The interior, often relegated to the realm of the apolitical or morally trivial, has remained a blind spot within mainstream political inquiry. This article proposes a theoretical bridge between political theory and the field of experimental and interior architecture, inviting a transdisciplinary reflection on the meaning of space for politics. Rather than prescribing models for organizing domestic or enclosed environments, it proposes an alternative mode of engagement that challenges the canonical assumptions of political theory, a discipline historically intertwined with modern conceptions of citizenship and democracy, and thus with the public sphere as the privileged site of deliberation and protest. Within this framework, the interior has been largely overlooked, and by revisiting this omission, the article aims to open a conversation between political thinking and spatial practice, uncovering how interiors may serve as subtle yet significant sites where politics shapes everyday life.
AttiwillS. (2009, July2–4). Working space: Interiors as provisional compositions [Conference session]. Occupations: Negotiations with Constructed Space. Conference Proceedings University of Brighton.
2.
AuyeroJ. (2006). Spaces and places as sites and objects of politics. In GoodinR. E.TillyC. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of contextual political analysis (pp. 564–578). Oxford University Press.
3.
BatumanE. (2022). Either/or. Penguin.
4.
BaudrillardJ. (1996). The system of objects. Verso. (Original work published 1968)
5.
BeecherM. A. (2015). The political interior. In Asher ThompsonJ. A.BlossomN. H. (Eds.), The handbook of interior design (pp. 46–57). Wiley.
6.
BelfieldA.PetrescuD. (2024). Co-design, neighbourhood sharing, and commoning through urban living labs. CoDesign, 21(2), 171–194.
7.
BellD.ZackaB. (Eds.). (2020). Political theory and architecture. Bloomsbury.
8.
BennettW. L. (1998). UnCivic culture: Communication, identity, and the rise of lifestyle politics. PS: Political Science & Politics, 31(4), 741–761.
9.
BondanellaP.MusaM. (1979). The portable Machiavelli. Penguin.
10.
BourdieuP. (2010). Distinction: A social critique of the judgement of taste. Routledge.
11.
BrownT.AntonL. (2011). Introduction. In BrownT.AntonL. (Eds.), Between the Avant-garde and the everyday: Subversive politics in Europe from 1957 to the present (pp. 1-8). Berghahn Books.
ChecchiaV. (2013). Apt-Art. Alla ricerca dell’intimità perduta [Apt Art: In search of lost intimacy]. In BoràginaF.BrivioG. (Eds.), Interno domestico. Mostre in appartamento 1972–2013 [Domestic Interior: Apartment Exhibitions] (pp. 79-82). Fortino Editions.
14.
CohenJ. L. (1995). Scenes of the world to come: European architecture and the American challenge 1893–1960. Flammarion.
15.
CohenJ. L. (2015). La coupure entre architectes et intellectuels: ou les enseignements de l’italophilie [The Divide Between Architects and Intellectuals: Or, Lessons from Italophilia]. Mardaga éditions.
DeJeanJ. (2009). The age of comfort: When Paris discovered casual, and the modern home began. Bloomsbury.
18.
DraperJ. (2022). Gentrification and everyday democracy. European Journal of Political Theory, 23(3), 359–380.
19.
DryzekJ. S.HonigB.PhillipsA. (2011). Overview of Political Theory. In DryzekJ. S.HonigB.PhillipsA. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of political theory (pp. 60-88). Oxford University Press.
20.
EckertJ. (2014). Practice movements: The politics of non-sovereign power. In Della PortaD.DianiM. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of social movements (pp. 567–577). Oxford University Press.
21.
EliasN. (1983). Die höfische Gesellschaft [The Court Society]. Suhrkamp.
22.
FineG. A.HarringtonB. (2004). Tiny publics: Small groups and civil society. Sociological Theory, 22(3), 341–356.
23.
FishS. (2001). Boutique multiculturalism. In FishS. (Ed.), The trouble with principles (pp. 56–72). Harvard University Press.
24.
FournierL. (2021). Autotheory as Feminist Practice in Art, Writing, and Criticism. The MIT Press.
25.
FraserN. (1992). Rethinking the public sphere: A contribution to the critique of actually existing democracy. In CalhounC. (Ed.), Habermas and the public sphere (pp. 109–142). MIT Press.
26.
FumaroliM. (1994). Trois institutions littéraires [Three Literary Institutions]. Gallimard.
27.
FumaroliM. (1995). De l’âge de l’éloquence à l’âge de la conversation: la conversion de la rhétorique humaniste dans la France du XVIIe siècle [From the Age of Eloquence to the Age of Conversation: The Reconfiguration of Humanist Rhetoric in Seventeenth-Century France]. In BreyB.StrosetzkiC. (Eds.), Art de la lettre, Art de la conversation à l’époque classique en France (pp. 25–45). Klincksieck.
28.
GoffmannE. (1956). The presentation of self in everyday life. University of Edinburgh, Social Sciences Research Centre.
29.
GopnikB. (2000). Warhol. Ecco.
30.
GranovetterM. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 6(78), 1360–1380.
31.
GriffithE. J.JepmaM.SaviniF. (2022). Beyond collective property: A typology of collaborative housing in Europe. International Journal of Housing Policy, 24(1), 121–141.
32.
HabermasJ. (1991). The structural transformation of the public sphere: An inquiry into a category of Bourgeois society. MIT Press.
33.
HartmanS. (2019). Wayward lives, beautiful experiments: Intimate histories of riotous Black girls, troublesome women and queer radicals. Serpent’s Tail.
34.
HirschkopK. (1999). Mikhail Bakhtin: An aesthetic for democracy. Oxford University Press.
35.
HobbesT. (1991). Leviathan (TuckR., Ed.). Cambridge University Press.
36.
InglehartR. (1977). The silent revolution: Changing values and political styles among western publics. Princeton University Press.
37.
JohnsonG. F. (2022). Grounded normative theory. In ErcanS.AsenbaumH.CuratoN.MendonçaR. F. (Eds.), Research methods in deliberative democracy (pp. 52–65). Oxford University Press.
38.
KaprowA. (1966). Assemblages, environments and happenings. Harry N. Abrams.
MouffeC. (2013). Agonistics: Thinking the world politically. Verso.
43.
MouffeC. (2014). By way of a postscript. Parallax, 20(2), 149–157.
44.
OwenC.DoveyK. (2008). Fields of sustainable architecture. The Journal of Architecture, 13(1), 9–21.
45.
PetrescuD.PetcouC. (2023). The role of architects in initiating, sustaining and defending urban commons in mass housing estates: R-Urban in Grand Ensembles. The Journal of Architecture, 28(1), 169–181.
46.
Pinos SarmientoE. V. (2025). Building identities: A path to diversity and decolonization of interiors in Latin America. Journal of Interior Design, 50(1), 49–61.
47.
PotvinJ. (2015), Bachelors of a different sort: Queer aesthetics, material culture and the modern interior in Britain. Manchester University Press.
48.
PrestonJ. (2011). Blazing inter-alia: Tropes of a feminist interior practice. In BrownL. (Ed.), Feminist practices: Interdisciplinary approaches to women in architecture (pp. 99–122). Ashgate.
49.
RancièreJ. (2012). The politics of aesthetics. Continuum.
50.
RancièreJ. (2013). Aisthesis: Scenes from the aesthetic regime of art. Verso.
51.
RosenblumN. (2020). The democracy of everyday life in disaster: Holding our lives in their hands. Democratic Theory, 7(2), 69–74.
52.
SetäläM. (2017). Connecting deliberative mini-publics to representative decision making. European Journal of Political Research, 4(56), 846–863.
53.
ShryockA. (2012). Breaking hospitality apart: Bad hosts, bad guests, and the problem of sovereignty. The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 18, 20–33.
54.
SmithP. (2010). Just kids. Bloomsbury.
55.
TeerdsH. (2022). ‘The space between’: An architectural examination of Hannah Arendt’s notions of ‘public space’ and ‘world.’The Journal of Architecture, 27(5–6), 757–777.
56.
TravisJ. (2018). An interior of inclusion or the illusion of inclusion. Journal of Interior Design, 43(3), 3–7.
57.
TuanY.-F. (2011). Space and place: The perspective of experience. University of Minnesota Press.
58.
TumanovA. (2019). A life in music from the soviet union to Canada: Memoirs of a madrigal ensemble singer. University of North Texas Press.
59.
TutenelP.RamaekersS.HeylighenA.LeuvenK. (2022). The pavement and the hospital bed: Care environments as part of everyday life. Journal of Interior Design, 47(4), 3–10.
60.
TyszczukR. (2017). Provisional cities: Cautionary tales of the Anthropocene. Routledge.
61.
VestbroD. U. (2000). From collective housing to cohousing: A summary of research. Journal of Architectural and Planning Research, 17(2), 164–178.
62.
VidalG. (1948). The city and the pillar. Dutton.
63.
WeinthalL. (Ed.). (2011). Toward a new interior: An anthology of interior design theory. Princeton Architectural Press.
64.
ZackaB. (2020). What’s in a balcony? The in-between as public good. In BellD.ZackaB. (Eds.), Political theory and architecture (pp. 81–102). Bloomsbury.
