“Utopia” is not achievable.
An ideology of the creation of a perfect society, or world, is a strong sentiment that has been echoed for hundreds of years now, it can be strived for, but never achieved. We, as a society can work towards a goal of achieving maximum happiness and utility for what we need, but perfection is a goal far from becoming a reality. My Bigger Picture presentation asked how we could use mobile technologies to create a unified language to reach Utopia, and met with split views and responses, we first should consider how to collaborate efficiently. Working as collectives, the represented themes of Utopia can be strived for, but how can this be achieved efficiently through design practice, and specifically, architecture? Sustainability, collaborative work, efficient financial and political motivations can all help accelerate towards the goal of “reaching Utopia”.
Technologies have developed drastically in the modern age, starting originally with basic forms of visual communications such as drawings, to now, modelling 3D structures using CAD and physically printing buildings to be made on site. These jumps in the evolution of technology are constantly changing the face of architectural design and already aiding the creation of realising a better tomorrow. Several major influences of visualizing the future of the profession started in the past and still continue to have a significant influence on practitioners today. For example, practices such as Superstudio and Archigram have had major influences on famous and groundbreaking designers in the past century who have shaped the design practice to this day and who continue to shape it beyond their time. Current practices and studios operating today like WikiHouse and Assemble prove that there are ways to tackle the development of designing a better future as well as nurturing the ethics and preservation of the present. These are prime examples of how my design practice have been trying to deal with the creation of a future for the profession, now the question is, how can we use these particular examples to push towards a better tomorrow? How have collaboration and sustainable design technologies directed us to a better future?
In the 1960s, architectural firms, Superstudio and Archigram both toyed with the idea of planning for the future. Together they were a part of a larger, collaborative architecture movement that questioned the idea and ownership of design through practice. Through, fiction, illustration, storyboards and photomontages as the main forms of visual comunication, work was made that questioned not only methods of technical construction but also questioned where we could go further, as designers, and how far we could be willing to go to achieve a greater step in evolving architectural design. Superstudio’s tendency to envision immense, inspiring and grand megastructures, inspired such great designers such as Zaha Hadid and Rem Koolhaus which has now become a trait in both their works and their own studios. Archigram’s work was inspired from neo-futuristic approaches and draw inspiration through the adaptation and evolution of technologies in order to create a new and improved reality, but were purely hypothetical projects. Archigram’s collective were purely devoted to developing proposals that would utilize light-weight high-tech approaches, that would allow for a direct infra-structural direction to efficiently using survival technology to develop a sustainable future. The works created provide a detailed and appealing vision of a glamorous future, but no other factors such as environmental and social impacts were addressed. Despite being visually stunning and relatable, none of Archigram’s work could truly be taken further, a vision of a greater tomorrow, never fully realized. Archigram’s body of work now focuses on the integration and evolution of technology within the environment. One of their most famous pieces of work, “The Walking City”, depicted large building-sized robots that roamed and traversed cities and plains, acting similarly to insects. This proposal discussed a parasitic independence in which these roaming forms could replenish themselves with resources when plugged into ports within a city. This vision of the future questioned how society could recuperate from a dystopian level event into reforming communities and societies. “The Walking City” also draws inspiration and parallels from Corbusier’s phrase of a “machine for living”, quite literally, as a house is a machine to be lived in.
Le Corbusier originally represented his idea of a Utopian dream through the plans and proposals of Plan Voisin and Ville Radieuse. It reflected an ideal of the union between man and a well-ordered environment, based upon an abstract structure of the human body. Drawings of the design outlined the abundant green spaces with high-rise building and circulation integrated within, his intention to create plazas and spaces that fully utilized and connected the natural and built environment. However, in particular, these plan were met with high criticism, due to its general lack of human scale and was slated as being a developed wasteland shunned by the public.
“There is no relationship at all between buildings and site, neither at grade nor atop the podium, since all vestiges of the existing site have been so totally obliterated. Thus, as one stands on the Plaza itself, there is an eerie feeling of detachment. The Mall buildings loom menacingly, like aliens from another galaxy set down on this marble landing strip.”
The received criticism meant that something practical had to be developed to prove how an idea of Utopia could be reached although this project was unrealized, Corbusier moved onto another. The alien nature of reaching a form of Utopia seems to be never recognized as a potential solution, which is why a practical outcome had to be produced. Le Corbusier’s most famous saying of, “a house is a machine to live in,” was a verbal realization of a strive for a different tomorrow. Corbusier envisioned the staple house as a fully functional living space that lived just like its owner. Each room and space had a function and use that would compliment the user’s lifestyle and through this sentiment, Le Corbusier developed plans and proposals of living spaces that would adhere and adapt to that premise. In particular, Corbusier’s Unite d’habitation is a real life product of his works. Using a modular design for each apartment in the building he was able to create a harmony between several different levels and with this proceeded to use this template as a solution for housing problems and sought it as his own way of developing future societal gains. This methodology has ben explored through pop culture as well, a fascinating medium that helps us begin to see how narrative decisions can impact further without developing anything practically. For example, J.G. Ballard’s novel, High Rise, depicts the dystopian-like downfall of a self sustaining block of flats that have been designed with Corbusier’s “Machine for living” maxim. It depicts that no matter what, societal class will always cause problems within a shared society, so perhaps, we are meant to find a solution that creates an equal union for us all to live on? A perfect society? A Utopia? Sustainable and collaborative efforts must be the way forward.
Sustainability through design takes a precedence in present design. Material considerations and structural development have become much more considerate due to environmental impacts of today. Firms and practices today deal with this in mind, but the collaborative collective, Assemble, prove time and time again how to consider design for a sustainable and reachable tomorrow. Their projects consist of reforming and repurposing original structures and materials. This is a huge step into considering a brighter tomorrow, conservation of materials and space prove that financial problems can be overcome and political motivation aren’t a hindrance. Realised proposals such as, “The Cineroleum” and “Folly for a Flyover” have shown at how, collectively, a project can be realised to prove a sustainable means of construction for functional and potentially permanent purposes. Despite not being project surrounding housing or living spaces like Corbusier, Assemble have managed to prove through each project how sustainable architecture can be used to greater advance the use of spaces for communal resolves. However, this begs the question to be asked of how can we now use the advancement of technology to further better these means of production?
The answer, WikiHouse. WikiHouse is an open sourced architectural innovation that is used for designing and constructing houses. Its aim, to simplify the construction of sustainable and light-resourced living spaces that is available for clients to simply just print out the “jigsaw” pieces on large CNC machines. The simplicity of the design and construction methods have proven to be a hit for those in impoverished areas and for clients in need of quick and easy dwellings. The collaborative effort behind the operation has caused huge amounts of media coverage with plans in place to use it as disaster relief in earthquake-prone areas. Set up as a construction handbook, a WikiHouse structure will typically take less than a day to build and inhabit, and that’s just using people with no experience in construction. The efforts and innovations such as WikiHouse, propel the open nature of design and tackles the hefty question of how to keep construction sustainable. This however causes the question, if open sourced architecture is the way forward for developing the design practice? This obviously allows for a collaborative effort from all types of designers, the collective effort of more than one designer of firm can cause a faster rate of production and therefore construction. However, multiple parties involved can cause design problems due to conflicting ideals and natures. What also should be taken into consideration is the funding of such technologies, crowd funding methods such as Kickstarter, allows contributions from outside the practice/profession to be involved in the making process and enhances a communal approach for development. This open approach to design has allowed drastic enhancements in this field and so far, the outcome is very promising.
British firm, Rogers Stirk Harbour and Partners, produced a showcase at this years Venice Architecture Biennale called, “Saving the City,” and explores several brand new approaches to adaptable and sustainable design. The Venice Biennale has been an incredible catalyst for the evolution of architectural design and RHS+P manage to backup that claim. Presented mainly through detailed models and diagrams, the proposals presented realised an achievable future of environmentally friendly and sustainable design to act as a feasible solution to the current housing crisis, in the UK in particular. However, these designs are so achievable with basic materials and construction methods that they can be applied to anywhere in the world. Using innovative technologies blended and integrated within the structures (living and work spaces), the ideas presented provide a clear strategy to the problem of spatial inefficiency. Modular structures, outdoor spaces and a considerable amount of thought about specific sustainable materials such as wood and recycled metals, provide the aesthetic and methodologies for constructing future practical solutions that can lead us to a brighter tomorrow.
If we combined all of these prime examples into one collective effort, then a direction can be seen to reach a brighter tomorrow can clearly be made. Sustainable, collaborative and innovative are the three main steps needed to enhance and further on the architectural design practice. Utilising these three themes can allow future architects to further advance our current methodologies and ideas that are currently in place, for example, Assemble’s sustainable approach to construction and WikiHouse’s answer to expanding innovation, shared with RHS+P’s future prospects. These are the aims and directions that we should be following as design collectives, whether its mobile, sustainable or brand new innovative technologies, a union is needed. Utopia may not be achievable, but it’s an ideal to strive for. We need to start looking into improving and bettering not only the future but, ultimately, how we design.