Mr Robinson Crusoe Stayed Home. Adventures of Design in Times of Crisis

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vNuAEUpcgXw

#robinsoncrusoe #mrcrusoestayedhome #adventuresofdesign #benakimuseum #literature #design##exhibition #crafts #literature #designtheory #bricolage#efficiency#economy #clumsiness #dexterity #postcolonialstudies

L’autre moi – a reflection on Claude Cahun & Marcel Moore

L’autre moi – a reflection on Claude Cahun & Marcel Moore

Artist talk \ Dialogue \ Q&A

Tuesday 02.07.19

8:00p.m.

Lothringer13 Halle, Munich

After a double nice Vernissage full of tremolo and transpiration, the gates of the Lothringer13 are now open for the two exhibitions in the Halle and in the Nest.

The framework-program launches today with a special anniversary, looking not just 50 years back to Stonewall but to 100 years Claude Cahun: The successful Danish author Kristina Stoltz devotes herself in her freshly printed book "Cahun" to the phenomenon of the artist pseudonym Claude Cahun in a literary way. In her novel, the artists Lucy Schwob and Suzanne Malherbe are the central figures, who as a couple and partners playfully broke up gender roles but even more lived out the role of the doubled individual and the shared identity. 

An evening for the "Early Masters of Twinning" about whom Kristina Stoltz in the exhibition booklet writes: „To speak of Claude Cahun leads us as a matter of course into the thematic field of twinship, for barely has one scraped the surface of Cahun’s art and biography before it becomes clear that what is known to us as Claude Cahun’s experimental self-portrait art involved not one person but two.“ 

Kristina Stoltz has been invited to participate into the exhibition at Lothringer13 Halle and we have the wonderful opportunity to welcome her in Munich.

As a specialist into Claude Cahun and Marcel Moore’s biography and work, she recently published a book, that is written after yearlong research. The novel Cahun is a free interpretation and imagination that leans into the all possible details you can gain in the interesting life of the couple, work relation and sisterhood of Cahun & Moore.

In a close cooperation Kristina Stoltz & Lene Harbo Pedersen selected the most relevant excerpts from the book & photographs for the exhibition. The text excerpts are exclusively translated into English & German and draws upon an observation and strengthen that behind the name ‚Cahun‘ a couple appears, not one but two very special people Lucy Schwob also known as Claude Cahun & Susanne Malherbe with the artist name Marcel Moore. Both with more than one identity, working with multiple genders and during the wartime with multiple voices – and making a very special mark in the history of arts.

The evening will be precious hot hours with Kristina Stoltz talk, a dialogue with the curator and open talk with the audience on twins, twinning and the queer world.

The talk will be held in English

The translation was made possible with a generous support by the Danish Art Foundation.

English by Martin Aitken / German by Peter Urban Halle

https://www.lothringer13.com/veranstaltungen/lautre-moi-a-reflection-on-claude-cahun-marcel-moore/

A Puppet Sun

NEON invites you to the opening of the site-specific installation A Puppet Sun by Athens-based artist Kostis Velonis, curated by Vassilis Oikonomopoulos as part of CITY PROJECT 2017.

NEON activates a neoclassical residence at Kaplanon 11, Athens, by commissioning the new installation of Kostis Velonis. The artist conceived A Puppet Sun especially for the site of Kaplanon 11, responding to its history, architecture and position in the heart of the city. The neoclassical residence, constructed in 1891 is a unique architectural example and one of the last remaining buildings of its kind in Athens. Narrated in such an extraordinary space, Velonis’ work addresses the site’s lived experience and memory, investigating the powerful historical, political and cultural intersections as well as personal narratives that are present. The neoclassical residence, constructed in 1981 is a unique architectural example and one of the last remaining buildings of its kind in Athens.

CITY PROJECT is an initiative for public art and the city, conceived and commissioned annually by NEON. NEON aims to activate public and historical places through contemporary art, contributing to the interaction of art, society and the city. This new commission by NEON is the largest-scale solo presentation of Velonis’ work to date.

Curator | Vassilis Oikonomopoulos, Assistant Curator, Collections International Art, Tate Modern

OPENING | CITY PROJECT | A PUPPET SUN | KOSTIS VELONIS

11/10/2017 19:00 - 23:00 

Kaplanon 11, Kolonaki

Free Entrance

OPENING

11 October 2017, 7pm

OPENING HOURS

Wednesday – Sunday | 12.00 – 20.00

http://neon.org.gr/en/event/opening-city-project-puppet-sun-kostis-velonis/

Behind the Presidential Curtains

One of the many huge velvet curtains in the palace of the parliament in Bucharest, designed by the Ceausescu regime, 2013.

Suspended House

Architect: Paul Nelson.1936-38. Acrylic, metal, paint, stone, textile, wood, 14 x 36 1/2 x 28 1/2" (35.6 x 92.7 x 72.4 cm). Sculpture and painting by Hans Arp Alexander Calder, Joan Miró and Fernand Léger.

Pollock as a Puppet Hero

A filmed performance of a shadow-puppet play .

Using techniques of the traditional Greek shadow-puppet theatre ("Karaghiozis"), East Asian storytelling theatre and the modern American musical, Apostolos puts together a highly idiosyncratic imaginative biography of Jackson Pollock. Performed in February 1999, in Athens, Greece, "The Tragical History of Jackson Pollock, Abstract Expressionist" is the alleged work of two fictional characters: the American artist, poet and puppeteer Alfred Hoos and the Greek avant-garde theatre director Yannis Philaretos. The play, and its performance in Athens, plays a central part in a novel called the "Republic". But here we have the paradox: though this was meant to be a fictional play in a real novel, now the play exists and the novel doesn't.

Alfred Hoos' shadow play staged by Yannis Philaretos, storyteller Alexandros Mylonas, assistant director Tassos Langis, painting katerina Karoussou, music Dimitri Papadimitriou, produced by Maria Nicolacopoulou, curated by Katerina Koskina and written disigned and directed by Apostolos C.Doxiadis. Zoumboulakis Galleries, Athens, 1999

Reyner Banham Loves Los Angeles

Vandalism Series

John Divola, Vandalism Series: archivally processed black and white photograph 20 x 16 inches, 1973-75.

The Grand Domestic Revolution – User's Manual

Revolution' is no longer just a notion from a bygone era that is periodically resuscitated as a fashion buzzword or in celebration of some technological innovation. The current crisis makes it abundantly clear that the triumph of neoliberalism has not guaranteed a better life for the majority of citizens and non-citizens. Living means struggling with perpetually rising housing rents and mortgage pressure, with the consequences of having work or no work, and anxieties arising from exploitation and self-exploitation. Living is flailing under the constant demand for individualised performance. Living means being locked up in our homes and workplaces, connected mainly through the Internet. Our lives have been distanced from families, friends, colleagues, neighbours and strangers. We want to change this—and that change has to be more than cosmetic.

'The Grand Domestic Revolution—User's Manual' (GDR) is our proposal for taking action and amending our precarious living conditions right here and now, starting from our homes, neighbourhoods and work places, to our towns, cities and beyond. After two years of 'living research' residencies, home productions, town meetings and affinity actions, GDR culminates in an exhibition that aims to share proposals for a grand domestic revolution today. We ask you to join us in our investigation of the conditions and status of the contemporary domestic sphere and in exploring ways of transforming it—building new forms of living and working in common.

Long Live The Grand Domestic Revolution!

The exhibition includes works by:

Agency, Ask! (Actie Schone Kunsten) with Andreas Siekmann, Sepake Angiama & Sam Causer, Pauline Boudry/Renate Lorenz, Doris Denekamp & Arend Groosman, Domestic Workers Netherlands (part of FNV Bondgenoten) with Matthijs de Bruijne, Paul Elliman with Na Kim, Hans van Lunteren and Rob van de Steen, Casco-HKU Creative Lab 'Extended Family', Andrea Francke, 'Our Autonomous Life' with Nazima Kadir, Maria Pask and evolving cooperative cast, Shiu Jin, Mary Kelly with Margaret Harrison and Kay Hunt, kleines postfordistisches Drama, Germaine Koh, Graziela Kunsch, Wietske Maas, Gordon Matta-Clark, Travis Meinolf, Emilio Moreno, Read-in, Martha Rosler, Helke Sander, Kateřina Šedá, Patricia Sousa, Xu Tan, Valerie Tevere & Angel Nevarez, Mirjam Thomann, Mierle Laderman Ukeles, Jort van der Laan, Agnès Varda, Werker Magazine, Vincent Wittenberg, and Haegue Yang.

Spatial design is by Ruth Buchanan and Andreas Müller. Exhibition map and signage is developed by Åbäke.

Themes:

Through the two-year research process, four main themes emerged that have become key lines of thought for engaging the large scope of GDR research and actions.

- Domestic space: housing the commons and living together
- Domestic work: invisible labour and working at home
- Domestic property: struggles between ownership and usership
- Domestic relations: extended families, neighbours versus networks

Locations:

The works themselves perform their positions in dialogue with the exhibition themes across Casco and other venues shared by our neighbours.

1. Casco – Office for Art, Design and Theory, Nieuwekade 213–215, Utrecht www.cascoprojects.org
Casco is transformed into a living and working space, functioning as 'home base' of the exhibition and further actions. It is also where GDR's cooperative sitcom 'Our Autonomous Life?' is produced and screened, and includes space for children and the GDR library.

2. Volksbuurt Museum, Waterstraat 27–29, Utrecht www.volksbuurtmuseum.nl
The Volksbuurt Museum finds its seed in Committee Wijk C, founded in 1974 to preserve and recover the neighbourhood, where Casco is also situated, in response to rapid urban renewal and demolition projects. GDR works are cohabiting with the various documents and objects in this local folks' museum. Annexed as a temporary structure to Volksbuurt Museum is 18b Pavilion consisting of the structural devices installed in the former GDR apartment.

3. De Rooie Rat, Oudegracht 65, Utrecht www.rooierat.nl
De Rooie Rat is the oldest leftist political bookstore in the Netherlands, established in 1974 just up the canal from Casco. Works that call for action mingle with the inspiring books at De Rooie Rat!

Occasions:
Watch out for the activities throughout the exhibition, including pilot premiere of the cooperative sitcom 'Our Autonomous Life?', 'Teach-in' by Read-in, 'Kitchen 139' organised by W139, Amsterdam with Casco in conjunction with GDR, 'Assembly (The Grand Domestic Revolution)' by Agency, 'Keywords Cooking School' book launch by Xu Tan, collective futurist fiction writing conference and home schools on GDR Future' (finnissage?). More information is available on our website or GDR wiki.

6 November 2011–26 February 2012
Casco – Office for Art, Design and Theory
Utrecht,The Netherlands
Source :www.cascoprojects.org

Swedish exhibition of Modern Homes

..at Malmo 7-28 September, 1939 and illustrated by Anders Beckman, a very active artist of his time. I found this poster from the Annual "Svensk Reklam" publication, P.A Norstedt &Soner, Stockholm, 1939.

Little gardens of happiness

TAF is pleased to present the exhibition Little Gardens of Happiness, which opens on Thursday, November 10 and will run until December 11, 2011. The exhibition is curated by the students of the Curating and Organizing Art Exhibitions seminar, part of the Athens College – College of Psyhiko adult continuing education programmes, and is led by curator and art critic Marina Fokides.
“Near to the sorrow of the world, and often upon its volcanic earth, man has laid out his little gardens of happiness;” Guided by the words of Friedrich Nietzsche, the curators attempt to pose timely questions regarding the possible ways in which societies react in times of crisis.
Man has the inherent tendency to voluntarily create for himself personal microcosms; small, intimate utopias that safeguard his remaining shreds of happiness. This personal space seems to operate as a symbolically protected garden – shelter. Sometimes however, these gardens transform into a personal hell where the individual feels isolated.
To what extent do these personal universes offer relief, to what extent do they cause terror and how extreme can they become? In this present time of uncertainty the little gardens of happiness can operate as spaces of self-organization and reevaluation, as sources of contrivance and as spaces of invention and mental formation and help us provide answers to the questions posed by reality itself.
Giorgos Panousopoulos’ film Mania will be shown as part of the exhibition.
Participating artists:
Stathis Athanasiou, Steven Antonakos, Kostis Velonis, Nikos Giavropoulos, Vangelis Gokas, Eunomia Dimitriadou, Theodoros Zafiropoulos, Christos Kolios, Giorgos Korbakis, Alexis Kiritsopoulos, Leda Luss Luyken, Vally Nomidou, Zafos Xagoraris, Giorgos Panousopoulos, Marie-Françoise Poutays, Marina Provatidou, Xenis Sahinis, Dimitris Tsoublekas, Pantelis Chandris, Manolis Charos, Alexandros Psihoulis, En Flo, Organization Earth
Curators:
Fotini Vergidou, Pinelopi Katsatou, Evangelia Melissourgaki, Poulheria Papageorgiou, Eleni Papagiannopoulou, Calliope Stamatacou

Exhibition opening: Thursday 10 November 2011, 20.30
TAF Gallery, Athens.

A Garden around Melnikov's House

Konstantin Melnikov’s house in Krivoarbatsky Lane in Moscow, completed in 1927-1929.

One Man’s Trash . . .

Working with a patient he calls Debra, a compulsive hoarder, the psychologist Randy O. Frost tried a simple experiment. Frost proposed sending Debra a postcard, blank but for the name and address. Debra’s assignment was to throw it away.

Days later, Debra complained that she had not had enough time with the card. She described the stamp and the postmark. When she finally let go, she pictured the card’s position in the trash. Later, she confessed she had cheated by writing down everything about the card she could remember and then saving the notes.


Illustration by R. O. Blechman

In “Stuff: Compulsive Hoarding and the Meaning of Things,” Frost, a professor at Smith College, and Gail Steketee, a professor and dean of the school of social work at Boston University, invite us graciously into territory that might otherwise make us squirm. They have spent nearly 20 years working with hoarders, sometimes in settings where tunnels lead through trash and roaches roam freely. Frost and Steketee introduce collectors who acquire through shopping, Dumpster diving and stealing. The resulting assemblages encompass broken machines and living things (cats and dogs, mostly).

People justify hoarding as curating and recycling, deeming odd objects beautiful and useful. Sometimes they act as if history were at stake. Andy Warhol, “straddling the border between eccentricity and pathology,” the authors write, would periodically sweep everything — cash, artwork, apple cores — off his desk and into a cardboard box. He stored hundreds of these “time capsules.”

To characterize hoarding, Frost and Steketee select what they call a “prototype” case involving a woman named Irene. Irene’s home is filled with seemingly random items: newspapers, children’s games, empty cereal boxes, expired coupons. The mess has driven Irene’s husband from the house, and she worries that he will seek custody of their children, including a daughter whose dust allergies make it hard for her to live there.

To Frost and Steketee, patients like Irene demand a new understanding of hoarders. Past experts have depicted sufferers as isolated and paranoid — deprived in childhood and now unable to discard worthless junk even when it bears no sentimental value. But Irene’s parents were comfortable financially. She has many friends. She treasures each item she owns and anticipates putting it to future use.

Hoarding has been linked to obsessive-compulsive disorder and its variants, and Irene, who displays contamination fears, probably meets criteria for O.C.D. But studies show that the genetics of hoarding differ from the genetics of obsessing. And while obsessionality is painful, Irene finds enjoyment in acquiring and revisiting her holdings. It is this pleasure in objects (think of Debra and the postcard) that distinguishes hoarding, in Frost and Steketee’s view. They suggest that hoarders may “inherit an intense perceptual sensitivity to visual details,” and speculate about “a special form of creativity and an appreciation for the aesthetics of everyday things.”

This upbeat account of hoarding’s basis has a humane ring: hoarders are discerning. But then, Irene can be indiscriminate, according every possession equal worth, whether it’s a newspaper clipping or a photograph of her daughter. Frost and Steketee are too thoughtful to give a simple account of what drives Irene. Possessions help her preserve her identity and relive past events. The objects make her feel safe and allow her to express caring. Newspaper clippings point outward, speaking to Irene of opportunities in the wider world. Irene is depressed; collecting promises relief. Irene displays perfectionism and indecisiveness, character traits that have been linked to hoarding. When there are so many motivations, no single one seems central.

Hoarding can also arise in connection with senility, injuries to the brain’s frontal lobes and Prader-Willi syndrome, a genetic disorder whose symptoms may include low intelligence. Ideally, any theory that ascribes a special aesthetic sensibility to hoarders would need to take account of patients whose thought processes are impaired. And as Frost and Steketee demonstrate, there is no end to competing explanations of how hoarding arises. The “terror management theory” holds that collecting mitigates fears of death, via the fashioning of a form of immortality. The “compensation theory” postulates that objects can provide reassurance to those who question their self-worth. Hoarding has been linked to gambling addiction; acquisition is a matter less of compulsion than of impulsivity. Frost and Steketee also connect hoarding with modern materialism and advertising (though they stress that materialism is associated with display and hoarding with secrecy); then again, they emphasize the condition’s universality.

Certainly, collecting is a common human activity. One hoard, 1,100 seal impressions on clay from the Fertile Crescent, has survived 25 centuries. As many as 90 percent of children collect something, Frost and Steketee report, and two-thirds of American households include a collector.

What separates pastime from disorder? Frost and Steketee rely on distress and impairment, criteria that psychiatry employs to delineate diagnoses. But some of the subjects Frost and Steketee discuss function well enough. What of the wealthy, cultured twins, each of whom has stuffed a hotel penthouse with moldering artwork? Both brothers have friends. Both can afford to move to new apartments as old ones fill up. Both take pride in their collections. Are the twins ill? If not, is it resources that set them apart from Irene, who is struggling to hold on to her children? It seems paradoxical that if one twin were to become desperate because he recognized that he had lost control, he might be labeled a pathological hoarder, while his brother, blithely rationalizing his purchases, would be deemed healthy.

As Frost and Steketee’s examples multiply, hoarding comes to seem an ever more diffuse concept. A majority of the subjects the authors study are clinically depressed. Frost and Steketee believe that hoarding causes the mood disorder. Working in different terrain, I see patients who complain first of depression. Twice, I have treated women who lived amid clutter because they could not discard the detritus of daily life, be it magazines or pay slips. I had no success with the filled rooms. But both times we made progress with the depression, and both times the patient moved, for business reasons. In the new house, each managed to keep up with the flow of paper.

Frost and Steketee, with their active collectors, do not see this sort of result. Forced clean-outs don’t work; hoarders restock houses quickly, and the sudden loss of objects causes rage and anxiety. (Nantucket, we learn, stopped town-­ordered cleanups when three hoarders died shortly after the interventions.) Frost and Steketee recommend self-help groups and variants of cognitive therapy to treat hoarding. Success is mixed. Clients report improvement, but their homes remain cluttered. One O.C.D. researcher tells Frost and Steketee that she excludes hoarders from her samples because they make therapy outcomes look bad — quite a statement when you consider that she is confronting a notoriously unyielding disease.

If Frost and Steketee have difficulty constructing a coherent new vision of compulsive hoarding, it is because they are too observant and too dedicated to the relief of suffering to make a complex phenomenon simple. They are collectors in their own right, stocking a cabinet of curiosities with intimate stories and evocative theories. To those who need to understand hoarders, perhaps in their own family, “Stuff” offers perspective. For general readers, it is likely to provide useful stimulus for examining how we form and justify our own attachments to objects.

Text by Peter D. Kramer

Source: The New York Times, published: April 23, 2010

We Need a General Theory of Individuality

Needed, an oxymoron: a general scientific theory of individual differences. To focus upon individuality is to celebrate particularity, whereas any general theory must, by definition, submerge the individual case in a wider sea of pattern. Each of us cherishes our own separate, individual personhood, making much of the "fact" that we are different from everyone else (while also insisting, of course, that we aren't all that different). But attention to individual differences runs the risk of being unscientific, insofar as science aims at generalizing, raising our heads above the individual trees to recognize the forest. Yet the need is there. When Kierkegaard insisted that his tombstone say "That Individual," he was identifying both an existential truth and a profound scientific dilemma.

One of the unspoken secrets in basic scientific research, from anthropology to zoology (with intervening stops at physiology, political science, psychology, psychiatry, and sociology) is that, nearly always, individuals turn out to be different from one another, and that—to an extent rarely admitted and virtually never pursued—scientific generalizations tend to hush up those differences. It can be argued that that is what generalizations are: statements that apply to a larger class of phenomena and must, by definition, do violence to individuality. But since science seeks to explain observed phenomena, it should also be able to explain the granular particularity of such phenomena. In fact, generalities lose potency if they occur at the cost of artificially leveling otherwise significant features of reality.

No geneticist would dispute that in every sexually reproducing species, individuals possess distinct genotypes (monozygotic twins excepted). In the best-studied species, Homo sapiens, we know that individuals differ apparently even in traits that don't provide an adaptive advantage, like fingerprints, as well as in physical appearance and personality. Field biologists can often distinguish individuals among their study animals by distinct physical and/or behavioral traits. Almost certainly such individuality is at least as apparent to the animals themselves. Every pet owner knows, moreover, that individual dogs, cats, or horses are not interchangeable, yet theoretical constructs in biological science, in particular, often proceed as though they were. Thus biologists theorize about adaptive traits for "the" adult male or "a" juvenile female, knowing full well that there are only individual adult males and juvenile females—each of them distinct, albeit similar enough to be grouped together.

Medical science, by contrast, is unusual in that it has long acknowledged the importance of individuality among its subjects. Thus, in their training, physicians are repeatedly urged to treat the patient, not the disease. Although there are typical syndromes and basic commonalities among organ systems and ailments, good doctors know that individual Homo sapiens may, for example, develop tuberculosis without fever, or idiosyncratic unresponsiveness or hyper-responsiveness to certain drugs. That is why The New England Journal of Medicine and most medical-specialty journals devote considerable space to individual case reports, something rarely found in other sciences. One of the hottest current areas at the interface of medical genomics and pharmacology concerns the prospects of directing particular pharmaceuticals and their optimal dosages, not to Homo sapiens generally, but rather to the DNA profile of each individual patient.

One of the frustrating things about reading older classics of natural history is the extent to which observers like Ernest Thompson Seton and C. Hart Merriam reported on prey-catching behavior of "the" lynx, or vocalizations of "the" golden eagle, without specifying whether the subject in question was male or female, juvenile or adult. Modern biologists demand that information because we recognize that neither "the" lynx nor "the" golden eagle exists; rather, there is only this lynx and that golden eagle. In fact, one of the triumphs of modern biology has been precisely the overcoming of a tendency to think in something like Platonic ideals. Taxonomists no longer concern themselves with the "type species" of a genus, implicitly recognizing the crucial role of individual variation.

Yet even as we yearn for more-detailed identifying information about lynxes and golden eagles, we do so to combine them into yet another conceptual group, smaller than the species but larger than the individual, like "the" adult male lynx or "the" juvenile female golden eagle. Most textbooks in animal behavior, including my own, contain extensive material, both descriptive and theoretical, concerning the behavior of such larger categories, but not a single entry for behavioral individuality. Generalization thrives, but individuality suffers.

Whether they are comparative psychologists looking for laws of learning, ethologists seeking to identify species-typical behaviors, or evolutionary psychologists concerned with the adaptive value of behavior, researchers in behavioral biology typically view deviations from the statistical norm as aberrant, either genetically or experientially. And for good reason. Few of us would credit as "science" a lengthy rendition of seemingly disconnected anecdotal accounts of individual cases. Furthermore, such detailed descriptions quickly become downright boring to anyone not intimately concerned with the individuals in question.

Accordingly, scientists try to reveal underlying processes, to identify and enunciate principles, to go inductively from the specific to the general. Yet, especially when it comes to living things, each specific case really is distinct. That is why the biological (and social) sciences are so involved with statistics. Chemists can concern themselves with "the" sulfuric acid molecule, or physicists with "the" neutron, confident that having seen one, they have pretty much seen them all. But students of the life and social sciences are always confronted with diversity. As a result, we lean heavily on complex mathematical techniques that tell us whether it is safe to generalize and, if so, how far we can go, and with how much confidence. That is what statistics is all about, and no reputable report in biology or the social sciences will present empirical data without accompanying confidence limits, correlation coefficients, or similar attempts to aggregate findings in a meaningful way—which means, subject to valid generalizations.

Just as Galileo, in the course of his enforced recantation, is said to have muttered of the Earth, "Nonetheless, it moves," many a researcher, considering the homogenization of disparate data so neatly massaged into a satisfying generalization, is likely to have muttered, of the various individuals thereby erased, "Nonetheless, they are different."

Which leads us to ask: Why are they different?

For biologists, understanding ideally takes place at both the proximate (immediate) and ultimate (evolutionary) levels of causation. On the proximate level, several factors appear likely. Genetic differences among individuals are obvious sources of individual variability, such differences being produced by mutation as well as (in sexually reproducing species) meiosis and sexual recombination, the basic processes whereby novel DNA is produced and then rearranged as each new individual is formed.

Proximate causes of individual differences must also include the different environments experienced by each individual, with "environment" defined broadly to include all experiences, personal and social. Age-related effects would thus also be expected, as the passage of time provides an opportunity for both genetic and environmental influences—not to mention their interaction—to be more thoroughly expressed. A newborn deer hiding in the brush, for example, will become immobile in response to almost any intruder, whereas adult males' response will depend on whether that intruder is another buck or a cougar.

Individual differences should probably be distinguished, however, from differences based on distinctive biological and social roles. Thus, among the hoary marmots, Marmota caligata, which I have studied extensively, adult males are typically either socially dominant within their colony, or clearly subordinate to a dominant individual. In a sense, the differences between dominant and subordinate males reflect important aspects of their behavioral individuality. When and if a satellite male assumes the role of dominant male, his behavior becomes that of such males generally. Reproductive females, for their part, are more aggressive than their nonreproductive counterparts, spending more time near their burrows; those roles switch when their reproductive roles reverse. Although social and biological roles are crucial to each specific behavior, it seems most useful to control for "role effects," and to restrict the concept of behavioral individuality to distinctions among individuals that are socially and biologically as similar as possible in all other respects, notably age, sex, social status, physical health, residence situation, and reproductive state.

Even in cases of genetically identical individuals, idiosyncratic differences in personal experiences can nonetheless be expected to generate a gap in observable characteristics among individuals. Such experiences may begin quite early in life: Intrauterine positioning, for example, can influence phenotypic variation among rodents. A fetus surrounded by males on either side is liable to be androgenized compared with one surrounded by two females. Despite extensive and intensive studies of behavioral development, we still know remarkably little about how individual differentiation actually occurs.

At the ultimate, or evolutionary level, individual differences are even more problematic. One deceptively simple explanation is that the adaptive significance of individual differences is directly equivalent to the adaptive significance of sexual reproduction itself, a subject that has received substantial attention from evolutionary biologists, but that still remains oddly resistant to straightforward explanation. Here is the problem: Given the many costs of reproducing sexually compared with asexually, it isn't clear why so many creatures opt for the former. A sexually reproducing individual projects only 50 percent of its genes into each offspring, while for asexual creatures, it is 100 percent. That would seem to convey a twofold benefit to any organism whose ancestors opted out of sexual reproduction.

It seems increasingly likely that sexual reproduction enhances the fitness of its practitioners by generating an array of offspring, at least some of which are likely to be adapted to an ever-changing environment, and/or by keeping ahead of parasites and other disease-causing organisms. In any event, a common thread amid diverse theories is that the adaptive significance of sex relates to the production of genetic diversity.

But in order for such genotypic diversity to convey a fitness benefit, it must be reflected in phenotypic diversity, which is to say, it must have some demonstrable effect on the way each individual looks, acts, or responds physiologically. In other words, there must be individual differences. It is therefore ironic that many biologists who are quite familiar with the theoretical dilemma associated with sexual reproduction, and with the received wisdom as to its adaptive significance, nonetheless tend to disregard the existence of substantial individual differences among their research subjects, or scratch their heads when asked to explain its prevalence.

Before biologists fully appreciated—and were confounded by—the genetics of sexual reproduction, Charles Darwin recognized individual differences as essential to the process of natural selection itself. Thus differential reproduction produces evolutionary change only if the more fit are different in ways that can be inherited from the less. Individuality therefore occupies a fundamental place in our understanding of basic evolutionary biology, italicizing the paradox that it has been so rarely investigated.

There are other possible ultimate explanations for the existence of individuality. In some cases, at least, it might be neutral or nonadaptive, a byproduct of selection that maintains genotypic differences for other reasons, such as the well-known case of sickle-cell anemia's being maintained in the human population because of a benefit conferred upon individuals whose sickle-cell gene is obscured by its genetically dominant alternative. Or it might be the unavoidable result of genetic "noise" that simply has not been selected against. It may even be maladaptive, although it stretches credulity that so fundamental characteristics of living things should carry a pervasive evolutionary cost. On the other hand, individual differences may persist, at least in certain cases, because, even though a "best" behavior or anatomy or physiology might exist, the vagaries of genetics combined with experience necessarily cause random and idiosyncratic departures from that ideal. It would presumably be adaptive, for example, for everyone to be well coordinated, but some are more so than others. In all probability, that isn't because of an evolutionary payoff to being a klutz, but because in the trajectory from one-celled zygote to adult human being, there are lots of opportunities for things to go at least somewhat awry.

It may also be that individual differences are directly selected if individuals benefit by being distinct from others. For example, when predators develop a "search image" of particular prey, individuals that differ from the most abundant form(s) of such images can experience an advantage. Selection of that sort could favor a continuously varying array of phenotypes, behavioral no less than physical. Individual differences could also be the result of sexual selection, if mate choice favored individuals who differ from the chooser, as a means of reducing inbreeding and its attendant disadvantages in fitness.

Several other factors could select for behavioral individuality, and (along with those described above) they are not mutually exclusive. Thus individual recognition between parent and offspring appears to be adaptive, predictable, and widespread. Especially when possible mix-ups could occur, selection should favor parents whose offspring are distinctive, hence not easily mistaken for a nonrelative. The inclusive fitness benefits of being able to identify kin beyond offspring/parents could also select for individual differences. The study of "kin recognition" has, in fact, become a cottage industry among students of animal behavior. When such recognition is demonstrated, attention is then typically directed to the mechanism whereby it is achieved, whether based on instinctive identification, imprinting from early experience, or simple physical proximity. Only rarely, however, does the chain of causation run the other way, to the possibility that individual differences may have been selected as a means of providing for the adaptive dispensing of nepotistic benefits.

It is also possible that the exigencies of reciprocal altruism have selected for individual differences among would-be reciprocators, as in the case of vampire bats, in which well-fed individuals donate blood meals to those less fortunate. In such cases, selection would probably be especially intense on the ability of initial donors—whether bat or human—to discriminate among their beneficiaries, all the better to insist upon subsequent recompense. By the same token, since the donor could subsequently be identified by the beneficiary, the donor is more likely to be paid back, and therefore more prone to benevolence.

Finally, environmental heterogeneity—defined broadly to include social as well as biological and physical environments—could result in proportionately more individual differences, both through simple adaptation to diverse experiences and through the selection of behavioral flexibility to exploit diverse environments. We might consider shared traits of a species or population as a kind of coarse adjustment in pursuit of fitness, and individual differences—however achieved—as the fine tuning.

Generalizations about behavioral individuality are, at this stage in our knowledge, difficult to support. It is tempting, for example, to suggest that "higher" animals with more-complex brains exhibit more individual variability than do their "lower" counterparts, which rely more on automatic, species-typical reactions to a narrow range of fixed stimuli. It would be surprising if jellyfish or barnacles turn out to demonstrate as much behavioral individuality as elephants or human beings do.

It may thus be significant that some of the most effective portrayals of behavioral individuality come from studies of large-brained animals like chimpanzees and gorillas. And yet, in their basic morphology, two oak trees are also likely to differ more from each other than two elephants are, at least in their physical structure, although we may assume that the inverse is true when it comes to behavior. Our inattention to such matters is emphasized by the fact that no common metric exists with which to make such comparisons.

When seeking to extrapolate from a sample to a larger population, life scientists typically present research results in terms of either mean or median, all the while knowing that there is no "average" individual. (Since there are roughly equal numbers of men and women, the average human being would have one ovary and one testicle.) The nature of statistical inference is such that results must be accompanied by measures of variation. It might seem that such measures effectively take notice of individual variability. But let's face it: We are overwhelmingly more interested in measures of central tendency, whether it be the area of a panda's paw, the alarm-calling frequency of a scrub jay, or the incarceration rates of young, unmarried men. We give at best only passing attention to statistical measures of dispersion, largely as unavoidable indices of irrelevant noise. Or—especially if one's own data are at issue—such measures are considered with trepidation, since if too great, they threaten to keep the results from "reaching significance." Very rarely are such indicators of individual differences seen as significant in themselves.

Like it or not, however, it is clear that individuality exists, and that it matters. The social structure of coyotes (Canis latrans), for example, is apparently influenced by interactive patterns among littermates; it has also been suggested that wolves (Canis lupus) are predisposed to social niches in their packs by individual traits that characterize them as pups. In yellow-bellied marmots (Marmota flaviventris), interactions among the young born in the same year are strongly influenced by their individual behavioral profiles, which in turn appear to be more consequential than patterns of genetic relatedness per se. Similarly, the greatest part of the variance in female reproductive success is explained by variance among individual females, rather than by the variance among different social groups or different genetic lines.

The impact of individual variability is probably especially great in highly social species (chimpanzees, elephants, human beings, hoary marmots) as opposed to relatively solitary ones (aye-ayes, rhinoceroses, woodchucks), which are less likely to encounter diversity. On the other hand, the fact that a species experiences a high level of social integration may suggest that individuals of the species are relatively unaffected by social vagaries, which may explain why they are capable of getting along in proximity. Species that are comparatively social might possibly develop greater behavioral individuality, since they are likely to occupy social roles that are more clearly defined. We simply do not know, for example, how eusocial versus solitary bees compare in their individuality. Nor, at this stage, can we even make cogent predictions.

I want to urge acknowledgment of the existence and importance of individual differences, and to disagree with Goethe's maxim "Individuum est ineffabile" (Individuality cannot be explained). Individual differences, I am confident, will eventually be explained. First, however, they must be recognized.

In part, the resistance encountered by human sociobiology, Darwinian psychology, evolutionary psychology—call it what you will—may reflect that none of the "ultimate" interpretations thus far offered account for the enormous amount of (perceived or actual) individual variation that human beings identify among themselves. Perhaps there is something about the human psyche that believes a theory of individuality will do insufficient justice to our own deeply cherished individuality.

The animated movie Antz begins with a hilarious scene in which Z, a troubled ant, is speaking (with the voice of Woody Allen) to a therapist about his feelings of "insignificance." To Z's consternation, however, the therapist approves enthusiastically: "Being an ant is being able to say, 'Hey-I'm meaningless, you're meaningless.' ... Remember—let's be the best superorganism we can be!" The reality is that the best superorganism a person can be is a terrible letdown for a species that has a hard time reconciling social homogenization with its insistence on being "me."

The current dearth of "individuality theory" may thus reflect the fact that, until recently, advances in applying evolutionary biology to human behavior have been almost entirely the work of biologists, who typically have given individuality short shrift. By contrast, psychologists—stimulated in part by the early work of Darwin's cousin, Francis Galton—have generally been more receptive to individual differences, with anthropologists occupying a more or less intermediate position (although with no small amount of individual differences!). Perhaps the growing involvement of the latter disciplines in attempts to flesh out a truly evolutionary theory of human nature will result in fuller incorporation of behavioral individuality.

Western science since Aristotle has sought to identify and understand classes of phenomena, looking beyond the particular to organize knowledge into general categories. Accordingly, my request for greater attention to individual differences may seem strangely retrograde. Maybe the best way to justify so perverse a preoccupation is to substitute individual differences for the famed question about climbing mountains: Why study individual differences? Because they are there.

Text by David P. Barash
Source: The Chronicle Review, May 2010

Ingestion / Anti-pasta

Here is a photo of Filippo Tommaso Marinetti eating a plate of spaghetti in 1930. What looks like an anodyne photograph was in fact a highly loaded image, for this was the man who, together with his younger colleague Fillia (the pseudonym of Luiggi Colombo), had just published the "Manifesto of Futurist Cookery" (1930), which dared declare anathema Italy's sacrosanct pasta. Marinetti saw the Italian table as weighted down by heavy traditional food. The English might be content with their dried cod, roast beef, and pudding, the Germans with their sauerkraut, smoked bacon, and sausages, but for the Italians pasta would no longer do. Marinetti wanted to reverse the best-known chapter of the history of Italian cuisine. In the 17th century, the city of Naples had initiated a gastronomic revolution whereby its inhabitants, until then known as mangiabroccoli and mangiafoglie, now became mangiamaccheroni. The pasta eater, holding the spaghetti in his hands above his mouth, became a stock figure, like the characters of Commedia dell'Arte, disseminated in prints all over Europe. Now the Futurists were calling for the abolition of what they deemed an absurd Italian gastronomic religion. Marshalling the opinions of doctors, professors, hygienists, and impostors, Marinetti claimed that pasta induced lethargy, pessimism, nostalgia, and neutralism. In short, pasta stood behind everything the Futurists had been battling ever since the appearance of their initial manifesto in 1909.

They lamented that pastasciutta—dried pasta of the sort we all eat—was 40 percent less nutritious than meat, fish, and vegetables. Mixing scientific data with poetic flights of eloquence, Marinetti held that pasta ensnared Italians within the slow looms of Penelope and bound them to the sailing ships somnolently awaiting a gust of wind on a sleepy Mediterranean. Being anti-pasta meant being antipassatista, i.e., against the past.

Predictably, upon its publication in the Turin daily Gazetta del Popolo on 28 December 1930, and its translation in the Parisian daily Comoedia a few months later, the manifesto provoked an uproar. Delighted to have finally managed to write a manifesto that, in line with Futurism's intent to transform every aspect of life, had finally hit on the one realm of the quotidian that affected every single Italian, Marinetti and Fillia gleefully devoted a whole section of their 1932 Futurist Cookbook to recording the blistering effects of the initial cooking manifesto. In typical Futurist fashion, the section containing the polemic preceded the section with the actual recipes. Marinetti and Fillia claimed, in equally characteristic Futurist inflationary style, that the pros and cons of pasta were endlessly debated in the Italian press in hundreds of articles by writers, politicians, chemists, and famous cooks, not to mention innumerable cartoons. Meanwhile, foreign publications from London to Budapest, from Tunis to Tokyo, and all the way to Sydney had announced somewhat incredulously that Italy was about to abandon spaghetti. In the city of l'Aquila (a few hours from the Italian capital) women had taken the situation into their own hands by signing a collective letter of indignation, addressed to Marinetti, in favor of pasta. In Genoa, an association called P.I.P.A., an acronym for International Association Against Pasta, was formed. Thousands of miles away in San Francisco, a fight had erupted between two Italian restaurants situated on different floors of the same building. While the head cook of the Savoia, Italy's royal family, actually came out against pasta, the mayor of Naples professed that vermicelli with tomato sauce was the food of the angels. To which Marinetti responded that if that were the case, it simply served to confirm the boredom of life in paradise.

Ultimately, Marinetti believed, modern science would allow us to replace food with free, state-sponsored pills composed of albumins, synthetic fats, and vitamins that would lower prices for the consumer and lessen the toll of labor on the worker. Ultraviolet lamps could be used to electrify and thus dynamize food staples. Eventually, a totally mechanized production would relieve humankind of labor altogether, allowing man to be at leisure to pursue nobler activities. Dining could thus become a purely aesthetic enterprise. On this premise, Marinetti and Fillia's proposals for the new Italian cuisine constitute one of the most inspired chapters in the annals of Futurism. The cookbook gave a new infusion of giovinezza—a favorite Fascist word, meaning "youth"—to the slightly tired antics of a movement now known as Secondo Futurismo. While the spectator could already expect, by the 1930s, to be abused by the Futurist text, the Futurist painting, the Futurist polimaterico (multimedia sculpture), and the Futurist performance, here the abuse went not to the head, but straight to the stomach.

The polemics in The Futurist Cookbook were followed by an elaborate account of some Futurist banquets. One of the more memorable of these Aeropranzi futuristi was a banquet for 300 people held on 18 December 1931 at the Hotel Negrino in Chiavari. Guests were delighted and terrified as they braced themselves to ingest dishes prepared by the famous cook Bulgheroni, who had come especially from Milan to this small Ligurian town to preside in the kitchen over the burial of pastasciutta. Although the Futurists had advocated the abolition of eloquence and politics around the table, the guests nevertheless first had to sit through a lecture by Marinetti on the state of world Futurism. Afterward, the meal began with a flan of calf's head seated on a bed of pineapple, nuts, and dates, stuffed—oh, surprise!—with anchovies. Then, to cleanse the palate, Bulgheroni served a decollapalato (a pun on decollare, meaning "to get off the ground"), a lyrical concoction of meat broth sprinkled with champagne and liquor and decorated with rose petals. The main dish was beef in carlinga (another aeronautic term, probably referring to a kind of Dutch oven), meatballs—whose composition was best left uninvestigated—placed over airplanes made out of bread crumbs. After a few more dishes the dessert, named eletricita atmosferische candite, arrived, consisting of colorful little cubes made of fake marble crowned with cotton candy that enclosed a sweetish paste containing ingredients only a long chemical analysis could disclose. Not everybody made it to the end of the dinner.

Most memorable among other Futurist recipes was the carneplastico: a synthetic sculptural interpretation of Futurist aeropittura referring to the much-beloved Italian landscape. In honor of the beacon of Italian industry, one could taste the pollo Fiat, a stuffed chicken placed on puffy pillows of whipped cream. On a more pornographic note, one could also have a porco eccittato, a cooked salami placed vertically on the plate with coffee sauce mixed with eau de cologne.

Whatever Marinetti might have thought about his capacities for perennial transgression, such conceits of dishes as "divine surprises" had a long historical lineage. They went back to the most extraordinary passages in Petronius Arbitrius's Satiricon, thus reviving an aspect of Romanita that the Fascists, in their eagerness to revive Roman glories, would have been all too happy to endorse. Indeed, many of the ingredients were coded so that the exotic fruits that appear in so many Futurist dishes were meant to evoke Italy's hope for a firmer grip on North Africa in fulfillment of its imperial ambitions as master of the Mediterranean. There was, it turns out, some disagreement during the Fascist ventennio as to the uer-history of pasta. According to the story presently told in Rome's Museo Nazionale della Pasta Alimentare (the only such museum in the world, founded in the 1990s), traces of early pasta implements were found in the archeological remains of the Etruscan town of Cerveteri, near Rome, dating to the 4th century BC. Pasta was also identified in low reliefs of the 12th century. And yet the writer Paolo Buzzi, in an article printed in 1930 in the much-venerated journal La Cucina Italiana, pointed to the fact that no mention of pasta by the ancient Romans could be found in the history of Italian cooking by d'Apico, the Homer of cooking. This might sound strange, he added, if one thinks of the thousand stories one was told as a child about the catastrophic volcanic eruption of Pompeii, one of which told of plates, still filled with maccheroni, thrown into the lava.

As always with Futurism, Marinetti's ottimismo della tavola had its darker side in the realm of realpolitik. Not by chance, as he himself acknowledged in the manifesto, Marinetti launched his attack against pasta just when Italy, hit hard by the Depression, was struggling to achieve one of Mussolini's great dreams: autarchy, or the elimination of Italy's economic dependence on foreign markets. Pasta, quintessentially Italian as it was, depended on expensive imports of wheat. The regime thus launched a campaign in favor of home-grown rice as a better substitute. Rice, we are told, was more virile, more patriotic, and more suitable for fighters and heroes. Rice also had its part in the history of Italian cooking as the great rival of pasta; it came from the Po valley in the industrial North, while pasta, with its hypothetical birthplace in Etruria and its triumph in Naples, was identified with the center, and even more with the agrarian and backward South. This was a battle that could thus be waged on familiar Futurist geopolitical territory.

And so the Futurists offered tuttoriso: new dishes to replace the traditional Northern risotto. More sinister is the fact that among the doctors summoned by Marinetti was the eugenicist Nicola Pende, the man behind the new Instituto di Biotipologia in Rome. Marinetti's attacks against pasta coincided, significantly I think, with the first wave of Taylorization of pasta production. On display in the Museo della Pasta in Rome are vintage photographs of women (almost never men) at work in front of vertical hydraulic presses, grinders, cutters, and blenders that look no less impressive, no less daunting, and no less alienating, than the assembly line at Fiat's famous Turin factory known as the Lingotto, a Futurist favorite back in the teens. By the 1930s, the institution of biotypes as substitutes for Taylorism to attain maximal efficiency in the working place and the provision of a master race had taken hold of the Fascist imagination. Thus the New Futurist Man, the man without pasta, the homo ludens who might eventually replace homo edens, the man whom one may be tempted to theorize as the postmodern "desiring machine" of Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari in Anti-Oedipus, was, then, first and foremost, the New Fascist Man.

Fine. But what is one to make of our Marinetti snapshot? The staple photograph we see reproduced shows Marinetti instructing a female cook on how to concoct one of his recipes, both of them standing in front of a 1913 Muscular Dynamism painted by Umberto Boccioni. So is our photograph here of Marinetti caught red-handed in the act of eating the infamous dish? A good Italian who just couldn't resist? And this taking place at Biffi, if one is to believe the caption, one of the best-known Milanese establishments (still in existence) and a favorite haunt of the Futurists? Or is it a clever maneuver by Marinetti intended to bamboozle the viewer, leave him or her guessing, spinning yet still more controversy? About to send off my text and still wavering between these two interpretations of this piece of photographic evidence, I stumbled on one little paragraph of The Futurist Cookbook. There, entry number 7 in a short section on apocryphal anecdotes provided a possible answer: "Photographs of Marinetti in the act of eating pasta appeared in a few mass-circulation magazines: they were photographic montages carried out by experts hostile to Futurist cuisine, who were trying to discredit the campaign for a new way of eating."1 There could, however, be another reading: the photo is real and Marinetti, whatever he might have claimed in his cookbook, was simply lying about the montage. There must have been moments when, even for Marinetti, the desires of the everyman vanquished those of the Futurist and the Fascist in him.


1 — Filippo Tommaso Marinetti, The Futurist Cookbook, trans. Suzanne Brill (San Francisco: Bedford Arts, 1989), p. 99.

Text by Romy Golan

Source: Cabinet magazine, Issue 10, Spring 2003

Central Hotel in Uriage-Les-Bains

Pierre Bonnard in his Room at the Central Hotel in Uriage-Les-Bains, photography by George Besson, 1918

Βιβλιογραφία

ΠΑΝΕΠΙΣΤΗΜΙΟ ΘΕΣΣΑΛΙΑΣ ΤΜΗΜΑ ΑΡΧΙΤΕΚΤΟΝΩΝ ΜΗΧΑΝΙΚΩΝ ΧΕΙΜΕΡΙΝΟ ΕΞΑΜΗΝΟ 2009-2010

«Αφηγήσεις της κατοικίας στη μοντέρνα και σύγχρονη τέχνη»

Μάθημα: Κωστής Βελώνης

Βιβλιογραφία

Agrest, Diana, Conway, Patricia, Weisman, Leslie Canes, (επιμ.) The Sex of Architecture, (Νέα Υόρκη: Harry N.Abrams, 1996)
Allington, Edward, "The Ride Stripped Bare", Frieze 56, (Iανoυάριος-Φεβρουάριος 2001): 83- 87.
Anger, Jenny, “Forgotten Ties: The Suppression of the Decorative in German Art and Theory, 1900-1915”, Not At Home (επιμέλεια) Christopher Reed (Λονδίνο: Thames and Hudson, 1989) :130-146.

Aynsley, Jeremy, “Displaying Designs for the Domestic Interior in Europe and America 1850-1950”, Imagined Interiors: representing the domestic interior since the Renaissance (επιμ.) Jeremy Aynsley, Charlotte Grant, Harriet McKay (Λονδινο: Victoria and Albert Museum Publications, 2006):190-215.

Bach, Teja Friedrich, Brancusi, photo reflexion, (Παρίσι: Edition du Regard, Didier Impert Fine Arts, 1991):8.
Bachelard, Gaston, La poetique de l’espace (Παρίσι : PUF, 1957).
Baydar, Gulsum και Heynen, Hilde (επιμ.) Negotiating Domesticity :Spatial Constructions of Gender in Modern Architecture (Λονδίνο, Νέα Υόρκη:Routledge, 2005).
Bellaigue, Marthilde, "An Artist and an Architect: The space Rebeyrolle at Eymoutiers", Museum International 196, αρ.4, τομ. ΧLIX (1997) : 30-34.
Bennet, Tony, The birth of the Museum (Λονδίνο: Routledge, 1995)
Berry, Francesca, « Lived perspectives:the art of the French nineteenth-century interior”, Imagined Interiors:representing the domestic interior since the Renaissance (επιμ.) Jeremy Aynsley, Charlotte Grant, Harriet McKay (Λονδινο: Victoria and Albert Museum Publications, 2006):160-183.

Boccioni, U., Scritti editi e inediti (Μιλάνο: Feltrinelli, 1971)
Bochner, Mel, "The Serial Attitude." Artforum 4, τομ. VI (Δεκέμβριος 1967) : 28-33.
Borden, Iain, Rendell, Jane, (επιμ.) InterSections, Architectural Histories and Critical theories (Λονδίνο : Routledge, 2000).
Bois, Yve-Alain, "the Sculptural Opaque", Substance 31 (1981) : 23-48.
Alain-Bois, Yves, Rosalind Krauss, L’informe, mode d’emploi, (Παρίσι : Centre d’art et de culture Georges –Pompidou, 1996).
Buck-Morss, Susan, "The City as Dreamworld and Catastrophe", October 73, (Καλοκαίρι 95): 3-26.
Βλάχος, Γιώργος Σ., «Ποπ, όπως ο ήχος της φτηνής σαμπάνιας», Panopticon, τευχ.00, (2002).
Brighton, Andrew, Flogging Dead Horses, de-, dis-, ex-. Ex-vacating Modernism, επιμ. Alex Coles & Richard Bentley (BACKless Books, 1996, Λονδινο): 1-2.
Broude, Norma, Garrard, Mary D., (επιμ.) The Power of Feminist Art, the American Movement of the 1970's, History and impact (Νέα Υόρκη : Harry N. Abrams, 1994).
Brooks, Peter, Reading for the plot: Design and intention in Narrative (Oxford: Clarendon, 1984).
Brewer, John, Porter, Roy (επιμ.), Consumption and the World of Goods, (Λονδίνο: Routledge, 1993).
Βrown, Theοdore, The work of G.Rietveld Architect, (Utrecht : A.W.Bruna and Zoon, 1958).
Briosi Sandro, Hillenaar, Henk (επιμ.), Vitalite et contradictions de l’avant-garde, Italie-France 1909-1924, (Paris:José Corti, 1988).
Buchanan Peter, «Brancusi's New Studio», Architecture, αρ. 4 (Απρίλιος 1997): 77-79.
Buchloh, Benjamin H. D., "Cargo and Cult, the displays of Thomas Hirschhorn", Artforum XL αρ.3 , (Νοέμβριος 2001) : 109-114.
Cardot, Emile, L’Art au foyer domestique (Παρίσι: Renouard, 1884).
Cahun, Claude, Ecrits, (Παρίσι: Editions Jean-Michel Place, 2002).
Causey, Andrew, Sculpture since 1945 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998).
Casey, Edward S., Getting Back into Place, (Bloomington, Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1993).
Century, Dan, “Brion Gysin and His Wonderful Dreamachine” www. legendsmagazine.net/105/brion.htm
Cooke, Lynne, Wollen, Peter, (επιμέλεια), Visual Display Culture: Beyond Appearances, DIA Center(Νέα Υόρκη: The New Press, 1995).
Colomina, Beatriz, Privacy and Publicity : Μodern Αrchitecτure as Mass Media (Cambridge, Massachusetts :MIT Press, 1994).
---,(επιμ.) Sexuality & Space, (Νέα Υόρκη: Princeton Papers on Αrchitecture, 1992).
Conrads, Ulrich, Μανιφέστα και προγράμματα της αρχιτεκτονικής του 20 αιώνα. (Αθήνα: Επίκουρος, 1977).
Le Corbusier, Urbanisme (Παρίσι : G. Crès και Cie, 1925).
---, L’art décoratif d’aujourd’hui (Παρίσι: G. Crès, 1925).
---, Vers une architecture ((Παρίσι : Crès et Cie, 1923).
Crary, Jonathan, "Spectacle, attention, counter-memory", October 50 (Φθινόπωρο 1989) : 96-107.
---, Techniques of the Observer: On Vision and Modernity in the Nineteenth Century. (Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, 1990).
---, Suspensions of Perception, Attention, Spectacle, and Modern Culture, (Cambridge, Massachusetts : MIT Press, 2001).
Curtis, Penelope, Sculpture 1900-1945 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999).
Clark, T.J, The Painting of Modern Life. Paris in the Art of Manet and his Followers (Princeton, New Jersey:Princeton University Press, 1984)
Clarke, Alison J., Tupperware, The Promise of Plastic in 1950s America (Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press, 2001.

Davilla, Thierry, «Une oeuvre de destruction», Les cahiers du Musée Νational d’art Moderne, Centre Pompidou (Χειμώνας. 2004/2005).
Debord, Guy, « Positions situationnistes sur la circulation”, Internationale situationniste, Internationale Situationniste 3, (Δεκέμβριος 1959), τρίτη έκδοση ( Paris: Fayard, 1997) : 104-105.
---, Η Κοινωνία του Θεάματος, μετ. Π.Τσαχαγέας-Ν.Β.Αλεξίου (Αθήνα: Ελεύθερος Τύπος, 1986).
---, Kotànyi, Vaneigem, «Sur la commune», Internationale Situationniste,12(1969).www.acontrecourant.org/acc2/index.php?page=commune.
O’Doherty, Brian, Inside the White Cube: The Ideology of the Gallery Space, (Santa Monica: Lapis Press, 1986).
Docherty J.Linda, “Model families: The domesticated Studio Pictures of William Merritt Chase and Edmund Tarbell”, Not At Home, (επιμ) C.Reed, (London : Thames and Hudson, 1989):48-64.
---, Theorising Modernism, Visual art and the Critical Tradition, (Νέα Υόρκη: Columbia University Press, 1994).
De Duve, Thierry, “Ex Situ”, LES CAHIERS du Musée National d’art Moderne 27 (φθινόπωρο 1989) : 39-55.
---, Kant After Duchamp, (Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press: 1996).
Eisenman, Peter D., "Notes on Conceptual Architecture: Towards a Definition." Design Quarterly 78-79 (1970): 1-5.
Efrat, Zvi, Fausch, Deborah, Singley, Paulette, El-Khoury, Rodolphe, (επιμ) Architecture: In Fashion (Νέα Υόρκη: Princeton Architectural Press, 1994).
Etincelle, Carnet d'un mondain, vol. I, (Paris: Rouveyre, 1881-82).
Krzysztof Fijalkowski “‘ Un salon au fond d’un lac’, The domestic spaces of surrealism” στο Mical, Thomas (επιμ.) Surrealism and architecture, (London : Routledge, 2005):11-30
Facos Michelle, “The Ideal Swedish Home :Carl Larsson’s Lilla Hyttnas”, Not At Home, (επιμ) C.Reed, (London : Thames and Hudson, 1989):81-91.
Farquharson, Alex, «Drastic Plastic», Frieze 68 (2001).
Focillon, Henri, Η ζωή των μορφών, μτφ. Α. Κούρι, (Αθήνα : Νεφέλη, 1982).
Foster, Hal, “The Archive without Museums”, October 77, (Kαλοκαίρι 1996) : 97-119.
---, The Return of the Real, (Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, 2002).
---, Design and Crime, and Other Diatribes (Λονδίνο και Νέα Υόρκη: Verso, 2002).
Francis, Mark, «Tune in, turn on, light up..» Tate etc. αρ.4, www.tate.org.uk/tateetc/issue4/summeroflove.htm
Fried, Michael, “Art and Objecthood”, Art Forum, Vol.V, αρ.10 (καλοκαίρι 1967): 13-23.
Frizot Michel, Dominique Paini, Sculpter photographier photographie sculpture (Παρίσι: Marval, 1991).
Frechuret, Maurice, Le mou et ses formes :essai sur quelques catégories de la sculpture, (Παρίσι: ESBA, 1993).
Geiger, John, Chapel of Extreme Experience: a Short History of Stroboscopic Light and the Dream Machine (Νέα Υόρκη: Soft Skull Press, 2004).
Giedon, Sigfried, Space, time and Architecture : The Growth of a new Tradition, (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1941).
Gintz, Claude, “Architecture et postminimalisme”. Revue d’esthétique 29 (1996).
Giovanni, Antonucci, Chonache del theatro futurista, (Roma: Abete, 1975).
Godin, Christian, La Totalité realisée, Les arts at la littérature (Seyssel: Champ Vallon, 1997).
Gray Noel, «The kaleidoscope: Shake, Rattle and Roll”, The Australian Journal of Media&Culture, αρ.6(1991)www. mcc.murdoch.edu.au/ReadingRoom/6.2/Gray.html
Greenberg, Clement, Recentness of sculpture, American Sculpture of the Sixties (Los Angeles: Los Angeles Country Museum of Art, 1967).
Greenberg, R., Ferguson, B. W., Nairne, S., (επιμ.), Thinking About Exhibitions (London and New York: Routledge, 1996).
Girst, Thomas ”Those objects of Obscure Desires :Marcel Duchamp and his Shop Windows στο Grunenberg, Christoph, Hollein Max (επιμ.), Shopping. A Century of Art and Consumer Culture, Schirn Kunstahalle Frankfurt και Tate Liverpool( Frankfurt , Liverpool :Hatje Kantz Publishers, 2002).
Grunenberg, Chrιstoph, Harris, Jonathan, (επιμέλεια), Summer of Love, psychedelic art, social crisis and counterculture in the 60’s (Liverpool: Liverpool University Press +Tate Liverpool, 2005).
Hahn, Till, “L’amour du verre”, Museum 172 (1991) : 202-205
Hoffmann, Gerhard, "Space and Symbol in the Tales of Edgar Allan Poe," Poe Studies XII, αρ.1 (Ιούνιος 1979) www.eapoe.org/pstudies/ps1970/p1979101.htm
Hainard, Jacques, Kaehr, Roland, Objects Prétextes, Objects Manipulés (Neuchâtel: Musée d’ethnographie, 1984).
Harrison, Charles, Wood, Paul, (επιμ.), Art in Theory 1900-1990 (Cambridge: Massachusetts: Blackwell, 1992).
Hergott, Fabrice, «Plight», Joseph Beuys. (Paris: Musee national d’art moderne: Centre Georges Pompidou, 1994).
Highmore, Ben, Everyday Life and Cultural Theory, (Λονδίνο: Routledge, 2002).
Hirst, Paul, “Foucault and Architecture”, AA Files 26 (1993) : 25-60.
Hirst, Lisa, “Dressing the part, Workwear for the Home 1953-1965”, Things 9 (Xειμώνας 98-99): 25-49.
Hulten, Pontus (επιμ.) Futurismo & Futuristi (Milano: Fabbri Bompiani, 1986).

Jones, Amelia, Irrational Modernism, a Neurasthenic History of New York Dada (Cambridge, Massachusetts, London: The MIT Press, 2004)
Jones, Jonathan, A House is not a Home, Frieze 55, (νοεμ -δεκ 2000 ) :84-89.
---, "Species of Spaces -Mike Nelson. Frieze 53, (Kαλοκαίρι 2000).
Joselit, David, Infinite Regress, Marcel Duchamp 1910-1941 (Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, 2003).
Judd, Donald, “Specific objects” Arts Yearbook 8. (1965) : 74-82
Irigaray, Luce, This Sex Which Is Not One, μτφρ. Catherine Porter. (Νέα Υόρκη: Cornell University Press, 1985).
Kabakov, Ilya, On the total installation (Bonn: Cantz verlag, 1995).
------, Tupitsyn, Margarita, Tupitsyn, Victor, “Conversation About Installation”, Art Journal 58, αρ. 4, (χειμώνας 99): 62–73.
Kachur, Lewis, Displaying the Marvelous, Marcel Duchamp, Salvador Dali, and Surrealist Exhibition Installations (Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, 2001).
Klimasmith, Betsy. At Home in the City: Urban Domesticity in American Literature and Culture, 1850-1930 (Durham, New Hampshire: University of New Hampshire Press, 2005 ) , ειδικα τα κεφ. the “Tenement home” και “The Apartment as Utopia”.
Κοτιώνης, Ζήσης. Πες, πού είναι η Αθήνα. Προβολές στην τοπογραφία της Αττικής (Αθήνα : Άγρα, 2006).
Kiaer, Christina, Imagine no Possessions. The Socialist Objects of Russian Constructivism(Cambridge, Massachusetts, London: The MIT Press, 2005).
Kiaer, Christina, « The Short life of the Equal Woman », 2009, Tate ETC Magazine, www.tate.org.uk/tateetc/issue15/russian.htm
Krauss, Eva, «Plaidoyer pour une archisculpture » L’architecture d’aujourd’ hui, 349 (Νοεμ-Δεκ. 2003): 58-63
Krauss, Rosalind. E., The Originality of the Avant–Garde and Other Modernist Myths (Cambridge, Massachusetts : The MIT Press, 1986).
---, Passages in Modern Sculpture,(Λονδίνο: Thames and Hudson, 1977).
Kwinter, Sanford, “Virtual City , or the Wiring and Waning of the World”, Assemblage 29, (Απρίλιος 1996) : 86-101.
----, Architectures of Time, Toward a Theory of the Event in Modernist Culture, (Cambridge, Massachusetts : MIT Press, 2001)
Lefebvre, Henri, Everyday Life in the Modern World (Νέα Υόρκη: Harper & Row 1971)
Leigh, Christian, “Home is where the heart is”, Flash art 145, (Μάρτιος-Απρίλιος 89).
Lessing, Gotthold Ephraim, Laokoon: Oder uber die Grenzen der Malerei und Poesie, (Βερολίνο :1766).
Loos, Adolf, Spoken into the Void, Collected Essays 1897-1900, μτφ. Jane O. Newman και John H. Smith (Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, 1982).
Λοϊζίδη, Νίκη, Απόγειο και κρίση της πρωτοποριακής ιδεολογίας ( Αθήνα: Νεφέλη, 1992).
Lippard, Lucy, Pop Art (Λονδίνο : Thames and Hudson, 1966).
Giovani Lista , ‘Εναέρια Άποψη και φουτουριστική Αεροζωγραφική: Μια μεταφυσική του χώρου» στο Η κατάκτηση του αέρα , (Θεσσαλονίκη:ΚΜΣΤ, 2003):89-115
Lyotard, J.F. “Les immateriaux”, Art & Text 17 (1985).
Mahon, Alyce “Displaying the Body, Surrealism’s Geography of Pleasure” στο Wood, Ghislaine (επιμ.) Surreal Things, Surrealism and Design (London : Victoria and Albert Museum, 2007).
Mahoney, Robert, “La révolte des objets: John Armleder et un postmortem moderne”, Artstudio 19 (Χειμώνας 1990) : 78-89.

Μαρινέττι, Μανιφέστα του Φουτουρισμού (Αθήνα: Αιγόκερος, 1987).
Massey, Ann, “The Emergence of Interior Decoration as a Profession”, Interior Design of the 20th Century, (Λονδίνο: Thames and Hudson, 1990).
Meleaf, Janine, "The House that Carrie Built: The Stettheimer Doll's House of the 1920s". Art & Design 51 (Νοεμβριος 1996) : 76-81.
Mehgham, Rod, "Inner Visions", Tate Magazine, issue 23, (2000):38-42.
Moholy–Nagy, Laszlo, Painting, Photography, Film, μετ. J. Seligman (Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, 1969).
Michelson, Annette, “Where is your rupture?” Mass Culture and the Gesamtkunstwerk” , October 56 (Καλοκαίρι 1991): 43–63.
Ντε Μικέλι, Μ. Οι πρωτοπορίες της τέχνης του εικοστού αιώνα (Αθήνα: Οδυσσέας, 1983).
Morris, Frances, Paris Post War: Art and Existentialism 1945-55, (Λονδίνο: Tate Gallery, 1993).
Morton Pat, "A visit to Womenhouse", Architecture of the Everyday, (επιμ.) Steven Harris, Deborah Berke (Νέα Υόρκη : Princeton Architectural Press, 1997): 166-179.
Miessen, Markus, “Wondering through the chasms of opportunity”, Contemporary 21, αρ. 87 (2006): 16-17.
Millet, Catherine, “Architectures de Dubuffet”, Art Press 45 (1981) : 33-37.
Mulholland, Neil, “Use your illusions”, Tate etc. αρ.4 , (Καλοκαίρι, 2005). www.tate.org.uk/tateetc/issue4/summeroflove2.htm
McNeil, Peter "Designing Women : Gender, Sexuality and the Interior Designer, c 1890-1940 Art History 17, αρ. 4, (34), (Δεκέμβριος 1994) : 631-57.
Nevins, Deborah, "The Triumph of Flora: Women and American Landscape, 1890-1935, Antiques 127 (Απρίλιος 1985) : 64-69.
Niderst, Alain, "Esthetique et materialisme a la fin du siecle", Dix-Huitieme Siecle, αρ. 24 (1992) :189-197.
Ørskou, Gitte, « Inside the Spectacle, Olafur Eliasson. Minding the world», ARoS Aarhus Kunstmuseum, (Hatje Cantz, Ostfildern-Ruit, 2004).
Ottmann, Klaus, “Jessica Stockholder”. The Journal of Contemporary Art 5 (Aνοιξη/Kαλοκαίρι 1991) : 100-107.
Παπανικολάου Mιλτιάδης (επιμ.), Πίσω από το μαύρο τετράγωνο (Θεσσαλονίκη : ΚΜΣΤ, 2002).
Parent Beatrice, «Mario Merz: Le soufle de la liberté». Artstudio 13 : 52-63.
Pollock , Griselda, « On Mary Cassatt’s reading le figaro or the case of the missing women » στο Looking back to the future eesays on art, life and death ( Amsterdam:G+B Arts International , 2001):227-273

Piano, Renzo, “Atelier Brancusi a Parigi” Ottagono 124 (Οκτώβριος 1997).
Read, Herbert, Ιστορία της Μοντέρνας γλυπτικής, μτφρ. Μ.Λαμπράκη-Πλάκα (Υποδομή, Αθήνα, 1974).
Reed, Chistopher, "Domestic Strife". Tate Modern 21 (2000) : 51-54.
Revel, Judith, “L’archive au present: pour une généalogie de l’infime”. Οmnibus, ειδικό τεύχος για Documenta X, (Οκτώβριος 97).
Romain, Antoinette Le Normand, Rodin en 1900: l'exposition de l'Alma (Παρίσι : Musée du Luxembourg, Musée Rodin, Réunion des musées nationaux, 2001).

Robinson, Joyce Henri « Hi Honey, I’m Home» : Weary (Neurasthenic) Businessmen and the Formulation of a Serenely Modern Aesthetic » Not At Home (επιμ.) Christopher Reed (Λονδίνο: Thames and Hudson, 1989) :98-112

Rosenthall, Mark, Installation Art, From Duchamp to Holzer (Munich : Prestel verlag, 2003).
Rossler, Beate, Privacies (Stanford, California : Stanford University Press, 2004).
Riley, Richard, «Μεταμόρφωση: νέες μορφές στη βρετανική τέχνη 1957-1971», στο Μεταμόρφωση, Βρετανική τέχνη της δεκαετίας του 60, (Άνδρος: Iδρυμα Βασίλη και Ελίζας Γουλανδρή, Μουσείο Σύγχρονης Τέχνης, 2005).
Sadler, Simon, The Situationist City (Cambridge, Massachusetts: ΜΙΤ Press, 1998).
Shapiro, Miriam, "Recalling Womanhouse". Women's Studies Quaterly 15 (Άνοιξη,/Καλοκαίρι, 1987): 25-30.
--- " The Education of Women as Artists :Project Womanhouse". Art Journal 31 (Άνοιξη 1972): 268-270.
Shapiro, Laura, Something from the Oven: Reinventing Dinner in 1950s America (Νέα Υόρκη: The Viking Press, 2004
Shelley, Rice, Inverted Odysseys: Claude Cahun, Maya Dern, Cindy Sherman, (Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press, 1999)
Solnit, Rebecca, Wanderlust A History of Walking (Λονδίνο: Verso, 2001).
Spigel, Lynn, “The suburban Home Companion: Television and the Neighborhood Ideal in Postwar America,”
---, “Installing the television set: Popular Discourses on Television and Domestic Space 1948-1955”. Camera Obscura 16 (Μάρτιος 1988) : 11-48
Staniszewski, Mary Anne, The Power of Display: A History of Exhibition Installations at the Museum of Modern Art (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1998)
Stephen Philips “Introjection and Projection : Frederick Kiesler and his dream machine” στο Mical, Thomas (επιμ.) Surrealism and architecture, (London : Routledge, 2005):140-155
Stewart, Susan, On longing, narratives of the miniature, the gigantic, the souvenir, the collection, (Durham: Duke University Press, 1993)
Sykora, Katharina “Merchandise Temptress : The surrealist Enticements of the Display Window” στο Grunenberg, Chrιstoph, Hollein Max (επιμ.), Shopping. A Century of Art and Consumer Culture, Schirn Kunstahalle Frankfurt και Tate Liverpool (Frankfurt , Liverpool :Hatje Kantz Publishers, 2002) .
Tabart, Marielle, Monod-Fontaine, Isabelle, Brancusi Photographe (Παρίσι : M.N.A.M, Centre G.Pompidou , 1979).
Taylor, Brandon, The Art of Today, (Λονδίνο: Everyman Art Library,1995).
Tiersten, Lisa, "The Chic Interior and the Feminine Modern: Home decorating as High Art in Turn-of-the Century Paris”, Not At Home, (επιμ) C.Reed, (London : Thames and Hudson, 1989):18-32.

Τροβά, Βασω (επιμ.), Από ποια πλευρά του τοίχου ; Ζητήματα φύλων στο σχεδιασμό του Χώρου (Βόλος: Πανεπιστήμιο Θεσσαλίας, 2008).
Τουρνικιώτης, Παναγιώτης, Ιστοριογραφία της μοντέρνας αρχιτεκτονικής (Αθήνα: Αλεξάνδρεια, 2002).
---------, «Τα μνημεία και τ’αυτοκίνητα στο Vers une architecture του Le Corbusier», Χρονικά Αισθητικής, τομ.37-38 (1997-1998):85-98.
---------, “Ιδεαλισμός και ορθολογισμός, η αντίληψη της αρχιτεκτονικής του le Corbusier” , Δελτίο Συλλόγου Αρχιτεκτόνων, αρ. 16 (Ιανουάριος –Φεβρουάριος 1988):43-47.
Tsutsui, William, Godzilla On My Mind: Fifty Years of The King of Monsters (Λονδίνο : Palgrave Macmillan, 2004).
Umbro, Apollonio, Futurist Manifestos (Λονδίνο: Thames and Hudson, 1973).
Van Zeijl, Gerard, The Architecture of Dwelling : A History of a(ir)rationality Bulwark, Dwelling as Figure of Thought, (επιμέλεια Hans Cornelissen) (Amsterdam : SUN, 2005): 103-129.
Vidler, Antony, The Architectural Uncanny, Essays in the Modern Unhomely (Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, 1992).
---, Warped Space: Art Architecture, and Anxiety in Modern Culture (Cambridge, Massachusetts : MIT Press, 2000).
---, “Splitting the difference”. Artforum, (Ιουν.2003) : 35-36.
Wakefield, Neville «Yucatan is Elsewhere, On Robert Smithson's Hotel Palenque». Parkett 43 (1995) : 133
Weil, B., “Remarks on Installations and Changes in Time Dimensions”, Flash Art 162 Vol. XXV (Ιανούαριος/Φεβρουάριος 1992) : 104-109
Whiting, Cecile, A Taste for Pop,(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997).
Widdis, Emma, Visions of a New Land, (New Haven και Λονδίνο:Yale University, 2003).
Ghislaine Wood, ”The Illusory Interior” στο Wood, Ghislaine (επιμ.) Surreal Things, Surrealism and Design (London : Victoria and Albert Museum, 2007):39-57.