One of his most evolutionary and ambitiousprojects is the well know ‘Fun Palace’ which unfortunately was never built. TheFun Palace was meant to be built on the banks of the Thames in 1961 for the progressive theatre director Joan Littlewoods. The Fun Palace wasa proposition for an alternative educational leisure center that was designedto facilitate various programmatic and spatial reconfigurations initiated byits users. Littlewoods thought of the Fun Palace as a creative and constructiveoutlet for this expected windfall of leisure. She saw it as a way to open theBritish public to new experiences and the possibilities of lifelong learningand discovery.
Her idea of a theatre where the audience are also playerscombined well with Price’s architectural vision of a collaborative andever-changing environment which would be a “laboratory of fun”, featuringmoving walls and floors, interactive panels and even an “inflatable conferencecenter”. Cedric considered the ‘theatrical’brief as a problem not of static and solid ‘building’. Although it was neverrealized, unlike other visionary projects of the 1960s it was fully intended tobe built.
In approaching the design of the FunPalace, Price began by considering Joan Littlewoods’s ‘theatrical’ brief as aproblem not of static and solid ‘building’, but in terms of a new kind ofactive and dynamic architecture which would permit multiple uses and whichwould constantly adapt to change. It would be a network of multiple events, aspace of oscillation between incongruous activities. The spaces would have beenendlessly varied in size, shape, lighting and accessibility.
Rather than seekdesign ideas from the conventional repertoire of modernist objects and spaces,he considered the program in temporal terms, and sought the solution within theproblems it posed. The Fun Palace would have to be an entity whose essence wascontinual change, which permitted multiple and indeterminate uses. His designsbegan to describe an improvisational architecture of constant activity, in acontinuous process of construction, dismantling, and reassembly. It would be avast framework where the working – class population of East London couldassemble their own learning and leisure environments, where Littlewoods’s dreammight be realized, where people might escape from everyday routine and serialexistence and embark on a journey of creativity and personal development. Pricethought of the Fun Palace in terms of process, as events in time rather thanobjects in space, and embraced indeterminacy as a core design principle.