ruba

Impacts on Architecture: Events and Aftershocks of May 1968

Student’s Name

Class

Professor’s Name

Date

4

The events and aftershocks of May 1968 are historically marked by the radical changes that took place in architecture as a discipline because it was the most radically changed. Before the year, what can be called as the rigid architectural principles and designs reigned in the discipline and determined the way not only buildings were constructed but also the way the entire towns and cities were shaped. These were the humble days when architects used to be the master of every work involving construction of any building or structure. They were the masters who solely and single handedly conceptualized, created and implemented a design into form. Without architects there were no constructions that would take place and this was the pride that characterized the practitioners1. However, the named year and date marked the end of the regime of the architects as per since massive changes took place and demands of flexible architectural services came into play. Arguably, one of the major event and aftershock of May 1968 is the change from a rigid architectural design that demanded the presence of an architect as the master of the project to a participatory design that recognized the importance of other stakeholders2.

Before the great students strikes, architectural work was taken to be very important and could not be destroyed or modified once created without involving the original architect. However, the events and aftershocks of the named year questioned the status quo and challenged the way things were being done. During this time, officials in MIT created an organization that was called Environmental Research Design Association that embraced and perpetuated the concept of what was called “social” design3. This was the precursor of the participatory design where designers took upon themselves to make designs those non-designers would comprehend and implement. Well there had been many cases of self-built houses that run all over the world at the time and the period that immediately followed but these were the components of the rigid architectural designs. What the elites at the named university were laying foundation for would come to be the modern day practice that would determine how much control the stakeholders of a project would have over it. The repercussion of this new movement actually became obvious because it introduced many user generated designs that were part and parcel of the participatory design concept.

Before the protests on how much control that the practitioners of architecture had over the landscaping of the environment and the design of various important building, the exclusivity that they had created for themselves, engineers let alone the users were not considered important in construction. Remarkably, some architects used to threaten different owners of various constructions including the governments that contracted them that if they did not recognize the significance of their work then they would terminate their contracts. A story goes of how an architect did strike to finish a given house for a local government during the time of the transition on the condition that he be put the head of the project, hoping to be called to finish it as he had proclaimed that it could not be done without him4. He was shocked when it was completed without him being called only to be awarded for its initial creation. The May 1968 events and aftershocks set a new pace that has seen the modification of old architectural design to the modern day participatory design. This is important because the designs reflect the thoughts of the stakeholders and have seen the upcoming of the modern cities and towns5. Another effect that has been in the same line is utilization of spatial environment to create organizational space as people are getting more money and need more space.

Notes

1.Hughes, Jonathan, and Simon Sadler, eds. Non-plan: essays on freedom, participation and change in modern architecture and urbanism. Routledge, 2013.

2.Jones, Peter Blundell, Doina Petrescu, and Jeremy Till, eds. Architecture and participation. Routledge, 2013.

3. Dutton, Thomas A., and Lian Hurst Mann, eds. Reconstructing architecture: Critical discourses and social practices. Vol. 5. U of Minnesota Press, 1996.

4. Yaneva, Albena. Mapping controversies in architecture. Ashgate Publishing, Ltd., 2013.

5. "Front Matter." Log, no. 13/14 (2008). http://www.jstor.org/stable/41765219.

Bibliography

"Front Matter." Log, no. 13/14 (2008). http://www.jstor.org/stable/41765219

Dutton, Thomas A., and Lian Hurst Mann, eds. Reconstructing architecture: Critical discourses and social practices. Vol. 5. U of Minnesota Press, 1996.

Hughes, Jonathan, and Simon Sadler, eds. Non-plan: essays on freedom, participation and change in modern architecture and urbanism. Routledge, 2013.

Jones, Peter Blundell, Doina Petrescu, and Jeremy Till, eds. Architecture and participation. Routledge, 2013.

Yaneva, Albena. Mapping controversies in architecture. Ashgate Publishing, Ltd., 2013.