The reaction to analytical functionalism and to the socio-economic thinkingof the 1930s C.I.A.M. movement was, in part, one of attitudes to both cultureand society. Central to the ideas discused by C.I.A.M. in the 1950s and to theensuing Team X group was that spatial form was less an attribute of func-Oonal concern and more one of inductive thought. The conceptual attitude todesign of the final years of C.I.A.M. and of the formative work of Team X canbe found In the contribution of the Dutch architect and urbanist Bakema,whose work with C.l.A.M.in the 1950s can be considered to be of a similarstanding to that of Gropius with the pre-war meetings of C.l.A.M.The paper is the result of a R.I.B.A. research Award study: 'J.B.Bakema, anarchitects social attitude to design, and refers to Bakema's writings from the 1940s to the 1960s. Bakema held leading positions with the Dutch Op-bouw group, which was a part of C.l.A.M.; with Team X and with the DutchForum group of the 1960s. In the reaction to the functionalist and economicideas of C.I.A.M. reflected in the Athens Carter, Bakema and his colleaguesconsidered that In the development of both society and art, architecture andurbanism ought to satisty: a programme which served social needs; spatialIdeas which were cosmic; and form which should be symbolic and organic.There is a tendency to think of C.I.A.M. simply in terms of the Athens Char-ter of 1933, but that would be an oversimplification. Possibly the contrastin viewpoint between the 'analytical-statistical' thinkers of the pre-waryears and the 'synthetic-reflective' people of the post-war years is of equalimportance to that of the aims of the Athens Charter. Bakeme was identifiedwith the 'synthetic-reflective' attitude and saw the change from 1930 to1957 to be one from specialisation towards integration and that includedspatial concepts. In 1930 the relationship between architecture and spaceresulted from form following the analysis of function. However, in 1957 thearchitect could be more flexible in his expression of design and in the wayspace was conceived.A clear change of attitude from that of Gropius appeared. Gropius felt thatthe architect's skills gave him a responsibility to show society how to forma new environment. Bakema was more concerned to learn from society theway new ideas may evolve. This opposition of ideas was reflected in the con-viction of the post-war C.I.A.M. members. Gropius' idea was considered bythem to be directive. Whilst that of Bakema and his colleagues allowed thearchitect to seek out existing structures of the community and to allow themto develop in a positive direction. Bakema's publications of the 1960s pre-sented ideas concerned with people and space to provide 'an architecture ofsociety']The paper refers to the R.I.B.A. Research Awand study and to the writings ofBakema and others involved in C.I.A.N. and team x from the 1940s to 1960s.