Footprint 31 examines a number of ways in which architecture can be understood as open. Ranging from structural to procedural, and from performative to conceptual forms of openness, the articles collected in the issue elaborate on a diversity of open architectures of the past an
...
Footprint 31 examines a number of ways in which architecture can be understood as open. Ranging from structural to procedural, and from performative to conceptual forms of openness, the articles collected in the issue elaborate on a diversity of open architectures of the past and present, in political, ideological, semiotic, technological, morphological, representational, and epistemological terms. Review articles provide further illustration by analysing three architectures by Nicolas Schöffer, Frank van Klingeren, and Lacaton and Vassal (with Jacques Hondelatte). The theoretical and methodological advantages and disadvantages of architectural openness identified by all contributors suggest alternative conceptualisations for the concept, and invite further reflection on the effectiveness and efficiency of its use towards the future. @en
