal ed., The Social Reproduction of Architecture - Politics, Values and Actions in Contemporary

Practice, Routledge, London, 2017, pp. 147- 157 Grant Erskine Architects, ‘Architect’s Fees’ Designing Buildings Wiki [website], 26 Feb 2018, Introduction,

<https://www.designingbuildings.co.uk/wiki/Architect%27s_fees>, accessed, 14 May 2018 Hadid, A., ‘Another Beginning’ in Peter Noever, ed., The End of Arhiteture? Documents and Manifestos, Prestel,

Munich, 1993.

Hunt, J. D., The Wider Sea: A Life of John Ruskin, Phoenix, London, 1998.

Hyde, R., Future Practice: Conversations from the Edge of Architecture, Routledge, London, 2013.

Landry, C., The Creative City: A Toolkit for Urban Innovators, Earthscan Publications, 2000), 20 Minton, A., Big Capital: Who is London For?, Penguin, London, 2017.

Pelsmakers, S., The Environmental Design Pocketbook, 2nd edn., RIBA Publishing, London, 2017.

Reinholdt, E. W, Architect Entrepreneur: A Field Guide, 30X40, Maine, 2015 Rifkin, J., The Empathetic Society, The Race To Global Consciousness In A World In Crisis, Polity, Cambridge, 2009.

Ruskin, J., The Seven Lamps of Architecture, General Books LLC, Breinigsville, 1849 Self J. et al., A Life without Debt, Bedford Press, London, 2015 Spencer, D., The Architecture of Neoliberalism: How Contemporary Architecture Became an Instrument of

Control and Compliance, Bloomsbury, London, 2016.

33