Infrastructure Space - Illustration

 

This image illustrates the idea of disposition and the responsible underlying factors. The image of the infrastructure on the right side shows how it is connected to all the active forms, and the image of infrastructure with broadband connection on the left side shows broadband’s impact on a city or country’s development that helps it globalizing and creates more opportunities that influence that country’s systems. But active forms and broadband both are manipulated by the capitalistic power that only looks for profits. And the background images show the two sides of reality that are being created because of the disposition; one is the developed side of the world and the other is the undeveloped side. So we must come up with an architecture theory that can deal with this issue.

Infrastructure space is not just the physical structure for transportation and communication, but also the shared protocol of technology, markets, and urbanism. These infrastructure spaces are the urban structures that have an impact on architecture and they are making international influences possible. 

All the active forms like the multipliers, remotes, topologies and governors that form spatial products and broadband connections can cause the disposition. Disposition refers to the idea of the dualism of what is shown versus what the actual reality is. Broadband connections help countries like Kenya to be more advanced and bring up the possibility to develop their infrastructures. However, it also challenges our design ability or creating a connection through architecture, as broadband can take away the necessity of connecting cities or countries through physical forms. This broadband in one way can behave like an active form. Active forms like multiplier can help create many opportunities or infrastructure, but the mass production takes away the uniqueness and main functionality of the form, thus creating a disconnection from the original intention. And when it comes to an internet connection, we see that they are more focused on developed countries. It helps them to grow even more compared to the developing or undeveloped countries, which creates the disposition.

Sustainable Buildings Initiatives - Illustration

Carbon emissions and energy consumption involving the built environment have a lot of negative impacts on climate change, and architects are fighting together to control this through their building design and planning. This image shows what climate change does to our environment, which is on the right side. Global warming, sea-level rise, glacier melting, drought, storms, etc. are caused because of greenhouse gas emissions. On the left side, an architect is trying to stop it by trying out net-zero energy, and other sustainable building design strategies. But this is just a fraction of what needs to be done. Although this is just a fraction of what needs to be done, it could slow down the process at a rate that people hardly realize.

The report “Buildings & climate change: a summary for decision-makers” explains the buildings’ contribution to climate change and what architects can do to reduce greenhouse gas emissions through sustainable building practices. Buildings contribute to 40% of global energy use and 30% of global greenhouse gas emission. If we do not implement proper measures to slow it down, then greenhouse gas emissions will keep increasing in the long term. The building sectors need to follow the climate change strategies locally and globally to mitigate CO₂ emissions.

The podcast: “Fighting climate change, one building at a time” also discusses this problem and the possible solutions. Today’s buildings can use technologies that require less energy for heating and cooling. It can reduce the amount up to 90 percent. The latest materials can be used for new buildings, but older buildings could also be retrofitted or upgraded to achieve the greenhouse gas emission goals. However, it is challenging to bring all the changes even though architects are getting more and more aware of this situation because of the neglect of the world leaders, unaware clients, and greenwashing marketing organizations. Architects can only do so much. We all have to work together in this process to fight climate change.

Architecture and Labor - Illustration

The illustration is showing an architect working in her office. She is working on a building project and creating diagrams, drawings, and 3D models for a real-life building. It takes a lot of time and dedication to produce this amount of work, which is shown by using illustration of clocks. Architects work full-time or even overtime to meet the deadline. This illustration also shows that the architect is considering the building structure, systems, and its context while designing and producing drawings for the building. It depicts the idea that architects are creative workers, and they deserve to get recognized for the efforts they put into a project.

In the Architecture and Labor TED talk at TEDxCalArts, Peggy Deamer mentions how practicing architecture is hard work, yet architects do not see themselves as workers. She talks about the issues and the possible solutions. The first problem is that we think “architects don’t do work.” We only design buildings and do creative work, but do not produce a product or provide services like people from other professions do. We have failed to consider our work as “work.” We get paid less compared to other workers. Secondly, we think “design is not work.” The division between design and production makes us think that we are designing for others to build them, hence they do the work. We have less control and risk, and so we get less reward. Architects also try to please their owners instead of educating them. Because of all the contracts and ownership, we let slip many opportunities. Here we have something to learn from the artists. Artists believe that “art is work.” We should learn from them and understand that the production of drawing is also work. Any kind of creation should be considered as labor. Architects need to cooperate and integrate their work with other parties and share the risk and reward collectively without having to worry about getting sued. There are so many processes required to get the final product and we do it. Therefore, it is work and it is the right work.

 

The Three Ecologies - Illustration

 

The three ecologies by Felix Guattari explores the concept of the three interconnected ecologies that are important for the reconstruction of our society. The image above illustrates the idea of the transversality of the three ecologies that need to be developed to find solution to the capitalistic world. The three ecologies are social, mental, and environmental ecologies.

Our world is at risk because of the “Integrated World Capitalism” that is worsening the climate issues, deteriorating social relations, and manipulating individual and collective subjectivity. The mass media is also responsible today for damaging human relationships between “the social, the psyche and the nature.” Technological advancement and machine development are damaging our environment.

The number of ecological crises we are facing today should be solved on a global scale and we need to question the capitalistic power that is forming globally. Guattari argues that we need a reorientation of our thoughts and understand our social relations, natural environment, and human subjectivity. We need to use our technology toward more human goals instead of allowing it to determine our future. We need to be liberated from capitalistic manipulation and understand the transversality of the three ecologies to find solutions. If we understand how all three ecologies work together, then we can create social equity and a sustainable world. 

Deconstructivism and Its Impact - Illustration

 

The notion of deconstructivist architecture and not following the standard to invent something new is illustrated here through this collage. The inspiration is derived from the writings called Delirious New York: A Retrospective Manifesto for Manhattan by Rem Koolhass, Deconstructivism Architecture by Philip Johnson and Mark Wigley, Manifesto by Lebbeus Woods and “Suburban Life and Public Space” in Sprawl and Public Space Redressing the Mall by Margaret Crawford. The illustration indicates how the concept of deconstructing a buildings' form has created a new type of architecture that was never seen in the past. In the collage, the Royal Opera House is the representation of what a pure form of building used to look like and when deconstructivist architecture was introduced, irregular geometry and dismantled form started the new architectural practice which created buildings like the Walt Disney Concert Hall. The people on the left are the public that goes with the norm, and the ones on the right are open to new experiments which at first is unaccepted by the majority but later causes an impact that transforms our views. It all comes together when implemented with great attention and care.

When new style gets introduced to the people, many of them critics the idea and rejects it. When deconstructivist architecture was introduced, it shocked the modernist but opened the path for a new architecture theory. Although architects always have been coming up with new and suitable design styles for their time and move on from what has been done previously, deconstructivism has impacted how people experiment with their design today. Architects that were presented in the 1988 MoMa deconstructivist architecture exhibition had something in common about their work, the deconstruction of a pure form. Their works are distinguishable and expressive. It has "disturbed our thinking about form" but developed a new standard that influenced our design strategies. The other readings about the Manhattan grid and readdressing malls also embrace the idea of a change that can establish a larger, positive impact in the long run. 

"A Pattern Language" and "The Real Meaning of Architecture" - Illustration of the Concept

 

This is an illustration of the essay called “A Pattern Language” and “The Meaning of Architecture” written by Christopher Alexander. The first tree represents what architecture is like without a pattern language, second tree is the pattern language, and the third tree is architecture with pattern language. The first tree is not fully grown and developed because it is the architecture that is losing its connection to the work process and human feelings. It does not address social, cultural, and environmental issues. Architects are losing their core values to money and only designing what their supposed to design. This is when architects need to use the pattern language to find solutions to the complex building problems. Patterns typically move from macro to the micro, which means it goes from larger scale projects to the smaller scale projects that are more detailed. All projects are in some way connected or linked to each other. Here we have some large circles at the top of the tree that represent independent regions or towns. As it goes down, smaller circles that contain more details are added to the large circles. The circles are connected by the branches of the tree. They come together at the end and connects to the root, which is the pattern language.

When this pattern language is applied, we get the third tree that is livelier and greener. Because of the pattern language, architects can design spaces that are well-planned and connected, related to the culture and tradition, and create aesthetics that are meaningful to the people. When architects learn to recognize a problem, they can use the pattern language to find a solution that works. It allows architects to make decisions that involve the owner and the users. Architects can study and gain knowledge of the site and select local materials based on the local conditions. It allows them to understand how the form and its functions work. When their design contains their own style, brings the community together, and relates to the location, it makes their work more successful.

Michel Foucault. Discipline & Punish (1975), Panopticism Summary

        

This is an illustration of the panopticon system that we see in our life. The guy is doing his everyday work but aware of being observed by the eyes. The eyes are constantly watching the person, however he does not know exactly who is watching him. This fear of being watched has strong influence over his action. It is almost as if he is trapped inside a prison cell. 

The panopticon is a prison system that is designed by Jeremy Bentham. It has a circular plan where a security guard observes prisoners from an observation tower positioned in the middle of the plan, and the peripheral building that is surrounding the tower is divided into prison cells. These cells have windows both on the inside and outside. This provides light and allows people from the outside and the guard from the tower to constantly observe them, but “visibility is a trap.” The prisoners have no idea who is watching them and whether they are always being watched or not. The idea is to make the prisoners feel like they are always under surveillance even though the guard or staff may or may not be watching the inmates. It helps the system to exercise its power over the criminals by encouraging them to be more disciplined which allows them to control their action better and there is less chance of them trying to escape. Bentham believed that “power should be visible but unverifiable.” The power of constant surveillance and the panopticon can easily make people aware of their own actions.

Michel Foucault in his writing Discipline & Punish (1975), Panopticism criticized the panopticon by comparing it to the village that was under disciplinary observation which was cruel and harsh. Foucault began his writing by talking about the plague that happened in the seventeenth century and how citizens were strictly under surveillance all the time. They were constantly being inspected and separated from the society to purify the community. The consequence of breaking the quarantine was death. All of these were to keep people under control and to regulate the community to establish a better disciplined society which started the idea of a systematic approach to controlling individuals. We see some similarities to that quarantine life today in this pandemic and how rules are being imposed on us so that we can maintain our distance and stop the virus from spreading. However, people of today have more freedom, and our punishment for breaking rules is less severe. This results in people denying reality and exposing themselves to the virus and risking their lives as well as others.

Therefore, the panopticon offers a solution to situations like this where people are needed to be regulated and disciplined. In a panopticon, cells are separated by walls placed in between. There is no opportunity to interact with others, no confirmation of who is watching, and it leaves them with no choice but to follow all the rules and regulations. It creates a “disciplinary blockade” that makes people conscious of their action in their everyday life no matter how small it is which ensures a “utopia of the perfectly governed city.” Bentham’s proposed design was for a prison system; however, this system is seen to be used for institutions like hospitals, schools, sanatoriums, and asylums that require more discipline. Foucault argues that “it is polyvalent in its applications; it serves to reform prisoners, but also to treat patients, to instruct schoolchildren, to confine the insane, to supervise workers, to put beggars and idlers to work.” Because the “permanent visibility assures automatic functioning of power,” the cells act like a laboratory where people are forced to do something for experiment purposes. It takes away one’s freedom of communication and action. It violates our human rights while trying to play a positive role. Does that make it better than our regular, overcrowded prison system which is also a penal institution? And should we be worried that other institutions like schools and hospitals in many ways function like a panopticon?