What should the architect’s role be with regard to public space and architecture in the midst of the new desire for regeneration? What are the boundaries – political, factual and legal – of the architectural discipline itself and how can the game rules be redefined? Ultimately, what is the real political capacity of architecture? Despite the topical nature of these questions – their belonging to the world of clichés – the continual formulation of these recurring themes remains necessary insofar as they act as a talisman, as a spur capable of endowing architecture with meaning if we want to understand it exactly as it should be: a form of commitment.

Peer Reviewed