Bibliographic record
Abstract
This essay examines the unbuildable architectural and interior design drawings of Love/House (1984) by architect and professor Lars Lerup. Developed at University of California, Berkeley, and the Canadian Centre for Architecture, Lerup’s work is shown to use fictional narratives in drawings to explore certain poetic ideas about the human experience from Roland Barthes’s 1977 book, A Lover’s Discourse: Fragments. His deliberate exploration of artistic, fictional, and unrealisable aesthetic effects aimed to offer a critical revision to the rise of American West-Coast suburbanisation, and the commercialisation of domestic, social behaviours in an increasingly commoditised media culture of the 1980s. Through a close reading of several of Lerup’s lesser known texts from the 1970s and 1980s that foregrounded the Love/House project, this essay shows there was more to his work than the somewhat cryptic and idiosyncratic employment of fictional drawings to challenge the commercial rhetoric of late-capitalism. It argues that his largely unexamined approaches to spatial design resulted from a deeper theoretical derivation that human action was irreducibly unpredictable, and unable to be categorised into behaviourist models or functional planning. By unpacking the qualities of his ‘interactionist view’ of people, objects, and the built environment from his first theoretical text, Building the Unfinished (1977), the unbuildable compositional effects of the Love/House drawings are shown to have resulted from his earlier attempts to establish the complex and unpredictable nature of human action as the central tenet of spatial design. For Lerup, exploring ideas of poetry and fiction in drawings played a crucial role in cultivating his theory of space that reflects people’s unfinished search for meaning.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".