The world is full of architecture, more or less interesting; we do not wish to add any more. The last four hundred years of architectural excess produced enough undiscovered public architectural knowledge to nurture, at least, our practice; the last twenty, a hangover of creative-shapes-on-steroids we are trying to recover from. F**k originality. Rather, copies allow us to explore all the potential left unexplored by other’s rush. Knowledge can be public, yet undiscovered, if independently created fragments are logically related but never retrieved, brought together, or re-conceptualized. And that is what we do. Don’t ask us for new stuff, we copy.
Friction in architectural discourse is not only desirable but necessary for the development of the field. The lack of consensus should be taken as an engine for the creation of knowledge and Agonism, in its opposition to Antagonism, as a positive approach to discussions and the creation of polemics in the field. We are interested in the production of strong positions that activate and extend public architectural polemics.