Neo-Nature | Neo-Wilderness

[Image: "Howl" (2007) by Amy Stein; from The Altered Landscape edited by Ann M. Wolfe]

Nature / wilderness are human inventions. We put them on the fringes of our inhabitation because we've defined them as separate entities. We like the idea of both because through them we believe we understand where we come from and they serve as a datum of where we need to be, how we need to live.

Nature makes us feel good.

Nature is a connection.

Nature is green.

Green equals healthy.

It's hard to argue with these statements because my intuition assigns similar value. But if we were to remove the notion of nature and wilderness from our vocabulary what are we left with? What arguments of sustainability and ecological design can we have? If climate change cannot be defined as a human or natural condition does this alter perception and mode of response? Contemporary understanding of the terms "nature" and "wilderness" might be stated as:

Wilderness is mostly experienced through media.

True wilderness is frightening.

Wilderness provides wildlife habitat.

Wilderness and nature can only be visited by people.

Computers are as natural as a wetland, technology as natural as ecology. Geographer David Harvey writes:

There is nothing inherently unnatural about a built environment such as Manhattan, neither is there anything inherently natural about any landscaped environments. Both the landscape and the urban operate as systems organised around the exchange, processing and distribution of life and matter within contexts which are immanently social, political, and economic, and do so interdependently  to form larger ecologies which are not only environmental, but also social, subjective and historically contingent.

[Image: Gold nanoparticles, courtesy of Georgia Tech]

In nature we identify a healthy organism with growth, but growth cannot exist without waste. But the "non-human" nature has evolved to metabolize all waste, and all byproducts of growth are reintroduced into the system. Cities in this way act very similarly to organisms in relation to growth. If we were to look at a time lapse video of NYC starting 100 yrs. ago this would be very evident, yet we view our waste as a dirty little secret of consumption and production, and not a natural byproduct of a well-functioning healthy city.

Without getting too deep into the origins of man's earthly dominion I ask these questions to challenge the idea of pristine nature in regard to landscape architecture, urbanism, and design responses to reclaimed land, in particularly, landscapes of waste. If we equate waste as growth we can look for a moment at landfill, in particular the well documented developing project of Fresh Kills Park, imagined through Field Operations.

A critique of Fresh Kills by John May in an essay [and another by Mario Ballestros] parallels some of our thinking, in that attempts by landscape architects to return to an idyllic vision of the "bird's in a meadow" depiction has put a stranglehold on what marginal landscapes, or urban parks should/could be. Or even if the use of the term "park" is a appropriate connotation for every public open space condition. Ballestros quoting May writes:

In the urbanism of Fresh Kills, before and after closure, a series of enormous corrective measures and technological “fixes” (along with minor changes in the official rhetoric) are supposed to heal and cleanse and erase the ugly from the site, leaving a landscape that can be consumed without guilt as the “wholly fantastical Photoshop collages of upper-middle class recreational enjoyment” of the proposal demonstrate. One has a nagging sense of this whole idea of a place set back on the right track, and healing itself back to normal is something of a hoax, “a remarkably compelling lie, beautifully rendered, but a lie nonetheless.”

And May again:

There was no acknowledgement of the terrible environmental legacy the landfill had left. Only blind faith in a picture of rescued nature that had been draped both across its unholy terrain and over our collective consciousness.

What interests me about May's writing is a need to challenge the nurturing motherly qualities of so much of contemporary park design. They are safe and green, comforting, depicted through renderings for all walks of life, revitalizing even.

[Hylozoic Ground by Phillip Beesley]

Could we not achieve other positive responses of the human condition through landscapes of fear, danger, and the sublime of the vast? In the same manner that wilderness once evoked these senses, the dark emptiness of the forest, or the scale of the mountain could be designed on Fresh Kills. Imagine massive canyons of bacteria solidified landfill, glowing at dusk through bio-luminescence which responds to toxicity levels within the layers of ground. Heat produced from the breakdown of organic material provides opportunities for microclimates, exotic plantings resilient even in winter disperse the landscape. Cooler moist temperatures mix with warmer pockets creating mist and fog, obscuring the occupants sense of space and time. Upon the massive artificial mountain, the view of the not so distant city becomes clear, but to be able to return is still unsure. Like true wilderness, predatory animals have been re-introduced and all senses must be active to negotiate their presence. There are no soccer fields, and you have never felt more alive.

The metabolizing of waste happens within the landform through bio-tech soil injection [bacteria] and protocell deploying geotextiles which alternate through seen and unseen as they move through the site. Methane capturing architecture is integrated both physically and visually so that the occupant understands the relationship of the living but artificial tectonic transforming under one's feet.

This is an idea of a Neo-Wilderness, taking what we understand of idyllic nature and assimilating that into the margins of urbanisation.  These are the zones where growth ends and waste begins to form a spatial condition to experience all that is sublime of the technological capabilities of man and the resiliency of all living organisms.

Metabolic Tectonic I

[Image by Vince Guallart. Denia Mountain.]

My recent work at RISD has led me to a final proposal in which I will be looking at the formal and chemical transformation of waste heaps to build a new landscape tectonic, particularly using the deployment of protocell and soil bio-technology.

RISD has dominated the schedule as of late so posting has been sparse, but this will begin a series of posts on my exploration and research of metabolic landform.

We'd like to consider a post-natural agenda that accepts the implausibility of recovering a pristine version of nature, but understand that the instinct of nature still exists within us, and around us. In the construction of our habitat, let us move beyond the role of landscape as a decorative device, or merely pragmatic sustainable infrastructure. A new framework can act as a catalyst for change, for a co-evolution of nature and man, progressing us towards non-autonomous landscapes that emphasize and value the inseparability of ourselves from the environment.

By constructing through the deployment of protocell technology we have the capacity to create devices that co-evolve with surrounding environmental conditions, metabolizing with that condition to establish a new landscape typology. This new metabolic landscape typology will make the once or soon to be un-inhabitable, habitable. Most importantly, this is a low-biotech solution, which uses ubiquitous materials that are available, durable, and affordable throughout the world..

Landfills and waste heaps are a landscape stratum that demarcates the human condition. Both sublime and tragic in their colossalness, they present a severe environmental detriment, but also an opportunity to use the remediation as a process to utilize its massive scale in creating a habitable condition.

One adequate and seemingly successful transformation of the landfill is through burial and park creation. This however is only a surface treatment, leaving a potentially collapsible landform, CO2 emission, and leachate [trash juice] which inevitably penetrates insufficient protective liners, and enters the groundwater system.

We will be looking at the potential of protocells, which have the capability to be chemically programmed to respond to certain environmental conditions. Through the design and development of a skeletal fabric structure as the form work for landfill, artificial landform is constructed. The landform however is not static. Stored protocells from the skeletal fabric are released and begin to chemically lithify the waste and leachate, preventing its release into the groundwater, and creating a structural landscape typology.

There is the potential for additional benefits of artificial landform generation beyond the obvious management and remediation of landfill. As our climate warms, and sea levels rise, our landscape systems need to adapt. With a new capability to build up quickly, we can begin to inhabit cooler atmospheres and avoid the encroaching sea rise. Micro-climates in interstice of landform can respond to a multitude of extreme atmospheric conditions.

At the moment we are not sure that this is even possible, but in reality, anything is possible, so we will proceed.

RISD Facade Media Festival

We're pretty excited for an open student proposal event to be put on by the AIAS here at RISD; The Media Facade Festival:

This Spring RISD’s newly formed American Institite of Architecture Students(AIAS) brings you the Facade Media Festival – an event exploring building scale projections, the relationship between media and space. This event will follow an afternoon symposium presented by the architecture deparment, Teaching Architecture Beyond the Desktop Horizon.

The event will showcase selected works projected onto the north facade of the BEB, viewed from the parking lot. Performances, visualizations, installations, interventions, any media. The AIAS is accepting submissions until April 1st. (no joke) Submissions might engage questions of architecture/space, technology/media, scale, light etc. Sound accompaniments are welcome. Proposals should account for a 2-10 minute performance. The projection dimensions are roughly 100’ x 75’. Along with the performances, selected student projects will be documented and profiled by some of our media partners.

Projection has been a particular interest to DUS for it's capabilities in spatial context. While contemporary projection technology is powerful in the distance it can cover, we're really looking to advancements in 3D. Add sensing, sound, and light, and our ideas of space manipulation and interaction enter new territories.

We will be at the event and feature some of the nights highlights as well as possibly look at projection work from today's artists.

Zones of Contention

[Image by Adam E. Anderson]

Zones of contention, borders, and transboundary parks have continued to be an interest of mine. Recent rising tensions and legislature in regard to the US/Mexican border and illegal immigration render this particular zone a terribly awesome area of conflict.

The idea of reinforcing the border with 2,000 miles of physical barrier seems an impossible idea, and futile. By the time one generation feels they have the solution, and a construction is implemented, the next generation comes to power, equipped with their own ideologies, new circumstances, and technologies.

[Image by Adam E. Anderson]
I wanted to share this hybrid drawing study I've been working on that aims to construct a narrative of what this border zone might look like after several generation’s failed attempts to construct what I am calling “The Great Wall of America."

During the initial constructed perspective process, the narrative of the place began to develop. I saw “new and improved” additions being made to pre-existing wall structures. “Immigration Sectors” were added to cantilevering platforms and “Great Towers of Future Energy Harvesting” replaced the cantilever all together in some sections.

The material might also hint at ownership and transitions of power. Perhaps a militant regime constructed the original wall platforms, then, discovering a natural energy source in the area the wall became privatized and massive energy harvesting structures were erected.

[Image by Adam E. Anderson]

The first drawing's intention was to portray a period of transition and lawlessness. This marks the beginning of a new frontier where few permanent inhabitants exist and power struggles over resources make for a hostile environment. The following two depict an evolution of that transition, homesteading and inhabitation.

The entourage was carefully chosen to depict how the wall becomes inhabited and ideas of culture, but, some of this was intentionally left ambiguous, so that each viewer can construct their own narrative with the characters and components provided. This I hope might challenge each of us to reflect on the arguable relevancy of the contemporary idea of "border." Furthermore, is there a process for landscape intervention that can be deployed on all zones of contention that might resolve conflict?



Update on Thursday, February 24, 2011 at 05:00PM by Adam E. Anderson

Nice read elaborating on our border discussion here over at dpr-barcelona.

The Agency of Botanical Counter Terrorism

[Photo: Noah Shachtman]

Plants are living. If they do not receive one of their requirements for life they physically change alerting a caregiver if present the need for intervention. This ability naturally has environmental quality implications. If a plant is subjected to an overdose of pollution it signifies that maybe things are not suitable for humans as well.

The unfortunate part is that this is not a real time process and does not really allow anyone to react appropriately. But what if plants were trained to visually respond to their environments immediately? Even enhanced to broaden or even focus the elements to which they responded to.

We were excited to find a research group at the Colorado State University who is very close to making this happen. As reported on Wired, the research team has successfully injected "receptor" proteins into a plants DNA which makes the plant turn white in reaction to proximity of certain chemicals often used for bomb making.

As Wired, illustrated, anyone attempting to transport these chemicals near one of the receptor plants a botanical alarm would be sounded as all them would immediately turn to white. They could be placed in all public places susceptible to terrorist attacks.

Does this present a potentially new niche for a landscape architect? Counter terrorism through landscape, through horticulture? The design of public spaces arranged to unknowingly filter people through stages of botanical surveillance, measuring possible hidden threats of all kinds. There are definite positive advantages to this alarm system but do complications with privacy rights propose problems down the road?

Imagine receptor plants becoming the common choice for urban parks because of their pollution detecting capabilities. But this science becomes more advanced, more variable in what they can detect. Plants that were once used to detect "terrorist" chemicals can now detect data streams through wifi signals, ethnicity, language, sexual orientation. Parks that were once places of refuge become, unbeknownst to the general public big brother surveillance zones.

A less dystopic vision, is the ability to compose the visual change in response to other plants and elemental factors. Certain plants placed in proximity to each other begin to change in color as one detects the other. Imagine being able to see the actual process of pollination, a plant illuminated each time it interacts with a bee or butterfly.

Either way, this will be exciting research to follow.