Introduc)on


Archigram

The
Archigram
group
consisted
of:


Warren
Chalk:
Born
in
London
in
1927.
Abrasive,
cri)cal
and
ques)oning

individual,
who’s
concerns
oHen
led
to
innova)ve
improvements.
Concerned
with
innova)on.


Peter
Cook:
Born
in
Southend
on
Sea
in
1936.
Most
public
member
of
the

Archigram
Group.
Invented
situa)ons
and
solved
them
graphically
through
metamorphosis.

Concerned
with
commodity.


Dennis
Crompton:
Born
in
Blackpool
in
1935.
Gadget,
machine,
technique,

and
system
enthusiast.
Concerned
with
firmness.


David
Greene:
Born
in
NoTngham
in
1937.
Poet
and
conceptual
thinker.

Thought
of
the
conceptual
possibili)es
of
architecture.
Concerned
with
Delight.


Ron
Harron:
Born
in
London
in
1930.
Was
said
to
“Draw
like
a
dream.”

Op)mis)c
and
quiet
individual.
Did
not
understand
constant
fuss
and
cri)cism.
Observed

mostly,
and
reflected
through
his
projects.
Concerned
with
delight.


Mike
Webb:
Born
in
Henley
on
Thames
in
1937.
Lived
in
America
for
a
long

)me
and
was
a
loner.
Gave
Archigram
easier
access
to
American
values
and
trends,
and

exposed
America
to
Archigram’s
works.
Portal
between
countries.


These
individuals
came
together
because
they
saw
the
work
they
were
doing
in
their
firms
as

dull,
and
wanted
change.
The
group
met
to
cri)cize
projects,
to
enter
compe))ons,
and
to

write
le_ers
to
the
press.
With
their
combined
works
and
projects,
the
group
created

Archigram,
the
magazine,
full
of
comic
strip
style
graphics,
collages,
proposals
of
works,
and

other
experimental
ideas.
The
aim
of
the
magazine,
and
their
work,
was
to
break
the
barriers

of
the
norm,
and
to
open
the
minds
of
their
readers
to
new
forms
through
their
built
work

and
new
statements
through
their
literature.

1

Plug‐in
City
and
Capsules


Plug‐in
City
[1964]

Consisted
of
a
mega
structure
with
removable,
use‐specific
units.
The
city
not
only

allowed
units
to
plug
into
the
city,
but
also
allowed
linking
between
en)re
ci)es.



The
Capsule
Homes
Tower
had
a
central
structure
and
circula)on
system
with

individually
owned
capsules
hung
around
it.
The
tower
formed
an
apartment

building,
with
fully
func)onal
units
for
living
in
small,
efficient
packages.



The
use
of
interchangeable
parts
allows
for
prefabricated
and
simple
organiza)on
of

parts
to
create
a
whole
very
quickly
and
efficiently.


2

Walking
City,
Blow‐out
Village,
Drive‐in
Housing


Walking
City
[1964]

Most
famous
of
Archigram
projects,
started
trend
of
mobility.
City‐sized
pod
with

legs.
Allowed
the
city
to
move
loca)ons,
for
weather
changes,
natural
disasters,

economical
needs,
ect…


Drive‐in
Housing
[1964‐1966]

Allowed
a
mobile
unit
to
drive
up
to
and
plug
into
an
exis)ng
building,
increasing
the

floor
space
of
the
building.
Also
allowed
several
units
to
link
together
to
form
one

large
volume.
Diagram
shows
several
units
combining
to
form
a
large
joint
space.


Blow‐out
Village
[1966]

HovercraH
that
carries
collapsed
and
compacted
parts
that
can
travel
and
blow‐out

whenever
needed.
Uses
telescoping
poles,
screens,
and
inflatable
objects.
Allows
a

once
compact
vehicle
to
turn
into
a
habitable
village
with
a
minimal
amount
of
effort

and
)me.
Allows
users
to
add
spaces
wherever
they
want
on
the
main
structure.


3

Instant
City
[1968‐1971]

Involves
a
networking
system
that
links
metropolises
together.
The
idea
is
that
a

traveling
system
of
vehicles
stops
at
mul)ple
loca)ons,
sharing
informa)on.
The

system
would
consist
of
transport
vehicles,
a
system
of
audio‐visual
components,

lights,
lightweight
and
collapsible
structures,
entertainment
facili)es,
and
exhibits.

The
Instant
City
would
u)lize
the
spaces
of
the
permanent
loca)on
in
addi)on
to
its

own
equipment.
As
shown
in
the
diagram
in
the
center,
when
the
Instant
City
leaves

the
metropolis
it
leaves
behind
a
permanent
network
of
communica)on
between
all

past
and
future
Instant
City
visits.
The
system
would
be
a
sort
of
concert
with
an

en)re
metropolis
as
the
performer,
rather
than
an
individual
ar)st.


4

Features:
Monte
Carlo
[1970‐1971]

Compe))on
winning
project.
Project
was
to
be
a
space
large
enough
to
host
a
large

banquet,
variety
of
shows,
circus,
and
other
public
events
in
a
permanent
loca)on.

Although
the
site
is
not
mobile
or
city‐scale,
the
structure
holds
a
mul)use,
mobile

system
within.
All
of
the
interior
walls
are
temporary,
allowing
a
space
to
change
from

a
stage
for
one
event,
to
an
ice
rink
for
the
next,
and
a
banquet
hall
for
the
next.

Unlike
a
typical
building,
the
roof
is
all
but
a
standard
roof.
The
exterior
is
a
hilled

park,
with
the
hint
of
a
building
only
through
a
limited
number
of
access
points.

Atypical
from
the
majority
of
Archigram’s
work,
the
structure
is
permanent,
but
it

does
hold
a
system
of
mobility
within,
realizing
Archigram’s
applica)on
to
a
standard

form
of
architecture.
Although
the
site
is
permanent,
it
holds
Archigram’s
theore)cal

framework
within
with
a
system
of
impermanence
and
efficiency.


5

Graphic
Comparison

Compare
temporary
to
permanent
structure,
and
amount
of
user
circula)on.


6

Triad
and
Theory


Compare
Vitruvian
triad
to
framework
of
Archigram.



Commodity

Innova)on


Delight

Firmness….


7

Works
Cited

Cook,
Peter.
Archigram.
New
York,
NY:
Praeger
Publishers,
1973.
Print.


8