The issue of social life in the everyday and everydayness by henri lefebvre

The paper ” The Issue of Social Life in The Everyday and Everydayness by Henri Lefebvre” is a perfect example of an article on social science.
In the comprehensive article, Henri Lefebvre explicates in a fairly complex but understandable language the sheer fact that before revolutions that ushered in modernization, living varied according to regions, populations, profession, sex among others. While the author does not explain how life differed based on the highlighted factors, he explicates that living presented a phenomenal diversity.
Apparently, there were functions, forms, and structures that dictated the way of life and these structures are and will always exist in society. Various physiological functions such as sleeping, drinking, and eating as well as social functions such as traveling and eating were performed either collectively or individually (Henri, p. 7). Natural and constructed structures supported the performance of these functions, which significantly increased social bonding. These kinds of forms and structures witnessed in the society are similarly replicated in architecture where every object is connected to some style and is an integral part of the larger structures and functions. Interestingly, the author notes that the rationalization and disengagement of functional elements through powerful political and economic lobbies and persuasive advertising did not lead to the vanishing of the form-function relationship and their relationship to structures. It has, in fact, become more visible and defined; “ A modern object clearly states what it is, its role and its place” (Henri, p. 8).
All systems such as food, fashion, and housing have functionality. Using a fairly simple language, the author describes that every day is a set of functions that joins systems that might otherwise appear to be divergent. The concept of every day, according to the author, establishes the platform for the erection of controlled consumerism in the current bureaucratic society. The author concludes by reiterating that the everyday aspect cannot be eliminated; not even by modernity, peace or vehemence (Henri, p. 11). I find this assertion being rather realistic as art and architecture is here to stay and will no doubt withstand the strong wave of modernity and technological advancement.