An interior view of Tehran's social and political community spaces Life in Tehran proliferates and thrives in its interiors. When public space is policed and controlled, domestic interiors become art galleries, clubs, cultural centers, workshops, and offices. Interiors cease to be the exclusive domain for individual life and family matters; homes become the spaces in which new forms of collective life are experimented and nurtured, and the battleground for social conflicts and political constituencies. Through its extensive apparatus of drawings, Tehran- Life Within Walls presents an archaeological inquiry into the politics and the ecologies of the interior spaces of the Iranian metropolis, from its foundation as the Iranian capital until today. The book is at the same time an accessible entry point for the study of Tehran and Islamic/Iranian architecture, as well as a methodological experiment for the study of contemporary cities. An appendix of six projects provides an imaginative—yet radically pragmatic—vision for the future of Tehran.@en

This contribution focuses on the possibility of isolating an Italian theory of architecture in the postwar period until 1969, taking the controversy over Renaissance proportions as a case study. Rather than defining a specific approach to the subject from Italian authors compared to their international colleagues, this contribution explores the specificity of Italian humanism and the significance of that experience from the point of view of the postwar reconstruction. The study of Renaissance architecture, rather than offering a historical precedent for the construction of national identities, warded off that possibility, constituting a problematic beginning for European modernity.@en

The status of architectural research has not yet been clearly defined. Nevertheless, architectural research has surely become a core element in the profession of architecture. In fact, the tendency seem for architects to be less and less involved with building design and construction services, which are more efficiently taken care of by engineering firms. On the contrary, the production and dissemination of knowledge is becoming central to the work of architects, who are more and more differentiating their activity throughout a variety of media such as exhibitions, publications, events, studios and workshops. The Dutch case is particularly instructive, since the Netherlands provided a vast network of public funding institutions for non-academic architectural research initiatives. In in the aftermath of the 2008 crisis, this network acted as a true welfare institution, allowing architects to find work opportunities after the shrinkage of the traditional architecture job market. Yet, this public spending is not to be seen just as a simple welfare policy, but it acted as a new model of urban development, triggering a series of urban renewal projects based on the injection of “creative” activities in vacant buildings and problematic neighborhoods. The public funding model is probably destined to an end. In 2011, the Dutch government approved cuts for 200 million euros to cultural activities, which led to the disappearance of internationally renowned architecture research institutions, such as the Berlage Institute. Nevertheless, the effects of the economic crisis seem to have brought permanent structural and anthropological transformations in the profession of architecture. In this process, new institutions and new subjectivities are emerging. The figure of the Dutch architect is today far from that of the 1990s, which was epitomized by the figure of the Superdutch—a cynical, brutally optimist white male able to surf on top of the waves of the Dutch “Golden Age”. This article attempts to sketch the portrait of the new architect-researcher as a knowledge worker, caught between contrasting forces of precarity of employment, budget cuts, populism, co-optation and gentrification.@en

Along with creativity, optimism and will, the early 1970’s London architecture scene was a moment of ideological conflict between political factions over which direction progress should be oriented. Instead of a victor being declared and a single vector followed, what resulted, at the Architectural Association at least, was an academic framework set up to preserve and even encourage such tendencies for conflict and divergence. Behemoth Press introduces here a text by Elia Zenghelis first published in 1975 that was originally written as a polemical response to a growing movement for unionization; a political form of labor that surely threatens the great productive potentials of competition and precarity.@en