Cedric Price Interview - Revision history

Archiblog at 10:33, 10 December 2025

2025-12-10T10:33:22Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:33, 10 December 2025
Line 287:		Line 287:

	Thus the syllogistic link is re-routed. Instead of architecture → problem-solving → anticipatory design, Price establishes architecture → question-asking → anticipatory design. By negating the conventional middle term, he replaces problem-solving with the operational mode that the CCA correctly identifies as central to his work: the persistent act of questioning.		Thus the syllogistic link is re-routed. Instead of architecture → problem-solving → anticipatory design, Price establishes architecture → question-asking → anticipatory design. By negating the conventional middle term, he replaces problem-solving with the operational mode that the CCA correctly identifies as central to his work: the persistent act of questioning.
		+
		+	DOI: [https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.32588.88969 10.13140/RG.2.2.32588.88969]

	-----		-----

Archiblog at 08:13, 10 December 2025

2025-12-10T08:13:06Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:13, 10 December 2025
Line 291:		Line 291:
	= References =		= References =

−	Fellows, N. (1993) Transcript - Interview of Cedric Price, [https://archiveshub.jisc.ac.uk/search/archives/8a4edd68-4f7b-3319-9480-d1a9d62cc943?component=836b51c1-fc25-32fb-ab88-0b484e993d3f Cedric Price Collection, St John's College Archives]. [1]	+	Fellows, N. (1993) Transcript - Interview of Cedric Price, X8 Mixed file: chiefly replies to students, matters of architectural education, 7 February. [https://archiveshub.jisc.ac.uk/search/archives/8a4edd68-4f7b-3319-9480-d1a9d62cc943?component=836b51c1-fc25-32fb-ab88-0b484e993d3f&fbclid=IwY2xjawOSZqtleHRuA2FlbQIxMABicmlkETFGRVpVTVFuWW5DZ3RoZVN4c3J0YwZhcHBfaWQQMjIyMDM5MTc4ODIwMDg5MgABHjths8U5jhemow-MO2MTslnttLDbLWFacxMl2tASeD3OGBboalfxC4YOMpaempvWVKVk8f0KEQoARnTUQ8w Cedric Price Collection, St John's College Archives]. [1]

	Fellows, N. (1993) Notes on Transcript - Interview of Cedric Price, Unpublished		Fellows, N. (1993) Notes on Transcript - Interview of Cedric Price, Unpublished

	Fellows, N. (1996) Extract from Transcript - Interview of Cedric Price, Unpublished.		Fellows, N. (1996) Extract from Transcript - Interview of Cedric Price, Unpublished.
		+
		+	Price, C. (1996) Anticipating the unexpected, The Architects' Journal, 5 September, pp. 27–41. [https://archiveshub.jisc.ac.uk/search/archives/8a4edd68-4f7b-3319-9480-d1a9d62cc943?component=df6307e7-be20-3cc7-b339-7c10c7935830 Cedric Price Collection, St John's College Archives]

	[1] The Cedric Price Collection includes:—		[1] The Cedric Price Collection includes:—

Archiblog at 08:08, 10 December 2025

2025-12-10T08:08:37Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:08, 10 December 2025
Line 297:		Line 297:
	Fellows, N. (1996) Extract from Transcript - Interview of Cedric Price, Unpublished.		Fellows, N. (1996) Extract from Transcript - Interview of Cedric Price, Unpublished.

−	[1] The Cedric Price Collection includes	+	[1] The Cedric Price Collection includes:—

	* "photocopy draft 'Summary of Cedric Price's Keynote Speech', Delft 150/A.C.S.A., 14 May 1992 ('X14');		* "photocopy draft 'Summary of Cedric Price's Keynote Speech', Delft 150/A.C.S.A., 14 May 1992 ('X14');
	* correspondence from students (Norman Fellows, 24 June 1996; [..]), ' X8',		* correspondence from students (Norman Fellows, 24 June 1996; [..]), ' X8',
−	* ~~with~~ transcript of Price's interview by 'NF' [Norman Fellows?], 7 February 1993 ('X9')..."	+	* [..] transcript of Price's interview by 'NF' [Norman Fellows?], 7 February 1993 ('X9')..."
	* (ib.)		* (ib.)

Archiblog at 08:06, 10 December 2025

2025-12-10T08:06:41Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:06, 10 December 2025
Line 268:		Line 268:
	*		*
	* NF So ... stop? Stop.		* NF So ... stop? Stop.
		+
		+	[https://www.designingbuildings.co.uk/wiki/Cedric_Price_Interview BACK TO TOP]

	-----		-----
−	= ~~Interviewer's notes~~ =	+	= Endnotes =

	The author observes that the argument emerging from the first Cedric Price interview (February 1993) has the outline of a syllogism, albeit one that subverts the classical form. The sequence appears between Price’s Delft keynote speech of 1992, the author’s first reading of Cedric Price Works II (1992), and Price’s later formulation in the Architects’ Journal (September 1996). A supplementary remark from the CCA — “His modus operandi was to question” — further clarifies the operative logic.		The author observes that the argument emerging from the first Cedric Price interview (February 1993) has the outline of a syllogism, albeit one that subverts the classical form. The sequence appears between Price’s Delft keynote speech of 1992, the author’s first reading of Cedric Price Works II (1992), and Price’s later formulation in the Architects’ Journal (September 1996). A supplementary remark from the CCA — “His modus operandi was to question” — further clarifies the operative logic.
Line 305:		Line 307:

	College Sidekick (2025) [https://www.collegesidekick.com/study-guides/atd-epcc-introtophilosophy/categorical-syllogisms Introduction to Philosophy, Categorical Syllogisms]		College Sidekick (2025) [https://www.collegesidekick.com/study-guides/atd-epcc-introtophilosophy/categorical-syllogisms Introduction to Philosophy, Categorical Syllogisms]
		+
		+	-----
		+	--[[User:Archiblog\|Archiblog]] 08:06, 10 Dec 2025 (BST)
		+
		+	-----
		+	= Related articles on [https://www.designingbuildings.co.uk/wiki/Designing Designing] [https://www.designingbuildings.co.uk/wiki/Building Buildings] =
		+
		+	[https://www.designingbuildings.co.uk/wiki/Anticipatory_Design Anticipatory Design]
		+
		+	[https://www.designingbuildings.co.uk/wiki/ATOM:_A_generating_system_designed_by_Cedric_Price ATOM: A generating system designed by Cedric Price]
		+
		+	[https://www.designingbuildings.co.uk/wiki/Cedric_Price Cedric Price]
		+
		+	[https://www.designingbuildings.co.uk/wiki/Generator Generator]
		+
		+	[https://www.designingbuildings.co.uk/wiki/Housing_Research_by_Cedric_Price Housing Research by Cedric Price]
		+
		+	[https://www.designingbuildings.co.uk/wiki/Potteries_Thinkbelt Potteries Thinkbelt]

	[[Category:Articles_needing_more_work]] [[Category:Research_/_Innovation]]		[[Category:Articles_needing_more_work]] [[Category:Research_/_Innovation]]

Archiblog at 07:57, 10 December 2025

2025-12-10T07:57:05Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:57, 10 December 2025
Line 5:		Line 5:
	• Cedric Price		• Cedric Price
	\|width="50%"\|		\|width="50%"\|
−	This article presents a fairly unstructured, question-by-question interview with Cedric Price which nevertheless established the terms of a logical argument. However, in order ~~not to interrupt the flow of the interview, the terms are ...~~	+	This article presents a fairly unstructured, question-by-question interview with Cedric Price which nevertheless established the terms of a logical argument. However, in order to avoid your having to accept such terms, they are not defined until the end of the interview.
−		+
−	to avoid your having to accept such terms, ~~the ...~~ until the end of the interview.	+

	Interview Details		Interview Details

Archiblog at 07:53, 10 December 2025

2025-12-10T07:53:00Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:53, 10 December 2025
Line 289:		Line 289:

	-----		-----
−	== References ==	+	= References =

	Fellows, N. (1993) Transcript - Interview of Cedric Price, [https://archiveshub.jisc.ac.uk/search/archives/8a4edd68-4f7b-3319-9480-d1a9d62cc943?component=836b51c1-fc25-32fb-ab88-0b484e993d3f Cedric Price Collection, St John's College Archives]. [1]		Fellows, N. (1993) Transcript - Interview of Cedric Price, [https://archiveshub.jisc.ac.uk/search/archives/8a4edd68-4f7b-3319-9480-d1a9d62cc943?component=836b51c1-fc25-32fb-ab88-0b484e993d3f Cedric Price Collection, St John's College Archives]. [1]

Archiblog at 07:50, 10 December 2025

2025-12-10T07:50:36Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:50, 10 December 2025
Line 274:		Line 274:
	= Interviewer's notes =		= Interviewer's notes =

−	~~=== Proposed streamlined version~~ of the ~~notes ===~~	+	The author observes that the argument emerging from the first Cedric Price interview (February 1993) has the outline of a syllogism, albeit one that subverts the classical form. The sequence appears between Price’s Delft keynote speech of 1992, the author’s first reading of Cedric Price Works II (1992), and Price’s later formulation in the Architects’ Journal (September 1996). A supplementary remark from the CCA — “His modus operandi was to question” — further clarifies the operative logic.

−	The author observes that the argument emerging from the first Cedric Price interview (February 1993) has the outline of a syllogism, albeit one that subverts the classical form. The sequence appears between Price’s Delft keynote of 1993, the author’s first reading of Cedric Price Works II (1992), and Price’s later formulation in the Architects’ Journal (September 1996). A supplementary remark from the CCA — “His modus operandi was to question” — further clarifies the operative logic.	+	In a standard syllogism, the major premise links the middle term to the major term; the minor premise links the middle term to the minor term; and the middle term disappears in the conclusion. This forms the conventional structure:—
−		+
−	In a standard syllogism, the major premise links the middle term to the major term; the minor premise links the middle term to the minor term; and the middle term disappears in the conclusion. This forms the conventional structure:	+

	* middle : major		* middle : major
Line 291:		Line 289:

	-----		-----
−	This first interview in February 1993 was conducted after Cedric Price's Keynote Speech given in Delft [1] and Norman Fellows' first reading of [https://www.designingbuildings.co.uk/wiki/Cedric_Price Cedric Price] [https://www.designingbuildings.co.uk/wiki/Works Works] II [2] in 1992 and before the third and last interview in July 1996 and Cedric Price's article published in AJ in September 1996. In addition the CCA wrote "His modus operatus is to question".	+	== References ==
−		+
−	~~According to Norman Fellows:—~~	+
−		+
−	* "The reason why I think notes should be limited is that (now this may sound a bit ‘loose’) there is a discernable argument being made by Price along the lines of: major premise “I think architecture is too slow for problem-solving” (Price) which can be affirmed; that the link between problem-solving and anticipatory design can be denied but affirmed when question-asking and anticipatory design are linked – “His modus operandi was to question” (CCA – Cedric Price fonds); conclusion that “Architecture is slow and therefore requires anticipatory design” (Price, AJ 9/96) – so the middle term ‘problem-solving’ is missing. Sketchy, I know, but a syllogism in the making!"	+
−	* (Notes on Fellows, N. (1993) Transcript - Interview of Cedric Price)	+
−		+
−	~~Various authoritative sources have discussed the rules of logic for a standard syllogism. They can be characterised as follows:—~~	+
−		+
−	~~# ... that the major premise of a standard syllogism affirms some relation between its middle and major terms;~~	+
−	~~# ... that the minor premise links the middle and minor terms; and~~	+
−	~~# ... that the middle term is missing from the conclusion.~~	+
−		+
−	~~In other words, the structure of standard syllogism is as follows:—~~	+
−		+
−	~~# middle : major~~	+
−	~~# middle : minor~~	+
−	~~# minor : major~~	+
−		+
−	~~Following the rules of logic for a standard syllogism, this means:—~~	+
−		+
−	~~# ... that there is some relation between 'problem-solving' and 'architecture' (major premise)~~	+
−	~~# ... that 'problem-solving' links with 'anticipatory design' (minor premise)~~	+
−	~~# ... that 'problem-solving' is missing from the conclusion.~~	+
−		+
−	~~Thus a conventional argument might run along the following lines, namely:—~~	+
−		+
−	~~# ... that the major term is 'architecture'~~	+
−	~~# ... that the middle term is 'problem-solving'~~	+
−	~~# ... that the minor term is 'anticipatory design'.~~	+
−		+
−	~~However, the argument gleaned from the first interview and subsequent ... is a Pricean syllogism, namely:—~~	+
−		+
−	* Major premise: ... that "architecture is too slow for problem-solving";	+
−	* Minor premise:... that problem-solving does not align with anticipatory design;	+
−	* Conclusion: ... that "architecture is slow and therefore requires anticipatory design."	+
−		+
−	= References =	+

	Fellows, N. (1993) Transcript - Interview of Cedric Price, [https://archiveshub.jisc.ac.uk/search/archives/8a4edd68-4f7b-3319-9480-d1a9d62cc943?component=836b51c1-fc25-32fb-ab88-0b484e993d3f Cedric Price Collection, St John's College Archives]. [1]		Fellows, N. (1993) Transcript - Interview of Cedric Price, [https://archiveshub.jisc.ac.uk/search/archives/8a4edd68-4f7b-3319-9480-d1a9d62cc943?component=836b51c1-fc25-32fb-ab88-0b484e993d3f Cedric Price Collection, St John's College Archives]. [1]
Line 345:		Line 306:
	= Further reading =		= Further reading =

−	~~According to the Introduction to Philosophy by~~ College Sidekick:—	+	College Sidekick (2025) [https://www.collegesidekick.com/study-guides/atd-epcc-introtophilosophy/categorical-syllogisms Introduction to Philosophy, Categorical Syllogisms]
−		+
−	* Now, on to the next level, at which we combine more than one categorical proposition to fashion logical arguments. A [http://www.philosophypages.com/dy/c.htm#casyl categorical syllogism] is an argument consisting of exactly three categorical propositions (~~two premises and a conclusion~~) ~~in which there appear a total of exactly three categorical terms, each of which is used exactly twice.~~	+
−	*	+
−	* One of those terms must be used as the subject term of the conclusion of the syllogism, and we call it the [http://www.philosophypages.com/dy/m7.htm#mint minor term] of the syllogism as a whole. The [http://www.philosophypages.com/dy/m.htm#majt major term] of the syllogism is whatever is employed as the predicate term of its conclusion. The third term in the syllogism doesn't occur in the conclusion at all, but must be employed in somewhere in each of its premises; hence, we call it the [http://www.philosophypages.com/dy/m7.htm#midt middle term].	+
−	*	+
−	* Since one of the premises of the syllogism must be a categorical proposition that affirms some relation between its middle and major terms, we call that the [http://www.philosophypages.com/dy/m.htm#majp major premise] of the syllogism. The other premise, which links the middle and minor terms, we call the [http://www.philosophypages.com/dy/m7.htm#minp minor premise].	+
−		+
−	([https://www.collegesidekick.com/study-guides/atd-epcc-introtophilosophy/categorical-syllogisms ~~https://www.collegesidekick.com/study-guides/atd-epcc-introtophilosophy/categorical-syllogisms~~])	+

	[[Category:Articles_needing_more_work]] [[Category:Research_/_Innovation]]		[[Category:Articles_needing_more_work]] [[Category:Research_/_Innovation]]

Archiblog at 13:07, 9 December 2025

2025-12-09T13:07:45Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:07, 9 December 2025
Line 274:		Line 274:
	= Interviewer's notes =		= Interviewer's notes =

		+	=== Proposed streamlined version of the notes ===
		+
		+	The author observes that the argument emerging from the first Cedric Price interview (February 1993) has the outline of a syllogism, albeit one that subverts the classical form. The sequence appears between Price’s Delft keynote of 1993, the author’s first reading of Cedric Price Works II (1992), and Price’s later formulation in the Architects’ Journal (September 1996). A supplementary remark from the CCA — “His modus operandi was to question” — further clarifies the operative logic.
		+
		+	In a standard syllogism, the major premise links the middle term to the major term; the minor premise links the middle term to the minor term; and the middle term disappears in the conclusion. This forms the conventional structure:
		+
		+	* middle : major
		+	* middle : minor
		+	* therefore minor : major
		+
		+	A conventional architectural syllogism might therefore be expressed as follows: architecture (major) relates to problem-solving (middle); problem-solving relates to anticipatory design (minor); therefore architecture relates to anticipatory design.
		+
		+	However, the interview indicates that Price inverts the structure. His argument can be reconstructed as a ‘Pricean syllogism’ in which the middle term is introduced only to be refused. The major premise — “architecture is too slow for problem-solving” — affirms a mismatch between architecture and the middle term. The minor premise — that problem-solving does not align with anticipatory design — removes the middle term from the chain entirely. What remains is the conclusion articulated in 1996: “architecture is slow and therefore requires anticipatory design.”
		+
		+	Thus the syllogistic link is re-routed. Instead of architecture → problem-solving → anticipatory design, Price establishes architecture → question-asking → anticipatory design. By negating the conventional middle term, he replaces problem-solving with the operational mode that the CCA correctly identifies as central to his work: the persistent act of questioning.
		+
		+	-----
	This first interview in February 1993 was conducted after Cedric Price's Keynote Speech given in Delft [1] and Norman Fellows' first reading of [https://www.designingbuildings.co.uk/wiki/Cedric_Price Cedric Price] [https://www.designingbuildings.co.uk/wiki/Works Works] II [2] in 1992 and before the third and last interview in July 1996 and Cedric Price's article published in AJ in September 1996. In addition the CCA wrote "His modus operatus is to question".		This first interview in February 1993 was conducted after Cedric Price's Keynote Speech given in Delft [1] and Norman Fellows' first reading of [https://www.designingbuildings.co.uk/wiki/Cedric_Price Cedric Price] [https://www.designingbuildings.co.uk/wiki/Works Works] II [2] in 1992 and before the third and last interview in July 1996 and Cedric Price's article published in AJ in September 1996. In addition the CCA wrote "His modus operatus is to question".

Archiblog at 11:55, 9 December 2025

2025-12-09T11:55:50Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:55, 9 December 2025
Line 274:		Line 274:
	= Interviewer's notes =		= Interviewer's notes =

−	This first interview in February 1993 was conducted after Cedric Price's Keynote Speech given in Delft [1] and Norman Fellows' first reading of [https://www.designingbuildings.co.uk/wiki/Cedric_Price Cedric Price] [https://www.designingbuildings.co.uk/wiki/Works Works] II [2] in 1992 and before the third and last interview in July 1996 and Cedric Price's article published in AJ in ~~Septemner~~ 1996.	+	This first interview in February 1993 was conducted after Cedric Price's Keynote Speech given in Delft [1] and Norman Fellows' first reading of [https://www.designingbuildings.co.uk/wiki/Cedric_Price Cedric Price] [https://www.designingbuildings.co.uk/wiki/Works Works] II [2] in 1992 and before the third and last interview in July 1996 and Cedric Price's article published in AJ in September 1996. In addition the CCA wrote "His modus operatus is to question".

	According to Norman Fellows:—		According to Norman Fellows:—

Archiblog at 11:46, 9 December 2025

2025-12-09T11:46:41Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:46, 9 December 2025
Line 274:		Line 274:
	= Interviewer's notes =		= Interviewer's notes =

−	This first interview in February 1993 was conducted after Cedric Price's Keynote Speech given in Delft [1] and Norman Fellows' first reading of [https://www.designingbuildings.co.uk/wiki/Cedric_Price Cedric Price] [https://www.designingbuildings.co.uk/wiki/Works Works] II [2] in 1992 and before the third and last interview in July 1996.	+	This first interview in February 1993 was conducted after Cedric Price's Keynote Speech given in Delft [1] and Norman Fellows' first reading of [https://www.designingbuildings.co.uk/wiki/Cedric_Price Cedric Price] [https://www.designingbuildings.co.uk/wiki/Works Works] II [2] in 1992 and before the third and last interview in July 1996 and Cedric Price's article published in AJ in Septemner 1996.

	According to Norman Fellows:—		According to Norman Fellows:—
Line 286:		Line 286:
	# ... that the minor premise links the middle and minor terms; and		# ... that the minor premise links the middle and minor terms; and
	# ... that the middle term is missing from the conclusion.		# ... that the middle term is missing from the conclusion.
		+
		+	In other words, the structure of standard syllogism is as follows:—
		+
		+	# middle : major
		+	# middle : minor
		+	# minor : major

	Following the rules of logic for a standard syllogism, this means:—		Following the rules of logic for a standard syllogism, this means:—
Line 299:		Line 305:
	# ... that the minor term is 'anticipatory design'.		# ... that the minor term is 'anticipatory design'.

−	~~===~~ However, ~~this article ... ===~~	+	However, the argument gleaned from the first interview and subsequent ... is a Pricean syllogism, namely:—
−		+
−	~~This~~ first interview ~~in February 1993 came after a reading of Cedric Price Works II in 1992~~ and ~~before the third and last interview in July 1996~~.	+
−		+
−	~~Thus this article assumes the following Structure of Syllogism:—~~	+
−		+
−	~~# middle : major~~	+
−	~~# middle : minor~~	+
−	~~# minor : major~~	+
−		+
−	~~TO BE CONTINUED~~	+
−		+
−	..~~. gleaned from these sources~~ is a Pricean ~~Syllogism~~:—	+

−	* Major ~~Premise (P1)~~ ... that "architecture is too slow for problem-solving" ~~[1]~~	+	* Major premise: ... that "architecture is too slow for problem-solving";
−	* ~~Middle Term (P2)~~ ... that problem-solving	+	* Minor premise:... that problem-solving does not align with anticipatory design;
		+	* Conclusion: ... that "architecture is slow and therefore requires anticipatory design."

	= References =		= References =