Imagine, the revolution has broken out and architecture has nailed its colours to the mast. It has opted for change. Architects have laid out the facts about the inequality in land ownership, inheritance law, capital accumulation, and the resulting segregation, an inequality they have observed first-hand for many years, have helped shape or even profited from. These experiences from direct spatial practice now lend legitimacy to the revolution.
Can these two notions, precarity and entrepreneurialism, apparently distant, coexist? In his book Entreprecariat, Silvio Lorusso aptly addresses the uncanny coincidence of precarity and entrepreneurialism as “two sides of the same perverse coin”. Such discordance is precisely what qualifies the subject that he calls entreprecarious.