PLUG-IN CITY

Archigram
1964

Humanities Assignment | Issues In Contemporary Architecture

Arc 204
Sheffield School of Architecture
Year 2 | 2012-2013

Stefania Tsigkouni
110215389
Table of Contents

Context

Plug-In City Description

Sustainability (Economic, Environmental, Social)

Technology

Iconic Architecture

Conclusion

Bibliography

Image Citations

2
With the following audit, I will investigate Archigram’s
Plug-In City within the themes of Sustainability,
Technology and Iconic Architecture.

Context

The 1960s were a period of radical change and

technological advances. Yuri Gagarin became the first
1) Yuri Gagarin, the first man in space
man in space (Fig.1), and the photocopier, the laser
action hologram and the contraceptive pill were
invented. Following a decade of post-war reconstruction,
British architecture was pleased enough with its
achievements that it chose to overlook these societal
changes1. In contrast to that, and willing to formulate
their own personal approach, Archigram became one of
the most recognizable architecture groups of visionary
architecture in Europe of the 1960s. Their work was
known for its ‘futuristic and often monumental urban
machines’2 that later became the leading ‘architectural
neo-avant-garde of the 1960s and early 1970s’3 . The
pamphlet Archigram I (Fig.2) was printed in 1961 to
officially declare their ideas. The group’s ideology was
2) Archigram 1, the first issue
closely linked to the technocratic philosophy of the
American designer Buckminster Fuller and to that of his
British adherents John McHale and Reyner Banham and
was devoted to a ‘high-tech’, light-weight,
infrastructural approach4. Archigram consisted of the
architects: Warren Chalk, Peter Cook, Dennis Crompton,
David Greene, Ron Herron and Michael Webb (Fig.3).
Plug-In City was the proposal that most expressed the
group’s attitude and preoccupations in the early years of 3) The Archigram Group
their career.

1"Archigram / - Design/Designer Information." Archigram / - Design/Designer Information. Web. Accessed 12

May 2013. <http://designmuseum.org/design/archigram>
2 Sadler, Simon. Archigram: Architecture without Architecture. Cambridge, MA: MIT, 2005. p.11. Print.
3 Sadler, Simon. Archigram's invisible university. Architectural Research Quarterly, (2002) , p. 247-255. Print
4 Frampton, Kenneth. "Chapter 4: Place, Production and Scenography: International Theory and Practice
since 1962." Modern Architecture: A Critical History. London: Thames and Hudson, 1992. p.280. Print.
3
Plug-In City Description

The Plug-in City was the aggregate of a series of smaller

projects and ideas that were investigated between 1962
and 1964. The themes discussed in the pamphlets of
Archigram 2 and 3 gradually accumulated arguments of
approval concerning expendable buildings: “it was then
inevitable that we should investigate what happens if
the whole urban environment can be programmed and
structured for change.” wrote Peter Cook 5.
Plug-In City made its first appearance in the magazine
Archigram Issue No.4 (1964) (Fig.4,5), as a ‘speculative 4) Archigram, Issue 4

series of proposals for a computer-controlled city

designed for change with removable elements plugged
into a ‘megastructure’ service framework’6 .

Sustainability

Issues of economic, environmental and social

sustainability are raised in this description and the whole
philosophy behind Plug-In City. The term sustainable is
defined by the Oxford Dictionary as the ability to be
maintained at a certain rate or level. Archigram made an
attempt to foresee into the future and create a design 5) First appearance of Plug-In City in
completely adaptable to people’s needs and the constant Archigram No.4
change of technology that would endure future
generations. The success of this scheme is to be
discussed.

Plug-In City has two significant differences over existing

cities. The first is that it is linear rather than circular.
What this means is that as cities grow, the periphery
(villages, week-end cottages etc.) will become
inaccessible if one wishes to go for a short period of time
(i.e. for a weekend). Archigram saw Plug-In City as a
connecting device across Europe (Fig.6), that would
collect all the ‘little piecemeal buildings that are 6) Study showing the spread of Plug-in City
over England
smothering the countryside7’. This would make use and

5 5 Cook, Peter. "5 Plug-In." Archigram. Basel [Switzerland: Birkhäuser Verlag, 1991, p.36. Print.
6"Plug-In City Study." Archigram Archival Project, 2010. Web. Accessed 12 May 2013. <http://
archigram.westminster.ac.uk/project.php?id=56>.
7Chapman, Priscilla. "Plug-in City Article." Archigram Archival Project. The Sunday Times, 1964. Web.
Accessed 12 May 2013. <http://archigram.westminster.ac.uk/project.php?id=63>.
4
take advantage of all land and resources, and not just
the centre of a city, in order to make everything equally
accessible and usable. Another important feature of the
city is that it can continually build and re-build itself.
This is allowed by a a monorail that runs along the top of
the grid (Fig.7). The monorail, besides carrying
passengers, also carries cranes which can, in their turn,
carry sections of the grid in vertical, horizontal and
oblique directions. The spaces that are formed by the
grid are where the crane ‘plugs in everything that makes
7) Section through a part of Plug-In City
up a city, from living rooms to parking lots etc’8 . The showing its components
flexibility of the structure allows the city to function
over a number of years and adapt to continuously
changing technology. For instance, if and when cars
become extinct, one will be able to unplug the road
systems and parking lots in order to plug in whatever is
needed for the new kind of transport. The scheme also
addressed the problems of population growth and traffic
that were considered at the time to ‘render great cities
unsustainable’9 . However, Archigram not only noticed the
speed of technological change but identified in it a kind
of hierarchy. According to it, the elements that were
more responsive to the speed and rhythm of a rapidly 8) Section showing the whole scheme
changing city would be located at the top of the and its mechanisms.

structure-city. Respectively, the more stable, long lasting

elements would find their way towards the bottom of the
city. All this would be done with the help of a clip-on
appliance wall, that would replace each function with
another one, still keeping the same location (Fig.8). The
advantage of this concept is that by being a completely
self-built and self-destroyable system it is easily adapted
to people’s needs and therefore endures as an
economically sustainable scheme for the future
generations to come, along with all the changes they will
bring with them.

It is evident at this point that Archigram was strongly

inspired by the introduction of mass-production in the
society and identified this attitude as healthy, positive

8Chapman, Priscilla. "Plug-in City Article." Archigram Archival Project. The Sunday Times, 1964. Web.
Accessed 12 May 2013. <http://archigram.westminster.ac.uk/project.php?id=63>.
9 Sadler, Simon. Archigram: Architecture without Architecture. Cambridge, MA: MIT, 2005. p.20. Print.
5
and productive . It considered it being ‘the product of a
sophisticated consumer society, rather than a stagnant
and declining one’10 . Plug-In City is designed in a way
that most of its elements are expendable and are
designated for future replacement. This is supported by
the definition of the City that is given by Peter Cook in
the book Archigram 11 :

The Plug-in City is set up by applying a large

scale network-structure, containing access ways
and essential services, to any terrain. Into this
network are placed units which cater for all
needs. These units are planned for
obsolescence. The units are served and
manoeuvred by means of cranes operating from
a railway at the apex of the structure. The interior
contains several electronic and machine
installations intended to replace present-day
work operations. Typical permanence ratings
would be:

Bathroom, kitchen, living room floor: 3-year

obsolescence
Living rooms, bedrooms: 5-8 year obsolescence
Location of house unit: 15 years duration
Immediate-use sales space in shops: 6 months
Shopping location: 3-6 years
Workplaces, computers, etc: 4 years
Car silos and roads: 20 years
Main megastructure: 40 years

In addition to the main craneway there are

smaller craneways and mechanized slipways as
well as telescopic handling elements.

The nature of the scheme acknowledges and accepts

throw-away architecture. The issue that is raised at this
point is how environmentally sustainable the
aforementioned system can be. The envisioned city
works by considering almost everything as a consumable
expendable product. This means that as most elements
have an expiry date, they are designed with a short life-

10Cook, Peter. "Editorial from Archigram 3." Archigram. Basel [Switzerland: Birkhäuser Verlag, 1991, p.16.
Print.
11 Cook, Peter. "5 Plug-In." Archigram. Basel [Switzerland: Birkhäuser Verlag, 1991, p.39. Print.
6
span, thus needing continuous replacement. As the
concept of the scheme is to be able to sustain future
generations and therefore last long enough, it is clear
that Archigram relied on infinite resources. In addition,
the design of the City is based on long linear motorways
and lifts embracing whatever motorized means of
transport will be used in the future, and does not provide
any infrastructure for pedestrian movement and other
sustainable transport (i.e. cycle routes)(Fig.9).
9) Speculative proposal investigating
Encouraging and praising the use of motor-generated application of Plug-in City to local needs of
transport would essentially lead to a higher level of transport interchange
carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, and thus to an increase
of air pollution. Moreover the roads at different levels
would unavoidably be rushing past people’s bedrooms
creating a source of noise pollution. At this point, it is
important to note that in the 1960s, when Plug-In City
was conceived, there was little environmental awareness
and sensitivity. One can presume that the group was not
concerned with the ecological consequences of their
megastructural proposal and promoted the idea of an
expendable environment. Nowadays, with the recycling
of resources and materials being one of the most
significant issues of contemporary life, Plug-In City would
have failed to comply with the new requirements of an
environmentally-conscious society. Their concept was
‘evidently still overcome by its context despite their
best efforts to ‘see in the future’.’12: it was conceived at
a time where human impacts on the decline of natural
systems where not entirely understood.

The scheme may be environmentally unsustainable, it

has, however, an interesting and debatable approach to
social sustainability. With the term social sustainability I
refer to its philosophical approach; that the ideal
sustainable life style is not the increase of wealth, but
instead the development of a reverse-consumerism 13. In
Plug-In City, Archigram managed to reduce people’s
needs to the absolute essentials, by creating cubicle-like 10) Plug and Clip Dwelling, the capsule-like
houses for every person, thus offering an equal quality of house, Section

12 Sadler, Simon. Archigram: Architecture without Architecture. Cambridge, MA: MIT, 2005. p.90-138. Print.
13"Social Sustainability." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 20 Mar. 2013. Web. 12 May 2013. <http://
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_sustainability>.
7
life to every individual (Fig.10). The praise to the idea of
mass-production is evident here. According to Warren
Chalk, each house would be made out of ‘mass-
produced, cheap and expendable, plastic and metal
rooms.’14 (Fig. 11). This means that each unit would be
of a standard size, with a specific space arrangement in
order to be able to plug-in at several locations and fit
the infrastructure. This could be seen as a positive thing
as it offers equal goods and options for travel to
everyone. On the other hand, it could be argued that
11) Plug’n’ Clip Dwelling, the capsule-like
with this formula, individuality and personal expression house, Interior View
may be offended. If everyone lives in identical houses,
with the same expendable furniture, there is not much
space left for the development and self-expression of the
individual (Fig.12). The capsule-like homes would be very
similar to hotel rooms, making them impersonal. This
could be seen as a drawback to a scheme that wishes to
enhance people’s quality of life.

Technology
12) Section through Plug-In City
showing the identical capsule-like
The flourishing of mass-production might have prevented houses

the development of individualism and personal

expression; it allowed, however, Archigram to conceive a
design that would potentially make the 21st century
person’s life easier. In a technologically driven society,
more people would be able to play an active ‘part in
determining their own individual environment, in self-
determining a way of life’15 . The main qualities of mass-
production may be those of repetition and
standardization but the architects supported that parts
could be changeable and inter-changeable depending on
the individual needs and preferences of the consumer.
Plug-In City responds exactly to that. Its Plug-In Capsules
(the houses) are seen as consumerist products that offer
a type of dwelling different to what is known as the
traditional house, closely related to the design of
refrigerators and automobiles. Arguably, Archigram
predicted the rapid evolution of technology as well as

14Chapman, Priscilla. "Plug-in City Article." Archigram Archival Project. The Sunday Times, 1964. Web.
Accessed 12 May 2013. <http://archigram.westminster.ac.uk/project.php?id=63>.
15Cook, Peter. "Editorial from Archigram 3." Archigram. Basel [Switzerland: Birkhäuser Verlag, 1991, p.17.
Print.
8
the ‘constant movement and traveling of people in
different countries and the instability this would cause
to one’s life’16 . Their moveable, plug-in houses (Fig.13,
14) respond precisely to the 21st century person’s
everyday needs, making traveling much easier as one
would only need to unplug his house from one place, and
plug it in the next one, without having to leave his
belongings, stay in hotels etc. Businessmen would be
13) Plug’n’ Clip Dwelling diagram,
able to travel throughout Europe in the comfort of their showing the possibilities of moveable
houses
own house. Nevertheless, the affects of this extreme
standardization is concerning and its negatives have
already been analyzed at the previous paragraph.

Archigram strongly believed that ‘modernism should

celebrate all that is new’17 . It is important to note, at
this point, that the group had a more ‘symbolic and
aesthetic approach’18 to what technology means and was
more interested to the image and what it looked like. In
depth details of how the megastructure, the cranes and
the plug-in elements would be constructed is not evident
as this was not the focus point of the project, rather the
symbolization of technology and the opportunities it
allowed. Even today, ideas like this are still unfeasible
and unrealizable. However, the evolutionary and
advanced technology of the time inspired them and 14) Plug’n’ Clip Dwelling
allowed them to think big and unconventionally. Without
it, it is likely that Peter Cook wouldn’t have even
conceived the idea of Plug-In City, with its megastructure
and all the removable, plug-in elements.

Iconic Architecture

Archigram are considered to be one of the most iconic

architecture groups of the 1960s. The architectural
theorist Charles Jencks writes that in order to become
iconic, “a building must provide a new and condensed
image, be high in figural shape or gestalt, and stand out 15) Walking City, another project
from the city. On the other hand, to become powerful it by Archigram

16Cook, Peter. "Editorial from Archigram 3." Archigram. Basel [Switzerland: Birkhäuser Verlag, 1991, p.17.
Print.
17 Sadler, Simon. Archigram: Architecture without Architecture. Cambridge, MA: MIT, 2005. p.11. Print.
18Mathews, Stanley. From Agit-prop to Free Space: The Architecture of Cedric Price. London: Black Dog
Pub., 2007. p.242. Print.
9
must be reminiscent in some ways of unlikely but
important metaphors and be a symbol fit to be
worshipped, a hard task in a secular society.”19 ,
although in this case, one would replace the term
‘building’ with ‘scheme’. Archigram responded exactly to
that, as it managed to create a completely unique and
distinctive architecture, despite never being built and
remaining paper architecture. Even though its idea was
to defeat monumentality by creating buildings out of
industrially produced and disposable ‘kits-of-parts’, its
architecture became universally recognizable. More 16) Archigram Book by Peter
Cook, Cover Page
specifically, the group introduced a memorable style that
was accumulated from ‘the nineteenth-century
industrial architecture, twentieth-century
manufacturing, military apparatus, science fiction,
biology, technology, electronics, constructivism, pop art,
cutaway technical illustration, psychedelia, and the
English seaside-which would serve as an inspiration for
an architectural movement, high-tech, and feed into the
stream of postmodern/deconstructivist trends of the
1970s, 1980s and 1990s’20 . The group’s drawings and 17) Instant City, another project by
collages are representative of the society, technology, Archigram, Collage
modernity and style as well as the architectural
profession of the 1960s: they are considered to be of the
most recognizable images of that era (Fig.15). Another
reason why Archigram’s work is iconic is the presentation
style of its work, the aesthetic style of the group’s
drawings. According to the sociologist Leslie Sklair
“Iconicity in architecture is defined in terms of fame and
special symbolic/aesthetic significance as applied to
buildings, spaces and in some cases architects
themselves.”21. Archigram’s representation technique was
distinctive at its time: collage had rarely been used as a
communication technique in architectural design until
Archigram made it a characteristic part of its work22 (Fig.
18) Plug-In City, Axonometric
16,17). Plug-In City demonstrates all the aforementioned

19"California Literary Review." California Literary Review RSS. N.p., 3 Apr. 2007. Web. 12 May 2013. <http://
calitreview.com/70/an-interview-with-architect-charles-jencks/>.
20 Sadler, Simon. Archigram: Architecture without Architecture. Cambridge, MA: MIT, 2005. p.8. Print.
21 Sklair, L, Lecture: The Icon Project . Prague, 17th September 2011
22"Archigram: The Walking City, Living Pod and the Instant City." Victoria and Albert Museum, Online
Museum, Web Team, Webmaster@vam.ac.uk. Web. Accessed 12 May 2013. <http://www.vam.ac.uk/
content/articles/a/archigram-walking-city-living-pod-instant-city/>.
10
arguments. When represented in drawings and collages,
instead of seeming repetitive (due to its mass-produced
nature) it is highly picturesque and depicts a ‘systematic
gaiety’23 . This was the most extraordinary and dazzling
aspect of the drawings that made Plug-In City such a
memorable and noteworthy pop icon (Fig.18).

Conclusion

In conclusion, although most of Archigram’s projects

remained unbuilt, its conceptual contribution to the
evolution of architecture is highly significant. The
influence of Plug-In City (Fig.19) is noticeable in the
work of world-class architects of today, including the 19) Article of the Sunday Times in
1964 featuring Archigram’s Plug-In
well-known Centre Pompidou in Paris designed by City
Richard Rogers and Renzo Piano (Fig.20). Plug-In City can
arguably be seen as a distinguished proposition of the
architectural avant-garde of its day. The ideas and
images that were depicted in it were extreme, but
representative of an era of rapid change and of a
flourishing technology and modernity that was about to 20) Centre Pompidou, by Richard
come. Rogers and Renzo Piano

23 Sadler, Simon. Archigram: Architecture without Architecture. Cambridge, MA: MIT, 2005. p.18. Print.
11