Fourteenth International Conference on The Constructed Environment

Abstract

Decades after the post-structuralist, Marxist, and postmodernist critiques of power, architects continue to play a role in assimilating and, sometimes, marginalizing the population through a mode of spatial production that contributes to climate change, structural racism, income inequality, social isolation, and numerous other complex societal issues. Urban theorists such as philosopher Henri Lefebvre, urban geographer Edward Soja, architect and theorist Christopher Alexander, and sociologist Asef Bayat explain how governments and powerful individuals use architects to shape spaces that reproduce economic and social hegemony. Alexander calls this mode of production System-B, which continues to dominate through disciplinary power. However, Alexander also defines another mode of production, System-A, which allows people to participate in the production of space and thus gain their right to the city. This research compares Lefebvre’s concept of the spatial triad—lived space, spatial practice, and conceived space—to Alexander’s modes of spatial production to situate them within theories of contentious politics. By synthesizing this knowledge with Christopher Alexander’s conception of System-A, architects can create an ethical framework that includes the end-user in the production of space, recognizes the importance of shared identity, prioritizes adaptation, uses appropriate materials and adaptive reuse, reimagines the profession’s relationship with finance, and defines strategies for appropriating space. This framework would empower architects to become a social nonmovement and actively help the working class gain their right to the city. Through this transformation, architects can shift their role from being agents of repression within System-B to catalysts for positive change within System-A.