Two Last Words _ Forrest

I don’t think this class should be represented in two words. If anything the class can be summed up with one word from week 3: system. Each other word being a permutation or typology (or ecology) of the system. But since we have to discuss two words, the second word I am going to pick—green—was not an assigned word. I think in the comparison of the two words is where much of the future of architecture will be decided.

For architecture to have efficacy it needs to respond to the forces involved in both its inception and use. Many systems shape both the cities and buildings. Many of the words we have discussed in this class are either those systems (infrastructure and media) or the result of these forces (emergence, slums, fabric, utopias, hybrids, etc.). Interestingly, we did not discuss any word having to do with the abstract system of money, which has the greatest effect on how a city or building is constructed. Nonetheless, understanding these forces as a set of interrelated forces is crucial in a world that is increasingly networked at a global scale. The word system implies nascent relationships to be uncovered and discussed—for me this was really the essence of the class.

However, when things become increasingly complex and systems tangle into an overwhelming web, people fall back on a singular word. Green is such an example. The word is ubiquitous in media; just today I read about how Steven Jobs plans to make Apple more “green.” The logo is a grandma smith apple green imprinted in a recycled looking paper, an unsettling mixture of branding and corporate green washing that is (at least superficially) immediately understandable. The word “green” has been subjected to such reductions, as its immediate symbolism to the public is its greatest strength and weakness: while it represents honest intentions its easy application can be hugely deceptive. The reality behind the idea of “green” is that, no matter how complex systems become, we live in a closed system. At a global scale, we are increasingly seeing the social, political and environmental effects of ignoring this fact.

As architects, we must constantly question both our understanding of the systems at play as well as how these systems are understood and evaluated. I am skeptical that any design can fully master all forces at play, but I am even more skeptical that a (green) checklist can effectively deal answer this inadequacy. When dealing with cities and architecture, understanding a word’s power—either as a set of relationships (system) or a representation of a collective idea (green)--is essential in the practice of architecture.