M1 Excess Culture: an integrated framework of systems (Introduction)

The thesis seeks to investigate waste as a byproduct of consumerism and how it affects the cultural and economic growth of a society. In fact, if you dissect consumerism, one will find that it is a correlation of several systems that are interconnected, where one is dependant on the other—oil, environment, climate change, cultural impacts, obsolescence, morale, politics, materiality, the urban fabric, and city formations. Where the principles of thermodynamic equilibrium of these systems come to play in an integrated ecosystem that is constantly in flux and at the same time, in pursuit of balance in the natural order. It becomes important too look at this thesis in multiple parallels and as parallels that converge into a whole infrastructure of networked matrices. Keller Easterling considers the idea of what constitutes infrastructure and to think beyond the traditional infrastructure of transportation, communication, and utilities, into a network that includes collective standards of shared mechanisms in order to create our own understanding of space1. Though the topics proposed can be broken down into canonical sources, the importance of each subject is not weighted individually but as a collective, and imparts an approach on how architecture should design in the near future. To change our notion of waste and shift our values from something that is rejected into something that is accepted.

Waste is a scalar thing and also has no scale—it is everywhere, from a candy wrapper to building debris and large mountainous landfills. The term waste designates the elimination of a substance that no one claims or wants ownership of and is a devalued substance at the end of its life cycle, however, there is also no growth biologically and economically without the production and discarding of waste materials. Kevin Lynch, planner and philosopher, claim that it is a process that happens naturally and cannot be controlled, ergo we must accept it and find innovative solutions. He saw that we were all headed in a self-destructive direction that has implications for virtually every profession and that we should promote his philosophy on “positive wasting” and acknowledge this as valuable and necessary in the lives of people, things, and places2.

These solutions, whether through art, architecture, or by common practice, should seek to make waste a valued substance as it will be an abundant source for a future with scarce and depleting natural resources. We should also be mindful that waste as a byproduct has scalar implications on the environmental, social, and political impacts on society. As this topic is a growing problem, only recently have we been able to acknowledge this theme through art and architectural practice and education, by some notable urbanists, artists, and theorists—Kevin Lynch, Michell Joachim, Edward Burtynsky, Mira Engler, Alan Berger—are just some of many contributors to this growing discourse.

The fascination stems from waste being a diverse material that can take on many forms, as much of the waste we produce can be broken down into elements that are similar to the materiality that currently exists in the field of architecture. Since its origins, architecture has used the “waste” of agriculture as a primary material. These inedible parts—wood, hay, reed, bamboo—are often the primary ingredients that make up a building3. So why is it not possible to utilize synthetic man-made waste, given that modern architectural practices have been utilizing synthetic materials in construction since the industrial revolution? Futurist, Alvin Toffler spoke about the waves in historical milestones of civilization. Where the first wave is that of agriculture and the second, thousands of years later, the industrial revolution, and the third wave is the rise of a knowledge based economy in which we are currently in4. The thesis will overlap between the acceleration of the second and third wave intermittently as they are dependant upon each other. All of which stemmed from the industrial age of mass production, consumption, distribution, and mass society that was made possible through the production of cheap energies—coal, natural gas, and oil as the most significant. It is this wave that inspired the disposition of writers such as Orwell and Huxley on their political and dystopic writings.

It is only appropriate that this thesis explores the option of a narrative in parallel with architectural research. The purpose is to distribute a tone of voice that would carry on throughout the thesis to convey a sense of cynicism, black humour, and dystopia, while adopting the styles of Rem Koolhaas, George Orwell, James Howard Kuntsler, as well as my own. Narratives allow for play and a sense of urgency, a strategy that enables all types of people and generations to act empathetically. In Animal Farm, Orwell experimented with this method to tell his story that was written in the type of a fable and follows the traditional pattern of telling a moral tale with the personification of animals. The premise of the thesis’s narrative will follow loosely Orwell’s Nineteen-Eigthy Four from Room 101 where Winston’s worse fear is induced. It will then follow his journey as he experiences the thesis from his personal point of view.

The narrative would set up a scenario for the project that I would like to design. The setting is year 2050, oil has depleted to be almost nonexistent, to the extent that vehicular transportation and production has halted and as a result suburban culture dissipated as those who survived from disease and famine move towards the city in search for survival. Manhattan, a city that never slept was consumed by idleness as nothing came in or out of the city. Landfills become a natural part of the landscape, weaving itself into the different layers of the urban fabric. The sorting of rubble and rubbish become a natural thing as people salvage and ransack materials for survival. Consumed with boredom and the inherent habit of a “working” lifestyle from the past, naturally, a system of sorting, recycling, putting together of “stuff”, artworks, sculptures, and projects—begin to form a new union of jobs and a sense of community. Though intentions may vary, whether to create a sense of purpose, a goal, or to better society at a time of extremity. It is believed that the underlying purpose is to rescue themselves from futureshock, a term invented by Toffler to describe peoples’ reaction to the premature arrival of the future that often results in signs of deteriorated decision making capabilities or disorientation when change comes too quickly to absorb.

The plan is to consider the different types of waste that will be projected onto the city at a time when there will be little movement. A series of projects will investigate the reutilization of waste first as a building material, and second the implementation of waste that will define the city and its new built environment. Projects like a continuous flood barrier, housing, and waste spaces (oppose to green spaces), will closely follow themes of landscape urbanism to define a place’s use and to create adaptable “systems” instead of a rigid and systematic way of organizing space. Where we can begin to see an integrated framework of systems forming a ubiquitous landscape of an environment rich in forums, trading spaces, parks, and places of enlightenment.

Notes:
1. Keller Easterling. “Organization Space: Landscapes, Highways, and Houses in America.” Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1999
2. Kevin Lynch. "Wasting Away". Sierra Club Books: San Francisco, 1990
3. Yona Friedman, “Du Déchet fait art,” L'Architecture d'Aujourd'hui Sept./Oct. 2007: 81
4. Ted Turner, “Executive Interview with Alvin Toffler,” AMEinfo, 22 Aug. 2004, 5 Dec. 2009