Archigram was a group of architects who came together in the 1960’s because they were purely sick of the way architecture was being produced in the 1960’s. The hole idea of the modern slick buildings was lost and was instead substituted for horrible grey dirty buildings that was inspired from the movement of Bauhaus.
This group consisted of 6 men their names Peter Cook, Warren Chalk, Ron Herron, Dennis Crompton, Michael Webb and David Greene. These men of all different ages and different backgrounds came together to create a magazine called Archigram. The first issue of this paper was simply only a page and half long and had simple ideas and sketches on them which was first brought out in 1953. These fantastic 6 men challenged the idea of modern architecture in their magazine creating things that could only be discussed and make you question them. For example the building that Mike Webb created as a student called the FMA building was completely out there and was even spotted by an architect who completely blow it apart in his critical righting of the building, here is the image…
You can see here that all the main things that should be in the building are actually out side the building also known as ‘bowelling ‘. This is what the architect who slammed Mike Webb hated about this design, that everything was on the outside, it went against everything he thought was right but it was creative thinking but challenging the world of architecture at the same time. This is what Mark Webb was producing as a student.
Archigram wouldn’t last long though only lasted about 10 years. But in those ten years they produced some very made ways of looking at architecture and created some very out there pieces of work. The funny thing about Archigram is they never built anything from their magazine, it was all only theory. This is why most question, was it that influential in architecture, the view is very split. But if you like at some the ideas that was in side this magazine you can see their importance in the sense of not the building side but the creative thinking, being out side ion the box, challenging new ways of thinking and how you can create these new forms of building just by questioning and challenging the architecture of that age. here are some examples of some ideas they created in their magazine have a look and see how you feel about these ideas…
You can see here the first image is ‘The Plug in City’ by Peter Cook. This is a city that could consumed and chucked away at will. The idea was to be able to plug in what you was using at the time and unplug what ever wasn’t which in theory isn’t a to bad of an idea. The second image is ‘Seaside Bubbles…’ by Ron Herron back in 1966, you can see all these little sections and small living quoters in the image I am a fan of the image but not of theory even though how creative the thought is a small community living in these small quoters sounds a nice theory but would not interest me. Third and fourth image is ‘Walking City’ also by Ron Herron and is the most famous image/ design in the Archigram magazine series. The idea of a walking city is insane and totally out there could not much get crazier than that. But also the thought of a moving city that takes all the resources and moving is leaving nothing but a waste land sums up the greed of humanity in this image to me even the theory and the idea is really is a great and powerful concept.
Even though I have gone on saying that these ideas in Archigram was only theory, there is evidence that it has been influenced and some expects of these crazy designs have been thought on and some even created such as the building Pompidou Centre that has taken the concept of Mike Webb and created prototype of his vision as a student. Another example is the Kunsthaus Gros in Austria that was actually created by Sir Peter Cook is something from out the Archigram magazine the way it looks and has been designed. Here are some images of the two buildings…
As you can see very distinctive buildings. Some might say how ugly, others may say how great these designs are. But these building for me make me think how we look and consider how architecture can be pushed and be just as creative on a page of paper. So in my opinion simply because it does make me question does make me think how far I could push these ideas to creation Archigram was quite influential not maybe amazingly influential but did take part in the in the new generation of architecture. Some things that my lector said today which I didn’t consider that these men didn’t create for the future they created for the present the idea that you can create it now while in fashion and knock its down after and replace it with some new was ridicules at first but upon taking time thinking and looking back at their work really does point towards this idea and to make me think again what is architecture really for. Is it for just there for the function or is it simply about the creativity and how you can push these designs but can it just be the mixture of both but we quite don’t know where the line sits….