Studio DATA

Category: Writing

  • Exporting generative lines

    Exporting generative lines

    In a previous post, I wrote about making drawings by tracing over generated line patterns to stimulate the student design process. At the time, I identified a problem with getting the generated patterns out of the computer, alongside being able to create different patterns.

    Since then, I played around with adding a simple interface that allows someone to determine the number of lines, generate a random pattern using a button, and export it as a png for a drawing background.

    The next step is to layer more information into the line generator. I am interested in generating figure-ground patterns or playing around with grid arrangements as a catalyst for new ideas.

    Example

    Choose the number of lines, and push the Draw Lines button to see it in action.

  • Reading Before Prompting

    Reading Before Prompting

    Step aside Virtual Reality and Blockchain, Artificial Intelligence is now the king of hype. As ever, Neil Leach provides a thought provoking lecture in which he summarises AI in Architecture; all through the Digital Learning Futures You Tube page.

    On the back of my PhD thesis about Architecture and data, I’m currently fighting the Instagram FOMO and urge to become part of a new wave of “prompt engineers” using General Adversarial Network (GANS) diffusion tools such as Midjourny, DALL-E or Dream Studio. While the prompt tools are a lot of fun, it remains to be seen if these tools will result in new types of real world material forms, as opposed to speculative pixel based images. Before I join the prompt hype I’m aiming to read the literature mentioned in Leach’s lecture. I have included a list below to whet your appetite.

    Ai in Architecture and Design

    Bernstein, P. (2022). Machine Learning: Architecture in the Age of Artificial Intelligence. United Kingdom: RIBA Publishing.

    Carta, S. (2022). Machine Learning and the City: Applications in Architecture and Urban Design. United Kingdom: Wiley.

    Chaillou, S. (2022). Artificial Intelligence and Architecture: From Research to Practice. Germany: Walter de Gruyter GmbH.

    del Campo, M. (n.d.). Neural Architecture: Design and Artificial Intelligence. United States: Oro Editions.

    Imdat A., Prithwish B., Pratap T. (2022). Artificial Intelligence in Urban Planning and Design: Technologies, Implementation, and Impacts. Netherlands: Elsevier Science.

    Leach, N. (2021). Architecture in the Age of Artificial Intelligence: An Introduction to AI for Architects. United Kingdom: Bloomsbury Publishing.

    Leach, N., del Campo, M.  Eds (2022).Machine Hallucinations: Architecture and Artificial Intelligence. United Kingdom: Wiley.

    Manovich, L. (2018). AI Aesthetics. Russia: Strelka Press.

    AI and Society

    Clark, A. (2003). Natural-born Cyborgs: Minds, Technologies, and the Future of Human Intelligence. United Kingdom: Oxford University Press.

    Harari, Y. N. (2017). Homo Deus: A Brief History of Tomorrow. United States: HarperCollins.

    Hayles, N. K. (1999). How we became posthuman. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Mitchell, M. (2020). Artificial Intelligence: A Guide for Thinking Humans. United States: Picador.

    Tegmark, M. (2017). Life 3.0: Being Human in the Age of Artificial Intelligence. United Kingdom: Penguin Books Limited.

    ‍

  • Laugier’s Lack of Data

    Laugier’s Lack of Data

    Students explore various characters who shaped culture through writing in my Introduction to Architectural History course. Apart from the big ticket items such as Vitruvius and Alberti, we begin by reading Marc-Antoine Laugier’s “An Essay on Architecture” (Laugier 1753). Laugier’s essay, written in the age of The Enlightenment, argues for architecture’s origin. Consequently, he links the architectural principles of his day to the simplicity and functionality of nature, specifically through the allegory of the Primitive Hut. The writing provides a useful starting point for students as it shows how architectural culture is a contest of published arguments. It is also useful that his perspective can be critiqued for its oversimplification and idealisation of natural forms and primitive constructs, highlighting an ideological bias. In my practice, I find Laugier’s text useful because it emerged from an age of technological transition that provides an interesting parallel with our present-day experience.

    Human Senses

    My research explores architecture culture through data. Having data to analyse is good, but I am more interested in its cultural image, how we measure the world and the consequences. Laugier constructs an origin story for architecture and describes a “primitive man” building a “little rustic hut” who, in the process, invents art by “imitating the natural process” (Laugier, 1753, p11). This story alludes to architecture born from a purely analogue human existence where heightened human senses and practical skills allow survival in nature. For Laugier, architecture emerged from human sensory experience, which enabled “man” to fashion a structure from the environment. The “Primitive Hut”, seen as the prototype of all architecture, represents the outcome of an intuitive data behaviour where all the senses contribute to an improvised outcome. An architecture created in the moment. If I was to join Laugier in making cultural historical claims, the metaphor of the hut portrays a time when architecture reflected a human understanding of the world.

    Lack of Data

    The Enlightenment and the natural sciences discipline that emerged at the time viewed nature through empirical observation. Today, we can appreciate this era as a subjective human analogue experience that resulted in a simplistic worldview. When compared to our contemporary advanced scientific capabilities, we can forgive this simplicity as a lack of data (Carpo, 2017). Humans dealt with this lack by training observation to detect laws that could explain nature, which consequently appeared to be well organised and ideal. This approach contributed to a cultural view of nature as inherently simple and logical, which Laugier embraced in his architectural theory. However, with access to a greater range of measurements, our present-day ecological and biological sciences reveal that nature is a dynamic, interdependent system marked by complex processes rather than simple causal relationships. Humans can only observe what is humanly observable. Sanford Kwinter captures this data deficit in his book Far From Equilibrium (2007), highlighting the defective nature of human senses; that part of the world always remains hidden from us. The Enlightenment radically changed culture through empirical science, but it was based on a lack of data, leading to a worldview we still struggle to let go of.

    Anthropocentric View

    Through Laugier, we can appreciate an attempt to lay the foundation of architecture, but we can see it as promoting an anthropocentric worldview. Back then, the architecture of modernity aligned with the period’s nascent scientific methods and the limited scope of empirical data available at the time. Laws of nature conveniently plugged gaps in understanding to promote humans as special and unique. Today, we are much more aware of our connection to nature and the world’s knowns and unknowns. Today’s paradigm views us within a chaotic, non-linear, multifaceted ecological system. Marc-Antoine Laugier’s book discusses how architecture should be simple and inspired by nature, much like the basic shelters made by early humans. His ideas offer a good starting point for thinking about structures, but it myopically prioritised human survival and culture over everything else. You could argue that the architecture of the Enlightenment consequently produced human-focussed architecture through ornament, sympathetic scale and perspective. However, it also introduced a story of environmental exploitation that we conveniently still hold on to. Despite this limitation, reading Laugier’s argument is still valuable; it reminds us that architecture should be practical, human-scale, and connected to nature, but it must also benefit the environment and promote human survival.

    Carpo, M. (2017). The Second Digital Turn: Design Beyond Intelligence. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

    Kwinter, S. (2007). Far from Equilibrium : Essays on Technology and Design Culture. Spain: Actar-D.

    Laugier, M.-A. (1753). An Essay on Architecture. Los Angeles, CA: Hennessey & Ingalls. (Original work published 1753)

    ‍

  • Decentering the Lecturer

    Decentering the Lecturer

    My experience of university architecture education was that your motivation for success was aligned with pleasing your expert tutor. The desire for praise fueled long days and late nights in the studio. Studio culture promoted a work ethic emphasising producing beautiful artefacts like models and drawings. From my perspective, learning happened through doing, and much of the influences on design came from my library explorations or building visits. This approach to architecture education had one central assumption; that every student learnt through passively absorbing information and then developing a repetitive behaviour of effort and praise.

    End of Lectures

    Architecture education has long been characterised by traditional lecture-style teaching methods, where students passively receive information from their professors. At UTS College, we take a more student-centred approach to teaching architecture. Rather than the teacher acting as the central knowledge repository, the student-centred approach allows students to explore information and establishes active tasks that promote collaborative discovery. The fundamental shift is the teacher transitions from the central expert to a facilitator of student learning.

    What is Student-Centred Teaching?

    Student-centred teaching is an approach to education that places the student at the centre of the learning process. This approach acknowledges that students have unique learning needs, preferences, and goals and learn best when they can control what, when and how they learn. While the student-centred approach could be criticised for ideologically concentrating on individualism, autonomy, and choice over collective ritual, it emphasises academic focus on learning as a process, in contrast to the traditional obsession with outcomes. The argument is that products benefit academic profiles while the process prioritises student learning.

    The shift to student-centred learning potentially clashes with most university architectural faculties for several reasons.

    1. No more lectures: Student-centred teaching encourages students to be active learners rather than passive recipients of presented information.
    2. Personalisation: Student-centred teaching recognises that every student has unique learning preferences and needs. These needs are met through various modes of information engagement, such as videos, readings, presentations and quizzes, allowing students to learn at their own pace.
    3. Engagement: Student-centred teaching keeps students engaged and motivated by actively involving them in learning. Such an approach requires students to teach each other rather than rely on a teacher.

    Some tough decisions.

    The shift from a teacher-centred approach to education will be challenging for some academics who traditionally rely on lectures as their primary teaching method. I think there is a place for lectures in architectural education. Still, academics willing to embrace a de-centring from student learning must introduce more interactive and engaging activities into their lectures, using multimedia resources and tools and leveraging digital technologies to enhance the learning experience.

    Education is changing, and architectural academics must play a key role in designing and developing new teaching methods and approaches that suit the discipline’s unique knowledge and skills while better aligning with the needs and expectations of today’s students. While there is a debate about whether education should adapt to diminishing social media-induced attention spans or train students to achieve deeper focus, architecture academics must help shape the future of education and contribute to the ongoing evolution of the field.

    Ultimately, the key to academic success in a changing educational landscape is flexibility, adaptability, and a willingness to embrace new ideas and approaches. By staying up-to-date with the latest trends and developments in education and actively seeking opportunities for growth and innovation, academics can thrive as educators and mentors if they are willing to de-centre themselves.

    ‍

  • How Arch Manu Addresses Critical Challenges for a Sustainable Future

    Critical Challenges for a Sustainable Future

    Transforming the Architecture, Engineering, and Construction (AEC) industry to meet our global sustainability targets is not just important, it is essential. The built environment—the structures, infrastructure, and facilities that define our daily existence—accounts for a significant share of global resource consumption and carbon emissions. In Australia, as in many parts of the world, the challenge lies in addressing climate change, resource depletion, and environmental degradation. Despite the immense challenges and widespread recognition of the need for change, the industry remains fragmented, with no clear consensus on the best path forward, risking failure to meet its sustainability goals.

    Goals

    The AEC industry has set ambitious sustainability goals: achieving net-zero carbon emissions, improving energy efficiency, utilising sustainable materials, conserving water, reducing waste, protecting biodiversity, constructing climate-resilient infrastructure, and promoting social sustainability. The timeline is tight, with significant progress targeted by 2030 and net-zero by 2050. However, a critical barrier to achieving these goals is the profound skills gap, particularly in advanced computational techniques, digital fabrication, and data management. These are the very skills that could revolutionise how we design and construct, making processes more efficient, less wasteful, and more sustainable.

    Digital Integration

    There is broad consensus within the industry that digital integration of design and manufacturing processes is essential to achieving these goals. This integration is crucial for reducing the environmental impact of construction. However, a significant hurdle remains: converting architectural designs into machine-readable formats for direct use in manufacturing. The industry has yet to fully embrace the tools and techniques that could make this a reality.

    Techno-Social Systems

    Collaboration between human expertise and advanced technology will be a linchpin in achieving these goals. AEC professionals are adept at designing and executing complex projects, but they are constrained by the limits of human cognition and perception when managing highly intricate tasks, such as producing precise constructions at scale or detecting patterns in massive data sets. Emerging tools, like Neural Networks, can augment human abilities, allowing us to address these complexities more effectively. Yet, the expertise required to fully leverage these technologies is still in its infancy. Without developing these skills, the industry may miss critical opportunities to make more informed and sustainable decisions. The need for comprehensive education in architectural computing is urgent. Without a workforce proficient in the latest digital technologies, the industry will struggle to keep pace with the demands of digital transformation and sustainability.

    Circular Design

    Sustainable design is another area where consensus on its importance is universal, yet the integration of digital tools to enhance sustainability remains insufficient. Every building must be part of a circular economy to ensure we introduce as few new resources as possible into the built environment. However, achieving this level of circularity requires coordination and resource management beyond human capabilities; it demands digital tools that can identify, link, and track resource availability in real time.

    Sustainable Future

    Arch Manu is stepping into this complex landscape with a clear mission: to confront these challenges head-on. By providing cutting-edge training in digital skills, fostering deeper integration between design and manufacturing, and pioneering new approaches to data management, we aim to lead the AEC industry towards a more sustainable future. The centre is also exploring innovative business models and sustainable design practices, ensuring that the next generation of AEC professionals is well-equipped to tackle the industry’s most pressing challenges.

    The road ahead for the AEC industry is undoubtedly challenging. However, with the right skills, tools, and strategies in place, there is a clear path to a more sustainable, efficient, and resilient built environment. Arch Manu is committed to leading the way, ensuring that the industry not only meets its sustainability targets but thrives in the process.

    ‍

  • Digital Fabrications

    Digital Fabrications

    Galo Canizares is a rare practitioner; he is an assistant professor of architecture but is an advanced digital technology user with projects that explore the edges of the web and data. He is right up my Straße. His work helps me position my practice, as he is somewhat of an outlier. Take his book “Digital Fabrications” for instance, a book of stories describing experiments with digital tools, is a little confusing. If you knew Galo was an architect and you read the title, you would presume there would be examples of structures and physical objects scattered through the pages, but this is not the case. Digital Fabrication is about the digital image, and fabrications relate to fabricating reality more than it does to the fabric of reality.

    Interface

    I often find myself exploring ideas outside architecture, getting lost down the rabbit holes of technology’s cultural influence. Galo Canizares is the same; he is architecturally trained but has successfully expanded his practice to investigate and experiment with the digital, particularly the effects of digital interfaces on design. Today, he argues, software is ubiquitous and influences culture through the information we produce, consume and share through technical interfaces. Digital Fabrications highlights how Architects often use a variety of software packages and applications without thinking critically about how these tools have changed their work.

    Contexts

    The book unfolds like a fun journey through unrelated explorations, first setting the stage with the political influence of software and interfaces, then taking an exciting detour to narrate the history of Earth from a Martian perspective. This shift to science fiction is inventive and a surprising twist, but it veers away from the book’s expected theme, digital interfaces and dilutes the overall message.

    Experiments

    The projects featured in this book are technically impressive. Canizares develops an “absurdly dumb Twitter bot that would potentially say smart things” (p129), incorporating an artificial architecture culture personality into the design. The web drawing app Malevi.ch interprets the twentieth-century ‘Suprematist’ artist Kazimir Malevich’s theory of irrational space into an interactive interface. The written explanation is interesting, but the outcome of a force-directed figure-ground pattern generator doesn’t quite match the justification. It prompts one to question whether the tool was actually an experiment with matter.js and post-rationalised as a critical analysis of Malevich’s work.

    The Malevi.ch app by Galo and Jose Canizares

    Discussion

    Canizares’s digital interface experiments are noteworthy, but his two essays titled ‘Everything is Software’ are the real standouts. These pieces connect digital media theory with architectural discourse, defining two key terms: ‘postdigital’ and ‘postorthographic’. The ‘Post-Digital’ concept is exemplified by Carlo Listroti, who uses digital technology to craft architectural drawings that outstrip human precision and speed. In contrast, the ‘Postorthographic’ concept aligns with the work of Casey Reas, who uses pixels to generate images from data. ‘Post-orthographic’ signifies a shift from traditional 3D to 2D drawing techniques — like plans, elevations, and sections — to creating images based on pixels. Canizares argues that this ‘postorthographic’ approach ushers in a new form of dominant visual communication through social media, which in turn significantly impacts our social behaviours and collective cultural history.

    So What?

    I enjoyed reading the book, however, my critique would be that, at times, I found it difficult to follow the central point. A greater hierarchy of ideas through headings would have been beneficial, but I can understand the author’s choice as this would steer the writing into a more academic tone. I appreciate how the book links the past to the future through digital media, but I was left pondering, so what do we do? Canizares does well to convince the reader that interfaces and interaction are the future political spheres of influence but treats them as foregone conclusions and inevitable. This gap stimulates an alternative and critical response where designers reappropriate or hack interfaces to counteract the political influence gained from interaction.

    Canizares, G. (2019). Digital Fabrications: Designer Stories for a Software-based Planet. United States: ORO Editions/Applied Research & Design.

    ‍

  • Mixed Feelings About Reality

    The Luddites would have loved mixed reality.

    Mixed Feelings About Reality

    In the previous post, I wrote about the potential benefits of using mixed reality in architectural design and fabrication. The combination of Hololens, software communication protocols (such as Fololens) and design software (such as Rhino 3D) produce a cyber-human-material system that combines the tactile experience and physical feedback of human material experience with computational mathematical calculation. Previously I highlighted the capacity for mixed reality systems to embed knowledge from extensive craft practice experience into the interactive system resulting in a break in the relationship between skill and complexity of material manipulation. On the one hand, this potentially increases the quality of everyday objects, but on the other, it reduces the cultural value placed on those whose knowledge is bound within their mental and physical memory.

    If a future scenario occurs where complex structures are achievable without any practice or experience two trajectories seem very likely when set in a historical context. It is not hard to make a connection between the ability of the Hololens to the impact of manufacturing machines in the industrial revolution, both make material objects easier to produce. While I’m not saying mixed reality will have the same scale impact of industrial production, it is worth considering the effect of a system of architectural production that is driven by a desire to absorb expertise and externalise information via virtual projections.

    Virtual Luddites

    The Arts and Crafts movement, related to the machine sabotaging Luddites, viewed mechanical production as a threat to the artist’s freedom, their creative produce and their livelihood. While with hindsight it is easy to argue that art survived and found new mediums and subject matters through which to question the world, it is true the machine eroded the role of the artist in the production of cultural objects. The most significant loss from machinic repetitive production and specialisation was the shift in cultural importance on the learning of a skill. It is an unknown how cultural value would shift with increased use of mixed reality. The rise of the internet and improved access to digital fabrication was thought to sound the death knell for craft skills, but paradoxically they have become popular counter practices to the overtly robotic processes of making. However, there is a potential shift where most people can work with materials without really knowing them, or emotionally engaging with them over a long period. If there is no need to learn the behaviour of a substance through extensive creative practice, then a source of stimulation and expression is lost from human existence.

    Exploitation of the machine

    The other trajectory involves the use of humans akin to automated assets. When the industrial revolution introduced efficiencies in making and material use, it also brought a cultural shift in human management. The initial Taylorist project of economic management of human energy, hoped to liberate workers from the machine through greater leisure time, ultimately tied them back to the machines through new types of employment structures and exploitative practices. If a headset allows multiple unskilled people to make high-quality material construction, it is not hard to see the wages reduce in tandem with the skills required to participate. The intelligence is bound up within the digital system meaning that those who own, setup and manage the system exist in a central position of power, those who don a mixed reality headset potentially become a directable organic agent, one of many indistinguishable faces masked by the tinted headset screen. The outcome could be a mechanical Turk like system for construction, please never advocate for an “uber” for architecture.

    In a familiar Marxist scenario, those with the knowledge and means of production (Hololens technology) hold a position of economic power and capacity to absorb capital from material (the construction) and immaterial (the data) assets. The above may seem far-fetched, but it is critical to think about how emerging technology is employed in exploitative as well as liberating endeavours. The question to ask in developments with mixed reality is whether there is an imbalance in benefit between the human subject and material object. A more balanced scenario could be the use of technology to develop craft abilities or uses that engage the body with making but allows and encourages mistakes to benefit the mastery of the human subject rather than the material object. Not everyone has the ability and time to be a craftsperson, but the experience gained is a highly subjective experience and remains with the body for life. For a culture that no longer values craft it will once again become the domain of the wealthy and privileged.

    It is essential to cast a critical eye on technological development and understand how systems that benefit architecture can have a negative impact beyond the experience of the material object, however for the meantime I will be experimenting with Fologram some more, I just now need to beg, steal or borrow a $7000 Hololens.

    ‍

  • It Begins – The book that started it all

    It was an impulsive purchase, but a good one. I’d only just started reading a new issue of the Rhino 3D newsletter when I noticed a new book, Advanced 3D Printing by Diego Garcia Cuevas and Gianluca Pugliese. 3D printing is very familiar to me having taught digital fabrication at The University of Sydney, so I can navigate the world of 3D mesh modelling and STL files. This book promised something different by printing with G Code and I was intrigued. I have previous experience with G Code in a 3D printed chocolate project, but back then I had not written the code, merely fabricated it.

    The book arrived and I raced through it, working out what I could start to code and print. The example code is generally split into two parts, algorithms creating geometry for 3D printing slicer software, or algorithms simulating 3D printed lines. The sliced geometries worked like a dream, I will post some of the outcomes. However, controlling your 3d printer through G Code is on another level of complexity; I will post some of these colossal fails soon.

    If you are interested in the advanced 3D printing world, I recommend viewing the webinar on Advanced 3D or buying the book.

    __wf_reserved_inherit
    Advanced 3D Printing by Diego Garcia Cuevas and Gianluca Pugliese

    ‍

    ‍

  • Applying Beaudrillard’s Hyperreal

    Applying Beaudrillard’s Hyperreal

    I am writing the curriculum for a media communications course at UTS College and one of the theories taught to students is ‘Hyperreality’. Jean Baudrillard, the French philosopher and sociologist, is well known for this concept that explains how a representation replaces reality, such that the simulated version becomes more real than the actual experience  (Beaudrillard, 1994). While this concept is often discussed in relation to media and technology, it also has architectural relevance.

    Representation

    Architecture is one of the most prominent forms of representation of the built environment. It shapes our world experience, and as such, it can construct our understanding of reality. Buildings are often viewed as symbols of power, status, or cultural identity, and their design reinforces these meanings. In this sense, architecture has the potential to present the hyperreal that blurs the boundaries between the real and the imagined.

    Photo-realism

    The most obvious example of hyperreality is how architecture is marketed and consumed. Increasingly sophisticated photorealistic renderings for architectural visualisations create false realities altering the light, materials, activity, and even the weather. Photorealism makes it difficult to distinguish between the representation and the actual building. Like media that confuse viewers and leave them unsure of what is real and fake, these visualisations can lead to a disconnect between the expectations of the consumer and the reality of the built environment.

    Better-than-real

    Many consider the work of contemporary architects such as ZHA to be hyperreal as they often use technology to create buildings that seem almost unreal. But those who think this misunderstand the concept. Baudrillard does not say that the hyperreal presents things that we cannot tell are real or not, it is about things that are better than the real. In the case of visualisation, the image represents a building that is better than reality. However, many ZHA buildings look just like their representations; they do not present reality with no origin, they are the origin of a new architectural reality.

    Distortion

    A better, and scarier example of the hyperreal in architecture is found in theme parks and entertainment complexes. These spaces are designed to create immersive environments that transport visitors into a different reality. Disney World, for example, is a hyperreal space that presents a distorted version of reality through its architecture and attractions. The Magic Kingdom’s Cinderella Castle is a prime example of this, with its exaggerated size and intricate detailing creating a hyperreal version of a fairy tale castle that is better than any real castle. Similarly, their Pirates of the Caribbean ride presents the life of a pirate that is far from the reality of 17th and 18th-century pirating.  Similarly, Las Vegas build versions of Venice and Paris that aim to be better versions of the original, with less flooding and fewer Parisians.

    Critique the real

    Using Baudrillard’s concept of hyperreality to think about architecture is highly relevant. Like the media, the built environment has the power to present reality, and as such, it can also force us to question reality, for better or worse. Architects and designers should be aware of hyperreality in their work, but similarly, the general population need help recognising when they are served “a real, without origin or reality: a hyperreal” (Beaudrillard, 1994).

    Baudrillard, J. (1994). Simulacra and simulation. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

    ‍

  • Notes on a Planthroposcene

    Notes on a Planthroposcene

    Although Natasha Myers wrote the article [“How to grow liveable worlds: Ten (not-so-easy) steps for life in the Planthroposcene”](https://www.abc.net.au/religion/natasha-myers-how-to-grow-liveable-worlds:-ten-not-so-easy-step/11906548?fbclid=IwAR1vs9tGmX_Sf9oi0fHUd_pWcDw2tzbbOtbc6M0H4RSmKO_tjmbmZvQ2lVw) before COVID 19, her writing contains interesting ideas for those interested in the Anthropocene and human impact in a post Coronavirus world.

    Anthropocene

    Architecture is complicit in the Anthropocene’s existence, at its core it produces objects that provide human shelter, shelter from the chaos of nature. Human need sits at the centre of architecture’s presence as a discipline, and historically locates humanity at the centre of everything. As humans began to assemble and urbanise, the threat of nature became less a problem as the built environment pushed nature out onto the periphery of human settlement. Over the twentieth century, architecture began to completely block out what little trace of nature remained by producing mechanically conditioned and hermetically sealed internal environments. Once human shelter and habitats became conditionable, nature became redundant. Through a desire to protect the human and enable humanity to thrive, architecture unknowingly helped shape the Anthropocene. Architecture is only now starting to understand and engage with the impact of human destruction of nature and our exploitation of planetary resources.

    Comodifying Nature

    While Natasha Myers targets Capitalism and Colonialism as the two human ideologies responsible for the Anthropocencene, architecture must also acknowledge some responsibility. While architecture generally relies on the dominant political-economic condition it operates within, at times it has attempted to help shape it, for instance, the early twentieth-century modernist obsession with mass production. To survive, the majority of architects have no alternative but to engage in state-led economic systems that “sustainably” operate by managing nature through economics. As a result, sustainable architecture imagines architecture alongside nature as a self-funding resource and therefore [commodifiable through scientific study](https://www.amazon.com/dp/B004DCBC5I?tag=duckduckgo-ffab-20&linkCode=osi&th=1&psc=1). Additionally, architecture is complicit in projects of colonisation, where buildings destroy habitats and become weaponised in state-led land grabs, for instance, the [Israeli settlements](https://thefunambulist.net/magazine/architecture-colonialism). So while Myers does not mention architecture, it is part of the conversation.

    While Myers’ suggestion that we talk to and worship plants is an extreme suggestion, it shines a light on architecture’s compliance in maintaining the dominant scientific worldview status-quo, one that seeks to measure.

    ‍