45 From Cybernetics to an Architecture of Ecology: Cedric Price’s Inter-Action Centre Tanja Herdt Following the work of British architect Cedric Price human interactions, in which design addressed (1934–2003), this article investigates the influence human needs by shaping processes such as use of cybernetics and systems thinking on architec- and activity. This new view on functionalism in tural design during the 1960s and 70s, which can architecture changed the understanding of archi- be labelled ‘ecological’ in today’s terminology. tectural design from the production of an object Price’s works from that period reflect a trans- to an instrument of system intervention. Price’s formative step, in which the built environment was system-oriented approach to architecture mani- increasingly understood as a system of human fests in the Inter-Action Centre (1970–1977). Often interactions. This evolution will be illustrated using referred to as ‘the closest to the Fun Palace and his Inter-Action Centre (1970–1977) as well as the artless version of the Centre Pompidou’, the some earlier projects, such as the Fun Palace Inter-Action Centre is one of the very few projects main project (1961–1964), the Potteries Thinkbelt where the architect put these ideas into practice.5 (1965–1967) and the New Aviary (1960–1965).1 In the first part the article discusses the project Today’s understanding of ‘ecological design’ and Price’s specific approach to design. Price focuses on the reduction of any negative impact of began to employ relatively uncommon instruments human interventions in a natural system.2 However, to organise the design process, including surveys the concept of ecological design developed as and organisational diagrams, thus demonstrating early as the beginning of the twentieth century, his understanding of architecture as part of a when scientists, architects and planners began process that fosters social activities and urban to understand the world as a complex system of regeneration. His distinct approach is investigated flows and processes, evolution, and change as further in the second part of this article. Formative fundamental concepts shaping the human living for his ideas and methods was his collaborative environment.3 After World War II, these concepts work with the cybernetician Gordon Pask (for gained new impetus, not least by technological the Fun Palace main project, 1961–1964) and advances in automation, mass production and with the architect and systems theorist Richard information technology. Later referred to as the Buckminster Fuller (on his proposal for the spatial turn, space was no longer perceived as a Claverton Dome, 1961–1963, and the New Aviary, container of social activities but as part of a socio- 1960–1965).6 The Potteries Thinkbelt project environmental system, or ecology.4 (1963–1967) illustrates how Price drew on earlier Cedric Price was among the first to have this concepts of ecology, for example by referring new idea of space reflected in his architectural to urban pioneer and biologist Patrick Geddes’ projects. The analysis of his work shows that he ‘valley section’ and his methods of observational understood the built environment as a system of studies.7 28 All is in Formation: Architecture, Cybernetics, Ecology | Spring / Summer 2021 | 45–62 46 Finally, the last part elucidates that, in the 1970s, his idea of the project as a facilitator of interaction, cybernetics gave way to ecology as a concept to with the centre being at the heart of the community. describe the relationship between humans and the [Fig. 1] natural environment. In projects concurrent with the The Inter-Action Centre was the result of more Inter-Action Centre, Price moved away from the than seven years of planning by Cedric Price’s traditional understanding of architecture as building architectural office and more than a decade of design. Instead, projects such as Fun Palace community work and social activism of the local Stratford Fair (1974) or McAppy (1973–1976) community groups Talacre Action Group Ltd. were temporary and performative in character.8 and its successor, Inter-Action. Both groups had Whereas architects like John McHale suggested started performing agit-prop theatre and touring the the adaptation of natural principles in architecture streets of North London. Later they extended their as an ecological design approach, Cedric Price programme and organised a variety of activities for emphasised the role of design as an instrument of the inhabitants of the neighbourhood. intervention in the human habitat, that is, the inter- Such movements emerged against a back- related fields of the physical, urban, and social ground of widespread lack of development of the environments. In doing so, his understanding of urban environment and public space in London’s ecological design resembles the modernist idea of former working-class neighbourhoods, including the good life as an improvement of the human living Kentish town where the Inter-Action Centre was environment, simultaneously redefining the nature located. While London’s inner city was already rebuilt of architectural design as process-oriented, tempo- and well on its way to becoming a major financial rary system intervention. centre of the rising global economy, a large part of the city’s working-class neighbourhoods was still in The Inter-Action Centre a state of disarray and decay. After the slum clear- Starting from the well-known Fun Palace project, ance programme in the 1960s had replaced many the work of Cedric Price is frequently referred to of the nineteenth-century workers’ houses, waste- as an architecture of technology, using the latest lands still needed to be redeveloped, with public developments of industrial fabrication, media, and space, functioning high streets and other venues information technology to produce high-tech build- missing. The Inter-Action Centre was thus closely ings in the tradition of the functionalist machine.9 related to the idea of urban regeneration, in which Lesser known are the numerous projects of his newly built space would facilitate the creation of a later work, in which he used small-scale interven- new social space, both for the community and the tions for making space accessible and enabling neighbourhood as a whole. [Fig. 2] Accordingly, the exchange. centre was planned as part of a larger open space This change in his understanding of architecture dedicated to the neighbourhood by the Borough of becomes evident in the July picture of the Inter- Camden. It was to host the group’s various activities Action group’s 1978 calendar, dedicated to the that were already taking place in multiple locations group’s newly opened arts and community centre. around the district.10 The image showcases the diversity of a crowd of When the centre opened in April 1977, Inter- people visiting an event in front of the building. Action had 1 500 members and sixty full-time Whereas architectural images are often marked employees.11 These members were engaged in by the absence of people, here the building seems multiple activities, including education, community relegated to the background. Although Price did not welfare, and theatre; they hosted ateliers and media choose the picture himself, it represents very well workshops and offered support in city farming at 47 Fig. 1 Fig. 1: ‘West Kentish Town Neighbourhood Festival’, Inter-Action Community Calendar, 1977, Cedric Price Archive, CCA, Montréal, Document folio DR:1995:0252:632:015:001:007. 48 London’s first urban farm, which the group had When Cedric Price was selected as the centre’s established in 1971. All the group’s activities architect, he was already well known for his design shared the idea of improving the neighbourhood’s of a similar adaptable performative space, the Fun inhabitants’ living environment through activities Palace. Price had developed that project for agit- that promoted communication, engagement and, prop theatre director Joan Littlewood and the Fun thereby, learning.12 The group’s diversity of activities Palace Trust seven years earlier. In this ultimately and participants was lauded in the press confer- unrealised project, the architect designed an adapt- ence on the occasion of the centre’s inauguration able mega-structure that would respond to its users’ and seen as an accomplishment worthy of the new, needs through cybernetics and technology. The more individualised society which didn’t rely on same principles informed the design of the Inter- governmental institutions but responded directly to Action Centre. All group activities were to take place the public and local interests.13 literally under one roof, which Price designed as an Theatre director David Berman had established open, two-story steel frame, providing a division Inter-Action as a charitable trust in 1968, dedicated between different inside and outside spaces.17 Apart to community work with the goal of ‘breaking down from a roofed main hall, he attached prefabricated ethical class and temperament barriers’ within the plug-in portacabins to the structural framework. neighbourhood.14 Representing a novel approach Price had planned these rooms to be exchange- to small group work, Inter-Action worked with inter- able over time, depending on specific functions active theatre and games as new forms of citizen and demands expected to vary over the building’s engagement with the intention ‘to make arts more lifetime. Modules included, for instance, a media relevant in the community’.15 For example, in the workshop and rehearsal rooms. Simultaneously, environment game, participants could learn to use the structure defined open spaces in which various modern media and communication technology and enclosures could be added, such as a Fun Arts produce videos about their everyday life. As Berman bus that toured the neighbourhood for theatre writes in the organisational statement of Inter- performances or the local day nursery in the form Action, this bottom-up approach to community work of a Finnish log cabin.