When it is raining in Oxford Street the architecture is no more important than the rain, in fact the weather has probably more to do with the pulsation of the Living City at that given moment.
Living City and its catalogue were not about traditional architectural form, but its opposite: the formlessness of space, behavior, life
Situation was simply a source of street-level pleasure for architects to study firsthand, the raw material of a new architecture of events. Archigram conceived of situation in a more architectural, more plastic way than the situationist.
“The masses” were in fact aggregates of individuals, freed from the yoke of collectivism by their own, personal agendas for the city. There could be as many Living Cities as there were subjectivities. This was how Archigram attempted to explain its rather woolly sense of “Situation”:
This thing we call Living City contains many associative ideas and emotions and can mean many things to many people: liking it or not liking it, understanding it or not understanding it, depends on the personal associations. There is no desire to communicate with everybody, only those whose thoughts and feelings are related to our own.