4: The parts in my theater is the theater of my parts

In this course we have talked a lot about how the individual is being re-produced over and over again by the other. The thing/part is constituted by the reflection upon other things/parts and are intertwined in a larger matrix of bits and pieces. This relationship is something that I find interesting and is a possible connection between gender – technology theories and the work we do in studio #5

Cute fit

This relationship could be exemplified as a very straightforward architectural topic, the one of how things fit or don´t fit together. How one bit is connected to the other, physical – materialized, and what this connection or non-connection is doing to the individual bits. In my project, for example, we are dealing with a connection that we like to call cute fit. The cute fit could be described as a connection between to bits that are not completely accurate. The bits does´nt really fit into each other. There is small caps of inaccuracies generating spaces and figures. It is a connection that is trying to connect but not quite being able to in the stereotype/ accurate / tight fit. Perhaps it is possible to see this connection/ joint as the one that is doing the not aspected / wanted / It is the not so logically justifiable solution

This pieces / bits / parts / things / objects is being formulated by the larger network of information / bits / parts. The individual bits is effecting the other generating a kind of call & respons-matrix. One object mirroring / reflecting its characteristics upon the other. These bits are not really forming a hierarchy but more of a flat network where each individual part possesses the possibility of taking any position in the network. There is a fluidity that relate to the way identity is formulated today, as Judy Wajcman writes about post-traditional network society. Identity is formulated by our consumption rather that our social relations of work. The social networks are more elaborate and if we could talk about post-internet we see an individual being constituted in a non-physical environment where your avatar can adapt what characteristic you choses. I can choose to be man, transgender, woman, young, old, pink haired or blond and so on. The old binary system is being played out by a more fluid identity that has the possibility of endless change. Post-internet is offering a new way of understanding what the individual is. We could perhaps draw a paralell to how cultural expressions today appears to be more and more abstract. The old sub-cultures are replaced by a multiplicity of expressions combined in different ways, maybe we could talk about a kind of ”Allkonstverk” ”Gesamtkustwerk”

Perhaps we can use this ideas to challenge architecture on not only a theoretical level but also on a physical level.

What is the achtitect in this network, a recipe maker or a ‘world’ – representer? Maybe a carpenter or a machine operator.

How is the architecture materialized and what do the tools do in the network. If the pieces / parts / bits is in a flux the tools and method can just as easily as the thing being produced become the output architecture.

What is the physical response to post-traditional network society?

/Kristina Sundin

Advertisement