The anthropologist Claude Lévi-Strauss noted: «I do not believe that one can still speak of a single structuralism. There were many movements that proclaimed themselves structuralist. "[17] This diversity can also be found in architecture. However, architectural structuralism has an autonomy that does not comply with all the principles of structuralism in the human sciences. In architecture, different directions have created different images. This article analyzes two directions that sometimes occur in combination.

On the one hand, there is the "Aesthetics of Number" (Aesthetics of Number),[18]​ which was formulated by Aldo van Eyck in 1959. This concept can be compared to cellular tissue. The most influential prototype of this direction was Aldo van Eyck's Amsterdam orphanage, completed in 1960. The "Aesthetics of Number" can also be described as "Spatial Configurations in Architecture"[19]​ or "Mat-Building" (Alison Smithson).

On the other hand, there is the "Architecture of Lively Variety (Structure and Infill*)"[20] which was formulated for user participation in housing by John Habraken in 1961. Also, in the 1960s, many well-known utopian projects[21]​ were based on the principle of "Structure and Content". An influential prototype of this direction is the Yamanashi Chamber of Culture in Kofu by Kenzo Tange, completed in 1967. In relation to participatory housing projects Hertzberger used the expressions «Architecture as half-product» (Architecture as half-product) or «Open structures» and Alejandro Aravena the terms «Participatory design process», «Incremental housing» and «Half-houses».

In the international professional world, the year 1959 is seen as the beginning of the architectural movement of structuralism.[22][23][24][15] That year an international conference of architects called "CIAM '59" was held at the Kröller-Müller Museum in Otterlo. Structuralism was not yet discussed during the conference. In the Netherlands, the concept of structuralism first appeared in an architectural magazine in 1969,[25] in previous years the concepts of "forum architecture" and "configurative design" were common. Outside the Netherlands, structuralism in architecture had previously been published incidentally in professional journals: German in 1958,[26] Italian in 1959,[27] French in 1964,[28] etc. Francis Strauven, architectural historian, wrote about the origins of structuralism as an architectural movement: "Dutch structuralism as an architectural movement was recognized and launched internationally by the Swiss architect Arnulf Lüchinger"), since 1974."[29]

Structuralism in architecture and urban planning had its origins in the International Congress of Modern Architecture (CIAM) after World War II. Between 1928 and 1959, the CIAM were an important platform for the discussion of architecture and urban planning. Various groups with often conflicting views were active in this organization; for example, members with a scientific approach to architecture without aesthetic premises ("New Objectivity (architecture)" rationalists), members who considered architecture as an art form (Le Corbusier), members who were advocates of high-rise or low-rise construction (Ernst May), members who supported a course of reform after the Second World War (Team 10), members of the old guard, etc. Individual members of the small splinter group Team 10 laid the foundation for structuralism. The influence of this team was later interpreted by second generation protagonist Herman Hertzberger when he said: "I am a product of Team 10."[30]

As a group of avant-garde architects, Team 10 was active from 1953 to 1981, and from it emerged two different movements: the New Brutalism of the English members (Alison and Peter Smithson) and the structuralism of the Dutch members (Aldo van Eyck and Jacob Bakema).[30]

Outside of Team 10, other ideas were developed that promoted the structuralist movement, influenced by the concepts of Louis Kahn in the United States, Kenzo Tange in Japan and John Habraken") in the Netherlands (with his theory of user participation in housing). Herman Hertzberger, Lucien Kroll") and Alejandro Aravena made important architectural contributions in the field of participation.

In 1960, Japanese architect Kenzo Tange designed his well-known Tokyo Bay Plan. Reflecting later on the initial phase of that project, he said: "I think it was around 1959 or the early sixties that I started thinking about what I would later call structuralism."[31] Tange also wrote the 1966 article "Function, Structure and Symbol", in which he describes the transition from a functional to a structural approach. Tange considered the period from 1920 to 1960 under the title of "Functionalism" and the period from 1960 under the title of "Structuralism".[31]​

Le Corbusier created several early projects and built prototypes in a structuralist key, some of them dating back to the 1920s. Although he was criticized by members of Team 10 in the 1950s for certain aspects of his work (urban concept without "sense of place" or the dark interior streets of the Unité), they recognized him as a great model and creative personality in architecture and art.

One of the most influential manifestos of the structuralist movement was compiled by Aldo van Eyck in the architectural magazine Forum 7/1959.[18] It was written as a program for the International Congress of Architects in Otterlo (September 7-15, 1959). The central aspect of that issue of Forum was a frontal attack on the Dutch representatives of rationalism-CIAM "New Objectivity (architecture)") who had been responsible for the reconstruction work after the Second World War (for tactical reasons, planners such as van Tijen, van Eesteren, Merkelbach and others were not mentioned). The magazine collected many examples and statements in favor of a more humane form of urban planning. That 1959 congress marked the official beginning of structuralism,[15]​[12][32]​ although previous projects and buildings existed. The term structuralism in architecture was published incidentally in different countries since the 1950s (see Bibliography).[15]​[25]​.

Another influential manifesto was published by John Habraken in 1961. His book Supports: An Alternative to Mass Housing marks the beginning of participation in architecture, as part of the structuralist movement. This manifesto was published in Dutch, English, Italian, Spanish and German.

Some presentations and debates that took place during the Otterlo Congress in 1959 are considered the beginning of structuralism in architecture and urban planning. These presentations had an international influence. In the book CIAM '59 in Otterlo[22]​ the names of the 43 participating architects are listed:[30]​.

Louis Miquel"), Algiers / Aldo van Eyck, Amsterdam / Josep Antoni Coderch, Barcelona / Wendell Lovett"), Bellevue-Washington / Werner Rausch, Berlin / Willy Van Der Meeren"), Brussels / Ch. Polonyi, Budapest / M. Siegler, Genf / Paul Waltenspühl"), Genf / Hubert Hoffmann")}, Graz / Christian Farenholtz"), Hamburg / Alison Smithson, London / Peter Smithson, London / Giancarlo de Carlo, Milan / Ignazio Gardella, Milan / Vico Magistretti, Milan / Ernesto Nathan Rogers, Milan / Blanche Lemco van Ginkel, Montreal / Sandy van Ginkel"), Montreal / Peter Callebout"), Nieuwpoort") / Geir Grung&action=edit&redlink=1 "Geir Grung (architect) (not yet drafted)"), Oslo / Arne Korsmo, Oslo / Georges Candilis, Paris / Aljoša Josić, Paris / André Wogenscky, Paris / Shadrach Woods, Paris / Louis Kahn, Philadelphia / Viana de Lima"), Porto / F. Tavora, Porto / Jacob B. Bakema"), Rotterdam / Herman Haan, Rotterdam / J.M. Stokla, Rotterdam / John Voelcker"), Staplehurst / Ralph Erskine&action=edit&redlink=1 "Ralph Erskine (architect) (not yet drafted)"), Stockholm / Kenzo Tange, Tokyo / Terje Moe (architect)&action=edit&redlink=1 "Terje Moe (architect) (not yet drafted)"), Trondheim / Oskar Hansen, Warsaw / Zofia Garlińska-Hansen")}, Warsaw / Jerzy Sołtan"), Warsaw / Fred Freyler"), Vienna / Eduard F. Sekler"), Vienna / hr"), Zagreb / Alfred Roth, Zurich.

Since structuralism took different directions, there is more than one definition. Herman Hertzberger's theoretical contribution belongs to the most interesting versions. A recent and frequently cited statement by Hertzberger is: "In structuralism, a distinction is made between a structure with a long life cycle and contents with shorter life cycles."[33] A more detailed description of Hertzberger was published in 1973. This is a structuralist definition in a general sense, but also the basic concept of user participation: «The fact that we put 'form' in a central position with respect to notions like 'space' or 'architecture', in itself means nothing more than a change of accent. What we are talking about is, in fact, another notion of form than that which establishes and maintains a formal and immutable relationship between the object and the viewer. It is not an external form that envelops the object that matters to us, but rather the form in the sense of embodied capacity and potential vehicle of meaning. Form can be filled with meaning, but it can also be deprived of meaning again, depending on the use made of it, through the values ​​we attribute or add to it, or even deprive it of, all depending on the way the users and the form react and play with each other. The case we want to make is that it is this capacity to absorb, carry and transmit meaning that defines what the form can produce in users, and, conversely, what users can produce in the form. What matters is the interaction between form and users, what they mutually transmit and produce, and how they own each other. What we have to try is to form the material (of the things we make) in such a way that, in addition to responding to function in the strict sense, it is suitable for more purposes. And so, be able to play as many roles as possible in the service of the different individual users, so that each one can react to it for themselves, interpreting it in their own way, annexing it to their family environment, to which they will then make a contribution.

In comparison with other currents of structuralism in architecture, the following clarifications are worth noting: «In the new architectural movement, everything that resembles a woven plot and has a grid tends to be called structuralist. It would be a superficial way of looking at things. By nature, structuralism deals with the configuration of conditioned and multipurpose units of form (spatial, communicational, constructive or other units) at all urban scales. Only when users have taken possession of the structures through contact, interpretation, or content details do the structures reach their full status. Therefore, any architecture that has a tendency towards formalism is excluded. The much-discussed flexible form is also rejected as a neutral enclosure system as it does not offer the right solution for any space programme. In the architecture of Herman Hertzberger one can find the structuralist form from the smallest detail to the most complicated structure, whether in terms of spatial, façade or environmental design.

The following quote is a definition of structuralism in different fields. He also talks about the autonomy of the primary structure: «Many structuralists would describe a structure in general terms as a complete set of relationships, in which the elements can change, but in such a way that they remain dependent on the set and retain their meaning. The set is independent of its relationship with the elements. The relationships between elements are more important than the elements themselves. The elements are interchangeable, but not the relationships."[36]​.

The following aspects are less related to the visual side of architecture and are often described as ideological principles:.

The principle of “structure and content” (Structure and Infill) remains relevant to this day, both for housing projects and for urban planning. The following images influenced the housing projects: the perspective drawing of the “Fort l'Empereur” project in Algiers by Le Corbusier (1934), the isometric drawing of the “Diagoon” housing project in Delft by Herman Hertzberger (1971) and the social housing projects carried out by Alejandro Aravena in the 19th century. At the city level, important projects were: the Tokyo Bay Plan by Kenzo Tange (1960) and the fascinating images of the model of the Free University of Berlin by Candilis Josic & Woods (1963). Also worth mentioning are the utopias of Metabolism&action=edit&redlink=1 "Metabolism (architecture) (not yet written)"), Archigram and Yona Friedman. In general, the instruments for urban structuring were: traffic lines (for example, grid plans), symmetries, squares, notable buildings, rivers, coasts, green areas, hills, etc. These methods were also used in previous cities.

The principle of the “aesthetic of number” was less useful for structuring an entire city. However, exemplary articulated configurations emerged, both in architecture and in housing projects. The first influential images of this direction were provided by Aldo van Eyck with aerial photographs of his orphanage in Amsterdam (1960). He later built another inspiring configuration for the Estec Space Center in Noordwijk (1989). These two compositions can be counted among the most beautiful "icons" of structuralism.[18]​.

A notable characteristic of the architectural movement is the "structuring of the built volume with units and grid*", in different variants. In the book Structuralism in Architecture and Urban Planning[12]​ [Structuralism in architecture and urban planning] this design principle is published under the following titles:

Aesthetics of the number

The expression "aesthetics of number" (Aesthetics of Number) was introduced by Aldo van Eyck in the architecture magazine Forum 7/1959.[18]​ In his article, van Eyck showed two works of art: a structuralist painting by the contemporary artist Richard Paul Lohse") and a kuba fabric" (Bakuba scarf) by an African artist of primitive culture. The combination of these two cultures has had symbolic meaning in the structuralist movement. The external appearance of this architecture is immutable.

Structure and content: two-component approach: participation

In the 1960s, Dutch structuralists criticized the narrowness of the functional principle "Form follows function." In historic cities they found solutions for a more relevant formal principle: an interpretable, adaptable and expandable architecture (see below “Historic Cities – Reciprocity of Form”). In the magazine Forum they developed ideas about "Polyvalent form and individual interpretations*", "Reciprocity of form" (Reciprocity of form), "Structure and infill*) and "Participation".[18] Herman Hertzberger also used the expressions "Architecture as half-product" (Architecture as half-product) and "Structures". open» (Open structures).

The initiator of participation in architecture, as part of the structuralist movement, was John Habraken. In 1961 he published the book Supports: An Alternative to Mass Housing i in different languages. In the century, Chilean architect Alejandro Aravena is working with similar principles of participation. In relation to its social housing projects, Aravena speaks of "Participatory design process", "Half houses for participation" and "Incremental housing". Although Aravena was awarded the Pritzker Prize in 2016 for his architectural work. In 2008, for the Milan Triennale, Alejandro Aravena built a prototype of "Half House" in a similar manner to Le Corbusier's Pavilion de l'Esprit Nouveau in Paris in 1925.

Structure and content – vertical and horizontal communication units.

Participation in housing.

Participation with "half houses", five social housing projects in Chile —Quinta Monroy (2004), Iquique; The Mirror (2007), Don Francisco, Santiago de Chile; Villa Verde (2016), Rio Loncamilla, Constitución "Constitución (Chile)")—, Mexico —Las Anacuas (2010), Monterrey— and Italy —prototype of "Half-house", in the Milan, Triennale 2008—, made by Alejandro Aravena:.

Other structures

Park Hill housing estate in Sheffield, "Ungridded structure", 1961 (Jack Lynn and Ivor Smith).

Historic cities

Examples of urban planning and structuring. Regarding the relationship between historical and contemporary architecture, Le Corbusier wrote: «I was called a revolutionary, while my greatest teacher was the past. My supposed revolutionary ideas come directly from the history of architecture itself."[38]​.

Historic cities – reciprocity of forms

In Forum 2/1962 Jacob Bakema") conducted a study on the principle of "reciprocity of form" and "participation", especially on the Diocletian's Palace in Split.[18] In Forum 3/1962 Herman Hertzberger conducted research on the Roman amphitheaters of Arles and Lucca. Later, in 1966, the idea of the amphitheater of Arles was taken up by Aldo Rossi in his book L'architettura della città [The architecture of the city]. In 1976, Reyner Banham presented the Ponte Vecchio of Florence as one of the historical prototypes in his book Megastructure.[21]​.

New cities

The new cities in the century. The term "Urban Structuring" was introduced by Alison and Peter Smithson, the term "Articulations" by Herman Hertzberger. Both terms are used as the title of an architectural book.

In 1957, Jacob Bakema") and members of a CIAM reorganization committee requested that the name be changed from "CIAM: Congrès Internationaux d'Architecture Moderne" to "CIAM: Groupe de Recherches des Interrelations Sociales et Plastiques".[22] Two years later, the themes of the new "Working group for the investigation of interrelationships between social and built structures" [Group] of work for the investigation of the interrelationships between social and built structures] were published in the magazine Forum 7/1959.[18]​ This magazine was also the program of the CIAM '59 congress in Otterlo.[22]​

Team 10 themes on the cover of Forum 7/1959:.

In Europe, structuralism had a strong influence on theoretical debate until the late 1960s. In its effort to offer an alternative to classical modern architecture, it was accompanied by New Brutalism.[9] In 1975, structuralist philosophy lost its predominant position in the humanities due to major social and political changes.[10] In architecture, its position was undermined by the growing popularity of postmodern architecture promoted by authors such as Charles Jencks, Robert Venturi and Denise Scott Brown. Structuralist ideas remained to inform the work of important architects during and after the postmodern era, which is estimated to have ended in 1995.[11]​.

The theoretical concepts of structuralism in architecture were developed mainly in Europe and Japan, with important contributions from the United States and Canada. Arnulf Lüchinger's contributions to architectural journals"[12]​ and his compilation of structuralist projects published in 1980 (Structuralism in Architecture and Urban Planning) introduced structuralism to a broader audience. Kenneth Frampton[13]​ and Jürgen Joedicke") have made important evaluations of structuralist theory in architecture.[14]​.

In the 2010s, a new interest in structuralism in architecture was detected, although it can be argued that it was not accompanied by a resurgence of structuralism in the humanities. In 2011, an extensive scientific compilation of "structuralist activity" appeared in a publication called Structuralism Reloaded.[15]​ In this extensive book, articles by 47 international authors on philosophical, historical, artistic and other relevant aspects were published. The following parts of this article are based on the current status of that publication Structuralism Reloaded.

A few months after that book was published, the RIBA Institute in London debated the new candidates for the RIBA Gold Medal in 2012. A real question was: "Should the Venturis be given this year's RIBA Gold Medal?" [Should the Venturi receive this year's RIBA Gold Medal?]. Surprisingly, the RIBA committee did not award the Venturi for their postmodern vision, and instead gave the prize to Herman Hertzberger for his structuralist architecture and theoretical contributions. Times had changed and there had been a shift in emphasis. Former RIBA President Jack Pringle's comment was: "The Royal Gold Medal, Britain's most prestigious award, should go to an architect who has taken us forward, not back."

The anthropologist Claude Lévi-Strauss noted: «I do not believe that one can still speak of a single structuralism. There were many movements that proclaimed themselves structuralist. "[17] This diversity can also be found in architecture. However, architectural structuralism has an autonomy that does not comply with all the principles of structuralism in the human sciences. In architecture, different directions have created different images. This article analyzes two directions that sometimes occur in combination.

On the one hand, there is the "Aesthetics of Number" (Aesthetics of Number),[18]​ which was formulated by Aldo van Eyck in 1959. This concept can be compared to cellular tissue. The most influential prototype of this direction was Aldo van Eyck's Amsterdam orphanage, completed in 1960. The "Aesthetics of Number" can also be described as "Spatial Configurations in Architecture"[19]​ or "Mat-Building" (Alison Smithson).

On the other hand, there is the "Architecture of Lively Variety (Structure and Infill*)"[20] which was formulated for user participation in housing by John Habraken in 1961. Also, in the 1960s, many well-known utopian projects[21]​ were based on the principle of "Structure and Content". An influential prototype of this direction is the Yamanashi Chamber of Culture in Kofu by Kenzo Tange, completed in 1967. In relation to participatory housing projects Hertzberger used the expressions «Architecture as half-product» (Architecture as half-product) or «Open structures» and Alejandro Aravena the terms «Participatory design process», «Incremental housing» and «Half-houses».

In the international professional world, the year 1959 is seen as the beginning of the architectural movement of structuralism.[22][23][24][15] That year an international conference of architects called "CIAM '59" was held at the Kröller-Müller Museum in Otterlo. Structuralism was not yet discussed during the conference. In the Netherlands, the concept of structuralism first appeared in an architectural magazine in 1969,[25] in previous years the concepts of "forum architecture" and "configurative design" were common. Outside the Netherlands, structuralism in architecture had previously been published incidentally in professional journals: German in 1958,[26] Italian in 1959,[27] French in 1964,[28] etc. Francis Strauven, architectural historian, wrote about the origins of structuralism as an architectural movement: "Dutch structuralism as an architectural movement was recognized and launched internationally by the Swiss architect Arnulf Lüchinger"), since 1974."[29]

Structuralism in architecture and urban planning had its origins in the International Congress of Modern Architecture (CIAM) after World War II. Between 1928 and 1959, the CIAM were an important platform for the discussion of architecture and urban planning. Various groups with often conflicting views were active in this organization; for example, members with a scientific approach to architecture without aesthetic premises ("New Objectivity (architecture)" rationalists), members who considered architecture as an art form (Le Corbusier), members who were advocates of high-rise or low-rise construction (Ernst May), members who supported a course of reform after the Second World War (Team 10), members of the old guard, etc. Individual members of the small splinter group Team 10 laid the foundation for structuralism. The influence of this team was later interpreted by second generation protagonist Herman Hertzberger when he said: "I am a product of Team 10."[30]

As a group of avant-garde architects, Team 10 was active from 1953 to 1981, and from it emerged two different movements: the New Brutalism of the English members (Alison and Peter Smithson) and the structuralism of the Dutch members (Aldo van Eyck and Jacob Bakema).[30]

Outside of Team 10, other ideas were developed that promoted the structuralist movement, influenced by the concepts of Louis Kahn in the United States, Kenzo Tange in Japan and John Habraken") in the Netherlands (with his theory of user participation in housing). Herman Hertzberger, Lucien Kroll") and Alejandro Aravena made important architectural contributions in the field of participation.

In 1960, Japanese architect Kenzo Tange designed his well-known Tokyo Bay Plan. Reflecting later on the initial phase of that project, he said: "I think it was around 1959 or the early sixties that I started thinking about what I would later call structuralism."[31] Tange also wrote the 1966 article "Function, Structure and Symbol", in which he describes the transition from a functional to a structural approach. Tange considered the period from 1920 to 1960 under the title of "Functionalism" and the period from 1960 under the title of "Structuralism".[31]​

Le Corbusier created several early projects and built prototypes in a structuralist key, some of them dating back to the 1920s. Although he was criticized by members of Team 10 in the 1950s for certain aspects of his work (urban concept without "sense of place" or the dark interior streets of the Unité), they recognized him as a great model and creative personality in architecture and art.

One of the most influential manifestos of the structuralist movement was compiled by Aldo van Eyck in the architectural magazine Forum 7/1959.[18] It was written as a program for the International Congress of Architects in Otterlo (September 7-15, 1959). The central aspect of that issue of Forum was a frontal attack on the Dutch representatives of rationalism-CIAM "New Objectivity (architecture)") who had been responsible for the reconstruction work after the Second World War (for tactical reasons, planners such as van Tijen, van Eesteren, Merkelbach and others were not mentioned). The magazine collected many examples and statements in favor of a more humane form of urban planning. That 1959 congress marked the official beginning of structuralism,[15]​[12][32]​ although previous projects and buildings existed. The term structuralism in architecture was published incidentally in different countries since the 1950s (see Bibliography).[15]​[25]​.

Another influential manifesto was published by John Habraken in 1961. His book Supports: An Alternative to Mass Housing marks the beginning of participation in architecture, as part of the structuralist movement. This manifesto was published in Dutch, English, Italian, Spanish and German.

Some presentations and debates that took place during the Otterlo Congress in 1959 are considered the beginning of structuralism in architecture and urban planning. These presentations had an international influence. In the book CIAM '59 in Otterlo[22]​ the names of the 43 participating architects are listed:[30]​.

Louis Miquel"), Algiers / Aldo van Eyck, Amsterdam / Josep Antoni Coderch, Barcelona / Wendell Lovett"), Bellevue-Washington / Werner Rausch, Berlin / Willy Van Der Meeren"), Brussels / Ch. Polonyi, Budapest / M. Siegler, Genf / Paul Waltenspühl"), Genf / Hubert Hoffmann")}, Graz / Christian Farenholtz"), Hamburg / Alison Smithson, London / Peter Smithson, London / Giancarlo de Carlo, Milan / Ignazio Gardella, Milan / Vico Magistretti, Milan / Ernesto Nathan Rogers, Milan / Blanche Lemco van Ginkel, Montreal / Sandy van Ginkel"), Montreal / Peter Callebout"), Nieuwpoort") / Geir Grung&action=edit&redlink=1 "Geir Grung (architect) (not yet drafted)"), Oslo / Arne Korsmo, Oslo / Georges Candilis, Paris / Aljoša Josić, Paris / André Wogenscky, Paris / Shadrach Woods, Paris / Louis Kahn, Philadelphia / Viana de Lima"), Porto / F. Tavora, Porto / Jacob B. Bakema"), Rotterdam / Herman Haan, Rotterdam / J.M. Stokla, Rotterdam / John Voelcker"), Staplehurst / Ralph Erskine&action=edit&redlink=1 "Ralph Erskine (architect) (not yet drafted)"), Stockholm / Kenzo Tange, Tokyo / Terje Moe (architect)&action=edit&redlink=1 "Terje Moe (architect) (not yet drafted)"), Trondheim / Oskar Hansen, Warsaw / Zofia Garlińska-Hansen")}, Warsaw / Jerzy Sołtan"), Warsaw / Fred Freyler"), Vienna / Eduard F. Sekler"), Vienna / hr"), Zagreb / Alfred Roth, Zurich.

Since structuralism took different directions, there is more than one definition. Herman Hertzberger's theoretical contribution belongs to the most interesting versions. A recent and frequently cited statement by Hertzberger is: "In structuralism, a distinction is made between a structure with a long life cycle and contents with shorter life cycles."[33] A more detailed description of Hertzberger was published in 1973. This is a structuralist definition in a general sense, but also the basic concept of user participation: «The fact that we put 'form' in a central position with respect to notions like 'space' or 'architecture', in itself means nothing more than a change of accent. What we are talking about is, in fact, another notion of form than that which establishes and maintains a formal and immutable relationship between the object and the viewer. It is not an external form that envelops the object that matters to us, but rather the form in the sense of embodied capacity and potential vehicle of meaning. Form can be filled with meaning, but it can also be deprived of meaning again, depending on the use made of it, through the values ​​we attribute or add to it, or even deprive it of, all depending on the way the users and the form react and play with each other. The case we want to make is that it is this capacity to absorb, carry and transmit meaning that defines what the form can produce in users, and, conversely, what users can produce in the form. What matters is the interaction between form and users, what they mutually transmit and produce, and how they own each other. What we have to try is to form the material (of the things we make) in such a way that, in addition to responding to function in the strict sense, it is suitable for more purposes. And so, be able to play as many roles as possible in the service of the different individual users, so that each one can react to it for themselves, interpreting it in their own way, annexing it to their family environment, to which they will then make a contribution.

In comparison with other currents of structuralism in architecture, the following clarifications are worth noting: «In the new architectural movement, everything that resembles a woven plot and has a grid tends to be called structuralist. It would be a superficial way of looking at things. By nature, structuralism deals with the configuration of conditioned and multipurpose units of form (spatial, communicational, constructive or other units) at all urban scales. Only when users have taken possession of the structures through contact, interpretation, or content details do the structures reach their full status. Therefore, any architecture that has a tendency towards formalism is excluded. The much-discussed flexible form is also rejected as a neutral enclosure system as it does not offer the right solution for any space programme. In the architecture of Herman Hertzberger one can find the structuralist form from the smallest detail to the most complicated structure, whether in terms of spatial, façade or environmental design.

The following quote is a definition of structuralism in different fields. He also talks about the autonomy of the primary structure: «Many structuralists would describe a structure in general terms as a complete set of relationships, in which the elements can change, but in such a way that they remain dependent on the set and retain their meaning. The set is independent of its relationship with the elements. The relationships between elements are more important than the elements themselves. The elements are interchangeable, but not the relationships."[36]​.

The following aspects are less related to the visual side of architecture and are often described as ideological principles:.

The principle of “structure and content” (Structure and Infill) remains relevant to this day, both for housing projects and for urban planning. The following images influenced the housing projects: the perspective drawing of the “Fort l'Empereur” project in Algiers by Le Corbusier (1934), the isometric drawing of the “Diagoon” housing project in Delft by Herman Hertzberger (1971) and the social housing projects carried out by Alejandro Aravena in the 19th century. At the city level, important projects were: the Tokyo Bay Plan by Kenzo Tange (1960) and the fascinating images of the model of the Free University of Berlin by Candilis Josic & Woods (1963). Also worth mentioning are the utopias of Metabolism&action=edit&redlink=1 "Metabolism (architecture) (not yet written)"), Archigram and Yona Friedman. In general, the instruments for urban structuring were: traffic lines (for example, grid plans), symmetries, squares, notable buildings, rivers, coasts, green areas, hills, etc. These methods were also used in previous cities.

The principle of the “aesthetic of number” was less useful for structuring an entire city. However, exemplary articulated configurations emerged, both in architecture and in housing projects. The first influential images of this direction were provided by Aldo van Eyck with aerial photographs of his orphanage in Amsterdam (1960). He later built another inspiring configuration for the Estec Space Center in Noordwijk (1989). These two compositions can be counted among the most beautiful "icons" of structuralism.[18]​.

A notable characteristic of the architectural movement is the "structuring of the built volume with units and grid*", in different variants. In the book Structuralism in Architecture and Urban Planning[12]​ [Structuralism in architecture and urban planning] this design principle is published under the following titles:

Aesthetics of the number

The expression "aesthetics of number" (Aesthetics of Number) was introduced by Aldo van Eyck in the architecture magazine Forum 7/1959.[18]​ In his article, van Eyck showed two works of art: a structuralist painting by the contemporary artist Richard Paul Lohse") and a kuba fabric" (Bakuba scarf) by an African artist of primitive culture. The combination of these two cultures has had symbolic meaning in the structuralist movement. The external appearance of this architecture is immutable.

Structure and content: two-component approach: participation

In the 1960s, Dutch structuralists criticized the narrowness of the functional principle "Form follows function." In historic cities they found solutions for a more relevant formal principle: an interpretable, adaptable and expandable architecture (see below “Historic Cities – Reciprocity of Form”). In the magazine Forum they developed ideas about "Polyvalent form and individual interpretations*", "Reciprocity of form" (Reciprocity of form), "Structure and infill*) and "Participation".[18] Herman Hertzberger also used the expressions "Architecture as half-product" (Architecture as half-product) and "Structures". open» (Open structures).

The initiator of participation in architecture, as part of the structuralist movement, was John Habraken. In 1961 he published the book Supports: An Alternative to Mass Housing i in different languages. In the century, Chilean architect Alejandro Aravena is working with similar principles of participation. In relation to its social housing projects, Aravena speaks of "Participatory design process", "Half houses for participation" and "Incremental housing". Although Aravena was awarded the Pritzker Prize in 2016 for his architectural work. In 2008, for the Milan Triennale, Alejandro Aravena built a prototype of "Half House" in a similar manner to Le Corbusier's Pavilion de l'Esprit Nouveau in Paris in 1925.

Structure and content – vertical and horizontal communication units.

Participation in housing.

Participation with "half houses", five social housing projects in Chile —Quinta Monroy (2004), Iquique; The Mirror (2007), Don Francisco, Santiago de Chile; Villa Verde (2016), Rio Loncamilla, Constitución "Constitución (Chile)")—, Mexico —Las Anacuas (2010), Monterrey— and Italy —prototype of "Half-house", in the Milan, Triennale 2008—, made by Alejandro Aravena:.

Other structures

Park Hill housing estate in Sheffield, "Ungridded structure", 1961 (Jack Lynn and Ivor Smith).

Historic cities

Examples of urban planning and structuring. Regarding the relationship between historical and contemporary architecture, Le Corbusier wrote: «I was called a revolutionary, while my greatest teacher was the past. My supposed revolutionary ideas come directly from the history of architecture itself."[38]​.

Historic cities – reciprocity of forms

In Forum 2/1962 Jacob Bakema") conducted a study on the principle of "reciprocity of form" and "participation", especially on the Diocletian's Palace in Split.[18] In Forum 3/1962 Herman Hertzberger conducted research on the Roman amphitheaters of Arles and Lucca. Later, in 1966, the idea of the amphitheater of Arles was taken up by Aldo Rossi in his book L'architettura della città [The architecture of the city]. In 1976, Reyner Banham presented the Ponte Vecchio of Florence as one of the historical prototypes in his book Megastructure.[21]​.

New cities

The new cities in the century. The term "Urban Structuring" was introduced by Alison and Peter Smithson, the term "Articulations" by Herman Hertzberger. Both terms are used as the title of an architectural book.

In 1957, Jacob Bakema") and members of a CIAM reorganization committee requested that the name be changed from "CIAM: Congrès Internationaux d'Architecture Moderne" to "CIAM: Groupe de Recherches des Interrelations Sociales et Plastiques".[22] Two years later, the themes of the new "Working group for the investigation of interrelationships between social and built structures" [Group] of work for the investigation of the interrelationships between social and built structures] were published in the magazine Forum 7/1959.[18]​ This magazine was also the program of the CIAM '59 congress in Otterlo.[22]​

Team 10 themes on the cover of Forum 7/1959:.