‘i'm not saying that’s not worthwhile, but i think it's interesting to think about something that changes’

(26:35 -28:50)

A: For me, when I think of manifestos they're very rooted in a specific time period. I’m wondering if what we’re doing is in a way rooted in this period of uncertainty, COVID, distancing and political upheaval. I'm wondering if we are trying to root it in a time period or if we're not. If we're trying to let it exist beyond this time or if it kind of exists within this time period and then dissolves or changes.

B: I don't know how often manifestos are identified as a manifesto, but to identify something as a manifesto from the beginning is kind of like saying this is going to become obsolete, because if it's a manifesto, that means that it's rigid, and not open to change and the world is always changing. So maybe it's a manifesto for that moment. I'm not saying that’s not worthwhile, but I think it's interesting to think about something that changes. I also think that the whole culture in architecture, at MIT especially where they're always frantically searching for the next thing, the new thing. They’re always pressuring students to write manifestos or think like someone who writes a manifesto.  I'm like, ‘What the hell is that about?’. It feels like they're stuck in the past when people were writing manifestos, and it seems like that's not what young architects are doing or what they're interested in doing. There’s such a wider range of interests and the conversation isn't really centered in a single direction right now, which is maybe difficult to grapple with, but I don't think it's a bad thing.