LEUS Leonoor - Memoire Bucky - 2017

Leonoor Leus
The Living Building

 
Bucky and the Adaptability of Architecture

Leonoor Leus
The Living Building

Bucky and the Adaptability of Architecture
Leonoor Leus
A thesis presented to La Cambre - Horta School of Architecture, Université Libre de Bruxelles.
Supervisor: David Erkan
Co-Supervisor: Victor Levy
2016/2017
Abstract: The purpose of this thesis is to investigate the flexibility of current building models using historical
solutions, present-day examples and future predictions, the rise of new technologies and the ability to change
the function or configuration of a building. The influence of Buckminster Fuller on this subject applies to the
various fields of study that are related to this dissertation. He demonstrated as no one did, the importance of
targeting the future and providing new answers.
The profound crisis facing our coexistence on ‘Spaceship Earth,' as Buckminster liked to call our world, and the
unstoppable changes in our western ways of life demand an urgent change in the housing model that societies
provide for their citizens. The idea of adaptable architecture arose from the awareness that static building
compositions, based on tradition models of housing, in many cases established over 50 years ago, are not able
to respond to the needs of our current lifestyle which is, unlike our houses, changeable, flexible and adaptive.
Keywords: adaptability, flexibility, transformable architecture, Buckminster Fuller.
Triangles. Cover photo by Spires Mill Studio.

(Ah, never mind that outer space stuff, let's get down to earth!)
What is the architect doing?
He is by the riverside
What is he thinking out there?
He is committing egocide
Now isn't that a strange thing?
Well, to him it feels just
Oh we guess a person's gotta do
What a person feels he must
He said:
'I won't throw myself from the pier
I'm gonna go home and shut up for a year
And when the year is over I'll reappear
And have a solution'
I've reason to believe that what I find
Is gonna change the face of humankind
And all these years before, well I was blind
That's my conclusion
‘cause I'm the architect
(I feel it's touch and go)
Now the man has understood
That outer space is overrated
About all the problems on this Earth we should
Worry now to solve them later
And so he's brooding and alluding on a perfect design
He thinks that working on behalf of himself is a crime
He flashes out by the water, a view so divine
He's the architect of his own fate, a man in his prime
He said:

And have a solution'
I've reason to believe that what I find
Is gonna change the face of humankind
And all these years before, well I was blind
That's my conclusion
Cause I'm the architect
(I feel it is touch and go)
(That's it, we're going to make it)
(Don't let up)
(Don't let up or we won't make it)
And so he drew himself a pentagon
Thinking it through a geodesic dome
From the coast of Tahiti to the hills of Rome
Step aside ‘cause the man will take the Nobel prize home
He said:
And have a solution.
Now if these aspirations bother you
Well you are just you, you don't have a clue
I'm sticking to the plan, I will see it through
Let there be no confusion
Cause I'm the architect
Lyrics from ‘The Architect’ by dEus. 

Avant-propos
This work completes the seven-year period of my studies in architecture. The different courses, workshops
and the various fields of studies I attended during this time offered an ample view of the world through a
set of disciplines such as urbanism, sociology, ecology, and technology. I have always appreciated how the
Institute of ULB Horta - La Cambre encourages us to be influenced by references from several architectural
movements, as well as by the different cultures and ways of life present in the city of Brussels and the rest of
the world. I became acquainted with a variety of points of view and approaches that are part of the complex
domain of architecture. Through these studies, I have obtained an open, diverse, and flexible way of
perceiving the world.
For this reason, my thesis has become a collection of all these varied themes. In the personage of
Buckminster Fuller, I have found a topic that fits this goal perfectly. He called himself a 'comprehensive
anticipatory design scientist.' He wanted to invent things that would make human life here on earth
sustainable, years before architects gained interest in green building. He is often referred to as the 'the
architect of the universe' because he has always managed to connect several disciplines and combine them
in a sensitive way. He taught me that architecture dwindles largely beyond merely the build housing, but
that the purpose of design is to form the whole of life for all the living that inhabit it.
I will not end this preface with a detailed list of acknowledgments; I do want to express, in general, a sincere
thank you to all those who gave me the space, the opportunity, and the necessary support during the last
seven years, to allow me to find my own path. 
AVANT-PROPOS 7
!
Contents 
Avant-propos 7
Introduction 10
ADAPTABILITY 16
Nomad Living 19
Traditional Japanese architecture 21
The Mechanical Revolution 23
ADAPTABLE ARCHITECTURE IN THE 20TH AND 21ST CENTURY 27
The Modern Movement 27
1919: Bauhaus 27
1920: Le Corbusier 29
1921: Mies van der Rohe 34
1924: Gerrit Rietveld 36
1927: RICHARD BUCKMINSTER FULLER 42

1929: The Dymaxion House 47
1948: Standard of Living Package 52
1952: Geodesic dome 53
1967: Triton City 60
The Post-Modern Age 64
1961: Archigram 64
1963: Metabolism 66
1987: Jean Nouvel 68
1991: Steven Holl 70
1995: Rem Koolhaas 72
MODERN CASE STUDIES 74

1994: Heliotrope 75
1997: The Eden Project 78
2013: Makoko Floating School 81
STRATEGIES FOR ADAPTABLE DESIGN 86

1. Mass production and prefabrication 86
2. Transportable housing 88
3. Technology and interactive design 90
4. Environmental sustainability 92
5. A new economical model 94
CONTENTS 8
!
AN ADAPTABLE FUTURE 96
Inhabiting vs. inhabited space 96
Mobility 98
Participative design 99
Open Source architecture 102
Solidary spheres 104
THE LIVING BUILDING 109
CONCLUSION 114
Selected Bibliography 117
Print 117
Web 120
CONTENTS 9
!
Introduction
The architect, theorist, designer, and futurist Richard Buckminster Fuller claimed:
A room should not be fixed, should not create a static mood, but should lend itself to change so that
“ its occupants may play upon it as they would upon a piano. 1
The profound crisis facing our coexistence on ‘Spaceship Earth,' as Buckminster liked to call our world, and
the unstoppable changes in our western ways of life demand an urgent change in the housing model that
societies provide for their citizens. The idea of adaptable architecture arose from the recognition that static
building compositions, based on traditional models of housing, in many cases established over 50 years
ago, are not able to respond to the needs of our current lifestyle which is, unlike our houses, changeable,
flexible and adaptive. Constant and rapid change, as we see nowadays, calls for strategies in managing
everyday life and a high level of flexibility. Static solutions are no longer able to respond to the varying
requirements of our modern society, defined by social and demographic needs, economic fluctuation, and
even environmental change.
During the last decades, we saw the arrival of more dynamic ways of life, less tied to a particular place and
setting. Technological advances lead to new possibilities in the mobility and transformability of space. New
mechanical tools are capable of transforming the home, to extend rooms, link spaces together, and adapt
living areas through folding or sliding walls. We can create conditions in which we conceive a house literally
in the same way as we would an instrument.
As a model of development for human life, flexibility allows for a continuous adaptation that infinitely
modifies itself to meet new daily challenges. When we apply this model to architecture, we can start to
investigate at which level adaptability is the subject of a sustainable model. Such an experiment illustrates
the meaning of variation, adaptation and renewal and how we can apply these themes to construction
concerns. What are the consequences for the build if it was thought, drawn, and realised based on an idea
of a progressive process? How can we react to the demand for flexibility with build solutions? And,
ultimately: How can architecture provide a flexible environment allowing a constant change of use?
1Buckminster Fuller, Chronofile, vol. 36/1929. In: Fuller, R. B. Edited by Krausse, J. Lichtenstein, C. (1999). Your Private Sky: R. Buck-
minster Fuller, the art of design science. Lars Müller Publishers, Zurich. p. 111.
INTRODUCTION 1!0
Within the history of modern architecture, there are excellent examples of how architects looked for
adaptability in design. Many of the first generation architects of the Modern Movement in the 1920s
presented projects and plans to experiment on these principles, among them Walter Gropius, Le
Corbusier, Mies Van der Rohe, Gerrit Rietveld, and, in particular — as detailed in this thesis — Richard
Buckminster Fuller.
Their aim for adaptability, only later made possible by modern technologies and machines, inspired many
radical architecture movements in the 1960s such as Archigram, The Metabolists in Japan, and more
contemporary architects such as Rem Koolhaas, Jean Nouvel and Steven Holl.
The purpose of this thesis is to investigate the flexibility of current building models using historical
solutions, present-day examples and future predictions, the rise of new technologies and the ability to
change the function or configuration of a building. The influence of Buckminster Fuller on this subject
applies to the various fields of study that are related to this dissertation. He demonstrated as no one did,
the importance of targeting the future and providing new answers.
Fuller had an open, enormously extensive — and for that reason such a rewarding — vision of life and
looked from a broader perspective to architecture. In this vision, 'architecture' is perhaps the central theme
of his work, but it is, first of all, used as a support to communicate a more all-encompassing view on living.
His innovating theories and models find their origin in domains varying from architecture to the fine arts,
literature to mathematics, technology, and even sustainability. He has always refused to treat these study
areas as elements of specific research, as he was convinced that such a way of thinking would put a brake
on his intuitive, independent and extended way of thinking.
We are in an age that assumes the narrowing trends of specialization to be logical, natural, and
“ desirable. Consequently, society expects all earnestly responsible communication to be crisply brief.
Advancing science has now discovered that all the known cases of biological extinction have been
caused by over-specialisation, whose concentration of only selected genes sacrifices general

adaptability. Thus the specialist's brief for pinpointing brevity is dubious. In the meantime, humanity
has been deprived of comprehensive understanding. Specialization has bred feelings of isolation,
futility, and confusion in individuals. It has also resulted in the individual's leaving responsibility for
thinking and social action to others. Specialization breeds biases that ultimately aggregate as
international and ideological discord, which in turn leads to war. 2
2Fuller, R. B. in collaboration with Applewhite, E.J. (originally published in 1975, Vol. 2 in 1979) Synergetics: Explorations in the Geom-
etry of Thinking. Macmillan. . xxv.
INTRODUCTION 1!1
To this day Richard Buckminster Fuller is still first and foremost know as an architect — although he would
never limit himself to that title — and most of his contributions, both physical and intellectual are
acknowledged and honoured all over the world. During his life, however, he was often denunciated for his
architectural abilities. When he presented his first projects, most of the prominent architects present were
not remotely impressed. They envied Buckminster for his intellectual freedom, yet they criticised him for his
apparent lack of 'realism.' At best, they considered Fuller's ideas as refreshing hypotheses, but never
regarded his work to be intended as a concrete proposal.
Buckminster, however, developed himself as one of the most innovative, futuristic and global thinkers of his
time. His headquarter, the ‘Inventory of World Resources, Human Trends and Needs’ contains the findings
of his extensive worldwide research. From the 30s onwards, Fuller has handled a vast amount of data and
used it to make some important and relevant predictions about the future of our society.
His dynamic and critical way of thinking proves that Buckminster preferred a much more complicated but
progressive route than those who operate in a static security. He reflected upon architecture as a
philosopher. He did not build houses as aesthetic constructions but as an expression of a way of life that is
always evolving.
In his own aphorism: 'In architecture, a form is a noun, in the industry a verb.'3, as he constantly sought
for a design that both adapts to us, its users or its environment, and can be adapted to meet new needs,
new functions or that can change its composition throughout its lifespan. Through his liberal understanding
of the built environment, he continuously investigated the ability of architecture to adapt to the varying
requirements of our modern day society. We can thus see his work as a guide to understanding how design
can accommodate those changing situations and be adapted to new forms of use, rather than stagnation.
Besides reaching the ultimate structural mobility, Buckminster deemed it possible for a building to be
completely self-sufficient, way before the actual technologies to achieve this were developed.
I live on Earth at present, and I don't know what I am. I know that I am not a category. I am not a
“ thing — a noun. I seem to be a verb, an evolutionary process —an integral function of the universe. 4
3 Fuller, R. B. (1938). Nine Chains to the Moon. J. B. Lippincott Company. Philadelphia. p. 41.
4 Fuller, R. B. with Agel, J. and Fiore, Q. (1970). I Seem to be a Verb. Bantam Books
INTRODUCTION 1!2
Buckminster had a strong metaphysical confidence in the meaning of life. After the illness and death of his
first daughter Alexandra, he pondered on the hostile conditions in which man lives and the necessary
actions it would take to solve this situation. He developed his ambitions for architecture and went looking
for modern techniques that could update the way we are living and which give residents the chance to grow
up healthy and live a prosperous life. Buckminster saw it as his duty to acknowledge the world and focus
our thoughts on the success of man on earth. In many ways, he looked to duplicate the way in which nature
'builds itself.'
Other aspects of his research brought about that with the help of tools and strategies Fuller became one of
the first advocates of renewable energy. His energy research demonstrates that we can indeed produce
enough energy for everyone in the world while phasing out the use of fossil fuels and nuclear energy.
It is now highly feasible to take care of everybody on Earth at a higher standard of living than any
“ have ever known. It no longer has to be you or me. Selfishness is unnecessary. War is obsolete. It is a
matter of converting the high technology from weaponry to livingry. 5
In views of the demographic and environmental changes taking place today and prospected for the
remaining 21st century, flexible layout and ideas of participation, as well as simple, industrialised, yet
individualised architectural solutions, are highly topical once more. Buckminster already seemed to have
recognised — and at least partially solved — in the midst of the previous century, some of the problems
with which our modern society is confronted today. His ideas and way of thinking are, maybe more than
ever, relevant today. We are still lacking a consistent housing model that offers a dynamic way of living, a
so-called flexible house, that with the help of tools and strategies allows for a reconfigurable living space
that we can be easily adapted to changing needs.
As Buckminster stated:
Our beds are empty two-thirds of the time. Our living rooms are empty seven-eighths of the time.
“ Our office buildings are empty one-half of the time. It is time we gave this some thought. 6
5 Fuller, R. B. (1981). Critical Path. Estate of R. Buckminster Fuller. p. 332

6 Quote from ‘Starting with the Universe’, exposition in the Whitney Museum, New York.
INTRODUCTION 1!3
 
 
ADAPTABILITY
Adaptability is a term that is often used — and misused — when describing architecture. In the strict sense,
it is an approach that focuses on the repositioning of partitions and other secondary building elements,
changeable according to the user's needs, such as sliding panels or movable furniture, which can be
modified separately from the structure of the house. In this specific model, the lay-out of the space can be
continuously adapted to meet the current use of the space. Examples of this kind of architecture can be
found early on, in nomadic dwellings and traditional Japanese architecture, and have over the years been
studied and applied, to evolve and to respond to a modern way of living.
The concept of adaptability in architecture aims to optimise the use of (often limited) spaces by
incorporating mobile systems and components that can adapt themselves in response to external stimuli.
These changes can apply both to internal and external modifications, can be manipulated either manually
by its user or mechanically with the use of newly developed systems.
Frei Otto, architect and founder of the Institute for Lightweight Structures at the University of Stuttgart, later
organised the International Colloquium for Adaptable Architecture in 1974. He gathered the prominent
architects of the time around the theme of adaptability and the question: 'How can the built medium adapt
itself to the necessities and interests of its inhabitants?'
During his conference entitled ‘Adaptability,' Frei Otto also stated:
The truth is that architecture is not pacific in and of itself. It should be actively converted into an
“ instrument of the human co-existence.7
This thesis tries to analyse how particularly residential architecture can and should function as an instrument
of social transformation, given that the dwelling is the primary place from which a person can develop their
creativity, freedom and social sense.
To quote the British architect Richard Rogers: 'we are searching for is a form of architecture which, unlike
classical architecture, is not perfect and finite upon completion. We are looking for an architecture rather
like some music and poetry which can actually be changed by the users, an architecture of improvisation.'
7Conference by Frei Otto: Adaptability. In: Otto, F. Hennicke, J. (1975). Adaptable architecture. Krämer [in Komm]. Berthold Burkhardt,
Universität Stuttgart.
ADAPTABILITY 1!6
Trying to accomplish this, I want to look further into the idea of design based around flexibility, one that can
distance itself from a more traditional lay-out. I decided to focus on projects seeking their identity around
the possibility to adapt to future needs and changing conditions. This way, we can move away from spaces
determined and thought off in advance and purely at the hand of the architect, sometimes years before the
project is realised; and instead, aim for a flexible user-based design that gives users a much wider range of
influence on their everyday living space. Design based on these tactics can result in a more enjoyable and
more efficient use of space by combining multiple functions and uses in one single room, expanding or
decreasing the space occupied by a certain activity, and hosting different functions over time.
Instead of limiting the ideas of adaptability and flexibility are often to a couple of moveable elements in an
open lay-out, in this thesis I wanted to highlight a broader approach to the subject. Through my research, it
shows that the adaptable building can be defined both as a trans-functional and multi-functional element
and that it must allow the possibility of changeable use, as one can occupy a space one moment to sleep,
then to eat, to work, or as a container of several uses simultaneously. Therefore, I want to propose that for a
building to be described as adaptable it should meet and respond to all possible layouts, programs, and
structural changes, and not merely be restricted to different spatial re-arrangements.
In 1931, Mies van der Rohe directed an exposition at the German Building Exhibition, in which he stated:
The dwelling of our time does not exist. But altered circumstances in our lives demand that it be
“ created. Before it can be created it is essential that we have a clear idea of what our living
requirements really are. Overcoming today's discrepancy in living conditions between actual needs
and false pretensions, between genuine demand and inadequate supply, is a burning economic
challenge, and a precondition to the advancement of ‘culture’. 8
The last decades have brought about enormous social changes. The traditional occupation of a house has
transformed in many ways to present a more varied field of types of configuration. New social tendencies
and the new dynamics in family models have modified the number of individuals that constitute a
household, varying multiple times over a lifetime or even in the timespan of a week. We no longer only
think of a classic family of four — two parents, and two kids — but we see more single people, single
parents, reconstituted families with kids that spent one week here, the other there.
8Van der Rohe, M. (1931). Die Wohnung unserer Zeit (The dwelling of our time). Section of the Deutsche Bauausstellung Berlin (Ger-
man building exhibition Berlin).
ADAPTABILITY 1!7
This thesis is concentrated on a specific domain in architecture, the house, that addresses from a very close
position the inhabitant that occupies the dwelling more than the architect that designed it.
Fuller affirmed that the traditional house is the phenomena of our environment that is less likely to be
developed and studied, precisely because it is so close to us, in a similar way as each individual has less
critical capacity about himself than about others. Throughout the thinking of Fuller, especially at the end of
the nineteen forties, he was constantly challenging the concept of the house and the role of the architect.
The human being is too close to its home to have a perspective, and, therefore, needs to gain a
“ distance to, from there, ask himself: ‘What is a house?’ 9
Social change, urban development, climate conditions, and lifestyles that are less bound to one space, are
some of the fastest growing tendencies of the last century. Nomadic lifestyles and joined work and living
spaces ask for a different approach and development models in how to achieve houses that grow with us
and for us. New social needs require changeable spatial configurations.
Our relationship to the environment, technology, and our work have challenged the usual ways of living and
working. Ever smaller personal computers and broadband wifi-connections have allowed people to connect
their living and working space more closely. In a technologically advanced society, more people work from
home, partly, entirely, or remotely — and, in doing so, are often traveling. A new housing model is required
to accommodate these new relations and lifestyles.
The parameters used in this thesis are not common to most descriptions used for architecture. Instead of
talking about space, form or envelope, I will be analysing design based on change, adaptation, variety and
flexibility. These principles apply to the new ways of living that have re-emerged, especially in the Western
world, during the last decades. They are also related to the housing forms that these new approaches are
urgently demanding.
To truly understand the notion of static versus adaptable architects, we must take a look at historical
precedents in flexible architecture. Throughout, it is inevitable to cross the boundaries between
architecture, interior design, product design and furniture design, as all the elements that compose the
house influence other levels and degrees of the total adaptability of a project.
9 Fuller, R. B. (1938). Nine Chains to the Moon. J. B. Lippincott Company. Philadelphia.
ADAPTABILITY 1!8
Nomad Living
Throughout history, the need and the search for shelter have been general human goals. Solutions have
often come in the form of fixed or temporary residences, as environmental conditions were not always
assured. It is common for humankind to seek a feeling of belonging, whether that be in a physical
surrounding or by engaging in social interactions. Therefore there are different ways of creating and
defining ‘a home.’
In Why We Build, Rowan Moore describes the nomadic home as following:
“
If one desire is to create a static, rooted image of perfection, another is to migrate, to colonise, and
adapt different places to make a home out of a city or landscape.10
He further states that during most of our history, a significant portion of humans continuously lived on the
move. Native tribes such as the Arab ‘Bedouin,' the African ‘Masai,' and Romani, commonly known as
'gypsies,' living mostly in East Europe, all base their communities on the act of moving to each time new-
found territories, in search of food, accommodation, and the right climate conditions. Small, flexible, and
movable constructions have been a part of their lifestyle for centuries.
Their dwellings reflect the quest for mobility and adaptability to the living environment. The form and
materials of the house also determine its ideal function and use. Round, circular or semi-circular housing
best-benefited nomad groups, as they were structurally efficient to set up. Instead of opting for stone, for
portable housing people applied lightweight materials such as timber for the frame and a light membrane
cover that can be transported or used immediately available resources to built their home on the site.
Prehistoric wooden shelters were simple, crude, and suitable for his nomadic life. Generally round in
“ shape and made out of saplings lashed together they did not require expert building skills. 11
In ‘Shelter,’ a publication released in 1973, Lloyd Kahn brings a tribute to handmade, traditional building
techniques, used for over several centuries and throughout human history. The examples of small dwellings
made in natural materials inspire people to start making shelters using their own hands, at a time the
knowledge of these basic building crafts has largely been forgotten in our modern day society.
10 Moore, R. (2012). Why we Build. Pan Macmillan. London, UK.

11 Kahn, L. (1973). Shelter. Shelter Publications, Inc. California.
ADAPTABILITY 1!9
Lloyd Kahn. Shelter Publications.1973.
One of the man’s earliest shelters was a simple dome, made out of pliable branches, woven into a double-
curved surface providing protection from weather conditions. Its shape was:
“
not just a utilitarian form of vaulting, which had originated for structural or environmental reasons in
some one country, but was primarily a house concept, which had acquired in numerous cultures its
shape and imaginative values (based) upon an ancestral shelter long before it was translated for
ideological reasons into more permanent and monumental form by means of wood and masonry.12
12 Kahn, L. (1973). Shelter. Shelter Publications, Inc. California.
ADAPTABILITY 2!0
When agricultural techniques became more controlled and reliable, the sedentary lifestyle of the early
farmers changed the way in which they used and built houses. Sedentary communities show a more
rectangular approach to building, as it was deemed more easily expandable and structurally more resistant.
This more permanent way of occupying a territory rapidly made mobile houses redundant, as well as
creating a disconnect to the building process, drastically changing the way in which we adapt to our houses
and how they adapt to us.
Traditional Japanese architecture
The concepts of flexibility, individualisation, and personal control have a longtime history in traditional
Japanese architecture. The traditional Japanese home has for centuries been a perfect example of a
dwelling that can be applied to modifications. In 1969, Noboru Kawazoe expressed in the following way
how Japan anticipated modern architecture:
A frame structure allows the room to be more open and flexible and obviates the need for solid walls
“ as a structural element. In the continuity of interior and exterior, in the flexibility of a room design
using movable partitions, traditional Japanese architecture has pioneered many solutions, such as
the integration of the garden and the interior, the protection of the interior with overhanging roofs,
the use of the veranda as a link between interior and garden, the connection of the different parts of
a building by corridors, the introduction of the sliding wall (fusuma) by means of which a room can be
enlarged or reduced in size, the use of screens (byobu) for visual protection, and the tatami mat
serving as a module of the floor area. Not only for the sake of industrialisation, but also for the sake
of flexibility, it is necessary to resort to standardisation — something the builders of the past have
done. In the traditional architecture, ‘kiwari’ signified a modular order and a ‘grammatical’
determination of components for the layout and design of rooms.13
The modularity of the tatami can be seen as restrictive, yet organises the space in a clear way. Sliding panels
made out of lightweight materials give the user the opportunity to modify the size and the function of a
room according to current use or change the relation between interior and exterior of the house. These
characteristic features are mainly imagined to control the extreme weather conditions, especially the warm
13 Curtis, W. (1982, third edition 1996). Modern architecture since 1900. Phaidon. p. 507
ADAPTABILITY 2!1
and rainy summers. By creating spaces for multiple purposes, Japanese architecture is both efficient in the
use of space, as well as from an economical and sustainable point of view.
Japanese people live in a way that implies them to continuously move and remove, fold and unfold and
adapt the space to their necessities. Occupying a space becomes an active role in assuring its usability. This
mechanism is in stark contrast with the modern occidental house with its determined functions.
Even today Japanese architecture remains mostly defined by moveable and temporary objects, out of
tradition, convenience and because space is scarce in most urban settings. Robert Kronenburg, an English
architect who wrote many books on the flexibility of architecture, states:
The home of the modern Japanese family contains at least one room with tatami including flexible
“ furniture and installations, which can be displaced depending on the necessities. The same room can
be used as a social space, a place for private retreat and sleeping zone. People sit down on the floor
on cushions that sometimes have a back and armrests; low tables are used for working or sometimes
eating, and the futons are deployed to sleep on. On some occasions, the stairs or closets are mobile
pieces that connect the different heights. Living in space like this means compromising with it in a
much more significant way than simply switching a light on or opening a window. It implies
reorganising the environment according to the mood and the circumstances. 14
14 Kronenburg, R. (2007). Flexible: architecture that responds to change. King. London, U.K.
ADAPTABILITY 2!2
The Mechanical Revolution
The Mechanical Revolution in domestic utilities resulted in a significant shift in the distribution of the
general house. The introduction of mechanical and technical tools into the living sphere of the house, in the
first place, put a constraint on the previous, more spontaneous flexibility of the use of the home and
resulted in a shift towards a more specialised function per room. Whereas before the idea of having one
room reserved for bathing seemed unthinkable, when services like running water, heating and electricity
became more integrated into the house, their use also defined more pre-envisioned functions.
It has only been in the last three centuries, especially throughout Europe, that the different rooms of a
house each hold their individual function. According to Witold Rybczynsi in his book Home. A short history
of an idea, people only started differentiating rooms in the more recent history of housing. Before the 17th
century in Holland and 18th century in France specifically, spaces changed their function using foldable or
movable furniture.
According to Witold Rybczynsi, the first specialization of spaces during that time consisted of separating the
living and sleeping areas, also known as day and night use, and the public and private areas in the house.
Later on, in the palace of Versailles, different rooms started to acquire specific functions when the Bourgeois
filled them with valuable furniture, even though they still did not make any attempts for permanent
arrangements.
The idea of relating a specialised function to a separated room still hadn’t occurred to them. There
“ were, for example, no dining rooms. The tables were removable and the people ate in different parts
of the house (…) when their mood and the number of diners varied, the number of tables, and chairs,
had to increase or decrease to accommodate them. At night the tables were put away, and the beds
were brought out. (…) The first use of the term salle à manger (dining room) occurred in 1634, but
the replacement of the multipurpose salle by a series of specialised rooms for dining, entertaining
and converse had to wait until the following century.15
Soon every space in the house had a strictly determined function: the bedroom, the bathroom, the living
room, the kitchen, the dining room, etc. The arrival of the television and home computers even created the
need for a television room, and sometimes, a gaming room.
15 Rybczynsi, W. (1987). ‘Home: A Short History of an Idea’. Penguin Books.
ADAPTABILITY 2!3
For a long time, it seemed that a certain degree of flexibility could only be attained in the rooms without
specific installations, unlike rooms as the bathrooms and kitchen. The different spaces in a house became
very much defined by the objects they contained rather than the activity or the amount of time one would
spend there.
The new models of co-housing, the relocation and reappearing flexibility of life and work, and the
development of new technologies, however, pushed us to a more dynamic life, less tied to a certain space.
When we look at the new relationships between man and technology, we always see new tools of
transformation appear that can be applied to our houses. Amongst those new mechanic advancements are
completely removable facades — Japanese architect Shigeru Ban uses these in many of his projects —,
roofs that can be lifted with the use of hydraulics, light modules, automatically controlled heat and
ventilation systems, movable and removable partitions, and a wide variety of furniture that can be hidden
away or transformed. Mobile housing unit or tiny houses have become solutions to the need for people to
live more nomadic lifestyles.
Robert Kronenburg describes this new mobility in his book ‘Flexible’:
Human beings are flexible creatures. We move about at will, manipulate objects and operate in a
“ wide range of environments. […] Most cultures now live a more or less sedentary life, but it could be
that flexibility is once again becoming a priority in human development and that technological and
economic changes are forcing, or at least encouraging a new form of nomadic existence.’ 16
In 1958, the French filmmaker Jacques Tati introduced the world to 'the house of the future' in his famous
film ‘Mon Oncle.’ The ultra-modern villa of the family Arpel, with its straight lines and an aesthetic but
mostly unpractical design, is defined by an open space — 'Oh, c’est si pratique, tout communiqué' — and
is filled with new technical inventions. In the story, Mister Hulot or ‘Mon Oncle’ represents the human
counterpoint in this deployment of domestic technology and shows how it affects the human experience.
The future will reveal if a balance can be found between human life and the growing presence of
technology in our everyday activities. According to Robert Kronenburg, flexible buildings are 'intended to
respond to changing situations in their use, operation or location,’ and as a result of this, adapting to
occurring changes in our cultural and social society.
16 Kronenburg, R. (2007). Flexible: architecture that responds to change. King. London, U.K. p. 10
ADAPTABILITY 2!4
Stills from the movie ‘Mon Oncle’ by Jacques Tati. 1958.
 
ADAPTABILITY 2!5
ADAPTABLE ARCHITECTURE IN THE 20TH AND 21ST CENTURY
At the beginning of the nineteen twenties many creators, architects, and engineers — Buckminster Fuller
specifically — committed themselves to the conception and construction of adaptable objects. During this
era, the development of pre-fabricated, flexible objects and architectural elements resembled a race to set
new records. Following the technological advancements of the Industrial Revolution, many leaders in the
field sought to do away with the static structures in architecture. In no time at all, the design of buildings
was transformed and became considered as having a crucial role and an important function in recreating
the living environment from a progressive, rational, and democratic point of view.
According to the architects belonging to the Modern Movement, the construction of modern architecture
had to be the expression of a liberal spirit that, in proposing new forms of housing, offered an alternative
way of living to the reigning social injustice, misery, and exploration of the previous years.
Technological and structural innovations, amongst others, allowed for architecture in glass and steel and
liberated people and their strict living spaces from a thick and enclosed atmosphere.
The Modern Movement
1919: Bauhaus
When German architect Walter Gropius became the new director of the Bauhaus school in Weimar in 1919,
it was in a ‘utopian' mindset that he began creating flexible types of housing in steel to satisfy the changing
spatial need of the modern family better. To achieve this, he promoted flexible and cost-efficient building
and used prefabricated components. This new rational approach to architecture resulted in very functional
design, without ornamentation of any kind. He stated 'the maximum standardisation possible (low costs)
and the maximum possible variety of housing' as his primary objectives for residential housing.
Between 1921 and 1923, Gropius carried out different studies on the serial aggregation of isolated space
units with the help of Adolf Meyer. The so-called ‘Baukasten im Großen’ (Large Building Kit) contained
standardised and prefabricated elements that could be united in a variety of combinations to create
different types of 'housing machines.'
ADAPTABLE ARCHITECTURE IN THE 20TH AND 21ST CENTURY 2!7

Walter Gropius. Baukasten im Großen. 1923.
The logic of the ‘Baukasten im Großen’ reminded of children games, on a big scale, and used industrially
prefabricated and straightforward 'building block' construction elements with which inhabitants could play
according to their number and their needs. Although Gropius and Meyer made several successful models,
the project, due to the technical resources available at the time, was never realised.
Later on, in 1927, Gropius collaborated with the director Erwin Piscator, one of the most radical
protagonists of modern theatre at the time, to join him in developing a new type of multi-functional theatre
building. Gropius opted out of the traditional static stage setting and used new strategies to open up
endless options in the set-up of the space.

Gropius stated that
the contemporary theatre architect should set himself the aim to create a great keyboard of light
“ and space, so objective and adaptable in character it would respond to any imaginable vision of a
stage director: flexible building, capable of transforming and refreshing the mind by its spatial
impact alone. 17
Although the project was never realised, it showed a revolutionised approach to static architecture. Gropius
set himself to creating a building which could respond regarding convertible space and adjustable lighting
to every demand of the director, a so-called 'machine or an apparatus.'
1920: Le Corbusier
Le Corbusier used a similar reference to define the modern house as 'une machine à habiter' ('a machine for
living in') in his 1923 manifesto ‘Vers une architecture’ (‘Towards an Architecture’). He defended his points of
view using concise aphorisms and surprising analogies between things like temples and cars, palaces and
factories, using automobile publicities, diagrams or drawings from his travels. The book presented his
architectonic philosophy and illustrated the critique and obsessions of the creative myth of the artist.
The principal idea was that a new culture was arising, ‘L’Esprit Nouveau’ and that this culture, based on the
machine, had not found its true architectural and authentic form yet, although its first results were silos,
factories, submarines, airplanes, and cars. He talked about architecture as a 'phenomenon of emotion, lying
outside questions of construction and beyond them,’ and imagined that, if ‘L’Esprit Nouveau’ could invade
art, design, houses, and cities, it would reign the harmony between man, machine, and nature.
Le Corbusier understood that the classic order was a disappearing symbolic system that ought to be
replaced with a new set of conventions for the era of the machine. In time, he wished that the fundamental
principles of classicism (proportion, repose, rigidity of ideas and forms) would be introduced in the new
reality, purified by the machine. The 'machine' becomes an idea, a fundamental instrument of the universal
progress. Le Corbusier considered boats, airplanes, and cars as true expressions of the century.
17 Schlemmer, O. (1996). The theater of the Bauhaus. Johns Hopkins University Press. p.12

Le Corbusier. Domino model. 1914.
Le Corbusier also included the concept of flexible housing and their mass production. These researches
were based on the ‘Domino model,’ which he had previously developed in 1914. The system proposed a
standardised two-story house composed of slabs of concrete resting on concrete columns and a connecting
stairway. The exterior walls or facades would no longer carry the building, and columns or ‘pilotis’ would
replace the load-bearing walls. The open plan that was achieved through this composition allowed for an
unlimited flexibility of interior spatial arrangement and wall placement. Moveable and fold down furniture,
designed by Le Corbusier himself, contributed in making the houses as adaptable and practical as possible.
At the second CIAM (Le Congres International d’Architecture Moderne) in 1929, Le Corbusier presented his
model of the prefabricated house: ‘Maison Loucheur’. It was designed to come out of the factory, together
with the group of workers, with all its elements and interior equipment. The floors of the ‘Maison Loucheur'
were compact and connected to a unit of installations in the form of a capsule. It was the first apparition of
the element, later so extensively used. These houses included sliding partitions and foldable beds so that
the house could be adapted to its day and night functions.

Le Corbusier. Maison Loucheur. 1929.
In July 1927, Mies van der Rohe invited Le Corbusier to participate in his Weissenhofsliedlung exposition in
Stuttgart. The project included a colony of housing designed by the most prominent architects of the
century. Le Corbusier was given two parcels with broad views on Stuttgart on which he built two versions of
his ‘Citrohan’ sketches of 1921 (a play on the word Citroën: a house like a car). One was an individual house,
the other one a double, with two unities, joined sideways. According to the critic William J. R. Curtis, the
houses of Le Corbusier had the most telling interior spaces of the whole region, and
the interiors of both houses opened up to convert themselves into transparent spaces for their
“ daytime use and could be divided at night with partitions. 18
From 1929 to 1931, Le Corbusier designed and built the apartment of Charles de Beistegui on the Champs-
Elysées in Paris. The attic space had various mobile dispositions like a movie projector that could be hidden
in the ceiling, a mobile screen and even the graded rooftop held a mechanism of hedges on hydraulics that
could rise or sink at the touch of a button.
Throughout the years, Le Corbusier continued working on other mobile elements that would allow the
architectural space to be variable. All those experiments lead him in 1931 to the ‘Ville Radieuse,’ his new
model for the city. He meant it as an intention of an entire social and spatial reform. The housing blocks of
this linear city were raised on ‘pilotis’ and hosted many public functions such as kindergartens and collective
18 Curtis, W.J.R. (1987). Le Corbusier: Ideas and forms. Hermann Blume. p. 69

restaurants. The roofs also featured running tracks, playing areas with sand and swimming pools. The water
and heating systems were centralised. Kenneth Frampton describes this new housing model of Le Corbusier
for his city as follows:
The unit of the Ville Radieuse is a flexible plan, on one single floor and with a variable extension
“ […] making the most out of every square centimetre of space, to the point where the wall panels
had a thickness so reduced that they became inadequate as acoustic barriers. With the same
purpose, the service cores (kitchens and bathrooms) were reduced to a minimum. Moreover, each
dwelling was susceptible to certain transformations, to use it in a different way at night and during
the day, using sliding panels that could be hidden. When they were pulled out, these elements
divided the sleeping spaces; and, when they are pulled back, they allowed to form a continuous
shape of children games that could be joined to the living room. 19
In other projects, like his ‘Unité d’habitation', built in Marseille between 1947 and 1952, adaptability was
achieved by the repetition of pre-assembled housing blocks. By stacking these elements in a similar way
into a steel or concrete frame, also called 'construction by imbrication,' each cell (living space) remained an
independent part of the whole, like a box that could slip into the infrastructure of the building as if it was a
wine bottle in a bottle shelf. The aim is for the units to be pre-fabricated and replaceable over time as 'the
cells off the rack were left open to receive these conceptually packaged apartments.20’ The solid, concrete
support of the building and the mixed steel and timber frame for the building offers a high variety of
apartment sizes and types of dwelling.
The production of these ‘machines for living' goes beyond the concept of standardisation, as it also
provides a high degree of customisation. The house becomes a tool, giving the user an active role as it is
continuously adapted.
19 Frampton, K. (1980, edition 2007). Modern architecture: a critical history. Thames and Hudson. p.181.
20 Gans, D. (1987). The Le Corbusier Guide. Princeton Architectural Press. Princeton, New Yersey. p. 117.

Le Corbusier. Unité d’habitation. 1952.

1921: Mies van der Rohe
Ludwig Mies van der Rohe, born in 1886 in Aachen, Germany, was another architect who during the
beginning of the 20th century dedicated his life to the diffusion of the ‘New Architecture.’ Around 1921,
Mies developed his first 'modern' project for a competition of an office building on the Friedrichstrasse in
Berlin. His proposition existed of a 20-floors tall skyscraper, almost purely made in glass. Because of its
progressive nature, the project is not taken seriously throughout the competition.
Feeling misunderstood by the jury, Mies continues publishing projects made out of steel and glass, none of
them ever being realised. Between 1923 and 1924, these experiments lead him to the last and most known
utopian project, the Country Brick House. The house, of which only a ground floor plan and one perspective
were saved, consists of one fluid and continuous space, creating movement in the space with controlled
views upon the surrounding landscape.
Throughout his work, Mies searched for the essential morphological principles in his architecture. By using
new materials and construction techniques, he wanted to reduce architecture to its original state: that of the
space. He worked with this space as a generic element in which one could move freely, and took inspiration
from Henry Ford in pursuing a form of 'industrialised construction.’
In July 1927, Mies, artistic director of the German Werkbund at the time, was commissioned to create a
housing complex called the ‘Weissenhofsliedlung,’ in Stuttgart, Germany. Mies was in charge of the urban
planning and the coordination of the works. Many architects of the Modern Movement, including Le
Corbusier, Mart Stam, Hans Sharoun and Walter Gropius, were invited to design housing blocks. The
resulting 33 buildings and a total of 63 apartments are kept unitised by following the same design
guidelines of straight lines and white facades in a cubic and abstract geometry, later to be known as the
fundamental characteristics of the 'International Style'.

Mies van der Rohe. Stuttgart-Weissenhof Residential building. 1927.
Mies’ contribution is his first housing block with a metal structure, used to liberate the interiors of the
apartments from supporting walls and allowing him to design big openings in the facade of the building.
The stairs and installations were concentrated as to leave the most amount of space open to various
interpretations of the rest of the house to its inhabitants. The kitchens and bathrooms were the only fixed
elements, and the open space could be divided by sliding walls, according to the desires of the owner.
The regular scheme and the mobile divisions of the interior space made different distributions and a flexible
use of the various floors of the houses possible.

Mies described his project as following:
“
Currently, economic reasons call for the rationalisation and normalisation in the construction of
houses for rent. But, on the other hand, this increasing differentiation in our needs for habitability
demands more freedom in this type of use. (…) if we limit ourselves to making only the bathroom
and the kitchen as constant spaces, due to its installations, and we opt to divide the rest of the
spaces with moveable walls, I think we can satisfy any habitability requirement. 21
He affirmed that a regular skeleton in steel was the most appropriate form to authorise a revolutionary
freedom in the division of the interior space. The aim was to 'give the user the possibility to subdivide the
space according to their needs’ 22, as Gideon writes in a description of the housing of Mies.
The concept of open and flexible space that Mies had previously proposed in the office buildings on
Friedrichstrasse and his utopian projects of the previous years, was finally realised in the housing of the
‘Weissenhofsliedlung.’ A dematerialisation of the interior walls provided the much-needed freedom of
movement that Mies aimed for. Both in his 1929 ‘Barcelona Pavilion’ and the ‘Tugendhat House’ which he
finished in 1930, walls are detached, liberated from their supportive function, and placed at varying angles,
to free the space and push towards a new way of living, undefined by vast functional spaces.
1924: Gerrit Rietveld
During those same years, Dutch architect Gerrit Rietveld was working on a prefabricated house,
economically realised and versatile in use. Rietveld planned to prefabricate the central unit of the house,
giving inhabitants the liberty to construct, around it, the rest of the house.
In 1924, Rietveld designed the first architectural project of his lifetime: the ‘Rietveld Schröder House’ in the
city of Utrecht, located in the Netherlands. This house became, with time, the most important flexible
domestic space of its era and one of the most featured houses in the history of 20th-century architecture.
The house materialised one of the recurring ideas of the ‘Modern Movement’: an entire floor in which the
interior walls, freed from all structural function, can be moved around or can be hidden away.
21 Van der Rohe, M. (1927). About my block of houses. Deutscher Werkbund, Stuttgart. p. 77.
22 Giedion, S. (1928) Bauen in Frankreich, Eisen. Eisenbeton, Leipzig. p. 47.

Gerrit Rietveld - Rietveld Schröder House, 1924. First floor.
The lady of the house, Mrs. Truus Schröder, was a pioneer with a progressive mind and it was probably her
inspiration and ideas that were used to create this revolutionary house. During the design process, she
would insistently say: 'Can those walls go too?' And Rietveld would respond: 'With pleasure!'23
From the outside, the house resembles a painting by Mondriaan, who was, like Rietveld, a member of the
innovating art movement De Stijl. Stylistic lines and primary colours are the main property of the house.
Inside, the colours red, blue, and yellow are used to indicate the different functions of the house. The bright
colours and the adaptability of the inside spaces look more like a Rubik’s Cube.
23 Overy, P. (1988). The Rietveld Schröder House. Interview with Rietveld in 1963. The MIT Press.

While the ground level is organised in a traditional lay-out — four separate rooms with a precise function
around a central staircase, hidden behind a sliding door, the top floor consists of a one large dynamic and
open space. This space is arranged to allow maximum adaptation to the movements throughout the house
and throughout the day. With the use of manually reconfigurable sliding walls, the house can be modified
progressively and daily in function of the different occupations of the home.
Rietveld used his experience in furniture design to create an elaborate system of foldable and deployable
panels. The panels slide into accurate rails in the floor, an idea most likely inspired by traditional Japanese
architecture, thus forming temporary walls. This way, the first floor can be used either as one giant living
room or, when all panels are tucked away, as a hallway, a living room, three bedrooms and a bathroom.
Several other elements such as doors, hanging stairs and adapting furniture, like couches that turn into
beds, contribute to the particular adaptability and multi-functionality of the house.
The proposition showed a clear contrast with the traditional housing of the time, composed of rigid rooms
and spaces. It asked for plenty of courage and open-mindedness, both from the designer as well as the
users. The then teenage children of Mrs. Schröder later testified that they weren't very fond of the house
due to the lack of privacy and the constant need to keep in mind the need of their co-inhabitants.
Ultimately, that's the price they paid for living in such an experimental and avant-garde project.

 
Gerrit Rietveld - Rietveld Schröder House, 1924. Axonometric.
ADAPTABLE ARCHITECTURE IN THE 20TH AND 21ST CENTURY !39

 
1927: RICHARD BUCKMINSTER FULLER
Richard Buckminster Fuller was born in 1895, in Milton, Massachusetts, to a well-respected family. After four
generations of his family having attended Harvard, Bucky — as he if often called — was deemed a failure:
he did not graduate from the Ivy League university (even was expelled twice) and did not have the prospect
of finding a 'respectable profession.' Luckily, this fear proved to be unfounded: Buckminster developed
himself as one of the most fascinating and original minds of his century.
In the book R. Buckminster Fuller: An Auto-Biographical Monologue/Scenario (1980), his son-in-law and
documentary director Robert Snyder sums up the many careers, prices, and titles Bucky gained throughout
his lifetime:
A marine, a machinist, a generous generalist, an activist, a young old, a student of the new, a
“ technical redactor, a businessman, an angel, an athlete, a professor, a critic, an experimental seminar,
an element of hazard, a verb, a diverse creator, an engineer, architect, a cartographer, a philosopher,
a poet, a cosmogonist, a choreographer, a visionary, a scientist, a valid unit, a mathematician, a pilot,
a Marine lieutenant, a despicable genie, a geometric, an extraordinary thinker, a soft revolutionist, an
admirable genie, an anti-academic, a doctor of science, doctor of arts, doctor of drawing, doctor of
mental science, a mad man, a prophet, a guardian of vital resources. 24
From early on Buckminster showed and interest in the conception and construction of objects, especially
related to geometry and naval architecture. He often experimented on designing and building new devices
such as small boats which would be driven by human power. In his later life, he always found that the
foundation of human civilisation could be found in the ocean or on the water. He would often talk about the
challenges sea travellers are faced with rather than sedentary ‘earthlings.’ He stated that they endured
much higher risks caused by nature such as the endless sea, the strong waves, the depths and lows, the
darkness and cold, the storm and the silence.
Years later, Buckminster Fuller would realise that these early experience had not only produced a project he
would remain fascinated with but that he had also become familiar and had gained a lot of knowledge
about the materials that his later projects would require.
24 Snyder, R. (1980). R. Buckminster Fuller: An Auto-Biographical Monologue/Scenario. St. Martins.
RICHARD BUCKMINSTER FULLER 4!2

In 1927, Le Corbusier’s ‘Vers une Architecture’ was translated into English under the title Towards a new
architecture. The young Buckminster Fuller, 32 years old at the time, read the book with passion and
adoration while going through a profound personal crisis seeking for purpose in his life. The company in
which he worked had recently been sold, and he lost his position as head of sales. He found himself without
a job, and went through an economically difficult time. Living with his wife Anne and their second daughter,
Allegra, while still trying to cope with the sudden passing of his first daughter, Alexandra, five years earlier.
Fuller found himself in a desperate situation, even contemplating suicide while standing on the border of
the Michigan Lake when , according to him, a divine voice made him change his mind. Fuller dedicated the
ongoing year to silence, reflexion, and lecture, and focussed all his energy on developing a new radical
approach to the dwelling, geometry, and structures. He underlined that he considered his work as part of a
bigger project to improve the life of humans on Earth.
Le Corbusier guided him on his path towards the industrialisation of the dwelling, just as Henry Ford did
when he created the assembly line for automobiles. Ford describes in his book ‘Life and Work,’ published in
1922, the way in which he made the car into a simple and cheap product, produced in series for mass
consumption. The progression in technology resulted in better products at lower cost with an extensive
reach of productivity.
Buckminster Fuller used this idea and started designing sustainable and inexpensive dwellings which he
imagined would be mobile, modular, and easy to adapt. His dream being the transformation of the
traditional house into a living machine, industrially fabricated, available to a broad audience. He analysed
housing in the same way that Ford did with the automobile, aiming at simplicity, standardisation, and
automatisation. He looked for the optimal materials to reach structural efficiency and, in consequence,
obtain a minimum weight.
To achieve this, Buckminster based a large part of his inventions and findings on natural systems and
approximate the laws of nature in a new and more accurate way. It seemed to him that each structure had
to revolve around a central point — in a similar way as our universe does — and achieve optimal strength
by the use of triangle, hexagons and tetrahedrons in construction. This collaboration between geometry
and mathematics was something he would call ‘synergetics.’

Initially, the word ‘synergy’ states that two or more instances enter a collaboration in which each participant
benefits from the co-operation. But for Buckminster, it held the core principle of interactive systems, and he
often used the term when talking about potential projects.
Synergy is the only word in our language that means behaviour of whole systems unpredicted by
“ the separately observed behaviours of any of the system’s separate parts or any subassembly of
the system’s parts. There is nothing in the chemistry of a toenail that predicts the existence of a
human being. 25
Before Fuller popularised the term through his conferences and books, it was exclusively reserved for
chemical laboratories. Fuller aimed it important to generalise its usage to learn how to create meaningful
relations between different components of a whole.
In his work ‘Synergetics’, Fuller presents his holistic view on life. ‘Synergetics’ is beside a very extensive
vision, also one that is multi-dimensional: Buckminster analyses geometrical models, creating mutually
beneficial relationships by combining them, based on his personal experiences and overall thinking process.
He tries to understand and identify methods applied in nature — both physical and metaphysical.
There was, for Fuller, no difference between architecture for humans and architecture for the universe. He
made a bold assumption at this moment, namely that in our social systems, the time had come for the
politicians to give up control of the designers and artists. He based this idea on his diagnosis that the
members of that first group (like all 'specialists') just looked at reality through a small hole through which
they can never see more than a part of it.
Buckminster Fuller also aspired to inspire humanity and motivate people to take a thoughtful look at the
finite world in which we live and the limited possibilities of the living standard in this world, that could
continue to rise. In ‘Critical Path’ Fuller explains why humanity is at a critical point in its evolution. We have
two directions to choose from: that of a perfect world where we all have what we want, or the complete
destruction as we destroy everything and everyone.
Beside great social reform, technology represented for Buckminster the way to realise a utopia of absolute
self-sufficiency and freedom. He shows that technology can be used in a positive way, as a liberating power:
Fuller outlines the 'Spaceship Earth' as a capsule, in which humanity must survive. In his scheme, humans
25 Fuller, R. B. (1971). Operating Manual for Spaceship Earth. E.P. Dutton & Co., New York.

benefit from the technology of their time, instead of being enslaved by it. Buckminster, however, was not
talking about developments that would only start to exist millennia later, he believed the technology was
already available, we just didn’t know how to apply it correctly.
Neither the great political and financial power structures of the world, nor the specialization-blinded
“ professionals, nor the population in general realise that sum-totally, the omni-engineering-
integratable, invisible revolution in the metallurgical, chemical, and electronic arts now makes it
possible to do so much more with ever fewer pounds and volumes of material, ergs of energy, and
seconds of time per given technological function that it is now highly feasible to take care of
everybody on Earth at a 'higher standard of living than any have ever known.' It no longer has to be
you or me. Selfishness is unnecessary and henceforth unrationalizable as mandated by survival. War
is obsolete … It is a matter of converting the high technology from weaponry to livingry. The
essence of livingry is human life advantaging and environmental controlling. With the highest
aeronautical and engineering facilities of the world redirected from weaponry to livingry production,
all humanity would have the option of becoming enduringly successful. 26
Buckminster Fuller dedicated himself to study society throughout its different fields and on different scales.
He deemed the individual well-being equally essential as the correct functioning of the whole community
and taking adequate responsibility of the planet for generations to come. Through our existing moral
values, he believed, we could evolve to a better understanding of how we could live to benefit all of us.
On the other hand, Buckminster had strong confidence in technology, partly because of its deeper
meaning, as it could provide a solution to man. He was a passionate statistician who, like no one else, knew
how to read and interpret graphs, with an incredible understanding of quantities. He kept to strict numbers
and dimensions and did so in a proper way to link his sometimes dreamy philosophy to the proper
implementation and solution of the problem.
Fuller first imagined housing towers built around a high mast of reinforced concrete from which different
slabs were hung, suspended by cables, in the form of metal rings. He was, amongst other structural
elements, inspired by the large communications towers popping up on landscapes at the time. These
structures hold no beams and are created only as elements of compression and traction, whose rigidity and
stability is achieved solely through triangulations. Since his early days, Fuller had been attracted to triangles
26 Fuller, R.B. (1981). Critical Path. Estate of R. Buckminster Fuller. pp. 34.

and tetrahedrons, forms that repeatedly appear in the models that he, since he was a kid, built with small
sticks. He was also fascinated by the structures of bicycle wheels, umbrellas and tennis rackets. Fuller knew
that steel was the most efficient when applied in traction, to attain a determined force with a minimum
amount of material and weight. The cables in these towers were hidden, both in the facade as in the interior
partitions. In this way, the central mast functions as the only support, but also serves to canalise the
installations and contain the elevator. This mast held up the complete structure, following a hexagonal
geometry, with triangular floors and facades.
This structural model allowed Fuller to imagine high housing towers, assembled in a factory, equipped,
transported through the air and dropped on site. He drew towers hanging from helicopters and made
schemes showing that they would be significantly lighter and faster to build than traditional constructions.
In 1928, he published his ideas under the title ‘4D Timelock,’ based on a 'philosophy of four dimensions'
including time. The book was a fusion of technocratic thinking, ideas of Le Corbusier and domestic and
spiritual economy. Fuller pointed out his quest for:
a house in which the true individualism of a person and their family can be developed; in which all
“ the necessary that has to be done (eat, sleep, clean) demands little time. Leaving time to other
things, the mind can be dedicated to a contemplation of a life more rhythmic and philosophical. 27
In these early publications, he included his ‘Lightful Houses’ because lightness was his primary objective, in
a parallel way as when Henry Ford created the automobile. Fuller questioned the traditional concepts of the
house, as well as the traditional role of architects as perceived until then. He pursued a new housing type
that would be industrially produced, just like the automobiles, using the latest technology and, like them, in
continuous improvement.
The book was distributed during a meeting of the AIA (American Institute of Architects) in 1928, but many
modern architects did not give it any relevance and considered it a utopian vision directed to an audience
of little architectural knowledge. Fuller also sent his book to different companies, friends and influential
persons in the American intellectual scene. Finally, in 1928, at 33 years old, he presents his ideas for the first
time in the Petit Gourmet in Chicago, in a conference entitled: ‘The Hexagon House.’
27 Fuller, R. B. (1972). 4D Timelock. Lama Foundations.

R. Buckminster Fuller. 4D Tower. 1927. Illustration.
1929: The Dymaxion House
In April 1929, a large-scale model of ‘The Hexagon House’ was exhibited during two weeks in the Marshall
Field Department Store in Chicago, in the area of the store dedicated to interior design, together with a
new collection of modern furniture imported from France. During the exhibition, Fuller gives six conferences
of half an hour each day, 50 talks in total. Marshal Field hired Waldo Warren, a specialist in communication,
to create a commercial name for Buckminster’s project. Waldo attentively listens to Fuller’s rather particular
jargon, including words like ‘dynamic,’ ‘theologic,’ ‘sum-totally,’ ‘earthian,’ ‘maximise.’ He concluded that
Fuller was 'obviously a four-syllable personality' and decided to give the house a 'four-syllable name.’ The
‘Dymaxion’ concept finally arose, based on the three most used principles by Buckminster Fuller:
‘dynamics,’ ‘maximum,’ and ‘tension.’
The — now-baptised — ‘Dymaxion house’ was an 'autonomous residential unit' weighing only three tons, at
the cost of about 3,000 dollars, although the automatisation of factories and the production in series could
even further reduce the price. This dwelling left behind every preconceived idea about 'the house,'
transforming it into an industrial product in continuous evolution and redefinition. This idea completely
opposed the traditional aesthetics of a home. His intention was to create a quick, economical, modular and

self-sufficient housing. Fuller planned that it could be rented or bought over the telephone, transported
through the air and mounted in a couple of days. It also had the possibility to be moved later on and, if
necessary, replaced at any time by a different model.
His drawings and models showed a five-person dwelling with a hexagonal ground plan and a central mast,
pulling up both the ceiling and the floor, similar to a hanging bridge, allowing the walls to be non-bearing.
The pole was anchored into the ground using a base that included a septic tank, a deposit of fuel, the
heating, the electricity generator, the pumps and an air filter. By regrouping all the utilities into this central
pole, the whole installation could be easily transported in a compact metal tube.
The house would be delivered fully equipped with furniture and installations such as a radio, television
(used for the first time that year), a writing machine and a calculator. It also held air-conditioning, in a way
that the air entered the house through a couple of openings in the central mast and was humidified, cooled
down or heated as wished. The bathroom was a prefabricated 'mold' that held a bathtub, the toilet and the
sink, and included light, ventilation and water flow.
Additionally, the house was an example of self-sufficiency: it could be heated and cooled using natural
systems, produced its own energy, was built to resist earthquakes and storms, was made out of engineered
materials that did not need any painting, repair or other periodic maintenance. The design also included
wind turbines on the roof and a vast system of cisterns to collect and recycle rainwater. For the bathroom
unit, Fuller created the 'Dymaxion Bathroom' — consisting of a shower that required one cup of hot water
and a toilet that uses no water at all.
The house was light, portable and mobile. The exterior walls would be fabricated from thin metal plates,
making the house easy to be transported, stored and re-built or deconstructed rapidly. The weight of the
construction (a recurring theme in his further works) was aimed to be as minimal as possible, as such that
the Dymaxion could be easily shipped across the country or the world. The remodelled 1929 version
weighed under 3000 and provided over 150 square meters of living space.

R. Buckminster Fuller. Dymaxion House. 1929
The interior of the space was modular, creating a flexible ground plan that was incredibly customisable and
permitted users to quickly adapt the configuration to their personal needs, by hiding away the bedrooms to
enjoy a large living room for example. The idea was that the house would be in constant evolution.
Buckminster’s idea was that the inhabitants could modify over and over again the configuration of the
house, converting it in a clear example of the adaptable dwelling. All the elements in the house were
designed to be mobile, including the installations. Even the technical unities which were connected to the
central structure, could be moved or replaced.

In 1929, the ‘Dymaxion house’ was published in the magazine ‘Architecture.’ The article recalls the flexibility
and the possible evolution of the project:
This plan is capable of expansion radially and on a number of levels, providing flexibility of extent
“ without deviation from the unit principle. 28
The article also posed the question: 'What will become of the architects?’ trying to reflect upon the
consequences for the profession of an industrial design of this sort, destined to reach a significant number
of clients, as opposed to the traditional design of a personal house, built as an artisanal construction.
In response to that question, during the presentation of the ‘Dymaxion House’ in the Harvard Society of
Contemporary Art, Fuller identified the issues his houses were supposed to eliminate: the heavy tasks, the
exploitation, the egocentrism, the politics, and the centralised control. The natural threats from which it had
to protect people: floods, hurricanes, thief, and finally the actions in which it would save time: education,
leisure and personal improvement. For him, these should be the true objectives of architects, but
'architecture never held any of this in account'. Fuller understood that, upon reflecting on the house, one
had to apply the scientific experimentation and abandon the fixation for the aesthetic questions typical of
the profession that he often described as the 'tailoring of inhabiting'. In this way, for Fuller, the first thing
you had to get rid of in a house was the architect, in his traditional task, which should be, at least, diluted.
While Fuller excelled at creating mesmerising geometrical forms and complex tensile structural
compositions, it was often difficult for him to convince the general public. The opinion on the house was
divided, and even though an important amount of people showed interest in his ‘Dymaxion houses’, it was
as often heavily criticised. In a 1932 article in the New Orleans Tribune, the journalist stated that in
Buckminster’s ‘Dymaxion world’ ‘We Live in Circles and Eat in Merry-Go-Rounds.'
Even though it was never realised, the concept of the ‘Dymaxion House’ was proof of forward and
innovative thinking on Buckminster's part, influencing the subjects of prefabrication and durability.
Buckminster tried to substitute the traditional idea of a static, immobile home for that of a vehicle, or even
that of a ship.
28Buckminster Fuller, Chronofile, vol. 36/1929. In: Fuller, R. B. Edited by Krausse, J. Lichtenstein, C. (1999). Your Private Sky: R.
Buckminster Fuller, the art of design science. Lars Müller Publishers, Zurich. p. 135.

 
R. Buckminster Fuller. Dymaxion house in Wichita, Kansas. 1946. The Estate of R. Buckminster Fuller.

R. Buckminster Fuller. Standard Living Package. 1948.
1948: Standard of Living Package
From 1948 onwards, Buckminster starts teaching at different academies and universities. Due to his
charisma and enthusiasm, Fuller was known as being an inspiring professor. He established many
friendships in the experimental environment, where he worked with composer John Cage, choreographer
Merce Cunningham and the artists and former Bauhaus professors, Josef and Anni Albers. The
collaborations with his colleagues and the contribution of students like Kenneth Snelson, Don Richter and
Shoji Sadao were crucial in the further progress of Fuller’s work. His way of teaching was unacademical and
as a pioneer of 'project education,' he often assigned his students exercises with references to his own
research.
While teaching at the Chicago Institute for Design, he challenged his students to the following task: design
a home that could hold an entire household for six people and their furniture that could fit into a container
and transported with a trailer. Together, they developed an eight meters long and two meters wide shipping
container-like box with walls that could be collapsed down. When the walls were down, all furniture and
household items could be stacked on top of them.
Through these investigations, Fuller proposed the ‘Standard of Living Package'’ a model for an autonomous
and mobile house. The package contained an ensemble of portable accessories which one would use to
develop a comfortable domestic life. All the elements of the house could fit into a single shipping container.
RICHARD BUCKMINSTER FULLER !52

They could be unfolded almost anywhere, under a transparent dome, almost immaterial, that also could be
disassembled and transported in the same container.
This proposal had a certain degree of elasticity and permeability because inside of the dome it was possible
to reach different levels of relationship between the exterior and the interior. Parallel, the capacity to
improve singular elements converted this dwelling, although never realised, into a perfectible proposal.
1952: Geodesic dome
Buckminster sought for efficiency and beauty through geometric structures. Symmetrical triangulation
proved for them to be the most rigid structures and a way to englobe the most amount of volume with the
least amount of material. He continued to work on geometric structures, and by the nineteen fifties, he had
further developed the probably most defining project of his lifelong career: the geodetic dome, from which
the first large-scale models were built at the Black Mountain College.
A geodesic dome consists of a pattern of adjacent triangles placed on the spherical structure started from
an icosahedron or a 20-sided shape. All the nodes of this structure are found on a spherical surface,
resulting in smooth domes composed of individual bars.29 The design of the geodesic dome is so precisely
calculated that it perfectly distributes the structural stress throughout the geodesic sphere and, when
simplified, only contains elements of the same length. This form makes it possible to englobe a maximum
of volume with as little material as possible. Buckminster was convinced of his virtuosic invention, and he
saw it as an illustration of his strategy to always start his inventions with whole pieces instead of several
components.
Buckminster was not the first one to use the systems of geodesics in construction. Previously, the German
engineer Walter Bauersfeld had already constructed a Zeiss-planetarium using a sort of geodesic dome,
with the only difference that the stems disappeared in a concrete ceiling and only acted as stabilisation.
29 Baldwin, J. (1997). Buckminster Fuller’s Ideas For Today: Geodesic Domes. John Wiley.

Buckminster Fuller with his Montreal World Fair's Dome. © Magnum Photos.
The principle of the dome signified for Fuller more than just a question of geometry. It held an equally
important structural component: how can we, by means of a geodesic network, create a supportive
structure that can be produced in an industrial way, that allows an easy and time-efficient installation, uses a
minimum of material to attain a minimum weight, doesn’t need any structural support, is economically
interesting to produce, can be modified, can be put in position, withdrawn and re-used, can be transported
over long distances, resists extreme weather conditions, etc?
From the moment they were introduced, the domes became important for two different reasons: first,
because they were excellent technical objects, praised for maximum efficiency in volume and weight, easy
to assemble in terms of time and mobility, and second, because they offered a socio-cultural alternative to
the typical rectangular architecture. These domes realised — or at least, promised to realise — the dream of
society to lead a life of freedom.
For Fuller, the geodesic dome was the right method to optimise the content and surface ratios of the
building's envelope and get maximum rigidity on the outside. It was the perfect shape as it was strong,
light, and enclosed a large area with very little building material.

Fuller was not the original inventor of the geodesic dome, but he is credited with the US popularisation of
the idea for which he received US patent 2,682,235 on 29 June 1954. His patent included the incredible
comparison between a regular building, which counted an average of 240 kilograms building material per
square meters, a moderate four kilograms for the same covered volume in his geodesic construction model.
In his publications, Buckminster repeatedly advocated an ecological vision, because ultimately each
building demands plenty of primary resources and a significant use of energy.
Even before the patent on the geodesic domes was formalised, Fuller received the task of creating a dome
for a popular tourist attraction, the 'Ford Rotunda.' This building, a lightweight steel construction by
architect Albert Kahn, was a colourful, decorative attraction during the night for 'A Century of Progress,’ the
Universal Exhibition of '33 in Chicago. For the fiftieth anniversary of the Ford Motor Company, Fuller was
asked to draw a dome to cover their circular courtyard with a twenty-eight meters diameter. They chose
Fuller because the change in diameter was likely to cause a substantial difference in pressure on the support
of the building. Fuller has proven that if the diameter of the sphere is doubled, the surface area would be
multiplied by four and the volume to become eight times as large. The strength of the frame rises in
proportion to its size; it encloses the largest volume of the space with the smallest possible surface area.
Because of its broad scope, Fuller chose to build spatial support points in a triangular formation: the group
of octets (octahedral-tetrahedral). Fuller immediately saw the group very closely tied to the problem of 'the
closest packaging' of a sphere. To minimise weight, Fuller and his colleagues selected aluminum as a
material and transformed it in bars with a triangular cross section. It was the only time Fuller would make
use of the octets group in its flat shape that recalls the molecular structure of graphite. 30
Fuller himself tended at that point rather to 'spatial' structures; that is to say structures that developed in all
directions. The choice of the octet was probably motivated by the intention to use continuous synthetic
cover. The dome was covered with vinyl because it could not be produced to such dimensions given its
prime choice, polyester.
The geodesic dome also lends itself to commercial use, as demonstrated in the 1953 Dome Restaurant,
overlooking Woods Hole Harbour of Cape Cod, Massachusetts. Fellow architect and aspiring restaurateur
Gunnar Peterson commissioned the construction.
30 Gössel, P. Leuthauser, G. (2005). Architecture in the 20th Century. Taschen. pp. 366-367.

Although the project initially received a lot of opposition from the local population believing it would highly
obstruct their skyline, the project became quite popular as a leisure spot for upper-class society. Diners
enjoyed the fantastic location from where you could look out on the ocean through the triangular windows,
and enjoy the musical program such as a zither player named Ruth Welcome.
Several structural issues lead to the pre-foreseen closure of the projects. First of all, the gigantic dome and
its glass composition transformed it into a greenhouse and made it during the summer unbearable for staff
and customers to spent time inside the dome. A year after opening, a white fibre glass shield was placed
over the dome to ensure its climate regulation, thus obstructing the magnificent views of the horizon and
any star-gazing through the ceiling. Secondly, the dome functioned as an acoustic amplifier, blasting the live
instrumental music throughout the whole valley. Other re-occurring incidents such as water leaks, broken
windows and other maintenance issues, were dismissed by Buckminster as 'construction errors'. A former
student of him, Jay Baldwin, pointed out to that this was mainly due to the flexibility of the materials, and
the irregularity of the joined triangles.
In 1960, Fuller built another dome for Ford, this time with a diameter of about thirty-five meters at the base
and a thousand square meters of floor area. It was about twice the size but weighed a quarter of the first
dome, something that Fuller, the eternal statistician, immediately pointed out because it signified an eight-
fold improvement in a few years. In 1958, beat the record of most volume englobed by a structure with
almost 120 meters of diameter for the dome of the Union Tank Car Company in Baton Rouge.
Although the geodesic domes did not became as widely embraced as Buckminster had hoped for and
predicted, currently more than 300.000 are used in the entire world. Many of them are considered
architectural epiphanies such as the ‘Epcot Centre’ at Disney world in Florida (1982); the ‘American Pavilion’
at the Universal Exposition in ’67 in Montreal; the ‘Dome house’ for Judge Bernard, located in the hills of
Hollywood in California, achieved in 1962 (my personal favourite); and recently the non-profit
organisation‘The Eden Project’, in Cornwall, England. 31 
31 See chapter Modern Case Studies.

 
Bernard Judge, Domehouse in Los Angeles, Californië. 1962. Photo by Julius Shulman, Getty Research Institute.
The concept of the geodesic dome made Buckminster receive global acknowledgment for his work and a
lot of freedom to build and design. For many clients it was not so much the ecological benefits — their
tensile structure only demanded a minimal amount of resources in proportion to their size — but more the
reduced costs that convinced them, because these domes were relatively cheap to build.
Fuller's visions and experiments ultimately resulted in even greater dreams. In 1960, he proposed to put a
‘climate dome’ over midtown Manhattan, a giant geodesic dome which would overlap vast areas of the
peninsula as a solution to weather and air pollution issues, sheltering New Yorkers from heavy snowfalls
during winter and provide them with a comfortable environment temperature throughout the whole year. In
his biography of Buckminster, Alden Hatch described it as:
Its skin would consist of wire-reinforced, one-way vision, shatterproof glass, mist-plated with
“ aluminium to cut sun glare while admitting light. From the outside, it would look like a great
glittering hemispheric mirror, while from the inside its structural elements would be as invisible as
the wires of a screened porch, and it would appear as a translucent film through which the sky,
clouds and stars would appear. 32
Richard Buckminster Fuller. Manhattan dome. 1960.
32 Hatch, A. (1974). Buckminster Fuller: At home in the universe. New York. p. 230

Richard Buckminster Fuller. Shoji Sadao. Cloud 9. 1960. Photo collage.
Instead of making the sky and clouds disappear, Buckminster later on started exploring them as the
destination for our human society. As there was no limit to the geodesic dome principle — its strength
grows each time it gets bigger, and the englobed surfaces multiplies by two, Buckminster imagined they
could house entire communities. Their structural lightness and their aerodynamic design meant they would
be able to float over the earth's surface. Buckminster partnered up with architect Shoji Sadao in 1960 33, to
create a photo rendering of this Project for Floating Cloud Structures which they called ‘Cloud Nine’.
The possibility of such a scenario happening real life is small — the floating physics are waterproof, but the
social and economic conditions of living in a giant floating structure are yet to be investigated. As a utopian
and futuristic vision, ‘Cloud Nine’ comes to show how wide our imagination can go regarding alternative
human living conditions. Buckminster presented the project as an 'exercise to stimulate imaginative
thinking.'
33 The same year that NASA started to employ satellite balloons to explore outer space.

1967: Triton City
In 1967, Buckminster Fuller was commissioned by Japanese executive named Matsutaro Shoriki to design a
community for Tokyo Bay. The city was getting overcrowded and new territory needed to be explored.
Thus, they turned to the waterfront as a solution and an opportunity for expansion of the city.
Buckminster’s driving structure was made up out of a set of habitable tetrahedrons 34 which would be
floating on water and which could be anchored to the shore. Dealing with land scarcity, these cities would
be able to house up to 100,000 people and include outdoor spaces, shopping, entertainment and schools.
They could also be connected to one another or to the mainland by bridges. In a city docked with these
floating constructions, the purchase of land becomes useless, and homes would be cheaper and therefore
readily available to a broad audience. Fuller also pointed out that such a city model would increase the land
area available for agricultural purposes.
Buckminster Fuller no longer saw ‘the act of building' as a strategic act of colonisation, which according to
him had previously often led to social injustice, misery and war. For Fuller, owning a property signified living
at a particular place for a certain time, and using the land as a source of food or as the site of a house. It
also meant that the land remained available to others, as the sea remains open to others when we cross it
by boat. ‘On the sea which is constantly in motion, no one who crosses it seeks to possess the water
beneath it. Only on the static country, people get this idea’, Fuller remarks sarcastically and polemically, but
ultimately he was convinced that sooner or later it would become clear to what extent this is absurd.
Three-quarters of our planet Earth is covered with water, most of which can accommodate floating
“ organic cities. Floating cities do not pay rent, have no owners. They are located on the water, which
they desalinate and re-circulate in many useful and non-polluting ways. They are vessels with all the
technical autonomy of an ocean vessel, but they are also vessels that will always be anchored. They
must not go anywhere. Their shape and accommodations that allow human life are not
compromised, as it must be for the shape of the living areas of ships whose hull shapes are
constructed so that they can slip, like a fish, at high speed through the water and offshore with
maximum economy. 35 
34In geometry, a tetrahedron, also known as a triangular pyramid, is a polyhedron composed of four triangular faces, six straight
edges, and four vertex corners. Source: Wikipedia.
35 Fuller, R. B. (1981). Critical Path. Estate of R. Buckminster Fuller. p. 332

Richard Buckminster Fuller. Triton City. 1967. Model.
RICHARD BUCKMINSTER FULLER 6

!1
 
 
RICHARD BUCKMINSTER FULLER 6

!3
The Post-Modern Age
1961: Archigram
Buckminster Fuller and his technocratic philosophy inspired, amongst others, a group of architects by the
name of Archigram. The radical work of this collective embodied the notion of flexibility to a maximum, and
they often referenced Buckminster’s work in their ideologic ideas.
They, too, developed utopian and dystopian ideas and plans which were highly imaginary and rather
unlikely to be realised. Because of their shared intention to guide architecture away from its built shape,
their work came to be known as ‘anti-architecture.’ They wanted to elevate architecture to the domain of
the human experience, forgetting about all the recognisable shapes of buildings previously constructed.
Mobility and mobile parts played a huge role in their projects. Their work was known for its 'futuristic and
often monumental urban machines' 36 They were designing houses that accommodated a nomad lifestyle,
proposing mobile, flexible, and impermanent architecture as part of an idea of liberation. They self-
proclaimed to 'build for change,' and experimented with mobility, expandability, and interchangeability of
parts. Ultimately, Archigram dared to ask the question: 'should buildings be fixed all together'?
Peter Cook. Plug-in City. 1964. Photo via Archigram Archives.
36 Sadler, S. (2005). Archigram: Architecture without Architecture. MIT, Cambridge. pp. 11.
THE POST-MODERN AGE !64

Peter Cook, co-founder of the collective, defined this evolution as ‘non-solid architecture.’ He was
fascinated by mechanical objects and temporary architecture, as seen in his project ‘Plug-in City’ in 1964, an
ever-changing megastructure that held different 'frames' in which standardised components could be
'plugged in.’ Functions such as residences, transportation, and other essentials, could all be transported by
giant cranes. Their function, both mechanical and electrical, was more important than their form.
Warren Chalk’s 'Plug-in Tower' also represented high towers with interchangeable capsules attached to
vertical masts that provided the structure, circulation, and facilities. The ‘Gasket capsule’ he used was
strongly related to Buckminster Fuller’s ‘Lightweight Towers’ and his ‘Dymaxion house’.
In the same year, co-member Ron Herron proposed the idea of the 'Walking City,’ in which he imagined
colossal constructions with walking 'legs,' provoking a robot-like shape that could walk over land and water.
This nomadic city could move to new locations when that would become more optimal.
Archigram also planned other innovating spaces, technologically futuristic, praised for their interior
versatility. The proposition 'Living 1990,’ realised in 1967, is an example. The dwelling was conceived to
satisfy the changing demands of its inhabitants. Domestic robots and transformable furniture allowed the
house to be adapted to different living situations. Many ideas that were launched by Archigram were later
on absorbed into our modern day vocabulary in the field of architecture.
Ron Herron. A Walking City. 1964.

1963: Metabolism
Another radical postwar architectural movement, closely resembling the work of Archigram, were the
Japanese Metabolists, whose most prominent members included Kiyonori Kikutake, Kisho Noriaki
Kurokawa, and the critic Noburu Kawazoe. These architectural innovators worked primarily around the
concepts of change and growth, starting from a biological analogy and the ideas of renewal and
regeneration. While imagining the future of cities, they speculated on connected mega-structures and
grouped dwellings with pre-fabricated and interchangeable housing units attached to a core structure.
The concepts of the Metabolists combined ideas on adaptability and transformable spaces as seen in
traditional Japanese architecture, with high-tech innovations, some of them not ever practicable yet. They
shared, with the British Archigram group, an obsession for aero-spacial mechanisms and futuristic images.
From the late 1950s on, they proposed grand utopian projects and mega-structures which were aimed for
constant growth and adaption. In the drawings of Kisho Kurokawa, the inhabitable cellules are prefabricated
units that are hooked onto an immense spiral-shaped skyscraper, while in the ‘Floating cities’ of Kiyonori
Kikutake the cubicles clung onto the interior or exterior surfaces of large cylinders that float on the ocean.
About the fascination of change from the Metabolists, Kikutake said:
Contrary to the architecture of the past, contemporary architecture must be variable, mobile and
“ comprehensible, capable of responding to the changing needs of the contemporary era. With the
objective of reflecting the dynamic reality, what is necessary is not a fixed and aesthetic function, if
not something that is capable of undergoing metabolic changes (…) We have to stop thinking in
terms of function and form and think instead in terms of space and variable function. 37
The Metabolists were convinced that cities should be in constant evolution, renewing its proper
component, in the same way natural organisms regenerate their cells. The urban cells they developed were
housing units, designed as capsules that could be fabricated in series and attached to a more permanent
structure of streets and towers. When the capsules become worn out or need an upgrade, they can be
easily replaced.
37 Cited in Curtis, JR. (1986). Modern Architecture, since 1900. Hermann Blume. p.341.

Kisho Kurokawa. Nagakin Capsule Tower. 1972.
Unlike Archigram, the Japanese did manage to materialise some of their designs, although on a smaller
scale than envisioned. Many of the accomplishments of the group, however, have since been demolished as
most of their experiments were temporary. Kisho Kurokawa put to practice the dreams of change and
growth of the collective in his ‘Nagakin Capsule Tower’ in 1971, designed for single people, in Ginza, Tokyo.
Each capsule was a small hotel room, with a bed, a bathtub, and a built-in desk, that was attached to one of
the vertical elements that held onto the vertical circulation.
Although the tower achieved the concept of a 'plug-in' system, sought after by Buckminster Fuller, Le
Corbusier, Archigram and the Metabolism movement, the capsules were never actually replaced. The
building has been highly deteriorated since, and is potentially up for demolition. It is currently still possible
to spend a night in the tower through the room-renting service Airbnb, although many have said it is not a
very luxurious experience.
Despite their unfulfilled predictions and not proving that architecture is a generator of solutions for larger
social problems, the Metabolists did open a wider field of possibilities for research and innovative thinking
in architecture.

1987: Jean Nouvel
Technology and communication became a standard of project development by the late eighties when
electrical devices found their way into architecture. Besides undergoing and reacting to a direct action of its
user, newly developed computer programs allowed architecture to become responsive to its environment.
French architect Jean Nouvel was one of the first to apply it in his project for the Institute du Monde Arabe
in Paris in 1987.
The building featured a motor-controlled facade with 27.000 light sensitive diaphragms that open and close
gradually in reaction to the amount of sunlight hitting the South side of the building. The different aperture
sizes regulate the light and temperature levels inside the building. 'Form follows function,' as the oculars
provide both the aesthetic presence of the building and the functionality in terms of environmental control.
In other projects as well, Jean Nouvel introduced the notion of modifiable elements. In his project
‘Nemausus' (1987), a social housing building in Nîmes, France. The architect used industrialised con-
struction techniques and readily available materials to lower the cost.
Jean Nouvel. Institut du Monde Arabe. Paris. 1987. Photo by Sébastien Couderc.

The building holds three housing options: a one level, duplex, or three level apartment. The kitchen, bath-
room, and all service utilities are positioned centrally or lined up against one of the walls, allowing for any
division or subdivision, which results in great spatial flexibility.
The large open spaces and double height areas were unusual to social housing, but, because they were less
specified, they were open to receive different occupations, thus saving costs. The gradual completion of the
building and the range of options this design approach offers goes in against the usual form of standard
social housing, but also against the idea of delivering a house as a finished product in which the house
owners determine only the furniture and decoration.
In this particular case, the new residents were handed their apartment in a semi-finished status with the
possibility, although only through a limited amount of choices, to adapt the dwelling to their own
preferences, turning each unit into a unique reflection of the personality of its owner.
Stills from ‘Nemausus 1’, a documentary film by Richard Copans and Stan Neumann for Illuminations Media.

1991: Steven Holl
New York-based architect Steven Holl integrated the fundamental principle of traditional Japanese
architecture of flexibility in his ‘Nexus World’ housing project in 1991. Holl had been invited to do the
project by Japanese architect Arata Isozaki, who designed the master plan, alongside other famous
architects such as Rem Koolhaas, Mark Mack, Osamu Ishiyama, Christian de Portzamparc, and Oscar
Tusquets. The ensemble had to compose a super-block meant to introduce a ‘new urban lifestyle’ to Japan.
In his proposition, Steven Holl experimented with multi-use living units. He proposed 28 apartments
organised into four blocks, playing with the concepts of 'void space' and 'hinged space,' while achieving
the functional quality of the project by using the ‘Fusuma’ concept (mentioned in the chapter Traditional
Japanese Architecture). Throughout the building, opaque sliding panels can be withdrawn, used to expand
or subdivide rooms according to the requirements of the family. The use of doors, ceiling and pivoting
cabinets allow the reconfiguration of the floor plan of each apartment according to seasonal, episodic or
seasonal changes. The bedrooms can become living spaces during the day (in Japan, it is common to use a
futon instead of bed, a rolling mattress that during the day is stored in a closet and at night unfolds on the
floor). This flexibility also allows rooms to change in size, when children are born, when children grow up
and leave home or when parents age and move into the home.
One of the most important goals of the building, as a response to the failures of other housing projects, is
the ability to introduce, using movement, a human dimension into the individual differences. Here, each of
the twenty-eight apartments is unique, while at the same time being highly standardised, yet through its
adaptiveness, it introduces inhabitants and users into the process of defining their own space.
The state of indeterminability that Nouvel sought for was a direct response to the question of providing
affordable, social housing, using a design strategy of standardisation without completely giving up the
possibility of modification and giving the inhabitants a certain amount of control.
Later on, Japanese architect Shigeru Ban also tried to reinterpret the traditional Japanese house, using the
latest technology available. In 1997, he finalised his ‘Nine Square Grid House’ in Kanagawa, Japan, in which
one can use the interior space completely open or divide the living area using sliding panels. Two of the
four façades can disappear completely.  

 
Steven Holl. Nexus World Housing Project. 1991.

1995: Rem Koolhaas
The versatility of the two houses by Steven Holl and Shigeru Ban results from the possibility of controlling
the 'horizontal' relationship between different states of being. Dutch architect Rem Koolhaas explored on
his turn, in a very singular project, a 'vertical' versatility. His project for a house in Bordeaux, France, in 1995,
had as a starting point the limited mobile capacities of the client who was wheelchair bound after a nearly
fatal car accident left him paralysed from the waist down. Koolhaas’ office OMA designed a house with a
large platform that moves vertically from one floor to another.
In the recurring theme of the house as 'a machine for living,' this dynamic element became the centrepiece
and the heart of the project. It acts as more than an elevator, as it functions as an entire office and is entirely
open to connect with the other spaces from the kitchen on the ground floor, all the way to the bedroom on
the top floor. Through this, the spatiality of the house is continually adapted and redefined to the current
occupation and the surrounding space.
This process creates the spatial dynamics that give the user the capacity of moving freely throughout the
house and, instead of being a limitation, the wheelchair performs a crucial guiding point in how the house is
experienced.
In the intimate documentary ‘Koolhaas Houselife,’ a part of the ‘Living Architecture’ series, we get an insight
into the daily life in the house in Bordeaux. One of the most significant scenes of the movie shows the
housekeeper swiftly arranging the books on the library shelves that run along the total height of the house,
as the platform moves upwards. 

OMA/Rem Koolhaas. Bordeaux House. 1995. Still from Koolhaas Houselife.
 
MODERN CASE STUDIES
Buckminster Fuller seemed to have approached the idea of construction in a genuinely original and
innovative way. He attempted a method that allowed architecture to cut loose from its previously solidly
secured roots. The architects of the Modern Movement started designing from a credo that could be
resumed as 'less is more.’ Buckminster took this idea even further, as he was aiming to 'do the most with the
least.’ Later on, he would call this process 'ephemeralization,' his term for doing 'more and more with less
and less until eventually, you can do everything with nothing.’ 38
Buckminster identified technologic specialisation as a means to the progressive dematerialisation of
architecture, meaning less material is used for each project. His representation of spaces was based mainly
on mathematics and biology and, to a lesser extent, on the tradition of housing construction. Thus, he was
able to attack the building problems as if it were the first time that someone had looked at the problem.
Because of his inventiveness, however, the technology and construction methods necessary to realise most
of his projects were mostly undeveloped, unavailable or insufficiently adapted to architectural projects at
the time. He therefore repeatedly claimed that his ideas were 50 years ahead of their time.
Many of the issues that Bucky dreamed of erasing by intelligent design, still need to be faced today:
urbanisation and land scarcity, limited resources, socioeconomic inequality, changing domestic structures
and climate change. Many of the concepts Buckminster integrated into his work are still being studied and
used by modern day architects as a possible solution for many of the problems facing our world today. In
the following chapter, I will identify and analyse three recent projects as examples of how Buckminster’s
ideas were transformed and realised, intelligently using modern day technologies to reach a higher level of
sustainability and flexibility.
38 From: Krausse, J. Lichtenstein, C. (1999). Your Private Sky. Lars Müller. 92.
MODERN CASE STUDIES 7!4

1994: Heliotrope
In 1994, Rolf Disch designed his own house as the ultimate experiment for the latest technological and
sustainable solutions. His Heliotrope House, located in his hometown, Freiburg, is both his personal house
and his architecture studio. The construction uses modern technologies, resulting in a sustainable and eco-
logical building of excellent thermic and energetic efficiency. The construction was designed to be fully pre-
fabricated in a covered area, transported and later assembled on site.
The 18-sided circular building has a total heigh of 14 meters and a diameter of 10.5 meters. It stands on a
single supporting central column, 22 meters high and 2,9 meters wide, built in certified Finnish wood. The
central mast contains the electrical and water installations as well as a spiral staircase that circumferentially
distributes the levels, the rooms which are all connected to one another and the different installations. The
interior divisions of the house are flexible according to the inhabitant's needs. On top there is a roof terrace
with a rain water collection system, a solar panel installation and a two-axis sun-tracking system.
Rolf Disch. Heliotrope House. 1994. Section.

Rolf Disch. Heliotrope House. 1994.

The house revolves entirely around its central mast, moving about 15 degrees every hour, accompanying
the sun, trying to find an energetic efficiency and optimal illumination. To catch the most sunlight and use it
in the best way possible, half the facade is made out of wide windows, with triple glazing, which face the
sun in winter to absorb heat, while the other half incorporates high insulation panels, to protect from
overheating in summer. The photovoltaics on the roof rotate according to the sun, producing a net energy
four to six time higher than the average daily use of the house.
In addition, 34.5 square meters of vacuum tube collectors are installed on the balcony brackets to generate
energy for hot water and heating. Another geothermal heat exchanger, a pellet stove, a ventilation system
with heat recovery as well as floor and low-temperature ceiling radiant heaters are integrated.
Fully furnished with eco-bathrooms that recover rainwater and re-use residual water, the collected rainwater
is used for rinsing and washing, while the waste water is clarified in a planted pond cascade on the property.
Waste and faeces are decomposed without odor in a dry composting plant.
Beside this house and studio in Freiburg, Rolf Dish designed two other Heliotrope projects. One of them,
entitled the Solar Tower, belongs to the brand Hansgrohe and is located in Offenburg. The other one was
built in Basilea, for Swissbau. Both projects show great understanding in optimising the found resources in
nature and transforming them by means of technology, in the power to run the entire building. The 240
square meters rotatable eco-house is now available for about 400.000 euros. The prototype however still
costs 2 million euros and was financed by a credit of the Ökobank.
The house resembles Buckminster’s Dymaxion dream in many ways: it is a pre-fabricated and self-sufficient
structure. It features a hexagonal plan mounted on a central column that holds all the mechanical services
to allow the house to turn around its central axis. The walls are non-bearing and the space can be divided
to fit the inhabitant’s preferences.
The building however, is not transported to the site in an air balloon, nor placed in a giant crater. Despite its
great flexibility and adaptability, it is not a house that is meant to be moved, modified or disassembled and
reassembled once it has been built. The design of the house has some features that make the house
adaptable through everyday use and on the long term, but generally still portrays a sort of static nature. The
materials used are heavy and durable, rather than light and replaceable.

1997: The Eden Project
Another amazing adaptation of Buckminster’s genius use of geometric patterns, was realised in Cornwall,
UK by Tim Smit and architect Jonathan Ball, under the name ‘The Eden Project’.
When Tim and Jonathan joined forces in 1997, they decided to create an immense complex regrouping all
kinds of vegetation, including flora and fauna from all over the world. For geographical, historical and social
reasons, they determined the perfect location to be Cornwall, UK, in the Bodelva valley. The clay under-
ground of the site however was extremely unpredictable due to ongoing excavations during the planning
process of the project, resulting in a frustrating situation. Plans had to be constantly redrawn and adapted
to the rapidly changing topography of the terrain, while still being quarried during their preparations. Heavy
rainfall and hard weather conditions distanced them even more from a finished project.
A solution occured when they came in contact with architect Nick Grimshaw. Grimshaw was a longtime
admirer of Buckminster’s work and saw in his geodetic technique the perfect method for the botanical
garden that needed to be placed on a fluctuating underground. Fuller’s geodetic domes were at the time,
as so often is the case with great minds, impossible to realise due to the technology still being unavailable.
By the late 1990s, development of both materials and production techniques, made it possible to imple-
ment Buckminster’s ideas. Without this innovation, the Eden Project would probably have never been
realised. Only small adaptations were needed to adapt the large domes to their underground.
Tim Smit. Jonathan Ball. Nick Grimshaw. The Eden Project. 1997.

The design comes from the British architectural office Nicholas Grimshaw thus designed the final project, in
addition to the structural design of Anthony Hunt, the construction which was carried out by the Würzburg
company Mero. The domes are covered with double-walled cushions — made out of ETFE: a very light,
transparent plastic — which are fitted into standardised six- and five-piece tubular steel frame elements.
The support-free constructions has an overall surface area of approximately 30,000 square metres, reach a
height of up to 50 m with a diameter of up to 125 m, and cover a total area of 23,000 square metres.
By adapting Fullers geodetic domes to a series of intersecting domes, made out of light hexagonal steel
components and by applying the correct transparent foil instead of using glass, the enclosed biospheres of
the Eden project turned into something more than a regular greenhouse. It became a complex structure
made out of soap bubbles. The fact that this structure is recurring in nature, from bee combs to the eyes of
insects, shows that the designers truly understood the objective of the Eden project.
Tim Smit. Jonathan Ball. Nick Grimshaw. The Eden Project. 1997.

A second advantage of the round shapes of the building was that when the bubbles touched the ground
the laws of nature indicate that the point of intersection is then vertical. To achieve this, it is simply neces-
sary to view the Eden bubbles as entire spheres. As if we can only perceive the top of these giant globes,
which enter 100 of metres into the earth, resting on an underground terrain, independent of the influences
of excavations or erosion.
Lastly, in relation to the space it enclosed, materials and building methods had to result in the least weight
possible for the overall construction. The result, in the case of the Eden project, was a building that
weighed 'no more than the air inside'39 . An incredible accomplishment and living proof that Bucky’s idea are
indeed realisable today and that geodesic domes offer plenty of possibilities for adaptable projects and
their programmes.
The giant domes have become a popular attractions, both to tourists and locals, counting around 2 million
visitors every year. Economically the project has done very well, despite costs in maintenance and repairing
of the biome structures and its equipment.
For the inventors of the Eden Project, the biggest accomplishment however has been the ability of a radial
idea to make social and environmental change happen in the most unlikely way.
The domes in a sense still represent Buckminster’s optimism to fix the world with beautiful design.
Tim Smit. Jonathan Ball. Nick Grimshaw. The Eden Project. 1997. Panorama view.
39 Pearman, H. Whalley, A. (2003). The Architecture of Eden. Eden Project.

2013: Makoko Floating School
As land scarcity and climatic uncertainty contain to rise the possibilities and opportunities of mobile and
floatable architecture needs to be further investigated as a means to house people at risk of losing their
land and accommodation. Unpredictable climate changes along the world's most vulnerable coastal
communities, have produced some fascinating design solutions that test the resiliency of architectural
possibilities and the need for adaptation that these changes will produce.
In Makoko, a sprawling slum neighbourhood on the waterfront of Lagos, Nigeria, tens of thousands of
people live on structures constructed on stilts above the Lagos Lagoon. Endangered by heavy floods and
sea level risings, it became dangerous to live in the settlement. In July 2012, authorities started forcibly
destroying illegal constructions, as they were regarded as 'environmental nuisance, security risk and an
impediment to the economic and gainful utilisation of the waterfront' and undermined the 'megacity status'
of Lagos. 30.000 people lost their home.
Nigerian architect Kunlé Adeyemi, founder of NLÉ Architects, an architecture, design and urbanism practice
focused on developing cities, couldn’t stand by the waterside and do nothing, so he reached out to locals
to see how he could help. In collaboration with the Makoko Waterfront Community and with help from the
local population, Adeyemi conceived, designed and built a floating school. Adeyemi witnessed a harsh yet
beautiful 'condition of maximum organisation with minimum means'. Or as he describes it:
Makoko is a very extreme and powerful example of urbanisation in Africa. It’s a community that
“ without conventional roads, no static land, was able to develop a huge community, and develop a
complex social structure between them. 40
His office states that they began the project as an example of basic problem solving: The existing school
was based on reclaimed land, but often suffered flooding and unforeseeable problems. The community was
faced with issues of flooding, the difficulty of building large structures in uncertain undergrounds and the
socio-political threat that has endangered tenantship in the community.
Adeyemi’s team finally responded to these conditions by creating a floating structure, resting on 250 blue
recycled barrels, that allowed the building to rise and fall with changing tides.
40 Al Jazeera, ‘Rebel Architecture’. Documentary made by Riaan Hendricks.

NLÉ architects. Makoko Floating School. 2013. Photo by NLÉ architects.
Taking inspiration from both the local traditional building techniques and the expertise the architecture
practice had gained in The Netherlands, they developed a flotation device that takes in account the
increase of rainwater and offers a solution to the changing tide of the water level.
Regarding availability, construction time and durability, a triangular shape provided the best structural
stability, low centre of gravity and distribution of weight. It was built for, with and by the local community.
The three-storey construction is a multi-cultural and multi-functional building, that holds a playground,
classrooms and meeting room. It can both be used a school during the day, but also as a community centre
during the evening.
Although Makoko was being threatened out of existence as recently back as early 2013, the floating school
and other social initiatives have finally convinced the the Lagos State Ministry of Physical Planning and
Urban Development to develop a regeneration plan for the entire Makoko community. Ultimately, the whole
slum could be replaced with floating structures. Infrastructure might still be lacking, but social and political
change seems on the way to make such a scenario feasible.

According to Adeyemi:
This is a rare and significant moment in history where innovation is finally matched with an equally
“ open-minded reconsideration of established policies … [It] is an important signal for mobilising the
local and global interest that is critical for addressing the challenges and opportunities posed by
rapid urbanisation and climate change in developing African waterfront cities.
The problematic situation of Makoko is a recurring issue in many places in the world that border the ocean,
with three quarter of the world’s largest cities, such as London, Miami, Tokyo, Amsterdam and Djakarta,
directly touching the coast. The unpredictable nature of the water calls for adaptable strategies that will
proof their resilience in the future. In the prospect of climate change, land shortage and the rise of water
levels, architects and urbanists alike are looking for sustainable and durable solution. Scenarios of floating
structures and cities are being experimented, especially in Asia and the Netherlands.
Their relationship to water and the risk of rising sea levels has been a historic working point for the
Netherlands, with a quarter of their total land surface laying beneath the water level. Various actions are
currently being put in place to protect the Dutch coast from the expectation of a 65 to 130 cm rise in water
level in 2100 and up to four meters in 2200.41 The possibly affected areas house up to nine million people.
Architect Koen Olthuis, co-founder of the company Water studio, realised, among others, the Citadel
project in Amsterdam, a floating city district with over 60 apartments. Thanks to floatable devices and
vertical water guidance systems, the houses can move along with changing tides, working with the natural
cycles instead of going against it. Since the spring of 2016, an 'amphibious forest' by designer Jorge Bakker
can be found next to the pavilion in the harbour of Rotterdam.
Sustainable solutions are an urgent priority to waterfront cities and driving structures are part of a strategy
of adaptation. One of the prototype projects is the Floating Pavilion, a mobile pavilion made out of
floatable geodesic domes that houses expositions about architecture on water. Dutch engineering firm
DeltaSync, who built the project, presented the Floating Pavilion as part of their manifesto on the Blue
Revolution, a strategy that include several of the oceans strengths and benefits to expand human society.
Their visions include modular cities that can expand gradually, in line with social needs and economical
possibilities. Elements can be moved around to create a dynamic geography that changes along with the
cities growth and transformation.
41 ‘Callico, C. (2017). Amfibiesteden’. Focus Archi magazine, #10.

Many of the used references for these projects include marine structures such as platforms and mooring
systems. Some of the sustainability strategies applied to these floating structures include aerodynamics to
generate energy using the wind, ocean thermal energy conversion which withdraws energy from the
temperature difference of the water and water recovery processes that generate fresh and drinkable water.
DeltaSync also envisions aquaculture or water-based agriculture to provide citizens with food.
The idea of colonising the sea, as overpopulation and climate change is threatening our inhabitable lands,
is starting to become a realistic and crucial part of withstanding upcoming challenges. Florida architect
Jacque Fresco anticipated this idea by designing ‘cities of future’, giving preference to dome-like shapes,
one of which he himself lives in. These hybrid solutions allow for a dynamic infrastructure system that is
supported by the water. Entire city extensions can be imagined, simply anchored to the shore and moved to
different locations once that proofs to be necessary. They offer a political, social, and environmental
mobility like never before.
It seems as f Buckminster Fuller’s futuristic ideas have been updated and approved by modern engineers,
incorporating newly developed technologies.

Jorge Bakker. Dobberend Bos (Floating Forest). 2016.
Sub-Biosphere 2 is a closed, self-sustaining underwater habitat designed by Phil Pauley. 

STRATEGIES FOR ADAPTABLE DESIGN
Looking both at historical precedents, Buckminster’s research and the future possibilities and development
in technology, we can distinguish methods and strategies that convert buildings to be responsive and
adaptable to its user’s requirements, and technologic and energy-efficient solutions, that can make the
necessary resources available to all mankind.
If we start using the technological innovations available to us in an intelligent way, architecture can become
a powerful tool that shapes our daily living conditions. While some challenges still remain determinately
urgent to overcome, others can be eradicated by modern design and technology.
1. Mass production and prefabrication
Buckminster Fuller had the desire to become the Henry Ford of the housing construction. Despite the
promise of steel to be able to create flexible constructions, during the Modern Movement, pre-fabricated
construction in steel turned out to be as problematic as it had been in concrete. In an article on one of his
houses in steel, the architect Georg Muche wrote:
In the current age, all types of steel construction are still primitive. The amount of material
“ necessary is too high. Only specially developed constructions […] will make houses in steel a
modern industrial product in relation to the object, form, and price. 42
The concept of the prefabricated house, transported to its locations, remained a work in progress from the
1930 onwards. Pre-fabrication was a recurring dream and goal throughout the Modern Movement, in
Buckminster Fuller’s work and but throughout the 20th century. Its use however was still highly inefficient.
Although materials and construction techniques have evolved immensely, since then, prefabrication is still
not as commonly applied in the construction business as one would imagine. Flexibility and personal
adaptions have remained achievable, yet under-applied goals in terms of housing. Its use is mostly limited
to low income housing or architectural experiments. Instead of focussing on the possibilities of mass-
production of standardised housing, much opposed by the general public, pre-fabrication should open the
way to customisable housing.
42 Jackson, N. (2016). The Modern Steel House. Taylor & Francis. p. 24.
ADAPTABLE STRATEGIES !86

The Australian architect Glenn Murcutt has designed many of his projects based on compatible
components. He often applies materials and systems used in industrial architecture, using simple and
readily available materials, in many cases used and delivered by local companies.
In 1980, Murcutt purchased and altered one of his own projects, built 10 years earlier. He proofed his
ambition for conservation and reuse, by remodelling the house and relocating its uses. Most modifications
were done by moving and re-using the initial elements of the house, changing the complete composition of
the house without wasting any of the previous installed materials.
Even Buckminster Fuller’s concept of the Dymaxion dwelling, although innovative, missed the element of
customisability. Such a standardised approach was never deemed appealing nor liveable to home owners.
Individualism and difference of lifestyle or personal desires were largely overseen, and mass-production was
only used as a quick and economically interesting response to provide a solution for the 'average
inhabitant’.
Currently, scenarios of customisability are further more investigated in different areas. Although still under
development, the project Phonebloks wants to revolutionise the world by producing mobile telephones
made out of components that can easily be combined and later replaced. This invention would form a
solution for the enormous pile of hazardous electronic waste and give users a freedom in choosing their
desired functions. Even in the automobile sector, predictions are made as to where it will be possible to
liberally select the features on one’s car.
The same ideas applied to the practical field in architecture would allow for a flexible house which one
composes to its needs and which modifies whenever conditions or preferences change. It should be
possible to create architecture produced by a flexible yet industrialised process from which different com-
ponents are combined to make the final building. A general catalogue of compatible components would
allow for a building method in which each element can be interchanged or substituted for another one with
similar characteristics.
Laser cutting, 3D printing and other new production techniques have made it equally time-consuming,
expensive and efficient to produce a thousand similar parts as a thousand completely different parts. It
should thus become possible to step away from purely standardised pre-fabrication and move into a realm
of customisable and made-to-measure architecture.

2. Transportable housing
Everything Buckminster Fuller imagined, created and studied, he looked at from a progressive point of view.
Therefore, an aspect of his work was that his inventions were always adaptable. As the child of the Industrial
Revolution, he, more than anyone, understood that dynamic materials and new technologies allowed for
architecture in constant motion.
Further inspired by Ford’s automobile, Buckminster Fuller reckoned that ‘the house of the future' had to be
mobile. This way it could be mass-produced in a factory and transported to its location in it entirety.
Additionally, during its lifetime, as people move, it could be relocated. According to him, the modern man
lived on the move, now here, then there. He or she occupies a house for a while, then moves out and leaves
it to someone else, or simply takes it with him.
The uprising of current movements and trends such as the ‘Tiny Houses’ and different models of mobile
houses show that this idea indeed has become a more common reality. It has become possible to create a
fully functioning, yet minimal version of a standard house, that can easily be transported and relocated.
People find peace and freedom in living with less, if in return, that allows them to move around freely.
R. Buckminster Fuller. Dymaxion House. Illustration by Cole Gerst

Buckminster, on the other hand, wasn’t satisfied by the simple idea of placing the house on wheels and the
possibilities at time would have made it incredibly complicated to transport a fully or even partially built
house over land. Instead he imagined houses that were designed to be airlifted by a zeppelin and could be
transported as a whole to their location. It remained a challenge to get the houses to be light enough
through using lightweight material and using as little material as possible.
This idea was ultimately achieved by lifting the house from the ground and suspending it from a mast. Fuller
calculated that under tension, a steel could perform a strength twelve times bigger as when it was put
under compression. Thus, in his 1928 sketches, we can see a central column in a concrete foundation, while
the stabilising cables carry the hexagonal house around it. He went as far as imagining the zeppelin
dropping a bomb that would create a crater where the house would come.
Finish architect Matti Suuronen proposed a similar idea in 1968, a project which he called Future Houses.
The Future House was pre-fabricated and mobile house, with a round form. Visually it resembles a UFO and
technically it takes inspiration from airplane construction. Suuronen used a polyester envelope, re-enforced
with fibre glass, to create a solid structure that didn’t need any interior structure. The result was a 3,35
meters in height and 8 meters in diameter ‘pod’. In the same mindset as the proposals of Buckminster Fuller
and projects of Archigram and the Japanese Metabolists, the units could be transported entirely, hold up by
a cranes and joint to a vertical structure making up a skyscraper-like apartment block.
Buckminster approached the house in a scientific engineered way. Starting from the problem and providing
solutions for every step of the conception process. The suspension system held, according to Buckminster,
the solution for producing sustainable and affordable housing, in the most material-efficient and light-
weight way. The triangulated suspension cables holding up the house, meant it was also at a safe distance
from the ground, protecting it from flooding, earthquakes and even tornados.

3. Technology and interactive design
Buckminster approached new technological trends with curiosity. He saw technology as a way of liberating
the house of its statical nature. Reyner Banham describes this process in his book ‘Theory and Design in the
First Machine Age’. Drawing comparisons between the approach of Le Corbusier and Buckminster Fuller,
Banham states that: 'Even those like Le Corbusier who had given specific attention to this mechanical
revolution in domestic service had been content for the most part to distribute it through that house
according to the distribution of it pre-mechanical equivalent. Thus cooking facilities went into the room that
would have been called 'kitchen' even without a gas oven, washing machine into a room still conceived as a
'laundry' in the old sense, gramophone into the 'music room', vacuum cleaner to the 'broom cupboard',
and so forth. In the Fuller version the equipments is seen as more alike, in being mechanical, than different
because of time-honoured functional differentiations and is therefore packed together in the central core of
the house, whence it distributes services — heat, light, music, cleanliness, nourishment, ventilation, to the
surrounding living-space.'43
In ‘The Historiography of Modern Architecture’,Panayotis Tournikiotis describes how:
the convenience of the residence is no longer to be judged in terms of the arrangements of the
“ rooms in accordance with the uses of time past; it now depends on the disposition of technical
equipment that dispenses the services needed for day-to-day-living, analogous to the central
service dispenser of the Dymaxion House.44
With this, he indicates, in Fuller’s perspective the notion of 'convenience' is no longer an architectural
question and has rather become a technological one.
When the Dymaxion house was first presented, Buckminster mainly focused on and promoted the house as
it would largely facilitate the life of the typical 'housewife' in the late 1920’s. With the help of the integrated
household appliances, one could keep their house tidy and clean without the necessary help of a maid (a
concept that Le Corbusier did keep alive in most of his projects — in which he included separated rooms
for services and servants45 ).
43 Banham, R. (1980). Theory and Design in the First Machine Age. MIT Press. Cambridge, Massachusetts.
44 Tournikiotis, P. (1999). The Historiography of Modern Architecture. MIT Press. Cambridge, Massachusetts.
45 He is, amongst others examples, quoted saying '[i]n a decent house the servants’ stairs do not go through the drawing room – even
if the maid is charming.' Le Corbusier (1987). The city of tomorrow and its planning. Cambridge. pp. 157–178.

Fuller was not the first to integrate technological and mechanical equipment in residential design. In the
mid-19th century, American amateur architect Orson Squire Fowler promoted and inspired many to adopt
an octagonal housing plan. Years ahead of his antecedents such as Louis Sullivan and Frank Lloyd Wright,
Fowler applied the principle of 'form follows function' to defend this particular shape. He reasoned that the
octagon could provide maximum space at a minimum amount of resources. Way before these systems
became common household items, he imagined central heating, running water and even asserted the
potential benefits of an 'indoor water closet' as part of the house.
Even if both Fowler and Fuller had limited ‘official’ knowledge of architecture in the strict term of the word,
their respective design plans showed great understanding of the technical construction of the octagonal
and hexagonal house.
By the time Fuller planned his housing however, modern mechanical instruments had taken over the market
and houses featured indoor plumbing, built-in kitchen appliances, gas and electricity. In his futuristic mind-
set, Buckminster followed up on these trends as a means to reduce several time-consuming tasks around
the house. Modern architecture (for 'The House of The Future') meant more than modern design, it also
included modern appliances and household helps.
Going beyond the practical chores like cooking, cleaning, laundry, and so on, technology gives us the
possibility to integrate moving objects in a much more fluid and interactive way.
The first digital age has given us tools to digitally design and 'control' architecture. To effectively reap the
benefits of these new construction methods, we need to re-analyse the way in which we perceive and con-
ceive architecture. In his book ‘Towards a new kind of Building’ Kas Oosterhuis presents, through his own
work, the recent developments in design and technology. He focuses on two particular paradigm shifts: the
movement from architecture based on mass production to architecture based on industrially produced
made-to-measure components; and the related transition from a static architecture to a dynamic and
interactive architecture.
New manufacturing technologies are already being applied to facilitate the production of flexible archi-
tecture elements. Architecture students and people in the fields are starting to get familiar with ideas such
as FabLabs (fabrication laboratories) where they can get their hands on digitally designed projects and
customisable machines to produce those ideas.

4. Environmental sustainability
Fuller focused his work and life on the most important questions of our existence. He wanted to discover
what it takes to 'make the world work', i.e. gather enough food, provide energy and shelter for all humanity
to make it possible for everyone to enjoy a wholesome life.
Fuller was concerned about the future and the survival of man in the existing social-economical circum-
stances that he saw around him. He had lost his faith in large organisations, governments, or private
enterprises, and focussed on the capacity of the individual to make a change. He asked himself
continuously if it could be made possible for all mankind 'to live lastingly and successfully on Planet Earth,
and if so, how?' Through his analysis of our ‘Spaceship’ he tried to define its potential and richness.
Regarding the amount of relevant knowledge that man has accumulated, in combination with the amount of
recyclable and renewable material this earth is capable of generating, there was for him no reason left for
concurrence about the bare necessities of a qualitative life for every person on this planet. According to
him, we had reached 'the technological ability to protect, nurture, support, and accommodate all growth
needs of life' and would soon be living an age of 'omni-successful education and sustenance of all
humanity.' He prospected that soon renewable sources of energy, such as solar- and wind-derived electri-
city, would be available for everyone and that human design would no longer have a negative impact on
our world, but rather solve all of humanity’s problems.
Buckminster stated that:
the Dymaxion principle is doing ever more with ever less weight, time, and ergs per each given
“ level of functional performance. With an average recycling rate for all metals of 22 years, and with
comparable design improvements in performance per pound, ephemeralization means that ever
more people are being served at ever higher standards with the same old materials.
His way of thinking sustainably is very similar to the concept of 'cradle-to-cradle', developed by architect
William McDonough and chemist Michael Braungart. Through their motto ‘Reduce, Reuse, Recycle,’ they
encourage people to do more with less, to minimize the damage we are currently having on our planet. In
their provocative and visionary book ‘Cradle to Cradle: Remaking the Way We Make Things,’ they ask the
question: 'Why not challenge the belief that human industry must damage the natural world?'.

To do so, they, as did Buckminster Fuller, take nature as a model for production: a tree will produce
thousands of blossoms, to eventually create one new tree. The abundance does not result in hazardous
waste, because it is safe, beautiful and extremely efficient, as the remaining flowers and leaves will feed the
necessary organisms in which they end up. If we can produce in a similar way, or as they define their second
motto ‘Waste equals food,' products can be designed in such a way that, after they fulfilled their purpose
and function, they can be re-used to create a new product.
They purposefully differentiate between down-cycling and up-cycling. Whatever the name suggests,
'recycling' still doesn’t include a process that is designed to be managed from start to finish. The principle
of 'cradle to cradle' works on the base of a lifecycle analysis. The product passes through a chain of pro-
cesses from its origin (raw material extraction, production), use (energy consumption and consumption of
consumables such as washing powder and petrol) and disposal (recycling and landfill). On each of these
planes, adjustments can be made that allow for each element to be recuperated or used as a source for the
next step.
This new concept challenges us to an entirely different approach than the simple linear method we have
been using for centuries. Buckminster however, had the following to say:
You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model
“ that makes the existing model obsolete.
R. Buckminster Fuller. 4D World. Image by The Buckminster Fuller Challenge.

5. A new economical model
In a 1932 interview with Time Magazine, Buckminster declared that:
“
a house is not a property to be owned, but a mechanical arrangement to be used.
He noted the 'vast usefulness' of many of our daily object, such as houses and automobiles, which we felt
we needed to own, only to use them very infrequently, simply to justify ‘ownership’. Architect Thomas Rau
and economist Sabine Oberhuber recently made a plea for a circular economy model as an alternative to
our current 'exploitive' society, as they call it, based on exploitation. In their book 'Material Matters,'46, they
deliver a critical look at society as they urge for the passing from a linear to a circular model, encouraging
people to pass from product-based economy to a service-based economy.
According to them, we should no longer ‘own’ a certain product, but only pay for its ‘functionality’ during
the duration of its use. Whereas in our current economic system, the consumer has to take care of the
maintenance and disposal of the product, in a circular model the producer remains responsible for taking
back and reusing or recycling the used product back into the raw material. It may seem like a new and
challenging idea, but as Thomas points out, we already apply this principle when we buy a plane ticket or
rent a book from the library.
It will be difficult for people to let go of the concept of ‘owning’ as we need to distance ourselves from our
marketing-fuelled addiction to 'owning new things' that we have gotten so accustomed to. Rau and
Oberhuber believe that we as consumers have grown so mentally attached to consumerism and the
possession of new items, that we express our identity in owing material objects. We are continually being
seduced to buy new ‘unnecessary’ things, using up valuable resources, and thus making our development
depend on ever-changing impulses.
When producers continue being the owner of their product, they can no longer rely on the
“ business model of replacing it when it breaks down, stimulating them to deliver products of bad
quality. Instead, if the product comes back to them, they need to look for sustainable and durable
solutions to keep their products running for longer and be able to recycle them more efficiently. 47
46Rau, T. Oberhuber, S. (2016). Material Matters. Het alternatief voor onze roofbouwmaatschappij. Bertram + de Leeuw. The Nether-
lands.
47Economie opnieuw uitvinden - Thomas Rau | Triodos Bank. (2014). De Kleur van Geld: Triodos Bank Nederland. Retrieved 14 May
2017, from https://dekleurvangeld.nl/interview-thomas-rau/

‘Cradle to cradle’ is an idea in which materials circularly return to their source; in ‘performance economy’,
developed by Walter Stahel during the 1970s, that principle applies to the whole economic system. Instead
of overproducing a product to insure its availability, a business model is promoted that does not capitalise
on production, but rather on service.
Taking an example from the idea, Dutch-German entrepreneur, architect and visionary Thomas Rau
approached the Dutch company Philips Lighting, and started from the marketing point of selling 'light as a
service'. In their collaboration, Rau insisted he would neither be paying the cost of the material, the energy
bill, nor the recycling fee. Phillips would deliver him the lamps, Rau would pay them 'per lux' over a certain
amount of time and afterwards Phillips would recover the lamps. This approach urged Philips to drastically
modify their classical take on the project: they reduced the number of lamps needed to reach the
demanded amount of watts, replacing them for more powerful, less energy-consuming, but also more easily
repairable, replaceable and recyclable models. Instead of the company gaining profit each time a lamp
broke, they now reached maximum advantage if they lowered the costs of production, use, and recovery of
the lights. A win-win situation.
Circular thinking can also radically change and improve architecture and construction, the study field of
Thomas Rau. 'A building as well should be able to be completely disassembled. The building of the future
is a temporarily organised storage facility for raw material. A material bank. When you no longer need the
building, you take out the materials, and you can make something new out of it.'
To make the assembly and disassembly as efficient as possible, every material or element would carry a
personal identity card, Rau explains. 'A building can only be built if we are a hundred percent certain each
item can — and will — be repurposed. Only then do we minimise our impact.'
Buckminster’s self-sufficient, affordable, adaptable and transportable ‘living-machines’ would fit this original
theory perfectly as it offers a solution to wasteful production and product design.  

AN ADAPTABLE FUTURE
Architecture is capable of engaging with these political, social and environmental issues in a serious way.
Part of the aim of this dissection is to demonstrate the principles and guidelines that shape our current
world and, through them, investigate how not only the design of future dwellings can contribute to the life
of its inhabitants, but to that of the progress of the whole society. Mobile and flexible architecture is an
intelligent way of inhabiting an environment in a given time and place, being able to react and interact with
ongoing social and cultural changes, complex cities, uncertain territories, undefined boundaries and
changing structures. It can be adapted to new found possibilities and urgent needs. Flexibility and
changeability in architecture are strategies of design that prepare for unpredictable situations and also
commodify our daily habits.
Inhabiting vs. inhabited space
In 2013, international architecture students from all over the world joined Porto Academy, a summer school
organised by the majestic school of architecture in Porto, Portugal, home to star architects such as Alvaro
Siza and Eduardo Souto de Moura.
I myself participated in the atelier of Belgian architect Johan Anrys (51N4E). The aim of our studio was to
observe and analyse human behaviour and intimacy in the public space. We looked for examples of how
the inhabitants of Oporto invested their city, in order to create a lexicon of how people give meaning to
their own intimate life by relating it to the public space and vice versa. Wandering around the city, I came to
observe an interesting situation that would take place every night when homeless people found their
shelter to spend the night.
This specific example shows how architecture has the ability to adapt to newfound possibilities and needs,
even when it is not always designed to do so. Unimaginable scenarios can take place in a space as simple
as finding shelter in a store front window. The importance here lies in the focus on the ‘human experience’
and on creating an architecture that allows people to appropriate the space in a very personal and timely
way. When imagining future housing solutions and flexible modules, the starting point has to be how
people live, how they adapt their living spaces and how they themselves adapt to their living spaces.
The following scenario reads as a testimony of a personal engagement in our shared environment:
AN ADAPTABLE FUTURE 9!6

HALF TIME SLEEPING SPACES
One of the streets leaving the Boavista roundabout in Oporto, opposite to the majestic ‘Casa da Musica’ by
Rem Koolhaas, is called Rua Julio Dinis. Along this descending street, every pair of neighbouring shops
share a small covered entrance portico with two facing doors and a third one leading to the housing units
above the commercial ground level. The cosy space created by this setting presents itself as a useful shelter
for Porto’s homeless people staying there overnight, allowing them to spend the night in a more comfort-
able place than they usually would. During the day their mattresses, pillows and blankets are neatly bundled
to allow undisturbed access to the shops for their clients. This process is repeated every night and its organ-
isation is carefully managed by a local help organisation.
Being inhabited or inhabiting becomes in this scenario the result of creation and re-creating carried out by
the user, by changing the way the space is used and appropriated in a way it was perhaps not supposed to.
By movements, imagination and new rituals we express what we expect from a space. The constructions we
create are testimonies of a personal engagement to our environment.
People change their practice over time, and although the architect of these Portuguese buildings wouldn’t
have ever imagined his porticos would one day be used as a bedroom for unprivileged people, yet eco-
nomic and social factors changed the scenario he might have once envisioned. The function of the space is
being modified and to reconfigured to allow a new use.
A process of adapting and re-adapting takes place. We are being faced by a dynamics in which space is
constantly created and re-created, a dynamics which itself defines the strange phenomena of ‘inhabiting’.
From: ‘Urban Intimacy’. A Porto Academy publication.

Mobility
Starting in the late fifties, a group of young European architects, called the G.E.A.M (Groupe d’Études
d’Architecture Mobile) started to advocate for more mobile architecture, one that has the ability to adapt to
the residents’ needs. They critiqued modern architecture for its static principles and wanted to reach a more
dynamic outcome. Their proposal was a 'variable and exchangeable' kind of architecture. They followed
advancements in technology and science to back up their progressive ideas.
Parallel to the G.E.A.M, in 1958, architect Yona Friedman published his first manifesto called 'Mobile
architecture' (1958) in which he urges for a flexible and adaptable way of construction. Friedman explained
his concept of 'mobile' architecture as following:
In architecture, flexibility means a building conceived by an architect in which further changes are
“ possible, meanwhile mobility (in the sense in which I have interpreted it in the therm 'mobile
architecture') implies a flexible building whose disposition has been conceived for the future
inhabitant himself.
Fundamental to Yona Friedman is that the user is the one who decides the lay-out of their own habitat.
Friedman later expanded on the principles for Mobile Architecture by proposing the idea of an elevated
and flexible city, a project he called: La Ville Spatiale.
Yona Friedman. La ville spatiale. 1970.

The freedom of the choice for the individual and the flexible multi-layered use of city space were important
tools to Friedman to allow city dwellers to actively influence their own living environment. His purpose was
to introduce a methodical approach open to city expansion without the risk of land scarcity.
The principal objective of the ideas of Buckminster Fuller, Yona Friedman and the G.E.A.M. was that the
inhabitants themselves were responsible of their habitat as a unit 'separate' from a general structure which
supported it, shaped by the environment and the technical means of its construction.
They also explored the possibility that the future users, assisted by architects and engineers, would 'project'
the general structure or support. We can define this architecture created through collaborative processes as
‘participative architecture’ or ‘democratic architecture’
The ‘participative architecture’ develops a project of collective creation in which the architect acts as a
mediator in meetings in which the future inhabitants decide on the architectonic criteria. Participative
processes are spaces of dialogue between inhabitants and architects in which the inhabitants express their
vital experience and the architect their technical knowledge. Between them, different tools and ways of
representation are needed to facilitate the communication that allows the future residents to visualise their
future domestic space as a common environment.
Participative design
An example of ‘participative architecture’ can be found in the university apartment in Leuven (1974) by
Belgian architect Lucien Kroll (1927). The point of departure of Lucien Kroll’s work is the separation between
the 'support' as an industrial construction, and the content, inside of it, which can be defined, variated and
executed by the future users. To facilitate the intervention of the inhabitant, Kroll tried to fragment the
constructive element so that they were manageable by them. Kroll also incorporated the notion of time, as
he recognised that the best spaces are those which are able to evolve and transform over time.
He often developed constructive systems in his projects that allow for the intervention and variations of the
architecture by its proper users. This concept continued in his views on urbanism, as he would say:
“
'you should not manufacture a city, you must let it build itself.’ 48
48 Wolfgang Pehnt: ‘Introduction to Lucien Kroll’. In: Kroll, L. (1987). Buildings and Projects. Rizzoli. New York.

“
Lucien Kroll. La maison médicale des étudiants en Médecine. Bruxelles. 1970.
Kroll also understood that in essence architectonic spaces generated should be undetermined, creating 'an
action open to new necessities and to decisions that are always provisional and incomplete.'49
In 1968, the Belgian Catholic University of Leuven decided to move to Woluwe-Saint-Lambert in Brussels.
During the planning process of the new university students protested because the new faculty was being
created without relying on their input. The university decided to include them in the procedure, proposing
different architects to them. The students chose Lucien Kroll, defender of ‘participative architecture.’
The university’s programme was rather versatile. It included houses and apartments for families, couples or
single people, communal housing, various restaurants, a cinema, a theatre studio, sporting facilities, a
chapel, a kindergarten, a post office and even a metro station. Kroll delivered the project, joined by the
proper students, of the apartments of the Faculty of Medicines (‘La Mémé’). This building converted into a
manifest of his ‘democratic architecture’.
49 Rafaellla Poletti. ‘Lucien Kroll, Utopia interrupted, variety without difference'. Domus 937, June 2010.
!00
The outside of the building is complicated and appears to be a disorder. Kroll explained that this chaotic
composition represented the human diversity. The facades of the building incorporated a wide variety of
constructive elements, in a modular order. The exterior carpentry had an open size, in such a way that the
students could choose the windows of their apartments. Kroll turned out to be a pioneer, years later, of the
incorporation of computers and digital tools in the profession of architecture.
Kroll developed a complete participative process, together with the future users, destined to create and
architecture that could respond to their needs. The process included long discussions with the students on
how they would like to live, their cultural options and habits. It can be said that the project was born from
this mutual interaction.
One of the features of the building were the interior partitions which were mobile and interchangeable.
Once the project was in use, the students could locate and relocate these partitions on their own.
The architectonic design and the constructive elements tried to incentivise the creativity of the users,
leaving space for improvisation and spontaneity and incorporating the advantages of manual construction:
the learning process starting from real-time experience and the ability to respond in a direct way to
changing conditions. As the structure of the building was heterogenous, the individuality needed to adapt
itself to it.
Students in La Maison Médicale. Lucien Kroll. 1970.
!01
The building counted numerous accesses and connections between different compartments, in order to
create a large concept of community and sociability. It shows that including and encouraging user
participation, is also an act of democracy. According to Isabelle Doucet in her book ‘The Practice Turn in
Architecture: Brussels after 1968’:
it combines the empowerment of the user with a critical questioning of the architect’s power
“ relationships, be they with public clients or private developers. 50
We can note this democratic dimension in many of the projects of participatory architecture around the
1960s and 1970s, as highlighted in Doucet’s book. Italian architect Giancarlo De Carlo, an advocate himself
of an inclusive architecture process, stated that:
architecture has become too important to be left to architects, […] therefore all barriers between
“ builder and users must be abolished. 51
His hope was thus that users and inhabitants of architecture and cities became actively involved in the
imagination and creation of their built environment. No longer would architects be in charge of imagining
ideas and translating them to paper and later to building, users would become participants in the
imagination, appropriation and sometimes even construction, in the case of ‘self-building’.
The democratisation of architectural production, whether it be in the design or in the funding phase, as well
as in the user and consumer part, can open new possibilities for the profession. Instead of working endlessly
on a yet to finance and finalise project, we can create a large base of consultancy and management-based
tasks in order to make architecture readily and affordably available to more people while using less
resources to do so.
Open Source architecture
Socially engaged architecture has been around since the 1990s, seeing a revival in user-participation and
self-building practices. Showing parallels to the developments in politics, art and economy at the time,
architecture also proved to be an atmosphere in which collectivity and citizen participation could reach their
true realisation.
50 Doucet, L. (July 7, 2016). The Practice Turn in Architecture: Brussels after 1968. Routledge. Abingdon, UK.
51Giancarlo De Carlo, 'Architecture's Public', in Blundell Jones, P., Petrescu, D., Till, J. (2007). Architecture and Participation. Spon
Press. Abingdon, UK. p. 13.
!02
The term ‘open-source urbanism’ was coined as an alternative form of urban development where users and
citizens decided on long-term or temporary occupations, often in abandoned and vacant, spaces. At the
same time, policy was further developed to facilitate these activities. As more and more people started
living in cities, it become vital for them to become involved in the design, production and inhabitation of
their cities.
In the pamphlet ‘Urban Versioning System 1.0’, Matthew Fuller and Usman Haque enumerate seven
'constraints' which, when followed, could radically change the conventional way in which we build cities.
A system that encourages people themselves to create their own spaces and collaboratively build a
“ social space — such a system could be more efficient, more imaginative and more conceptually
'open'. Yet even this is not sufficient: there is no point in having an 'open' design process that results
in a structurally 'closed' entity. Architecture that is produced through an authentically open process is
never finished: there is no distinction between design and inhabitation. 52
They ultimately bring up a lot of conditions already brought up in this thesis, such as constantly re-inventing
pre-established architecture models, participatory construction, ‘waste is food’ and re-thinking the idea of
property as it was previously defined.
Open source is a term initially used to describe the concept of freely sharing digital data and software,
online, leaving the opportunity for those interested to modify, distribute or use it. When applied to
architecture and urbanism, it gives planners, designers, architects, urbanists, users and even urban 'activists'
the tools to plan and modify their living environment in a direct way. The hope is that such an approach can
create a more sustainable and qualitative model of architecture, based on a bottom-up perspective.
Architecture that is created by people, for people.
When the architecture review Domus released their issue 948 on 'open-source architecture, Italian Carlo
Ratti proposed to write his essay on the topic in a rather unusual way: he wrote the article as an open-
source document to which people could freely contribute like one would to a Wikipedia article. The
contributors to this article included Paola Antonelli, Adam Bly, Lucas Dietrich, Joseph Grima, Dan Hill, John
Habraken, Alex Haw, John Maeda, Nicholas Negroponte, Hans Ulrich Obrist, Carlo Ratti, Casey Reas, Marco
Santambrogio, Mark Shepard, Chiara Somajni, Bruce Sterling, and counting.
52 Fuller, M. Haque, U. Kahn, O. and Trebor, S. (2007). Urban Versioning System 1.0. Architectural League of New York.
!03
Open Source Architecture (OSArc) is an emerging paradigm describing new procedures for the
“ design, construction and operation of buildings, infrastructure and spaces. Drawing from references
as diverse as open-source culture, avant-garde architectural theory, science fiction, language theory,
and others, it describes an inclusive approach to spatial design, a collaborative use of design
software and the transparent operation throughout the course of a building and city's life cycle.53
Architecture here becomes a dynamic and collaborative process using modern day technologies to create
optimal building projects. Nowadays Creative Commons licensing and online interactive software, allow
people to have access to architectural programs, drawings and blueprints of all sorts and share information
from all over the world.
Beyond the production process, Open Source Architecture also closes the loop of feedback around a
project to rapidly receive the response of its users, its visitors and its constructors. Adaptions are made
before, while and after is built.
Its purpose is to transform architecture from a top-down immutable delivery mechanism into a
“ transparent, inclusive and bottom-up ecological system — even if it still includes top-down
mechanisms. 54
Solidary spheres
Increasing individuality and the lack of solidarity in the 21st century however, might pose a problem in this
somewhat utopian scenario. A combination of isolated individual components, connected to a larger
network, is proposed as a solution. Buckminster Fuller defined our collective responsibility for our shared
‘Spaceship Earth’. According to him, the Earth should not be regarded as a natural variable, but rather as an
artificial construction, a vehicle. In such a controlled environment, the inhabitant have it in their best interest
to protect the conditions of life inside the ship.
Peter Sloterdijk, a German philosopher and cultural theorist, gives insight into this process of
individualisation and solidarity in this book ‘Spheres’ as he uses the concept of 'Foam Cities' to advocate for
53Open Source Architecture (OSArc) - Op-ed - Domus. (2017). domusweb.it. Retrieved April 12 2017, from http://www.domusweb.it/
en/op-ed/2011/06/15/open-source-architecture-osarc-.html
54 Open Source Architecture (OSArc) - Op-ed - Domus. (2017). domusweb.it.
!04
a collective approach in imagining and building cities, one that focusses on the encompassing of many
fragmented social groupings in the present-day world into one world view.
He states that human societies are not static and analyses the changes necessary to grown from various
small and separated units to a bigger grouping, like a city, a nation or an empire. Ultimately, Sloterdijk
defines the relationships between these scales as ‘spheric expansion’. The success of the expansion
depends on the ability of the ‘sphere’ to absorb foreign elements and naturalise them as part of itself.
This new adventure in urbanism, as explored by Buckminster Fuller, Yona Friedman, Paolo Soleri, Peter
Cook, Ron Herron and other architects, Sloterdijk states, is emphasised on experimental city shapes,
resulting in a redefinition of urban space and a sense of 'society' in ever denser environments. The growth
of those so called 'Foam cities' is an assembly of enclosed social spaces whose limits are equidistant from
one local centre point.
The sphere is the interior, disclosed, shared realm inhabited by humans – insofar as they succeed in
“ becoming humans. Because living always means building spheres, both on a small and a large scale,
humans are the beings that establish globes and look out into horizons. Living in spheres means
creating the dimension in which humans can be contained. Spheres are immune-systematically
effective space creations for ecstatic beings that are operated upon by the outside.55
Spheres are a natural occurring phenomena, found amongst others in plants cells, foam and throughout the
human body. This analogy with nature affirms that Sloterdijk has an organic vision on architecture.
The co-isolated foam of a society conditioned to individualism is not simply an agglomeration of
“ neighbouring (partition-sharing) inert and massive bodies but rather multiplicities of loosely touching
cells of life-worlds.56
This powerful analogy between foam and the city shows how even in an extremely individualised society, at
least one of the limits of our isolated unit is shared with the common space. Co-operation and contempla-
tion between collective ensembles become a necessity for innovating architecture.
55 Sloterdijk, P. (2004). Sferen: Schuim. Uitgeverij Boom. Amsterdam. p. 28.

56 Sloterdijk, P. (2004). Sferen: Schuim. Uitgeverij Boom. Amsterdam.
!05
Referencing this experimental form of urbanism, is Tomás Saraceno, an artist and architect from Argentina.
His work ‘Cloud cities’ proposes a model for a utopian city floating in the air which, according to him,
projects a network of inhabitable spaces in the sky as a response to our fragile ecological situation.
He deems it possible that in the near future civilisations will not be limited anymore by standard constraints
such as asphalt, citizenship, or even gravity. Inspired by spider webs, he places thin threaded polyhedra in a
large open space, technically and architecturally exploring social phenomena like self-organisation and the
organic structural system of communities. He places humans in a future Aerocene era, speculating that
somewhere in the future we will be inhabiting clouds which spontaneously cluster in all three dimensions.
The flexible way in which Saraceno explores creative wisdom with reality is similar to Buckminster Fuller’s
approach in exploring utopian or dystopian hypotheses and his desire to improve the human condition, as
well as Archigram’s fictional urban visions in 3D and outer space.
The work of Sareceno also references the unconventional and experimental designs of Lebbeus Woods, an
American architect who shared with Fuller and Archigram the imagination of hypothetical futures in which
cities were either underground constructions, air bound ‘spaceships’ or situated in eternal space. His
floating structures pointed out his critical analysis of the human impact on our Earth and its environment in
our current era and his proposal of a new alternative future.
Saraceno’s Cloud cities are drifting in a similar atmosphere, launching us into a futuristic space where we
have solved our human relationship to the Earth, the environment and to each other, living as a more
interconnected society.
!06
Tomás Saraceno. Stillness in Motion—Cloud Cities; installation view at the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art,
December 17, 2016–May 21, 2017; photo: © Studio Tomás Saraceno. 
AN ADAPTABLE FUTURE !107

THE LIVING BUILDING
The ultimate purpose of this thesis is to regard the dwelling as a living organism, also a ‘living building’ that
can grow, adapt and is prepared to challenge many of the predictable and unpredictable changes humanity
will be faced with over the next centuries. Italian architect Paolo Soleri describes this process as:
In nature, as an organism evolves it increases in complexity and it also becomes a more compact or
“ miniaturised system. Similarly a city should function as a living system.
He defines his way of thinking as 'Arcology' (Architecture and Ecology), as it is focussed on the integration
of ecological process within built structures.
Arcology, architecture and ecology as one integral process, is capable of demonstrating positive
“ response to the many problems of urban civilisation, population, pollution, energy and natural
resource depletion, food scarcity and quality of life.
Soleri states that because we are faced with those problems in a rapidly changing world, it is necessary to
adapt our strategy, our processes and the results we want to achieve with them. We need to recognise the
necessity to re-organise our cities, houses and living environments to better support our complex, rapid,
digital and nomad lifestyles and the activities that define our world today.
We need to create a collaboration between different elements and the possibility to adapt the system while
it is up and running, rather than perform on outdated methods which are difficult and time-consuming to
modify. The aim is to constantly live in an ongoing laboratory allowing us to control, prove and change the
way we are living.
Instead of focusing on immovable and permanent constructions that function as a static frame to our busy
lives, architecture can become a physical form of our human ecology, with are continuously changing
configuration to optimally handle input and output.
In a society where production is a successful and physically gigantic fact, the coordination and
“ congruence of information, communication, transportation distribution, and transference are the
mechanics by which that society operates. It is not accidental that these are also dynamic aspects of
another phenomenon, the most dynamic of all: life.

!09
When we go look for inspiration in nature, for example in an ever busily thriving ants’ nest, it is clear that
processes are constantly being repeated, improved and adapted. There is a continuous flow of data and
physical matter that adapts to changing conditions and to improve and assure the integration of each of the
elements that make up the system.
This idea is confirmed by the term biomimicry, also known as ‘innovation inspired by nature’. In her book,
Biomimicry, professor and biologist Janine Benyus defines it as:
the process of learning from and then emulating life’s genius. It’s based not on what we can extract
“ from the natural world, but what we can learn from it.
When we apply biomimicry to our future designs, we re-create a connection with our initial design methods.
I use the term ‘initial,’ because at least in our recent history we have been designing almost exclusively to
meet our own demands, ignoring the negative impact such actions have on our natural environment. We
are creating pollution, hazardous waste and many other side products of building in a way that goes against
natural processes and is now seriously damaging our ecosystems and harming human life.
The purpose of biomimicry is to create — or recreate — a symbiotic relationship between humans and
nature. If we manage to effectively imitate natural systems we can reproduce some of the amazing features
that occur in nature’s ecosystems, in such a way that the waste of one system is recycled to become a
powerful fuel for a new system to benefit from.
From this perspective, architecture can be seen as a truly dynamic practice, constantly creating and re-
creating itself. It is not so much about the finished product or building one creates, as about the process
and the key each project represents in the circular chain over the duration of the process.
When we include our future users and give them the tools to actively imagine, create, produce, adapt and
re-invent architecture, we allow for a system that solves problems instead of causing them. The role of the
architect in this case becomes that of the advisor, to understand and make understandable the means
necessary to reach a certain situation.
The ‘living building’ is never finished. Its goal is to reach a state of constant indecisiveness that allows and
needs to be constantly adjusted and refined. It is a design approach that makes building and living flexible
actions, both practically, spatially and financially.

!10
The house then becomes an open source project. It is changeable, scaleable and modifiable. It is open to
learning, receiving from and giving input to its users. It becomes a tool of exploration that allows us to
experiment with spatial situations, develop new knowledge, try out different organisations and read the
results in a progressive and pro-active way.
Without wanting to glorify the state of poverty in which slum dwellers live, their informal settlements can be
seen as great examples of how human are able to adapt architecture to their most direct needs and initiate
an urban growth there were the western world is unable to meet the demands of its most vulnerable
citizens. Rapidly expanding all over the planet and estimated to currently host 1/3 of the world urban popu-
lation, we need to start recognising the potential of ‘a planet of slums’:
The buildings in the planet of slums are, paradoxically alike, and at the same time completely unique.
“ They are found on the antipode of the habitational thematic parks of the urban west world where the
middle class lives. 57
There were people were struck by poverty and overpopulation, they started to create their own laws and
regulations, practising architecture and urban design outside of the normal standards. Their houses are self-
made, using found materials such as ply-wood, paper boxes and other urban waste products. They are
constantly under development, morphing into different stadia of their life cycle, founded on the uncertain
conditions that surround them. They are proof of the inventiveness and the do-it-yourself mentality of
humans when preconditioned guidelines are unprovided. These alternative building practices can possibly
indicate how the built civilisation is going to develop in the upcoming decades.
This recognition is placed in a reality of changing natural and unnatural processes, social uncertainty, econo-
mical chaos and other circumstances that challenge our capacity to project, imagine, anticipate, produce,
relate and produce a new dynamic dimension of contemporary architecture which has the capacity to re-
solve, advance and reactivate the human world.
Conventional solutions will no longer suffice to shape our future. We will need to use our imagination and
experience to create an adaptable, constantly mutating form of architecture. A process that is eager to keep
on developing, rather than reach a certain kind of perfection. Instead of rebuilding everything every twenty
to a hundred years, why not design a building that can adapt to our shifting needs?
57 Davis, M. (2006). Planet of Slums. Verso

!11
Through digital and technological means certain elements in our built environment have become capable
of learning about and anticipating to our needs for change, creating an interactive relationship between
technology and humanity. Meanwhile, a paradox is being created between a much more tailored and
adaptive architecture that takes into account its users and reacts to their input, and at the same time a
constantly more automatised architecture that is being thought and moved by robots and computer
programmes.
In Charles Darwin’s model of survival, the success always depends on the capacity of an object to 'adapt to
a changing environment.' The same applies to architecture. In general, architecture is a very slow art that
learns through failure and error mostly on the long run. It is crucial for modern day architects to be aware of
social and environmental problems in order to correctly project their ideas. If we create an architecture that
is too static and stubborn, the fast pace of our modern society will rather soon than late catch up with it.
The need for a sustainable, resource and energy efficient model calls for a strategy of adaptiveness and
resilience to unforeseeable situations. Throughout this thesis we have explored the idea of flexibility as a
long-term approach to urgent matters. Adaptable or resilient design has the capacity to react to both
recurring changing conditions, daily changes and even disaster scenarios, such as flooding, climate change,
land and energy scarceness, which we will be faced with in the near future.
These strategies of sustainability extend further than the current perception of ‘passive housing,’ energy-
efficient or pre-fabricated building. They prepare buildings to withstand the challenges of time and to
remain accurate and meaningful for future generations.
Architect Carl Elefante defined this by saying: 'The greenest building is the one that’s already built.' The
challenge — for architects — remains how to design buildings that are durable and sustainable through
their adaptive design that can face ongoing modifications in its interior functioning, its exterior conditions
and its future planning or programming. 

!12
 
Foam. Photo by UCLA.

CONCLUSION
Present-day lifestyles are changeable, flexible and adaptive. In parallel to new ways of living, the world has
been going through a profound change as well, facing economical, ecological, political and even
psychological challenges. For that reason, this thesis proposes that for architecture to be best capable of
accommodating such change, it has to allow to be transformed and modified throughout its lifecycle,
during the process, the use and in terms of recovery and reversibility of materials.
This thesis analysed housing solutions, from the last 100 years, asking, from the inhabitant’s point of view:
'what does this house allow me to do?' and from and the architect’s point of view: 'how can I make it as
adaptable as possible?'. The selected projects each brought up important questions and values in regar-
ding the position and the adaptation of the dwelling in different stadia of the construction and occupation
of the house.
In a world in constant motion and at risk of environmental disasters that make living situations unsure and
unpredictable, mobility has become an ever increasing necessity. Design that is based on the assembly and
disassembly of different modular parts, can be re-located in a short timespan. Housing solutions that are
able to adapt to different situations has to become a part of the architectural vocabulary.
Beside provisionary planning, we need to establish a constant 'communication' with our houses, making it
modifiable and using programmable data to constantly modify our environments. Technology and
interactive design make it easier and more fluently to modify our living space in terms of light, heating,
disposition, orientation, and other possible configurations.
We need to create houses as technological eco︎︎system︎s, capable of generating sufficient energy, using
recycled materials and reducing or eliminating waste products completely. The lifetime of such houses can
be highly enlarged as adaptability allows for adaptation to new situations and conditions. Instead of
creating static solutions, the whole lifespan of a house needs to be considered as part of a loop, a
continuous movement.
Adaptable features can make important improvements on sustainability of a dwelling. We can start
designing houses, respecting the environment and the ecological, social and economical circumstances of
the current world, using resources and materials more carefully.
CONCLUSION 1
!14
Finally, in the midst of economic uncertainty and crisis, the idea of ‘circular economy’ opens up scenarios
where home-owners are no longer paying off a mortgage for several years, but are provided with affordable
housing through a system of community-based funding and insurance. A house is no lo longer a static,
expensive property, but becomes a temporary service in people’s lives.
The ‘Buck doesn’t stop here’.58 Buckminster Fuller’s influence and world vision can and should not be
underestimated. He has always thoroughly investigated the domains that interested him, without occupying
them completely, but by observing them from different perspectives and making infinite side-notes
analysing them. He has always wanted to apprehend and fully apply this knowledge. Not only
architecturally did he develop wonderful techniques that are not only aesthetically pleasing to look at, but
also pay a major ethical importance to its inhabitants and its environment. Hundreds of geodetic domes
have been planted all over the world, sometimes as exposition spaces or luxurious villas, at other times to
house homeless families against extreme weather conditions.
Bucky always held in account the life that would develop in his conceptions and looked for ways that would
help that to happen as optimal as possible. He managed to combine living and technology in a way that,
according to me, will be of great importance in the further development of human life on ‘Spaceship Earth’.
I am convinced Buckminster Fuller’s innovative thinking about the adaptability of architecture will inspire my
further exploration of the subject.
Building on his work and other inspirational examples, this thesis aspires to form a design approach that
does not predefine anything, but that is rather open to future spatial needs and uses. A model for both
designing and building for a future where financial lack and resource scarcity are undoubtedly present.
Following up on the continuous improvement of architectural prototypes can lead to accepting flexibility as
an essential element in architecture, regarding the dwelling as a living organism, as a ‘living building’.
To conclude, the ultimate purpose of this thesis is to get rid of the notion that things have always been the
same way, under the same rules, and are thus, unchangeable.  
58 Variation on the popular phrase 'the buck stops here’.
CONCLUSION 1
!15
Selected Bibliography
Print
- Aaseng, N. (1985). More With Less: Future World of Buckminster Fuller. Lerner.
- Baldwin, J. (1997). Buckminster Fuller’s Ideas For Today. John Wiley & Sons.
- Baker, L. (2014). Temporary architecture. Braun Publishing. Berlin, Germany.
- Banham, R. (1965). A home is not a house. Art in America, pp. 70-79.
- Banham, R. (1980). Theory and Design in the First Machine Age. MIT Press. Cambridge, Massachusetts.
- Banham, R. (1981). The triumph of software. In R. Banham, (1981. Original work published 1968). Design
by choice. London: Academy Editions. pp. 133-133.
- Berdini, P. (1986). Walter Gropius. Gustavo Gili, Barcelona.
- Blundell Jones, P., Petrescu, D., Till, J. (2007). Architecture and Participation. Spon Press. Abingdon, UK.
- Burdett, S. (1993). Buckminster Fuller. Prentice-Hall + IBD.
- Cook, P., Chalk, W. (Eds.). (1973). Archigram. Praeger, New York.
- Curtis, W.J.R. (1982, third edition 1996). Modern architecture since 1900. Phaidon.
- Curtis, W.J.R. (1987). Le Corbusier: Ideas and forms. Hermann Blume.
- Doucet, L. (July 7, 2016). The Practice Turn in Architecture: Brussels after 1968. Routledge. Abingdon, UK.
- Droste, M. (2006). Bauhaus. Taschen.
- Davis, M. (2006). Planet of Slums. Verso
- Frampton, K. (1980, edition 2007). Modern architecture: a critical history. Thames and Hudson.
- Friedman, Y. (1970). L' Architecture Mobile. Casterman.
- Fuller, M. Haque, U. Kahn, O. and Trebor, S. (2007). Urban Versioning System 1.0. Architectural League of
New York.
- Fuller, R. B. (1938). Nine Chains to the Moon: An Adventure Story of Thought (First ed.). Philadelphia:
Lippincott.
- Fuller, R. B. (1963). Ideas and Integrities: A Spontaneous Autobiographical Disclosure. Prentice-Hall.
- Fuller, R. B. with Agel, J. and Fiore, Q. (1970). I Seem to be a Verb. Bantam Books
BIBLIOGRAPHY 1
!17
- Fuller, R. B. (1971). Operating Manual for Spaceship Earth. E.P. Dutton & Co., New York.
- Fuller, R. B. (1972). 4D Timelock. Lama Foundations.
- Fuller, R. B. in collaboration with Applewhite, E.J. (originally published in 1975, Vol. 2 in 1979).
Synergetics: Explorations in the Geometry of Thinking. Macmillan.
- Fuller, R. B. (1981). Critical Path. Estate of R. Buckminster Fuller.
- Fuller, R. B. Edited by Krausse, J. Lichtenstein, C. (1999). Your Private Sky: R. Buckminster Fuller, the art of
design science. Lars Müller Publishers, Zurich.
- Grandry, P. (2012). What is the future of architecture? Crap is Good.
- Gössel, P., Leuthauser, G. (2005). Architecture in the 20th Century. Taschen.
- Giedion, S. (1928) Bauen in Frankreich, Eisen. Eisenbeton. Leipzig.
- Holl, S. (1995). Intertwining : selected projects 1989-1995 / Steven Holl. Princeton Architectural Press.
New York.
- Horden, R. (1995). Light tech. Basel, Switzerland: Birkhauser.
- Kahn, L. (1973). Shelter. Shelter Publications, Inc. California.
- Kaspori, D. (2003). 'A Communism of Ideas: towards an architectural open source practice'. in Archis.
- Kroll, L. (1987). Buildings and Projects. Rizzoli. New York.
- Le Corbusier (1923. Edition 1995). Vers une architecture. Flammarion. Paris.
- Le Corbusier (1987). The city of tomorrow and its planning. Cambridge.
- Leupen, B. (2006). Frame and generic space. 010 Publishers, Rotterdam.
- Lorance, L. Fuller, R.B. (2009). Becoming Bucky Fuller. The MIT Press. Cambridge.
- Lupfer, G., Sigel, P. (2004). Gropius. Taschen, Germany.
- Melis, L. (2003). Parasite Paradise: pleidooi voor tijdelijke architectuur en flexibele stedenbouw. NAi
Uitgevers. Rotterdam, Nederland.
- Moore, R. (2012). Why we Build. Pan Macmillan. London, UK.
- Mulder, B. (1999). Rietveld, Schröder House. Princeton Architectural Press. New York.
- Murcutt, G., Beck, H., Cooper, J., The Images Publishing Group. (2002). Glenn Murcutt: A Singular
Architectural Practice. The Images Publishing Group. Mulgrave, Australia.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 1
!18
- Neder, F. (2008). Fuller Houses. R. Buckminster Fuller’s Dymaxion Dwellings and other domestic
adventures. Lars Müller Publishers, Baden.
- Oosterhuis, K. (2001) Towards a New Kind of Building: Tag, Make, Move, Evolve. NAi Publishers.
Rotterdam.
- Otto, F. Hennicke, J. (1975). Adaptable architecture. Krämer [in Komm]. Berthold Burkhardt, Universität
Stuttgart.
- Overy, P. (1988). The Rietveld Schröder House. Interview with Rietveld in 1963. The MIT Press. Cambridge.
- Pearman, H. Whalley, A. (2003). The Architecture of Eden. Eden Project.
- Prouvé, Jean. (1971). Jean Prouvé: Une architecture par l'industrie. Architektur aus der Fabrik. Industrial
architecture. Éditions d'architecture Artemis. Zurich.
- Rau, T. Oberhuber, S. (2016). Material Matters. Het alternatief voor onze roofbouwmaatschappij. Bertram
+ de Leeuw. The Netherlands.
- Reginald, I. (1984). Gropius: an illustrated biography of the creator of the Bauhaus. Bulfinch press. Berlin.
- Rybczynsi, W. (1987). Home: A short History of an Idea. Penguin Books.
- Sadler, S. (2005). Archigram: Architecture without Architecture. The MIT Press. Cambridge.
- Sloterdijk, P. (2004). Sferen: Schuim. Uitgeverij Boom. Amsterdam.
- Snyder, R. (1980). R. Buckminster Fuller: An Auto-Biographical Monologue/Scenario. St. Martins.
- Schwartz-Clauss, M. Von Vegesack, A. Vitra Design Museum. (2002). Living in Motion: Design and
Architecture for Flexible Dwelling. Vitra. Wheil Am Rein.
- Taut, B. (1958). Houses and People of Japan. Sanseido Company. Tokyo, Japan.
- Till, J. Schneider, T. (19 Sep 2016) Flexible Housing. Routledge. Abingdon, UK.
- Tournikiotis, P. (1999). The Historiography of Modern Architecture. MIT Press. Cambridge, Massachusetts.
- Van der Rohe, M. (1927). About my block of houses. Deutscher Werkbund, Stuttgart.
- Woods, L. Myers, T. Harries, K. (2004) ‘Lebbeus Woods: experimental architecture’. Heinz Architectural
Center. Carnegie Museum of Art.
- Various authors (June 2011). Open Source Architecture. Domus # 948.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 1
!19
Web
- Adams, C. (n.d.) The Vision of Buckminster Fuller, by Celeste Adams. The Spirit of Ma'at. N.p. Accessed
December 22, 2016, from http://spiritofmaat.com/archive/apr2/bucky.htm.
- Gili Merin. (2013, July 12). AD Classics: The Dymaxion House / Buckminster Fuller. ArchDaily. Accessed
November 17, 2016, from http://www.archdaily.com/401528/ad-classics-the-dymaxion-house-
buckminster-fuller/.
- Selling light as a service. (n.d.) Accessed April 4, 2017, from https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/
case-studies/selling-light-as-a-service.
- Steven Sieden, L. (2013, Feb 26. Updated 2013, Apr 28). Buckminster Fuller: A Verb Who Supported All
Life on Spaceship Earth. Huffington Post. Accessed December 22, 2016, from http://
www.huffingtonpost.com/l-steven-sieden/buckminster-fuller-a-verb_b_2764737.html.
- Peters, A. (2016, March 31) Buckminster Fullers’ ideas are more important now than ever. Accessed
January 12, 2017, from https://www.fastcoexist.com/3058117/buckminster-fullers-ideas-are-more-
important-now-than-ever.
- Lansky, A. L. (2016, Dec 7). Can Buckminster Fuller’s Vision of the Future Help Save Humanity? Accessed
January 12, 2017, from http://www.wakingtimes.com/2016/12/07/can-buckminster-fullers-vision-future-
help-save-humanity/.
- Gluck, M. (2015). Paying Tribute to the Mad Genius of Buckminster Fuller. Nytimes.com. Retrieved 6 May
2017, from http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/17/t-magazine/gallery-paying-tribute-to-buckminster-
fuller.html
- Schwaller, N. (2017). Starting with The Universe. Architonic. Retrieved 6 May 2017, from https://
www.architonic.com/en/story/noemie-schwaller-starting-with-the-universe/7000121
- Collins, J. (2015). Makoko Floating School, beacon of hope for the Lagos 'waterworld' – a history of cities
in 50 buildings, day 48. the Guardian. Retrieved 6 May 2017, from https://www.theguardian.com/cities/
2015/jun/02/makoko-floating-school-lagos-waterworld-history-cities-50-buildings
- 'Exploring How And Why Trees ‘Talk’ To Each Other'. (2017). Yale E360. Accessed April 26, 2017, from
http://e360.yale.edu/features/exploring_how_and_why_trees_talk_to_each_other.
- '5 Architectural Secrets Of The Badjao: 21St Century Sea People'. (2015). Archdaily. Accessed April 27
2017, from http://www.archdaily.com/638523/5-architectural-secrets-of-the-badjao-21st-century-sea-
people.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 1
!20
- 'Arcosanti: The City Born From Nature'. (2017). Maptia. Accessed May 5 2017, from https://maptia.com/
danielperlaky/stories/arcosanti-the-city-born-from-nature.
- 'Tomas Saraceno Is Inventing Futuristic Cities That Are Lighter Than Air For A World Without Borders'.
(2017). Forbes.Com. Accessed May 6 2017, from https://www.forbes.com/sites/jonathonkeats/
2017/05/02/tomas-saraceno/#430129544626.
- 'Cloud Cities: Tomás Saraceno’s Visionary Architecture'. (2017). SFMOMA. Retrieved May 6 2017, from
https://www.sfmoma.org/read/cloud-cities-tomas-saracenos-visionary-architecture/
- Gamble, J. (2014). Has the time come for floating cities?. the Guardian. Retrieved May 6 2017, from
https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2014/mar/18/floating-cities-proposals-utopian-sci-fi 
BIBLIOGRAPHY 1
!21
-
We are on a spaceship; a beautiful one. It took billions of years to develop. We’re not going to get another.
Now, how do we make this spaceship work?
– R. Buckminster Fuller

LEUS Leonoor - Memoire Bucky - 2017

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

LEUS Leonoor - Memoire Bucky - 2017

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Leonoor Leus

The Living Building

Bucky and the Adaptability of Architecture

The Living Building

A thesis presented to La Cambre - Horta School of Architecture, Université Libre de Bruxelles.

Supervisor: David Erkan

Co-Supervisor: Victor Levy

targeting the future and providing new answers.

Keywords: adaptability, flexibility, transformable architecture, Buckminster Fuller.

Triangles. Cover photo by Spires Mill Studio.

What is the architect doing?

What is he thinking out there?

Now isn't that a strange thing?

Well, to him it feels just

Oh we guess a person's gotta do

What a person feels he must

'I won't throw myself from the pier

I'm gonna go home and shut up for a year

And when the year is over I'll reappear

And have a solution'

I've reason to believe that what I find

Is gonna change the face of humankind

And all these years before, well I was blind

‘cause I'm the architect

(I feel it's touch and go)

Now the man has understood

That outer space is overrated

About all the problems on this Earth we should

Worry now to solve them later

And so he's brooding and alluding on a perfect design

He thinks that working on behalf of himself is a crime

He flashes out by the water, a view so divine

He's the architect of his own fate, a man in his prime

'I won't throw myself from the pier

And when the year is over I'll reappear

And have a solution'

I've reason to believe that what I find

Is gonna change the face of humankind

And all these years before, well I was blind

Cause I'm the architect

(I feel it is touch and go)

(That's it, we're going to make it)

(Don't let up)

(Don't let up or we won't make it)

And so he drew himself a pentagon

Thinking it through a geodesic dome

From the coast of Tahiti to the hills of Rome

'I won't throw myself from the pier

I'm gonna go home and shut up for a year

And when the year is over I'll reappear

And have a solution.

Now if these aspirations bother you

Well you are just you, you don't have a clue

I'm sticking to the plan, I will see it through

Let there be no confusion

Cause I'm the architect

Lyrics from ‘The Architect’ by dEus.

perceiving the world.

seven years, to allow me to find my own path.

Traditional Japanese architecture 21

The Mechanical Revolution 23

ADAPTABLE ARCHITECTURE IN THE 20TH AND 21ST CENTURY 27

The Modern Movement 27

Lyrics from ‘The Architect’ by dEus. 

seven years, to allow me to find my own path. 