Monuments of architecture and creators of the transcendence - Realms of the idealist. Archigram (part 1)

(Images: Archigram 1960-1974. From archdaily.com)

To see the dramatic change in cities, of which technology and the new idealism of the nuclear family set a very imprinted precedence of a future.  And this future was within an idealistic cue, that was the hope of a new world after the devastation of World War Two, in its embracing of the traditional family unit.   That by its rapid transformation, this was also the beggining of the nuclear age and the Cold War that followed.  Yet despite its feverish infusions of technological wonder as an aspiration that a liberation would occur through the consumption of technology, this in an aesthetical sense is what is known as modernism.  There is an interesting  juxtapose in regards to the aesthetics of modernism, as it was seen from both dynamics of the political spectrum, at the turn of the 20th Century - of laying claim that a mid-century modernist world, in its rejection and rebuilding of the old world, would further assist in embracing the new in all of its future idealisms.  It was promoted both from capitalism and ironically also communism, as an emancipation and freedom from the tyranny of history.  

As this hyper consumption and the idealisms of 1950s society began to imprint, manifested through art-forms, architecture and its homogeneous standards of living, it became a center point of this new world.  It wasn't until the mid and late 50's, emerging both in Britain and America, a counter perspective appeared to, in sardonic viewpoints, saturate the glories of what may seem as a equalization of society through industry and consumption.  This new art form, was something never seen before in the turbulent history of modernism.  It offered a break to the rigidity and over intellectualism of art, more so it wanted to mock, in an artistic way, the middle class obsession with conforming to a society, without seeing the irony of it all.  Pop Art was thus the necessary wedge between the old and new world, however many critics believe that pop art from its 1950s and 1960s origins later expanded to become the postmodern art moments.  I would say that is not entirely correct, however as the trend of the so called pop art movement petted out, it never the less maintained a sense of detachment whilst prefabricating the ironic in all art forms.  Most certainty the 'art for art sake' postmodern impressions would also be in cross hair of a clever pop artist.  To which the pop artist Richard Hamilton in 1957 summarized the core aspects of pop art and its characteristics to architects Peter and Alison Smithson. 

“Pop Art is: Popular (designed for a mass audience), Transient (short-term solution), Expendable (easily forgotten), Low cost, Mass produced, Young (aimed at youth), Witty, Sexy, Gimmicky, Glamorous, Big business”

So, I feel it important not to be to swayed by the semantics of artistic categories, as all are essentially fleeting in time. Except, when it came to architecture, we know the importance of modernist and post modernism and the impact that they had on building design and structure is undeniable.  Yet, in 1961 a young architect by the name of Peter Cook, began drawing, very much in the pop art comic book style of a future city that could be created in the now, yet this was no low brow endeavor, rather he, being a trained architect knew engineering concepts and design.  He formed a group with fellow graduate architects that borrowed elements of modern art, namely the sardonic tone of pop art infusing the structural integrity onto its blueprints, which offered, despite the fantastic ideas.  A possible reality. This group was known as Archigram.