The focus on how space could be appropriated, stood in clear opposition to the prevailing modernist conception of space in architecture, most famously formulated by Giedion in his classic Space, Time and Architecture where he defined the essence of modernist architecture as the merger of space and time, creating the experience of movement9. Van Eyck’s concerns were of a completely different nature: “Whatever space and time mean, place and occasion mean more. For space in the image of man is place, and time in the image of man is occasion.”10 The question raised was not the emulation of movement towards some unknown horizon, the archetypical uprootedness of the experience of modernity11, but exactly the opposite: how can people make space their own and create a subjective “sense of place”? How to feel at home in the modern city, this machine of mass rationalization? The transitory playground was ‘place’ and ‘occasion’ combined.