“A Black Hole Culture” [V.05]
Innovation speaks of a day when everything can do anything. And by merely taking notice of how next week’s anticipated products have all the capabilities of last week's devices, it is irrefutable that we are attentively listening. Although the image of that day may be a bit more unclear than we would prefer, the means of how to get there is a message that innovation delivers quite clearly: that the culture of these times revolves around the individual.
This very culture is expressed by a constant means of refinement, one that repeatedly discards its layers towards a simplicity which we paradoxically refer to as complexity. Creator and creation gravitate toward one another in likeness; with each refinement, man sheds a layer of self and outsources those traits into mediums like technology, while the latter gradually personifies human traits.
And like how children reflect the image of their parents, creation also reflects creator, as these series of refinements portray how we are becoming simpler and more adept. To master a musical instrument, to pour over books in a library, to rent movies at the store, are all one by one, examples of activities being branded archaic. The internet, plug and play devices, social networking services, are all facets of instant gratification, the demagogue of our times. And smartly playing on our desires, its effects are refining man to a state in that every individual is like a black hole, drawing every desire and convenience closer and closer, all within a finger’s reach.
The days when Jimmy shreds the guitar while Neil backs him on the drums are numbered; those who aspire to be the next Daft Punk can orchestrate a symphony on a Roland sample machine in their basement. Black Friday used to be a Darwinist affair that took place at the stroke of midnight across shopping malls nationwide, but is now rapidly being replaced by the likes of online shopping services such as Amazon, Slick Deals, Newegg, and new shopping days like Cyber Monday. Even aspects of recent technology are becoming obsolete and replaced by stripped down and simpler versions of their predecessors; internet blogging is dying a slow death, the fly by fly updates on twitter have dominated, where people can instantly read complaints about the salad that someone had at McDonald’s.
The barriers are coming down in this world, because technology is so very pervasive. The world’s response to Babel is for everyone to learn English, since the language is easy to learn compared to the others such as Japanese and Arabic. The people of today dabble in many different things, Generation Z is geared to become a generation filled with jack-of-all-trades, where anyone can plug in to any situation and contribute work.
This individual oriented culture will ultimately refine itself to the point that all black hole individuals have become modular beings within a society. Just like the English language itself, putting certain people together will be like assembling certain letters to form words. Industry, niches, and specialists will be a thing of the past when skill sets become more varied within a single employee; the modern industrial revolution will produce standardized people.
But if the individual becomes standardized and modular, does that mean that the individual is artificial? Would we call people who use robotic limbs to replace lost ones, artificial people? And if so, would this apply to people who regenerate lost limbs and organs if stem cell research were to one day become commercialized? Technology, which is constantly being reinvented, is getting smaller and smaller. And although parodies on the shrinking size of Apple’s iPod units are amusing, it does hold a certain truth of where technology is headed: that one day technology will exist all around us, but out of sight. If this becomes reality, does that also mean that our reality will become artificial as well?
What does this mean for architecture?
More specifically, aside from designing buildings that are modular and technology integrated, where is this modular individual culture taking architecture? Perhaps buildings will no longer be in plain sight; just as how technology becomes seamless in our environments, why not buildings as well? Maybe the means of doing so might be to visibly hide the buildings so that facing a street elevation becomes watching a projected scene of what were to exist in the absence of the very buildings placed there. Or perhaps it means that architecture will biologically mimic locally existing natural systems in terms of structure, operation, and use to an extent where it blends in with those natural systems. Is this then, considered artificial?
Architecture will irrefutably follow wherever technology goes. But creator should also be wary of creation, because although their uses can be amazing and entertaining, we tend to forget that they are merely tools for us to control, not the other way around. We should be careful not to let the common extension of self be assigned to tangible forms manifested within wires, buttons, and monitors. Technology should be seen like a wild bronco to tame, meaning that it should be assimilated responsibly. So how will this affect our lifestyle?
“Space may be the final frontier, but it’s made in a Hollywood basement.”
At least that’s what the Red Hot Chili Peppers say. And they’re right.
But given the direction of the times, the validity of that statement may soon be outdated. Will environments also become artificial? What if space can be created in everyone’s basement? It may not necessarily mean the conditions of space are physically present, but they can most definitely be simulated. Add astronaut to the skill set of the individual, along with architect, musician, graphic designer, and movie director.
Simulation may even be commercialized further to the point where vacationers can experience destinations inside a simulation room thousands of miles away from the actual site. The term “staycation,” will be given an entirely new meaning. Consumers can make use of simulation rooms to become an extension or an experimental laboratory for their imaginations. “Do I have what it takes to climb Mount Everest? Can I run with the bulls? If I were to make Jay Leno and Conan O'Brien fight, who would win? What if I fought Jay Leno?”
Simulation can also be applied to benefit us in how we learn. What if the future of learning for children were in simulation rooms, where they can run and experience up close the same lessons which the children of today learn sitting in classrooms? Imagine a student being able to stand next to Guy Montag while he burns books in Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451 or watch Ralph and Jack struggle for leadership in William Golding’s Lord of the Flies or feel the tension between the American man and Jig in Ernest Hemmingway’s Hills Like White Elephants. What if the next soldier learns the merits of honor and value of life while experiencing the Battle of Thermopylae, or the value of teamwork and self sacrifice through other simulated battles? Perhaps disaster prone communities can prepare people by simulating disasters?
Simulation can also benefit us in how we live. Forget spending hours on the internet reading CNET or Consumer Report product reviews, what if we can just go into our simulation room and play with the product virtually? No longer do we have to make returns because we took the risk of ordering a small and not a medium or because we thought we would look great in orange. What if during cold winter days, a jogger can just adjust his environment and jog around Central Park right inside his warm living room? Living in the city may be too cooped up for some, so they change the insides of their rooms so they can sleep in the great outdoors or perhaps seasonal affective disorder can be cured by changing what is displayed through your windows?
Simulation in the working environment will reap endless benefits as well. Imagine training employees who deal with clients, to become more proficient when speaking, putting them in business meeting scenarios where the client is furious or uninterested, forcing the trainees to figure a way to handle such cases. Perhaps that could also be a tool for employers during interviews. Customer services can then visually instruct callers how to fix that buggy modem at home. Employees can have Casual Thursday everyday in a dress code enforcing work environment because they are projected wearing business suits. The break room may be redefined as a team building room, as it can be changed into any scenario for employees to interact. No longer can your boss say that there isn’t any budget to throw a paintball party for Dwight’s birthday. Office pranks will be redefined as well.
Aside from addressing fully interactive environments, architecture might also have to start addressing the concept of portability –not only for utilities, but structures and the sense of an environment as well. Taking this idea of “plug and play” further, what if architecture led to instant structures, deployable spaces, or even to a larger scale, like portable communities? The depths of space and Earth’s waters are the final frontiers for architecture to explore. Space colonies and underwater colonies may be archetypes to heavily consider if man can no longer adapt to the environment in which he ruined. And if he ruined it, will man just simulate Earth all over again and take it wherever he goes?
Your beginning kinda made me think about how architects at one point in time were referred to as master builders because way back when the architect served not only to design the building to be built, but also acted as the contractor, ensuring the construction of the building was built as per their own specifications, as well as the engineer who not only did all the empirical structural calculations, but also had to design and fabricate the tools and machines used to assemble the building.
ReplyDeletePhew. Huge ass run on sentence.
Anyways, since then, the role of the master builder has been scaled back to that of the architect, who merely designs the building and produces a document packet, but (usually) outsources structural calculations to an engineering firm (especially on larger jobs), and even usually gets a contractor (or the client does, rather) to enact the construction of the building, who utilizes existing machines and materials to bring the project into fruition, rather than creating all new, probably untested machinery.
Hooray for double run-ons.
It would seem that our role (in the future), just as everyone else's roles, will start to smear together into more blurred definitions, as you state in your opening. Even our roles as designers are being circumvented by the release of Google Sketchup, which as you know, is deemed "the CAD program for non-CAD people." Any schmo can now develop what we are being trained to do because of it (with varying degrees of success).
I forget where I'm going with this, but I think it's concurrence with what you're saying. I'm also assuming I'm to run out of space to type soon, so I'll just start a new post and read on.
I disagree with your assessment of English being one of the most simple languages to learn, as it has proven (through its little foibles and nuances) to actually be one of the hardest.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I believe your assumption that everyone can do anything (and I may be contradicting my earlier comment about google sketchup making us useless, primarily because I omitted this one key factor), may only hold true for some individuals. I believe that intelligence will play a crucial part in ones' ability to utilize every gizmo to replace other people; not knowing how to do simple google searches will most certainly prevent a person from taking advantage of cyber monday deals, and then they will have to go and trample the wal-mart employees on the morrow following Thanksgiving once again.
I also feel that desire may play a small role in the ability of the everyman to make use of all the technologies available to them. Simply put, ignorance is bliss. Once the layman takes on the role of designing the house they live in, they also take on the responsibility of its integrity. If it falls on their head, who do they sue? At least in America, the average person is incredibly litigious solely for the fact that they are not willing to accept the fact that they are at fault; it is not their fault they turned their iPod 20 decibels above deafening, it's Apple's fault, and now that individual wants 20 million from Apple.
And they have already gotten it. Since then, all iPods released have had lower maximum volume settings.
Starts to make me wonder if in fact we do move ahead into a culture where we get locked in our homes all day by the robots we built to protect us simply because that is the only way they can protect us from ourselves. And also: we will all end up leaving the theater wanting classic Chuck Taylor Converse sneakers. Goddammit.
At this rate, I may never make the end of your timeline, Mike. It's a good piece for discussion, though.
Also: nobody shop at Wal-mart.