Biophilic design is a concept used within the building industry to increase occupant connectivity to the natural environment through the use of direct nature, indirect nature, and space and place conditions. Used at both the building and city-scale, it is argued that this idea has health, environmental, and economic benefits for building occupants and urban environments, with few drawbacks. Although its name was coined in recent history, indicators of biophilic design have been seen in architecture from as far back as the Hanging Gardens of Babylon.

Biophilia hypothesis

The word "Biophilia" was first introduced by a psychoanalyst named Erich Fromm who stated that biophilia is the "passionate love of life and of all that is alive…whether in a person, a plant, an idea, or a social group" in his book The Anatomy of Human Destructiveness in 1973. Fromm's approach was that of a psychoanalyst (a person who studies the unconscious mind) and presented a broad spectrum as he called biophilia a biologically normal instinct.

The term has been used since by many scientists, and philosophers overall being adapted to several different areas of study. Some notable mentions of biophilia include Edward O. Wilson's book Biophilia (1984) where he took a biologist's approach and first coined the "Biophilia hypothesis" and popularized the notion. Wilson defined biophilia as "the innate tendency to focus on life and lifelike processes", claiming a link with nature is not only physiological (as Fromm suggested) but has a genetic basis. The biophilia hypothesis is the idea that humans have an inherited need to connect to nature and other biotic forms due to our evolutionary dependence on it for survival and personal fulfillment. This idea is relevant in daily life – humans travel and spend money to sightsee in national parks and nature preserves, relax on beaches, hike mountains, and explore jungles. Further, many sports revolve around nature such as skiing, mountain biking, and surfing. From a home perspective, people are more likely to spend more on houses that have views of nature; buyers are willing to spend 7% more on homes with excellent landscaping, 58% more on properties that look at water, and 127% more on those that are waterfront. Humans also value companionship with animals. In America 60.2 million people own dogs and 47.1 million own cats.

Biophobia
While biophilia refers to the inherent need to experience and love nature, biophobia is human's inherited fear of nature and animals. In the case of modern life, humans urge to separate ourselves from nature and move towards technology; a cultural drive where people tend to associate with human artifacts, interests, and managed activities. Some anxieties of the natural environment are inherited from threats seen in anthropocentric evolution: this includes fear of snakes, spiders, and blood. In relation to buildings, biophobia can be induced through the use of bright colors, heights, enclosed spaces, darkness, and large open spaces are major contributors to occupant discomfort.

Dimensions
Considered as one of the pioneers of biophilic design, Stephen Kellert has created a framework where nature in the built environment is used in a way that satisfies human needs – his principles are meant to celebrate and show respect for nature, and provide an enriching urban environment that is multisensory. The dimensions and attributes that define Kellert's biophilic framework are below.

Direct experience of nature

Direct experience refers to tangible contact with natural features:
 Light: Allows orientation of time of day and season, and is attributed to wayfinding and comfort; light can also cause natural patterns and form, movements and shadows. In design, this can be applied through clerestories, reflective materials, skylights, glass, and atriums. This provides well-being and interest from occupants.
 Air: Ventilation, temperature, and humidity are felt through air. Such conditions can be applied through the use of windows and other passive strategies, but most importantly the variation in these elements can promote occupant comfort and productivity.
 Water: Water is multisensory and can be used in buildings to provide movement, sounds, touch, and sight. In design it can be incorporated through water bodies, fountains, wetlands, and aquariums; people have a strong connection to water and when used, it can decrease stress and increase health, performance, and overall satisfaction.
 Plants: Bringing vegetation to the exterior and interior spaces of the building provides a direct relationship to nature. This should be abundant (i.e., make use of green walls or many potted plants) and some vegetation should flower; plants have been proven to increase physical health, performance, and productivity and reduce stress.
 Animals: While hard to achieve, it can be done through aquariums, gardens, animal feeders, and green roofs. This interaction with  promotes interest, mental stimulation, and pleasure.
 Weather: Weather can be observed directly through windows and transitional spaces, but it can also be simulated through the manipulation of air within the space; awareness of weather signified human fitness and survival in ancient times and now promotes awareness and mental stimulation.
 Natural landscapes: This is done through creating self-sustaining ecosystems into the built environment. Given human evolution and history, people tend to enjoy savannah-like landscapes as they depict spaciousness and an abundance of natural life. Contact with these types of environments can be done through vistas and or direct interactions such as gardens. Such landscapes are known to increase occupant satisfaction.
 Fire: This natural element is hard to incorporate, however when implemented correctly into the building, it provides color, warmth, and movement, all of which are appealing and pleasing to occupants.

Indirect experience of nature
Indirect experience refers to contact with images and or representations of nature:
 Images of Nature: This has been proven to be emotionally and intellectually satisfying to occupants; images of nature can be implemented through paintings, photos, sculptures, murals, videos, etcetera.
 Natural Materials: People prefer natural materials as they can be mentally stimulating. Natural materials are susceptible to the patina of time; this change invokes responses from people. These materials can be incorporated into buildings through the use of wood and stone. Interior design can use natural fabrics and furnishings. Leather has often been included as recommended Biophilic material however with the awareness of animal agriculture (leather being a co-product of the meat industry) as a major contributor to climate change faux, or plant-based, leathers created from mushroom, pineapple skin, or cactus are now seen as viable alternatives. It is also seen that to feel, and be, closer to nature and animals to destroy them in the pursuit of this is counter-productive and in conflict with the philosophy of Biophilia.
 Natural Colors: Natural colors or "earth-tones", are those that are commonly found in nature and are often subdued tones of brown, green, and blue. When using colors in buildings, they should represent these natural tones. Brighter colors should only be used sparingly – one study found that red flowers on plants were found to be fatiguing and distracting by occupants.
 Simulations of Natural Light and Air: In areas where natural forms of ventilation and light cannot be achieved, creative use of interior lighting and mechanical ventilation can be used to mimic these natural features. Designers can do this through variations in lighting through different lighting types, reflective mediums, and natural geometries that the fixture can shine through; natural airflow can be imitated through mild changes in temperature, humidity, and air velocity.
 Naturalistic Shapes: Natural shapes and forms can be achieved in architectural design through columns and nature-based patterns on facades - including these different elements into spaces can change a static space into an intriguing and appealing complex area.
 Evoking Nature: This uses characteristics found in nature to influence the structural design of the project. These may be things that may not occur in nature, rather elements that represent natural landscapes such as mimicking different plant heights found in ecosystems, and or mimicking particular animal, water, or plant features.
 Information Richness: This can be achieved by providing complex, yet not noisy environments that invoke occupant curiosity and thought. Many ecosystems are complex and filled with different abiotic and biotic elements – in such the goal of this attribute is to include these elements into the environment of the building.
 Change and the Patina of Time: People are intrigued by nature and how it changes, adapts, and ages over time, much like ourselves. In buildings, this can be accomplished by using organic materials that are susceptible to weathering and color change – this allows for us to observe slight changes in our built environment over time.
 Natural Geometries: The design of facades or structural components can include the use of repetitive, varied patterns that are seen in nature (fractals). These geometries can also have hierarchically organized scales and winding flow rather than be straight with harsh angles. For instance, commonly used natural geometries are the honeycomb pattern and ripples found in water.
Biomimicry: This is a design strategy that imitates uses found in nature as solutions for human and technical problems. Using these natural functions in construction can entice human creativity and consideration of nature.

Experience of space and place

The experience of space and place uses spatial relationships to enhance well-being:

 Prospect and Refuge: Refuge refers to the building's ability to provide comfortable and nurturing interiors (alcoves, dimmer lighting), while prospect emphasizes horizons, movement, and sources of danger. Examples of design elements include balconies, alcoves, lighting changes, and areas spaciousness (savannah environment).
 Organized Complexity: This principle is meant to simulate the need for controlled variability; this is done in design through repetition, change, and detail of the building's architecture.
 Integration of Parts: When different parts comprise a whole, it provides satisfaction for occupants: design elements include interior spaces using clear boundaries and or the integration of a central focal point.
 Transitional Spaces: This element aims to connect interior spaces with the outside or create comfort by providing access from one space to another environment through the use of porches, decks, atriums, doors, bridges, fenestrations, and foyers.
 Mobility: The ability for people to comfortably move between spaces, even when complex; it provides the feeling of security for occupants and can be done through making clear points of entry and egress.
 Cultural and Ecological Attachment to Place: Creating a cultural sense of place in the built environment creates human connection and identity. This is done by incorporating the area's geography and history into the design. Ecological identity is done through the creation of ecosystems that promote the use of native flora and fauna.

Each of these experiences are meant to be considered individually when using biophilia in projects, as there is no one right answer for one building type. Each building's architect(s) and project owner(s) must collaborate to include the biophilic principles they believe fit within their scope and most effectively reach their occupants.

City-scale
Timothy Beatley believes the key objective of biophilic cities is to create an environment where the residents want to actively participate in, preserve, and connect with the natural landscape that surrounds them. He established ways to achieve this through a framework of infrastructure, governance, knowledge, and behavior; these dimensions can also be indicators of existing biophilic attributes that already exist in current cities.
 Biophilic Conditions and Infrastructure: The idea that a certain number of people at any given time should be near a green space or park. This can be done through the creation of integrated ecological networks and walking trails throughout the city, the designation of certain portions of land area for vegetation and forests, green and biophilic building design features, and the use of flora and fauna throughout the city.
 Biophilic Activities: This refers to the increased amount of time spent outside and visiting parks, longer outdoor periods at schools, improved foot traffic across the city, improved participation in community gardens and conservatory clubs, larger participation in local volunteer efforts.
 Biophilic Attitudes and Knowledge: In areas with urban biophilic design elements, there will be an improved number of residents who care about nature and can identify local native species; resident curiosity of their local ecosystems also increases.
 Biophilic Institutions and Governance: Local government bodies allocate part of the budget to nature and biophilic activities. Indicators of this include increased regulation that requires more green and biophilic design principles, grant programs that promote the use of nature and biophilia, the inclusion of natural history museums and educational programs, and increased number of nature non-governmental organizations and community groups.

Benefits
Biophilic design is argued to have a wealth of benefits for building occupants and urban environments through improving connections to nature. For cities, many believe the biggest proponent of the concept is its ability to make the city more resilient to any environmental stressor it may face.

Health benefits
Catherine Ryan, et al. found that elements such as nature sounds, improved mental health 37% faster than traditional urban noise after stressor exposure; the same study found that when surgery patients were exposed to aromatherapy, 45% used less morphine and 56% used fewer painkillers overall. Another study by Kaitlyn Gillis and Birgitta Gatersleben found that the inclusion of plants in interior environments reduce stress and increase pain tolerance; the use of water elements and incorporating views of nature are also mentally restorative for occupants. When researching the effects of biophilia on hospital patients, Peter Newman and Jana Soderlund found that by increasing vista quality in hospital rooms depression and pain in patients is reduced, which in turn shortened hospital stays from 3.67 days to 2.6 days.
In biophilic cities, Andrew Dannenberg, et al. indicated that there are higher levels of social connectivity and better capability to handle life crises; this has resulted in lower crime rate levels of violence and aggression. The same study found that implementing outdoor facilities such as impromptu gymnasiums like the "Green Gym" in the United Kingdom, allow people to help clear overgrown vegetation, build walking paths, plant foliage, and more readily exercise (walking, running, climbing, etc.); this has been proven to build social capital, increase physical activity, better mental health and quality of life. Further, Dannenberg, et al. also found that children growing up in green neighborhoods are seen to have lower levels of asthma; decreased mortality rates and health disparities between the wealthy and poor were also observed in greener neighborhoods.

Mental health benefits
Highly prevalent in nature, fractal patterns, biophilic patterns possess self-similar components that repeat at varying size scales. The perceptual experience of human-made environments can be impacted with inclusion of these natural patterns. Previous work has demonstrated consistent trends in preference for and complexity estimates of fractal patterns. However, limited information has been gathered on the impact of other visual judgments. Here we examine the aesthetic and perceptual experience of fractal 'global-forest' designs already installed in humanmade spaces and demonstrate how fractal pattern components are associated with positive psychological experiences that can be utilized to promote occupant wellbeing. These designs are composite fractal patterns consisting of individual fractal 'tree-seeds' which combine to create a 'global fractal forest.' The local 'tree-seed' patterns, global configuration of tree-seed locations, and overall resulting 'global-forest' patterns have fractal qualities. These designs span multiple mediums yet are all intended to lower occupant stress without detracting from the function and overall design of the space. In this series of studies, we first establish divergent relationships between various visual attributes, with pattern complexity, preference, and engagement ratings increasing with fractal complexity compared to ratings of refreshment and relaxation which stay the same or decrease with complexity. Subsequently, we determine that the local constituent fractal ('tree-seed') patterns contribute to the perception of the overall fractal design, and address how to balance aesthetic and psychological effects (such as individual experiences of perceived engagement and relaxation) in fractal design installations. This set of studies demonstrates that fractal preference is driven by a balance between increased arousal (desire for engagement and complexity) and decreased tension (desire for relaxation or refreshment). Installations of these composite mid-high complexity 'global-forest' patterns consisting of 'tree-seed' components balance these contrasting needs, and can serve as a practical implementation of biophilic patterns in human-made environments to promote occupant wellbeing.

Environmental benefits

Some argue that by adding physical natural elements, such as plants, trees, rain gardens, and green roofs, to the built environment, buildings and cities can manage stormwater runoff better as there are fewer impervious surfaces and better infiltration. To maintain these natural systems in a cost-effective way, excess greywater can be reused to water the plants and greenery; vegetative walls and roofs also decrease polluted water as the plants act as biofilters. Adding greenery also reduces carbon emissions, the heat island effect, and increases biodiversity. Carbon is reduced through carbon sequestration in the plant's roots during photosynthesis. Green and high albedo rooftops and facades, and shading of streets and structures using vegetation can reduce the amount of heat absorption normally found in asphalt or dark surfaces – this can reduce heating and cooling needs by 25% and reduce temperature fluctuations by 50%. Further, adding green facades can increase the biodiversity of an area if native species are planted - the Khoo Teck Puat Hospital in Singapore has seen a resurgence of 103 species of butterflies onsite, thanks to their use of vegetation throughout the exterior of the building.

Economic benefits
Biophilia may have slightly higher costs due to the addition of natural elements that require maintenance, higher-priced organic items, etc., however, the perceived health and environmental benefits are believed to negate this. Peter Newman found that by adding biophilic design and landscapes, cities like New York City can see savings nearing $470 million due to increased worker productivity and $1.7 billion from reduced crime expenses. They also found that storefronts on heavily vegetated streets increased foot traffic and attracted consumers that were likely to spend 25% more; the same study showed that increasing daylighting through skylights in a store increase sales by 40% +/- 7%. Properties with biophilic design also benefit from higher selling prices, with many selling at 16% more than conventional buildings.

Sustainability and resilience
 On the urban scale, Timothy Beatley believes that biophilic design will allow cities to better adapt to stresses that occur from changes in climate and thus, local environments. To better show this, he created a biophilic cities framework, where pathways can be taken to increase the resilience and sustainability of cities. This includes three sections: Biophilic Urbanism - the physical biophilic and green measures that can be taken to increase the resilience of the city, Adaptive Capacity - how the community's behaviors will adapt as a result of these physical changes, and Resilient Outcomes - what can happen if both of these steps are achieved.

Under the Biophilic Urbanism section, one of the ways a city can increase resilience is by pursuing the biophysical pathway – by safeguarding and promoting the inclusion of natural systems, the natural protective barrier of the city is increased. For example, New Orleans is a city that has built over its natural wet plains and has exposed themselves to flooding. It is estimated that if they kept the bayous intact, the city could save $23 billion yearly in storm protection.

In the Adaptive Capacity section, Beatley states that the commitment to place and home pathway creates stimulating and interesting nature environments for residents – this will create stronger bonds to home, which will increase the likelihood that citizens will take care of where they live. He goes further in saying that in times of shock or stress, these people are more likely to rebuild and or support the community instead of fleeing. This may also increase governmental action to protect the city from future disasters.

By achieving Biophilic Urbanism and Adaptive Capacity, Beatley believes that one of the biggest resilient outcomes of this framework will be increased adaptability of the residents. Because the steps leading to resilience encourage people to be outside walking and participating in activities, the citizens become healthier and more physically fit; it has been found that those who take walks in nature experience decreased depression, anger, and increased vigor, versus those who walk in interior environments.

Use in building standards
Given the increased information supporting the benefits of biophilic design, organizations are beginning to incorporate the concept into their standards and rating systems to encourage building professionals to use biophilia in their projects. As of now, the most prominent supporters of biophilic design are the WELL Building Standard and the Living Building Challenge.

WELL Building Standard
The International WELL Building Institute uses biophilic design in their WELL Standard as a qualitative and quantitive metric. The qualitative metric must incorporate nature (environmental elements, natural lighting, and spatial qualities), natural patterns, and nature interaction within and outside the building; these efforts must be documented through professional narrative to be considered for certification. For the quantitative portion, projects must have outdoor biophilia (25% of the project must have accessible landscaped grounds and or rooftop gardens and 70% of that 25% must have plantings), indoor biophilia (plant beds and pots must cover 1% of the floor area and plant walls must cover 2% of the floor area), and water features (projects over 100,000 sqft must have a water feature that is either 1.8 m in height or 4 m2 in floor area). Verification is enforced through assurance letters by the architects and owners, and by on-site spot checks. Generally, both metric types can be applied to every building type the WELL Standard addresses, with two exceptions: core and shell construction does not need to include quantitative interior biophilia and existing interiors do not need to include qualitative nature interaction.

Living Building Challenge

The International Living Future Institute is the creator of the living building challenge – a rigorous building standard that aims to maximize building performance. This standard classifies the use of a biophilic environment as an imperative element in their health and happiness section. The living building challenge requires that a framework be created that shows the following: how the project will incorporate nature through environmental features, light, and space, natural shapes and forms, natural patterns, and place-based relationships. The challenge also requires that the occupants be able to connect to nature directly through interaction within the interior and exterior of the building. These are then verified through a preliminary audit procedure.

Criticisms

Biophilic design is considered young, as it has not been implemented in modern building projects for a long period of time. Because of this, there has been little research that explores the long-term challenges, negatives, and even benefits of biophilia in buildings and cities. Other concerns are the initial and maintenance costs of projects that implement expensive biophilic design principles. This could be due to the lack of research that was discussed above, as there is little information regarding payback periods for investors. Another issue could be the prices for the technology needed, however this should eventually lower as the concept becomes more commonplace.

Building-scale examples of application

Church of Mary Magdalene

The Church of Mary Magdalene is in Jerusalem and was consecrated in 1888. This church's architecture is biophilic in that it contains natural geometries, organized complexity, information richness, and organic forms (onion-shaped domes) and materials. On the exterior, complexity and order are shown through the repetitive use of domes, their scale, and placement. Inside, the church experiences symmetry and a savannah-like environment through its vaulting and domes – the columns also have leaf-like fronds, which represents images of nature. Prospect is explored through raised ceilings that have balconies and increased lighting; refuge is experienced in lower areas, where there are reduced lighting and alcoves and throughout, where small windows are encased by thick walls.

Fallingwater

Fallingwater, one of Frank Lloyd Wright's most famous buildings, exemplifies many biophilic features. The home has human-nature connectivity through the integrative use of the waterfall and stream in its architecture - the sound from these water features can be heard throughout the inside of the home. This allows visitors to feel like they are "participating" in nature rather than "spectating" it like they would be if the waterfall were downstream. In addition, the structure is built around existing foliage and encompasses the local geology by incorporating a large rock in the center of the living room. There are also many glass walls to connect the occupants to the surrounding woods and nature that is outdoors. To better the flow of the space, Wright included many transitional spaces in the home (porches and decks); he also enhanced the direct and indirect experiences of nature by using multiple fireplaces and a wealth of organic shapes, colors, and materials. His use of Kellert's biophilic design principles are prominent throughout the structure, even though this home was constructed before these ideas were developed.

Khoo Teck Puat Hospital

Referred to as a "garden hospital", KTP has an abundance of native plants and water features that surround its exterior. This inclusion of vegetation has increased the biodiversity of the local ecosystem, bringing butterflies and bird species; the rooftop of the hospital is also used by local residents to grow produce. Unlike many other hospitals, 15% of visitors come to Khoo Teck Puat for recreational reasons such as gardening or relaxing. The design behind this hospital was to increase the productivity of its doctors, wellbeing of its visitors, and increase the healing speed and pain resilience of its patients. To do this, the designers incorporated greenery from the hospital's courtyard to its upper floors, where patients have balconies that are covered in scented foliage. The hospital is centered on the Yishun pond, and like Frank Lloyd Wright's Fallingwater, the architects made this natural feature part of the hospital by having water stream through its courtyard, creating the illusion that the water was "drawn" from the pond. The hospital also utilizes natural ventilation as much as possible in common areas and corridors by orienting them in the direction the north and southeast prevailing winds; this has reduced energy consumption by 60% and increased airflow by 20-30%. This creates thermally adequate environments for patients and medical staff alike. Using Kellert strategies above, it is apparent that most of the strategies used for Khoo Teck Puat are direct nature experiences. The hospital also uses transitional spaces to make occupants more connected to the outdoors and has organized complexity throughout its overall architectural design. KTP has created a sense of place for occupants and neighbors, as it acts as a communal place for both those who work there and live nearby.

Sandy Hook Elementary School

After the disaster that struck Sandy Hook Elementary in 2012, a new school was built to help heal the community and provide a new sense of security for those occupying the space. Major biophilic design parameters that Svigals + Partners included in this project are animal feeders, wetlands, courtyards, natural shapes and patterns, natural materials, transitional spaces, images of nature, natural colors, and use of natural light. The school has incorporated a victory garden that is meant to act as a way of healing for children after the tragedy. The architects wanted the children to feel as if they are learning in the trees so they set the school back at the edge of the woods and surrounded the space with large windows; there are also metaphoric metal trees in the lobby that have reflective metal leaves that refract light onto colored glass. Using Kellert's biophilic framework, it is prevalent that the school utilizes many different nature experiences. The use of wood planks and stone on the outside of the building help enforce indirect experiences of nature because these are natural materials. Further, the interior environment of the school experiences information richness through the architects' use of light reflection and color. Naturalistic shapes are brought into the interior environment through the metal trees and leaves. For experiences of space and place, Svigals + Partners bring nature into the classroom and school through the placement of windows that act as transitional spaces. The school also has a variety of breezeways, bridges, and pathways for students as they move from one space to another. Direct experiences of nature are enjoyed through water features, large rain gardens, and courtyards found on the property. The animal feeders also act as a way to bring fauna into the area.

City-scale examples of application

Singapore, Singapore

Nicknamed a "city in a garden", Singapore has dedicated many resources to make a system of nature preserves, parks and connectors (ex. Southern Ridges), and tree-lined streets that promote the return of wildlife and reduce the heat island effect that is often seen in dense city centers; local governments agree with Kellert and Beatley that daily doses of nature enhance the wellbeing of its citizens.  To manage stormwater, Singaporean governments have implemented the Bishan-Ang Mo Kio Park Project, where the old concrete water drains were excavated for the reconstruction of the Kallang River; this allowed residents in the area to enjoy the physiological and physical health benefits of having a green space with water. The reimagining of the park has increased the biodiversity of the local ecosystem, with dragonflies, butterflies, hornbills, and smooth-coated otters returning to the Singaporean region - the river also acts as a natural stormwater management system by increasing infiltration and movement of excess water.

To increase the immediate presence of nature in the city, Singapore provides subsidies (up to half the installation cost) for those who include vegetative walls, green roofs, sky parks, etc. in their building designs. The city-state also has an impressive number of biophilic buildings and structures. For example, their Gardens by the Bay Project has an installation called the "Supertree Grove". This urban nature installation has over 160,000 plants that stem from 200 different species installed in the 16 supertrees; many of these urban ''trees''  have sky walkways, observatories, and or solar panels. Lastly, Singapore has implemented efforts to increase community engagement through the creation of over 1,000 community gardens for resident use.

Oslo, Norway
 Oslo is sandwiched between the Oslo Fjord and wooded areas. Woods serve as an important feature to this municipality. More than two-thirds of the city is protected forests; in recent surveys over 81% of Oslo residents said they have gone to these forests at least once in the last year. These forests are protected, as Oslo adheres to ISO14001 for its forest management – the trees are controlled under "living forest" standards, which means that limited harvesting is acceptable. In addition to its extensive forest system, the city compounds its exposure to nature by bringing the natural environment into the urban setting. Being an already compact city (after all, two-thirds is forest) the city allocates around 20% of its urban land to green spaces; the local government is in the process of creating a network of paths to connect these green areas so that citizens can walk and ride their bikes undisturbed. In addition to the expanding park accessibility, the city has also restored the city's river the Akerselva, which runs through Oslo's center. Because the water feature is near sets of dense housing, the city made the river more appealing and accessible to residents by adding waterfalls and nature trails; altogether the city has 365 kilometers worth of nature trails.
To connect the city with its fjords, Oslo's government has started the process of putting its roadways underground in tunnels. This, combined with the construction of aesthetically creative architecture (Barcode Project) on the waterfront and promenade foot trails, is transforming this area into a place where residents can experience enjoyment from the unobstructed views of the fjord. Lastly, Oslo has a ''Noise Action Plan'' to help alleviate urban noise levels – some of these areas (mostly recreational) have noise levels as low as 50 dB.

See also
Biomimetic architecture
Green architecture
Green building
Sustainable city
Thorncrown Chapel

References

Biophilia hypothesis
Sustainable architecture
Urban design

Biophilic design


is a Japanese law passed December 19, 1955. It outlined the basics for the use of nuclear power in Japan.

Overview

Article 1 (Objective)

The objective of this Law should be to secure energy resources in the future, to achieve the progress of science and technology and the promotion of industries by fostering the research, development and utilization of atomic energy and thereby to contribute to the welfare of mankind and to the elevation of the national living standard.

Article 2 (Basic policy)

The research, development and utilization of atomic energy shall be limited to peaceful purposes, aimed at ensuring safety and performed independently under democratic management, the results therefrom shall be made public to contribute to international cooperation.

Article 3 outlines definitions.
Articles 4-6 create the Japanese Atomic Energy Commission and the Nuclear Safety Commission and outline their basic purpose.
Article 7: Atomic Energy Development Institutions.  This section created the Japan Atomic Energy Research Institute.
Articles 8-11 Development and Acquisition of Minerals
Articles 12 and 13 Control over Nuclear Fuel Materials
Articles 14-16 Control over Reactors
Articles 17-19 Measures for Patented Inventions
Article 20 Protection from Radiation Hazards
Article 21 Compensation

See also
Nuclear power in Japan

External links
English text of the law
https://www.japaneselawtranslation.go.jp/en/laws/view/3759
Japanese legislation
Nuclear energy in Japan

Atomic Energy Basic Law


A nest is a place where animals build to hold their eggs or provide a place to raise their babies. They are most typical of birds, but many other vertebrates do make nests.

Nests can be made of organic materials such as twigs, grass, and leaves. They may be a simple depression in the ground, or a hole in a rock, tree, or building. Nests can be found in all types of habitat.

Other

 Bird nest
 Habitat

Ethology

Nest


The Battle of Blanchetaque was fought on 24 August 1346 between an English army under King Edward III and a French force commanded by Godemar du Fay. The battle was part of the Crécy campaign, which took place during the early stages of the Hundred Years' War. After landing in the Cotentin Peninsula on 12 July, the English army had burnt a path of destruction through some of the richest lands in France to within  of Paris, sacking a number of towns on the way. The English then marched north, hoping to link up with an allied Flemish army which had invaded from Flanders. They were outmanoeuvred by the French king, Philip VI, who garrisoned all of the bridges and fords over the River Somme and followed the English with his own field army. The area had previously been stripped of food stocks by the French, and the English were essentially trapped.

Hearing of a ford at Blanchetaque,  from the sea, Edward marched for it and encountered the blocking force under du Fay. Once the ebbing tide had lowered the water level, a force of English longbowmen marched partway across the ford and, standing in the water, engaged a force of mercenary crossbowmen, whose shooting they were able to suppress. A French cavalry force attempted to push back the longbowmen but were in turn attacked by English men-at-arms. After a mêlée in the river, the French were pushed back, more English troops were fed into the fight, and the French broke and fled. French casualties were reported as over half of their force, while English losses were light. Two days after Blanchetaque, the main French army under Philip was defeated at the Battle of Crécy with heavy loss of life. Edward ended the campaign by laying siege to Calais, which fell after twelve months, securing an English entrepôt into northern France which was held for two hundred years.

Background
Since the Norman Conquest of 1066, English monarchs had held titles and lands within France, the possession of which made them vassals of the kings of France. The status of the English king's French fiefs was a major source of conflict between the two kingdoms throughout the Middle Ages. English holdings in France had varied in size over the centuries, but by 1337 only Gascony in south-western France and Ponthieu in northern France were left. Following a series of disagreements between Philip VI of France () and Edward III of England (), Philip's Great Council in Paris on 24 May 1337 agreed that the Duchy of Aquitaine, effectively Gascony, should be taken back into Philip's hands on the grounds that Edward was in breach of his obligations as a vassal. This marked the start of the Hundred Years' War.

Early in 1345, Edward determined to attack France on three fronts: a small force would sail for Brittany; a slightly larger force would proceed to Gascony under the command of the Henry, Earl of Derby; and the main force would accompany him to either northern France or Flanders. The French anticipated, correctly, that the English planned to make their main effort in northern France. Thus, they directed what resources they had to the north, planning to assemble their main army at Arras on 22 July. South-western France and Brittany were encouraged to rely on their own resources.

The main English army sailed on 29 June 1345 and anchored off Sluys in Flanders. Edward was unexpectedly threatened with the loss of his Flemish allies, and to avoid this was forced to attend to diplomatic affairs. By 22 July, although the Flemish situation was unresolved, men and horses could be confined on board ship no longer and the fleet sailed, probably intending to land in Normandy. It was scattered by a storm, and individual ships found their way over the following week to various English ports where they disembarked. There was a further week's delay while the King and his council debated what to do, by which time it proved impossible to do anything major with the main English army before winter. Aware of this, Philip VI despatched reinforcements to Brittany and Gascony. During 1345, Derby led a whirlwind campaign through Gascony at the head of an Anglo-Gascon army. He heavily defeated two large French armies at the battles of Bergerac and Auberoche, captured French towns and fortifications in much of Périgord and most of Agenais, and gave the English possessions in Gascony strategic depth.

John, Duke of Normandy, the son and heir of Philip VI, was placed in charge of all French forces in south-west France. In March 1346 a French army numbering between 15,000 and 20,000, enormously superior to any force the Anglo-Gascons could field, including all the military officers of the royal household, marched on Gascony. They besieged the strategically and logistically important town of Aiguillon, "the key to the Gascon plain", on 1 April. On 2 April the arrière-ban, the formal call to arms for all able-bodied males, was announced for the south of France. French financial, logistical and manpower efforts were focused on this offensive.

Meanwhile, Edward was raising a fresh army, and assembled more than 700 vessels to transport it – the largest English fleet ever to that date. The French were aware of Edward's efforts, but given the extreme difficulty of disembarking an army other than at a port, and the existence of friendly ports in Brittany and Gascony, the French assumed that Edward would sail for one of the latter – probably Gascony – to relieve Aiguillon. To guard against any possibility of an English landing in northern France, Philip relied on his powerful navy. This reliance was misplaced given the difficulty naval forces of the time had in effectively interdicting opposing fleets, and the French were unable to prevent Edward successfully crossing the Channel.

Prelude
The campaign began on 11 July 1346, when Edward's fleet departed the south of England. The fleet landed the next day at Saint-Vaast-la-Hougue,  from Cherbourg. The English army is estimated by modern historians to have been some 15,000 strong and consisted of both English and Welsh soldiers combined with a number of German and Breton mercenaries and allies. It included at least one Norman baron who was unhappy with the rule of Philip VI. The English achieved complete strategic surprise and marched south. Edward's aim was to conduct a chevauchée, a large-scale raid, across French territory to reduce his opponent's morale and wealth. His soldiers razed every town in their path and looted whatever they could from the populace. The towns of Carentan, Saint-Lô and Torteval were destroyed as the army passed, along with many other smaller places. The English fleet paralleled the army's route, devastating the country for up to  inland and taking vast amounts of loot; many ships deserted, having filled their holds. They also captured or burnt over 100 French ships, 61 of which had been converted into military vessels. Caen, the cultural, political, religious and financial centre of north-west Normandy, was stormed on 26 July and subsequently looted for five days. The English marched out towards the River Seine on 1 August.

The French military position was difficult. Their main army was committed to the intractable siege of Aiguillon in the south-west. After his surprise landing in Normandy, Edward was devastating some of the richest lands in France and flaunting his ability to march at will through France. On 2 August, a small English force supported by a large number of Flemings invaded France from Flanders. French defences were completely inadequate. On 29 July, Philip proclaimed the arrière-ban for northern France, ordering every able-bodied male to assemble at Rouen, where Philip himself arrived on the 31st. He immediately moved west against Edward with an ill-organised and poorly-equipped army. Five days later he returned to Rouen and broke the bridge over the Seine behind him. On 7 August, the English reached the Seine,  south of Rouen, and raided up to its suburbs. Philip, under pressure from representatives of the Pope, sent envoys offering peace backed by a marriage alliance; Edward replied that he was not prepared to lose marching time to futile discussion and dismissed them. By 12 August, Edward's army was encamped at Poissy, 20 miles from Paris, having left a  swath of destruction down the left bank of the Seine to within  of the city.

On 16 August, Edward burnt down Poissy and marched north. The French had carried out a scorched earth policy, carrying away all stores of food and so forcing the English to spread out over a wide area to forage, which greatly slowed them. Bands of French peasants attacked some of the smaller groups of foragers. Philip reached the River Somme a day's march ahead of Edward. He based himself at Amiens and sent large detachments to hold every bridge and ford across the Seine between Amiens and the sea. The English were now trapped in an area which had been stripped of food. The French moved out of Amiens and advanced westwards, towards the English. They were now willing to give battle, knowing that they would have the advantage of being able to stand on the defensive while the English were forced to try and fight their way past them.

Edward was determined to break the French blockade of the Somme and probed at several points, vainly attacking Hangest and Pont-Remy before moving west along the river. English supplies were running out and the army was ragged, starving and beginning to suffer from a drop in morale. On the evening of 24 August, the English were encamped north of Acheux while the French were  away at Abbeville. During the night Edward was made aware, either by an Englishman living locally or by a French captive, that just  away, near the village of Saigneville, was a ford named Blanchetaque (so named for the white stones lining the river's bed). Edward immediately broke camp and moved his whole force toward the ford.

Battle

When the English arrived at the river they discovered that the French had defended the ford strongly. Guarding the far side of the crossing were 3,500 soldiers, including 500 men-at-arms and an unknown number of mercenary crossbowmen under Godemar du Fay, an experienced French general. A contemporary chronicler described this as an elite unit. The ford was  wide and as it was only  from the coast, it was strongly tidal, only passable for a few hours twice each day. When the English arrived at dawn, the tide was high and not expected to drop to crossable levels for several hours. The French force was drawn up in three lines along the sloping north bank, with the best soldiers, the 500 men-at-arms, positioned in the centre.

At about 9a.m., a force of English longbowmen, led by Hugh, Baron Despenser, started across the ford, 12 abreast on the narrow causeway. They came under crossbow shot, but continued until the water was shallow enough for them to be able to reply. The numbers shooting from each side at this stage are not known, but the longbowmen had the advantages that those to the rear were able to send arrows over the heads of those in front of them, and that they could shoot three times faster than the crossbowmen. The English archery proved more effective than the French crossbow shot. As their crossbowmen were overcome, some French men-at-arms mounted and entered the river in an attempt to ride down the longbowmen. The English had their own force of mounted men-at-arms standing in the river behind their longbowmen, probably led by William, Earl of Northampton, and seeing the French mounting, they made their way through and around the ranks of archers and engaged the French on the water's edge in a disorderly mêlée.

The opposing cavalry, having moved into contact at walking pace, suffered few casualties. The greater pressure of the English forced the mêlée onto the French bank of the river. The dismounted French men-at-arms were pushed back by the mass of retreating French and advancing English men-at-arms, making space for the English longbowmen to gain the riverbank. The longbowmen were themselves being forced forward by more English cavalry advancing behind them. More and more English were fed into the bridgehead and after a short, sharp struggle, the French broke, fleeing for Abbeville,  away. It seems that most of the knightly and noble French participants, being mounted, successfully escaped. The French infantry were unable to outrun the pursuing English cavalry and suffered heavy casualties. As was usual, no quarter was offered to the common soldiers. Du Fay was seriously wounded, but escaped.

An hour and a half after the French lines had broken, the entire English army was across the ford. The main French army was close enough behind them to capture a number of English stragglers and the slower of their wagons. However, the tide was turning, and the French halted, facing the English across the river for the rest of the 24th, debating whether to attempt to force the crossing at the evening low tide. They decided not to and on the morning of the 25th backtracked to the bridge at Abbeville, a 12-mile diversion. Casualties in the action are not clear, but it is claimed by a contemporary chronicler that as many as 2,000 French soldiers were killed in the battle or the rout which followed it. English losses are not known but were probably light.

Aftermath
Once the French withdrew, Edward marched the  to Crécy-en-Ponthieu where he prepared a defensive position. The French had been so confident that the English could not breach the Somme line that they had not denuded the area, and the countryside was rich in food and loot. So the English were able to resupply, Noyelles-sur-Mer and Le Crotoy in particular yielding large stores of food, which were looted and the towns then burnt. On 26 August the main French army under Philip was crushingly defeated here at the Battle of Crécy with heavy loss of life. Edward ended the campaign by laying siege to Calais, which fell after twelve months, securing an English entrepôt into northern France which was held for two hundred years.

References

Citations

Sources

Blanchetaque
Blanchetaque
History of Somme (department)
1346 in England
1346 in France
Conflicts in 1346
Edward III of England
Hundred Years' War, 1337–1360

Battle of Blanchetaque


The Dhaka University Library is the central library of the University of Dhaka which started in 1921 with a collection of eighteen thousand books received from Dhaka College and Law College. The Library now has over six lakh eighty thousand (680,000) books and journals. Moreover, it has around thirty thousand rare manuscripts. Dhaka University Library is the largest in the country.

The university building is situated beside the TSC main centre on the way towards the Charukala art faculty building of Dhaka University. All the activities of the library are performed from three separate buildings viz. administrative building, main library building and extension building and science library building. The present total measurement of the buildings is 150,830 square feet. But earlier, the total measurement of the Dhaka University library was 140,750 square feet. It is constructed out of bricks and cement with wide windows and space.

History
The library began in 1921 with 877 students, 60 teachers of 12 departments under three faculties art, science and law. Then the library was placed in the premises of Dhaka Medical College and Hospital and later it was transferred in the ground floor of a building situated at the north bank of the pond of Curzon Hall premises. Later, the library was transferred inro the present Central Library Building. The former principal of Dhaka College was the first librarian of the Dhaka University Library.

Administrative building

The Administration section, manuscripts, reprography, acquisition, processing building, periodicals, accounts, seminar, old Newspaper section, resource centre for the visually impaired students and cyber centre are housed in the administrative building.

Science library building
There are 4 reading rooms in the first floor of the Science Building. About 400 students can read at a time. The reading rooms are air-conditioned. There is also a reference room in the first floor. Teachers, researchers and students can use these and reference tools here. There are separate seating arrangements for teachers. Teachers, researchers, registered graduates, officers and employees can issue 10 books, 3 books for 14 days.

A complaint box is kept in every floor of the Main building and Science Building for readers. They can lodge any complaint in the box to redress the grievances. Those boxes are opened every week and necessary action taken accordingly. Besides, there is a senior officer in every floor who acts as a floor in charge. Readers can inform him about any sorts of problems for early solution. If he fails, readers can ventilate the same to the librarian for taking necessary action.

Present condition
The library has now 621,058 volume of books and bound journals. Moreover, it has over 30,000 rare and old manuscripts, numerous microfilms and microfiches. The collection of this institution is increasing gradually day by day. 3,188 books were received as donation and 187 titles of journals are added 2007-2008 alone. An amount of Tk. 9.9 million was allocated in the budget for procurement of books and journals in that academic year. The budget is obtained every year from the govt of Bangladesh through the UGC. Nevertheless, it may be pointed out here that necessary books and journals cannot be procured as per the requirements of the various departments due to the paucity of funds. And most of the student  are come here to read government job related study.

See also
Dhaka University Film Society

References

 Rahim, Ma 1991. History of the University of the Dhaka. University of Dhaka. p. 130
 University of Dhaka 1997 The calendar part 2 Dhaka
 University of Dhaka, p. 274
 Ibid 1981, p. 131

External links

 Official website
 Dhaka University Library

University of Dhaka
Libraries in Bangladesh
1921 establishments in British India
Libraries established in 1921

Dhaka University Library


Impossibilism is an idea for bringing about socialism. Impossibilism says that socialists should focus only, or at least mostly, on structural changes to society. They should not seek change through social or political reforms, because trying to bring about meaningful change under a capitalist system is pointless.

Some political parties that have followed impossibilism include the Socialist Party of Canada, World Socialist Movement companion parties, Proletarian Party and the Socialist League.

Other websites
 "Impossibilism," Encyclopedia of Marxism, Marxists Internet Archive, marxists.org/ Retrieved October 16, 2010.
 Larry Gambone, "The History Of Canadian Impossibilism," Socialist History Project, socialisthistory.ca/ Retrieved October 16, 2010.

Marxism
Socialism

Impossibilism


John Appleton (aka John de Appleton) was a Master of University College, Oxford, England.

Appleton was a mature commoner and Fellow of University College. He became Master of the College circa 1401 and remained in the post until about 1408. At the end of 1403, King Henry IV gave the College the manor of Marks Hall, located near Margaret Roding, one of The Rodings villages in Essex, through the efforts of Appleton's friend Walter Skirlaw, the Bishop of Durham. This supported three new Fellows at the College. The College prospered and developed under Appleton's mastership, especially in the area around Logic Lane (formerly Horseman Lane) off the High Street, to the east of the main part of the College.

Appleton later received a special Fellowship at the College in 1438.

References

Year of birth missing
Year of death missing
Alumni of University College, Oxford
14th-century English writers
15th-century English writers
14th-century scholars
15th-century scholars
Fellows of University College, Oxford
Masters of University College, Oxford

John Appleton (academic)


The Woman's Medical College of St. Louis (sometimes St. Louis Woman's Medical College) was a homeopathic medical college for women located in St. Louis, Missouri.  It opened first opened in 1883 as a branch of the Western Homeopathic Medical College, and then later reopened as a separate entity in 1891.

First college
The Woman's College of 1883 was opened to serve as a way for women to obtain medical degrees in the state of Missouri.  According to The History of American Homeopathy, "the orthodox medical educational community resisted the admission of women students longer than did the homeopathic and eclectic schools," meaning most women of the period who aspired to be doctors had to attend alternative institutions.  The college "held only one course of lectures" before closing in 1884.

Second college
In 1891, a new Woman's College was incorporated by T. J. Beattie, J. Block, C.A. Dannaker, and R.S. Sloan.  Now separate from the Western College, this new incarnation was the first college west of the Mississippi River that existed solely for the education of women in medicine.  The first classes were held in September 1892.

The opening of the college was met with opposition from the local medical community.  The St. Louis-based Medical Mirror published an editorial saying that "[w]omen are not endowed by nature or art with the qualities, nor can they gain the necessary equipment for making a successful physician."  Following the graduation of the first class in 1894, the Medical Mirror reported that the St. Louis Board of Health "found it inexpedient to admit women to the hospitals as assistant physicians [interns] ... inasmuch as the admission of women would mark a change from the established order of things."  According to Clevenger, only one graduate, Henrietta Borck, was ever admitted to the St. Louis Medical Society, nineteen years after her graduation.

Following a move to a new building, the Woman's College was affected by the Panic of 1893 and began to struggle financially.  It closed permanently in 1896.

See also
 List of current and historical women's universities and colleges in the United States

References
 "Early Medical Education for Women in St. Louis."  Washington University School of Medicine.  2004.  Accessed February 15, 2008.
 Clevenger, Martha R.  "From Lay Practitioner to Doctor of Medicine: Woman Physicians in St. Louis, 1860-1920."  Gateway Heritage.  1987.
 Haller, John S.  The History of American Homeopathy: The Academic Years, 1820 - 1933.  2005.

External links
 Women's History: Medicine: Health, Doctors, Nurses, Midwives
 Closed Colleges in Missouri

1884 disestablishments in the United States
Educational institutions disestablished in 1896
Defunct private universities and colleges in Missouri
Educational institutions established in 1883
Educational institutions established in 1891
Homeopathic colleges
Universities and colleges in St. Louis
1891 establishments in Missouri
1896 disestablishments in the United States
History of women in Missouri

Woman's Medical College of St. Louis


Texas v. Pennsylvania, 592 U.S. ___ (2020), was a lawsuit filed at the United States Supreme Court contesting the administration of the 2020 presidential election in four other states, in which Joe Biden defeated incumbent Donald Trump.

Filed by Texas State Attorney General Ken Paxton on December 8, 2020, under the Supreme Court's original jurisdiction, Texas v. Pennsylvania alleged that Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin violated the United States Constitution by changing election procedures through non-legislative means – thus violating the independent state legislature theory. The suit sought to temporarily withhold the certified vote count from these four states prior to the Electoral College vote on December 14. The suit was filed after about 90 lawsuits arising from disputes over the election results filed by Trump and the Republican Party had failed in numerous state and federal courts.

The suit had been drafted by a team of lawyers with ties to the Trump presidential campaign. Paxton agreed to file the case after other state attorneys general declined to do so. The Solicitor General of Texas Kyle D. Hawkins objected to the suit and refused to let his name be added. Paxton hired Lawrence J. Joseph, who had helped draft the suit, as special counsel to assist with the suit.

Within one day of Texas's filing, Trump, over 100 Republican Representatives, and 18 Republican state attorneys general filed motions to support the case. Trump referred to this case as "the big one" of the election-challenging lawsuits. Attorneys general for the defendant states, joined in briefs submitted by their counterparts from twenty other states, two territories, and the District of Columbia, urged the Court to refuse the case, with Pennsylvania's brief calling it a "seditious abuse of the judicial process". Legal experts argued that the case was not likely to be heard and not likely to succeed if it did get heard, and that it was thus a "Hail Mary" action.

The Supreme Court issued orders on December 11, declining to hear the case on the basis that Texas lacked standing under Article III of the Constitution to challenge the results of the election held by another state.

Background

Several states changed their voting laws prior to the 2020 United States presidential election to make postal voting easier, due to fears that in-person voting would expose people to COVID-19. Legal challenges to the changes were raised across the country. A number of these cases involved voting regulations that were altered by states' executive branches and not by state legislatures. In Texas v. Pennsylvania, Texas claimed that such alterations violated Article Two of the United States Constitution.

The initial tallies of votes, completed within the week of election day, showed that Joe Biden had won sufficient votes in the Electoral College to secure the presidency over incumbent Donald Trump. Trump and the Republican National Committee (RNC) launched many lawsuits against swing states challenging their vote tallies, particularly in states that had voted for Trump in the 2016 United States presidential election but had turned to Biden in 2020, such as Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Georgia. Most of the cases raised by Trump and the RNC were dismissed on procedural grounds or rejected on substantive grounds in the courts, and did not affect the projected Electoral College result. PolitiFact noted that the forces behind reversing the election had by this point "lost dozens of election lawsuits."

Before and after the election, Trump stated his expectation that the Supreme Court would determine the outcome. After the election, his legal team sought to bring a case before the Court, on which conservative justices—including three appointed by Trump—held a 6–3 majority.

Filings

Procedure
The case was filed on December 8, 2020, directly with the Supreme Court as it holds original jurisdiction over disputes between states. Such cases are infrequent: there were 123 "original jurisdiction" cases from 1789 to 1959. Original jurisdiction cases are immediately docketed pursuant to Rule 17 once the plaintiff submits its motion for leave to file and pays its docket fees. Because the suit requested expedited consideration, the Court set a deadline at 3:00 p.m. on December 10 for the four defendant states to respond. Whereas a typical case submitted through a writ of certiorari requires only four justices to accept to be certified by the Supreme Court, this case would have required five justices.

Texas

The suit was filed by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton. It claimed that Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin violated the Constitution by changing their election procedures to limit the spread of COVID-19. The case was filed on the same day as the "safe harbor" threshold, beyond which Congress must accept certified results from states ahead of the Electoral College's official vote on December 14, 2020. The suit alleged that the four states "ignor[ed] statutory requirements as to how [mail-in ballots] were received, evaluated and counted". It further argued that electoral processes in the four defendant states "suffered from significant and unconstitutional irregularities", and therefore that it was not clear who "legitimately won the 2020 election".

In the lawsuit, Texas alleged that the defendant states, by changing their election processes, violated three clauses of the Constitution: the Electors Clause (ArticleII, Section1, Clause2), the Equal Protection Clause, and the Due Process Clause. In particular, it argued the Constitution requires changes to electoral procedures to be made only by state legislatures, and not by executives such as secretaries of state. Accordingly, it argued, changes to election procedures made by executive action, and not by alterations to state law, rendered election results constitutionally infirm.

Texas argued it had standing to sue to prevent its votes from becoming "diluted". Texas instead alleged that "fraud becomes undetectable" because "unlawful actions of election officials effectively destroy the evidence". Whether "voters committed fraud" was not the "constitutional issue" in this case, according to Texas. Therefore, Texas declared that it did not need to "prove" fraud.

Texas sought relief by requesting the Supreme Court block those four states from voting in the electoral college and extend the deadline by which states must submit their certified vote.

Texas, in its December 11 response to the defendant states, stated "Defendant States do not seriously address grave issues that Texas raises, choosing to hide behind other court venues and decisions in which Texas could not participate and to mischaracterize both the relief that Texas seeks and the justification for that relief." In an interview, Paxton further argued that "the only place we can file is the Supreme Court, and we did what we did appropriately, so to call it 'seditious' is really ridiculous." In response to commentators who said the action was a Hail Mary, Paxton said, "Unless you throw the pass, you can't complete it."

Amici curiae respondents

Supporting plaintiff Texas
Attorneys general of seventeen additional states filed a joint brief on December 9 supporting Texas.

On the same day, Trump filed a motion to intervene in his personal capacity, thereby attempting to join the case as a plaintiff. Trump's brief was filed by Chapman University School of Law professor John C. Eastman, who in August 2020 authored an article published in Newsweek questioning Kamala Harris's eligibility for the position of vice president. On social media, the president referred to the case as "the big one". Over 120 Republican members of the House of Representatives filed an amicus brief in support of the suit, including leader Kevin McCarthy and his deputy Steve Scalise.
106 members of the House initially signed on to the lawsuit in support of the plaintiff. 20 additional members of the House signed on to the lawsuit in support of the plaintiff before it was dismissed.

Later on December 10, attorneys general of six states that had already responded in an amicus brief, Arkansas, Utah, Louisiana, Missouri, Mississippi and South Carolina, petitioned to the Supreme Court to let them join Texas as a plaintiff in the case. This effort was led by Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt.

 Lynn Fitch, Mississippi
 Tim Fox, Montana
 Curtis Hill, Indiana
 Mike Hunter, Oklahoma
 Jeff Landry, Louisiana
 Steve Marshall, Alabama
 Ashley Moody, Florida
 Patrick Morrisey, West Virginia
 Doug Peterson, Nebraska
 Jason R. Ravnsborg, South Dakota
 Sean D. Reyes, Utah
 Leslie Rutledge, Arkansas
 Derek Schmidt, Kansas
 Eric Schmitt, Missouri
 Herbert H. Slatery III, Tennessee
 Wayne Stenehjem, North Dakota
 Alan Wilson, South Carolina

 Ralph Abraham, LA-05
 Robert Aderholt, AL-04
 Rick Allen, GA-12
 Jodey Arrington, TX-19
 Brian Babin, TX-36
 Jim Baird, IN-04
 Jim Banks, IN-03
 Jack Bergman, MI-01
 Andy Biggs, AZ-05
 Gus Bilirakis, FL-12
 Dan Bishop, NC-09
 Mike Bost, IL-12
 Kevin Brady, TX-08
 Mo Brooks, AL-05
 Ken Buck, CO-04
 Ted Budd, NC-13
 Tim Burchett, TN-02
 Michael C. Burgess, TX-26
 Bradley Byrne, AL-01
 Ken Calvert, CA-42
 Buddy Carter, GA-01
 Ben Cline, VA-06
 Michael Cloud, TX-27
 Doug Collins, GA-09
 Mike Conaway, TX-11
 Rick Crawford, AR-01
 Dan Crenshaw, TX-02
 Scott DesJarlais, TN-04
 Mario Diaz-Balart, FL-25
 Jeff Duncan, SC-03
 Neal Dunn, FL-02
 Tom Emmer, MN-06
 Ron Estes, KS-04
 Drew Ferguson, GA-03
 Chuck Fleischmann, TN-03
 Bill Flores, TX-17
 Jeff Fortenberry, NE-01
 Virginia Foxx, NC-05
 Russ Fulcher, ID-01
 Matt Gaetz, FL-01
 Greg Gianforte, MT-AL
 Bob Gibbs, OH-07
 Louie Gohmert, TX-01
 Lance Gooden, TX-05
 Sam Graves, MO-06
 Mark Green, TN-07
 Morgan Griffith, VA-09
 Michael Guest, MS-03
 Jim Hagedorn, MN-01
 Andy Harris, MD-01
 Vicky Hartzler, MO-04
 Kevin Hern, OK-01
 Jody Hice, GA-10
 Clay Higgins, LA-03
 Trey Hollingsworth, IN-09
 Richard Hudson, NC-08
 Bill Huizenga, MI-02
 Bill Johnson, OH-06
 Mike Johnson, LA-04
 Jim Jordan, OH-04
 John Joyce, PA-13
 Fred Keller, PA-12
 Mike Kelly, PA-16
 Trent Kelly, MS-01
 Steve King, IA-04
 David Kustoff, TN-08
 Darin LaHood, IL-18
 Doug LaMalfa, CA-01
 Doug Lamborn, CO-05
 Robert E. Latta, OH-05
 Debbie Lesko, AZ-08
 Billy Long, MO-07
 Barry Loudermilk, GA-11
 Blaine Luetkemeyer, MO-03
 Kenny Marchant, TX-24
 Roger Marshall, KS-01
 Kevin McCarthy, CA-23
 Tom McClintock, CA-04
 Cathy McMorris Rodgers, WA-05
 Dan Meuser, PA-09
 Carol Miller, WV-03
 John Moolenaar, MI-04
 Alex Mooney, WV-02
 Markwayne Mullin, OK-02
 Greg Murphy, NC-03
 Dan Newhouse, WA-04
 Ralph Norman, SC-05
 Steven Palazzo, MS-04
 Gary Palmer, AL-06
 Greg Pence, IN-06
 Scott Perry, PA-10
 Bill Posey, FL-08
 Guy Reschenthaler, PA-14
 Tom Rice, SC-07
 Mike Rogers, AL-03
 John Rose, TN-06
 David Rouzer, NC-07
 John Rutherford, FL-04
 Steve Scalise, LA-01
 Austin Scott, GA-08
 Mike Simpson, ID-02
 Adrian Smith, NE-03
 Jason T. Smith, MO-08
 Ross Spano, FL-15
 Pete Stauber, MN-08
 Elise Stefanik, NY-21
 Greg Steube, FL-17
 Glenn Thompson, PA-15
 Tom Tiffany, WI-07
 Jeff Van Drew, NJ-02
 William Timmons, SC-04
 Ann Wagner, MO-02
 Tim Walberg, MI-07
 Mark Walker, NC-06
 Jackie Walorski, IN-02
 Michael Waltz, FL-06
 Randy Weber, TX-14
 Daniel Webster, FL-11
 Brad Wenstrup, OH-02
 Bruce Westerman, AR-04
 Roger Williams, TX-25
 Joe Wilson, SC-02
 Rob Wittman, VA-01
 Ron Wright, TX-06
 Ted Yoho, FL-03
 Lee Zeldin, NY-01

Supporting defendant states
An amicus curiae brief on the side of the defendants was filed by a group of former Republican office holders and officials.

The defendant states responded on December 10, urging the Court to reject the case. Pennsylvania's reply called the suit a "seditious abuse of the judicial process". The states urged that the justices "send a clear and unmistakable signal that such abuse must never be replicated".

Attorneys general of the District of Columbia, Guam, the Virgin Islands, and 20 states filed a brief in support of the defendant states the same day:

 Hector Balderas, New Mexico
 Xavier Becerra, California
 Leevin Taitano Camacho, Territory of Guam
 Clare E. Connors, Hawaii
 Thomas J. Donovan,  Vermont
 Keith Ellison, Minnesota
 Robert W. Ferguson, Washington
 Aaron D. Ford, Nevada
 Aaron M. Frey, Maine
 Brian E. Frosh, Maryland
 Denise George, U.S. Virgin Islands
 Gurbir S. Grewal, New Jersey
 Maura Healey, Massachusetts
 Mark R. Herring, Virginia
 Letitia James, New York
 Kathleen Jennings, Delaware
 Peter F. Neronha, Rhode Island
 Karl Racine, District of Columbia
 Kwame Raoul, Illinois
 Ellen F. Rosenblum, Oregon
 Josh Stein, North Carolina
 William Tong, Connecticut
 Philip J. Weiser, Colorado

Supporting both parties
Although Montana Attorney General Tim Fox participated in the joint brief filed on December 9 supporting Texas, outgoing Montana Governor Steve Bullock filed a separate brief on December 10 in support of the defendants.

Supporting neither party
On December 10, Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost filed a motion supporting neither side, but stated that "the [s]tates need this Court to decide, at the earliest available opportunity, the question whether the Electors Clause permits state courts (and state executive officials) to alter the rules by which presidential elections are conducted." Yost also stated Ohio could not support Texas's request for relief because Ohio's position is that state legislatures' power over elections should not be overridden by federal courts. Arizona also filed a brief on jurisdiction but supporting neither party.

Reactions to court filing

Law
The suit was criticized by legal experts and called "outlandish". University of Texas School of Law law professor Stephen I. Vladeck called the suit the "craziest lawsuit filed to purportedly challenge the election". Election law expert Rick Hasen characterized the lawsuit as a "press release masquerading as a lawsuit" and "the dumbest case I've ever seen filed on an emergency basis at the Supreme Court." Edward Foley, director of the election law program at Ohio State University, urged the court to ignore the case and refrain from interfering in the election.

Alan Dershowitz of Harvard Law School described the 11th-hour case a "Hail Mary pass" that was "creative but unlikely to win", because alleging that Texas, instead of its voters, was injured (in order to bypass the Eleventh Amendment to the U.S. Constitution) is "far-fetched"; he also expressed concern that the case was filed too late.

Another Harvard Law professor, Noah Feldman, characterized the lawsuit as a coup attempt by Republicans to overturn the results of the election.

Senator Ted Cruz, who previously served as Solicitor General of Texas and argued several cases before the Court while serving in that capacity, accepted Trump's request to argue the case should the Court hear it.

Legal experts also did not expect the Supreme Court to certify the case, given its reluctance to hear post-election challenges. On the same day as Texas's filing, the Court refused to hear arguments in another post-election challenge, Kelly v. Pennsylvania, without any dissents. The defendants also argued that the legal principle of laches, which may bar an action if it is filed too late, is grounds for dismissing Texas's claim.

Politics

In favor
Republican Texas Governor Greg Abbott signaled his support for the case, saying the case "tries to accelerate the process, providing certainty and clarity about the entire election process. The United States of America needs that."

President Trump retweeted several tweets that expressed support for the suit. On December9, he promised to intervene in the suit, and filed a motion to do so the same day, thereby attempting to join the case as a plaintiff. On December 10, he tweeted "the Supreme Court has a chance to save our Country from the greatest Election abuse in the history of the United States." On December 11 he tweeted, "I just want to stop the world from killing itself! ... Now that the Biden Administration will be a scandal plagued mess for years to come, it is much easier for the Supreme Court of the United States to follow the Constitution and do what everybody knows has to be done."

Republican Senators David Perdue and Kelly Loeffler, both involved in close runoff races in Georgia, voiced support for the suit. In a tweet, Republican Missouri attorney general Eric Schmitt stated his support for the suit, promising to "lead the effort in support of Texas's #SCOTUS filing today". On Twitter, Republican Arkansas attorney general Leslie Rutledge stated she would legally support the motion. Republican Louisiana attorney general Jeff Landry also supported the complaint.

In response to an email to every Republican member of the House of Representatives from Representative Mike Johnson of Louisiana, 125 Republicans joined him to sign an amicus brief supporting the suit. The number represented a clear majority of the Republican caucus in the House. Politico referred to the large number of GOP House members supporting the suit as "jaw-dropping". Republican members of the Senate, on the other hand, were much less likely to speak in favor of the suit, reflecting their different temperaments and political imperatives.

Against
The office of Republican Georgia attorney general Chris Carr also criticized the suit and Paxton. On December8, Carr's spokeswoman said that Paxton was "constitutionally, legally[,] and factually wrong about Georgia". Georgia's deputy secretary of state Jordan Fuchs denounced the suit as "false and irresponsible". Trump warned Carr to not rally other Republican officials in opposition to the suit, and the Republican majority in the Georgia State Senate expressed their approval for the filing.

Democratic Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel criticized the suit, labelling it a "publicity stunt... beneath the dignity" of the Texas attorney general office and saying "[t]he erosion of confidence in our democratic system isn't attributable to the good people of Michigan, Wisconsin, Georgia[,] or Pennsylvania but rather to partisan officials, like Mr.Paxton, who place loyalty to a person over loyalty to their country." Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul called the case "genuinely embarrassing". Pennsylvania attorney general Josh Shapiro stated that "[t]hese continued attacks on our fair and free election system are beyond meritless, beyond reckless—they are a scheme by the President of the United States and some in the Republican party to disregard the will of the people—and name their own victors."

Attorney and Lincoln Project founder George Conway called the lawsuit the "most insane thing yet". Former Federal Elections Commissioner Hans von Spakovsky said, "By almost any measure, this is the legal equivalent of a Hail Mary pass."

Chip Roy, a Republican Texas congressman and former chief of staff to Texas senator Ted Cruz, characterized the suit as "a dangerous violation of federalism [that] sets a precedent to have one state asking federal courts to police the voting procedures of other states". Republican Texas senator and former Texas Supreme Court justice John Cornyn said he was unable "to understand the legal theory" behind the suit.

Emails from Florida Attorney General Ashley Moody's office revealed that lawyers in the office ridiculed the lawsuit as "batshit insane" and "weird," and speculated about Paxton's motivations for filing it.

Governor Gary Herbert and Governor-elect Spencer Cox of Utah, both Republicans, denounced Republican Utah state attorney general Sean Reyes's decision to join the amicus brief in support of the lawsuit. Several other states also saw division among Republicans about whether coming out in favor of the suit was wise. The Associated Press wrote that the action "has quickly become a conservative litmus test."

Michael Steele, formerly the chair of the Republican National Committee, called Republican House members' decision to join the suit "an offense to the Constitution" that would "leave[] an indelible stain" on their "political skin".  Jeb Bush opined on the suit: "This is crazy. It will be killed on arrival".

Texas Solicitor General Kyle Hawkins, who normally would speak on behalf of the state in matters before the Supreme Court, was not listed on the suit.

Statistical analysis
The lawsuit included a declaration from economist Charles Cicchetti, who claimed that his statistical analysis showed that there was a less than one-in-one-quadrillion chance of Biden's having won any of the states in question. Cicchetti's analysis was widely criticized, since it assumed that voters behaved the same in 2020 as they had in 2016 and because it assumed that vote tallying patterns were random over time. In reality, Biden was a different candidate than Hillary Clinton had been in 2016, and the marked shift of early Republican vote counts to later Democratic votes counts had been anticipated well in advance, because several battleground states had forbidden mail-in ballots from being counted earlier; mail-in ballots favored Biden in part because Trump had long attempted to discredit the reliability of mail-in voting.

Writing at PolitiFact, Eric Litke described the analysis as "wildly illogical", citing professors of political science who described the analysis as "ludicrous" and "statistical incompetence", with one wrong assumption being that "votes are all independently and randomly distributed". At The Volokh Conspiracy, David Post described Cicchetti's analysis as "idiotic" because it was based on two blatantly false assumptions: (1) that voters' preferences had not changed since 2016, and (2) that party preferences did not differ between mail-in and in-person voters. Post stated that Paxton's use of Cicchetti's work was "unethical" because Paxton had not mentioned Cicchetti's key assumptions. At The Washington Post, Philip Bump said that the analysis in the lawsuit was "utterly ridiculous", noting that the 2016 results could not be extrapolated to 2020, because Biden was more popular than Clinton and because voters had become more polarized. Bump also wrote that vote-counting was not "homogeneous", with the "blue shift" phenomenon being entirely expected due to mail-in ballots favoring Biden.

Outcome

On December 11, in an unsigned ruling, the court ruled that Texas lacked standing and denied the suit.
The State of Texas's motion for leave to file a bill of complaint is denied for lack of standing under Article III of the Constitution. Texas has not demonstrated a judicially cognizable interest in the manner in which another State conducts its elections. All other pending motions are dismissed as moot.

Justice Alito, joined by Justice Thomas, disagreed with the ruling denying leave to file a bill of complaint, but did not otherwise find for the plaintiffs. He wrote that the Court is duty-bound to hear the case, referencing Thomas's dissent in Arizona v. California, 589 U. S. ___ (Feb. 24, 2020):
In my view, we do not have discretion to deny the filing of a bill of complaint in a case that falls within our original jurisdiction... I would therefore grant the motion to file the bill of complaint but would not grant other relief, and I express no view on any other issue.

Aftermath

After the Court declined to hear the case, Allen West, then-chairman of the Republican Party of Texas, suggested that "law-abiding states should bond together and form a Union of states that will abide by the constitution". The statement was criticized by Illinois Republican Adam Kinzinger, saying the call for secession was dangerous. The Lincoln Project's George Conway and National Review editor Rich Lowry also criticized West's remarks, stating they were unrepresentative of the "Party of Lincoln".

President Trump harshly criticized the Court's decision, saying "This is a great and disgraceful miscarriage of justice. The people of the United States were cheated, and our Country disgraced. Never even given our day in Court!" White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany echoed the notion that the case was never given a chance, saying the justices "hid behind procedure ... There's no way to say it other than they dodged." Paxton, for his part, said the decision was "unfortunate".

The Biden campaign said of the ruling: "The Supreme Court has decisively and speedily rejected the latest of Donald Trump and his allies' attacks on the democratic process. This is no surprise—dozens of judges, election officials from both parties, and Trump's own attorney general have dismissed his baseless attempts to deny that he lost the election."

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi issued a statement that "The Court has rightly dismissed out of hand the extreme, unlawful and undemocratic GOP lawsuit to overturn the will of millions of American voters" and admonished that "Republicans must once and for all end their election subversion—immediately." Additionally she reprimanded House members who supported the lawsuit: "The 126 Republican Members that signed onto this lawsuit brought dishonor to the House.  Instead of upholding their oath to support and defend the Constitution, they chose to subvert the Constitution and undermine public trust in our sacred democratic institutions."

New Jersey Representative Bill Pascrell, citing section three of the 14th Amendment, called for Pelosi to not seat Republicans who signed the amicus curiae brief supporting the suit. This proposal would have applied to nearly two-thirds of the Republican representatives of the incoming 117th United States Congress. Pascrell stated, "The text of the 14th Amendment expressly forbids Members of Congress from engaging in rebellion against the United States. Trying to overturn a democratic election and install a dictator seems like a pretty clear example of that."

See also

 Electoral Count Act (1887)
 Bush v. Gore (2000)

Footnotes

References

External links
 Motion filed by AG Paxton
 Motion to expedite
 Amicus brief filed by seventeen states
 Amicus brief filed by 126 Republican members of the House of Representatives
 Opposition to motion filed by AG Shapiro
 Order dismissing the case

2020 United States presidential election
Controversies of the 2020 United States presidential election
Donald Trump litigation
Post-election lawsuits related to the 2020 United States presidential election
Trump administration controversies
United States Constitution Article Three case law
United States standing case law
United States elections case law
United States Supreme Court original jurisdiction cases
United States Supreme Court cases
United States Supreme Court cases of the Roberts Court

Texas v. Pennsylvania


Harrison Carroll (23 June 1901 – 1972) was a Hollywood gossip columnist who worked at the Los Angeles Herald-Express, and whom John Wayne credited with being not only a mentor to him but helping him come up with a moniker to replace his birth name Marion Morrison. He was born in Waco, Texas at the turn of the twentieth century. After graduating from Waco High School, Carroll attended the Rice Institute before moving on to Columbia University, where he took his bachelor of arts degree in 1922. That same year, he moved to Los Angeles, California and began working as a reporter for the Los Angeles Times for $25 a week.

In 1925, he was hired as the drama editor of the Los Angeles Evening Herald (an afternoon newspaper that was a precursor to the Herald-Examiner and the merged Herald-Express that continued to employ him until he retired). The following year, he created his gossip column. He eventually had a feature called "Today's Puzzle" that gave clues to a star, never mentioning them by name. He tried not to hurt any of the stars he covered, which made him popular with the denizens of Hollywood.

He covered the film industry for 43 years, writing his last column in 1969, after which he retired.  His column was syndicated by the Central Press Association to 48 newspapers. He had feuds with the leading gossip columnists of the day, including Hedda Hopper, Louella Parsons and his fellow Herald columnist Jimmy Starr; all of them appeared as themselves in the 1947 crime movie The Corpse Came C.O.D..

Beginning in 1967 until he retired, Carroll's main place of business was the private, members-only Beverly Hills discotheque-cum-restaurant Daisy, a hang-out for the younger, hipper stars like Paul Newman when he was in L.A.  He created the Harrison Carroll Cinema Reporting Prize in 1971, the year before he died. John Wayne was the chairman of the foundation that awarded the prize. In addition to Wayne, Carroll was close to Clara Bow and Clark Gable. Reportedly, 1,000 subscribers cancelled their subscriptions to the Herald after he retired.

He was married twice, to Corrinne Carroll, by whom he had a son and whom he divorced, and to Maria Carroll, whom he lived with for 47  years.

Army Archerd, who would establish himself as a famous entertainment industry gossip columnist,  worked as a "leg man" for Carroll.

References

Journalists from Los Angeles
Journalists from Texas
American gossip columnists
1901 births
1972 deaths
20th-century American non-fiction writers
20th-century American male writers
American male non-fiction writers
20th-century American journalists
American male journalists

Harrison Carroll


José Sobral de Almada Negreiros (7 April 1893 – 15 June 1970) was a Portuguese artist. He was born in the colony of Portuguese São Tomé and Príncipe, the son of a Portuguese father, António Lobo de Almada Negreiros, and a Santomean mother, Elvira Freire Sobral. Besides literature and painting, Almada developed ballet choreographies, and worked on tapestry, engraving, murals, caricature, mosaic, azulejo and stained glass.

Life and work
His mother died in 1896. In 1900 he entered a Jesuit boarding school in Campolide, Lisbon. After the October 1910 republican revolution the school was closed and Almada entered the Escola Internacional, also in Lisbon.

In 1913 he had his first individual exhibition, showing 90 drawings. In 1915, along with Fernando Pessoa and Mário de Sá-Carneiro, he published poems and texts in the Orpheu artistic magazine, which would introduce modernist literature and art in Portugal. This same year Almada Negreiros wrote the famous Manifesto Anti-Dantas e por extenso, a humorous attack against a more traditionalist and bourgeois older generation. In 1915 the artist also conceived the O Sonho da Rosa ballet.

In 1917, with the aim of introducing  the Portuguese public to Futuristic aesthetics, Almada Negreiros published, together with Santa-Rita Pintor, the Portugal Futurista magazine, writing the Ultimatum Futurista, às gerações portuguezas do século XX ("Futurist ultimatum to the Portuguese generations of the 20th century"). He promoted a conference, the Sessão Futurista ("Futurist Session"), where he appeared wearing a flight suit.

Between the years 1918–20 Almada lived in Paris. To support himself, he worked as a dancer and as a factory worker. In 1920 he returned to Lisbon. In 1925 he produced two paintings for one of the most famous cafés in Lisbon, A Brasileira. In 1927 he went to Madrid where he wrote for several Spanish publications, including Cronica and La Farsa. Around this same time he wrote El Uno, tragédia de la Unidad.

Back in Portugal, in the following years his artistic production were wide and prolific as he became a key artist in Portuguese modern art, influenced by Cubism and, mainly, by Futurism. His role during António de Oliveira Salazar's authoritarian regime was however ambiguous, acting both as an "aligned" artist (doing public mural paintings or propaganda posters) and a provocative critic of Portuguese society of the time.

In 1934 he married painter Sarah Afonso (13 May 1899 – 14 December 1983). Re-settled for good in Portugal, he would continue in his role as "artistic agitator" within the oppressed society that was Portugal until the time of his death. In 1934 the couple had their only son, José Afonso de Almada Negreiros.

He was also, if only occasionally, an actor and a dancer, understanding that all forms of art are intimately linked.

Painting and visual arts
Almada  Negreiros always called himself a futurist artist, inspired by
Filippo Tommaso Marinetti and other modern artists; however his style is wider, and does not fit easily into a category. Adding to this modern approach his works also revealed a decorative and arabesque richness, and sometimes a geometrical abstraction.
His public art was often politically engaged, as his mural "Gare Maritima de Alcantara" shows. Many of his paintings and drawings show common people in daily affairs or attitudes usual in socialist art. His work as a visual artist extended to tapestry, printmaking, theater and ballet scenography.

Novels and writings
An important part of his artistic production was literary. Almada Negreiros wrote novels, poems, playwrights, essays and manifests that were, in his lifetime, published in books, magazines, newspapers or even low-cost booklets and flyers.

In his novels and playwrights the daily affairs of people appear between a sense of the absurd and non-sense that can be related to earlier writers like Eugène Ionesco or Arthur Adamov. His literary work is highly evolved with his artistic view, often visual and "geometric" in his descriptions and backgrounds.

His manifestos were highly provocative, like "Manifesto Anti-Dantas", a humorous and aggressive text against Júlio Dantas, a major figure of arts and culture of Salazar's regime, which stands as a banner against mediocrity and conformism. He also wrote essays on the theory of colours, the Portuguese antique painting, geometry and gave numerous conferences on cultural matters.

Literary works
 O Moinho (1913)
 Os Outros (1914)
 23, 2º Andar (1914)
 Frizos, published in Orpheu vol. 1, pp. 51–59 (prose) (1915)
 A Cena do Ódio (poetry) (1915)
 Manifesto Anti-Dantas e por extenso (1915)
 Litoral (1915)
 A Engomadeira (novel) (1915, published in 1917)
 Ultimatum Futurista, às gerações portuguezas do século XX (conference) (1917)
 K4, O Quadrado Azul (novel) (1917)
 Saltimbancos Contrastes Simultâneos (1917)
 A Invenção do Corpo (conference) (1921)
 O Cágado (1921)
 A Invenção do Dia Claro (1921)
 Histoire du Portugal par coeur (1922)
 Pierrot e Arlequim (theatre) (1924)
 Nome de Guerra (novel) (1925, published in 1938)
 A Questão dos Painéis (essay) (1926)
 El uno, tragedia de la unidad (composed of Deseja-se Mulher and S.O.S) (1928)
 Portugal, Direcção Única (1932)
 Elogio da Ingenuidade ou as Desventuras da Esperteza Saloia (1936)
 Mito-Alegoría-Símbolo, Monólogo autodidacta na oficina da pintura (1948)

References
 Fotobiografias do Século XX, Photobiography of Almada Negreiros, Círculo de Leitores.

 https://web.archive.org/web/20110515095015/http://www.vidaslusofonas.pt/almada_negreiros.htm (Portuguese)
 http://sincronia.cucsh.udg.mx/negreiros.htm (Spanish)

External links

1893 births
1970 deaths
20th-century Portuguese poets
Portuguese male poets
Portuguese Roman Catholics
People from Mé-Zóchi District
Portuguese people of São Tomé and Príncipe descent
São Tomé and Príncipe people of Portuguese descent
20th-century Portuguese painters
20th-century male artists
20th-century male writers
Male painters
Portuguese male painters

Almada Negreiros