Is Technology the Enabler of Junkspace?
"Although its individual parts are the outcome of brilliant inventions, lucidly planned by human intelligence, boosted by infinite computation, their sum spells the end of Enlightenment, its resurrection as farce, a low-grade purgatory... Junkspace is the sum total of our current achievement; we have built more than did all previous generations put together, but somehow we do not register on the same scales."
Koolhaas presents an intriguing dichotomy here between junkspace and modern technology; our modern technological advances are not being used to create new, revolutionary spaces, but to produce this detrimental "junkspace".
In the Modern architecture movement, technological advances were given artistic application; the new materials and methods of construction advanced the practice and theory of architecture. But what are we doing with the almost fantastical technology available to us in our modern age? Building bigger, cheaper, and faster; building junkspace.
Perhaps it is an idealistic thought, but I would like to think that as society progresses in science and technology, our own lives are being improved. And this is typically the case; there are ceaseless technological advances that allow us to perform almost every conceivable task faster, easier, and more efficiently. But in the case of junkspace, technology has just given rise to a "product of an encounter of an escalator and air-conditioning, conceived in an incubator of sheetrock". Rather than improving and advancing the field of architecture, the technology is enabling a degenerated quality of space. And quality of space, along with the phenomenological effects it has on its inhabitants, is [in my opinion] the essence of architecture.
Is the solution to this simply a thorough reevaluation of technical application in the field of architecture and its effects? or is something more radical needed to overturn this era of junkspace?
Koolhaas presents an intriguing dichotomy here between junkspace and modern technology; our modern technological advances are not being used to create new, revolutionary spaces, but to produce this detrimental "junkspace".
In the Modern architecture movement, technological advances were given artistic application; the new materials and methods of construction advanced the practice and theory of architecture. But what are we doing with the almost fantastical technology available to us in our modern age? Building bigger, cheaper, and faster; building junkspace.
Perhaps it is an idealistic thought, but I would like to think that as society progresses in science and technology, our own lives are being improved. And this is typically the case; there are ceaseless technological advances that allow us to perform almost every conceivable task faster, easier, and more efficiently. But in the case of junkspace, technology has just given rise to a "product of an encounter of an escalator and air-conditioning, conceived in an incubator of sheetrock". Rather than improving and advancing the field of architecture, the technology is enabling a degenerated quality of space. And quality of space, along with the phenomenological effects it has on its inhabitants, is [in my opinion] the essence of architecture.
Is the solution to this simply a thorough reevaluation of technical application in the field of architecture and its effects? or is something more radical needed to overturn this era of junkspace?
I tend to think that junkspace has always been and will always be part of our built realm. While we weren't around in the 60s I am sure there was junkspace then and still will be in 2050. Like you said, technology is meant to make our lives easier and in a sense junkspace is built because building techonologies have made construction easier and faster, just maybe not better. I think it is our duty as future architects and that of our industry peers to prove that better spaces can be made using better materials that can still be budget friendly. We have to learn how to work in a money-driven, budgeted world in order for great architecture to at least outnumber junkspace.
ReplyDeleteThe use of technology, in architecture and beyond, has always been to make human life easier. However in our constant search for simplicity we have begun to reach a point where new, different, and change are perceived as negatives because they slow down the task-oriented lifestyle by which many live. I believe that socially we are beginning to turn a corner towards complexity that is currently lacking in our our lives and architecture. There is an increasing value placed on craft, experience and exposure that in particular our generation seems to enjoy. Partly nostalgic and partly driven by the sameness to which we are accustomed, I believe we have a greater appreciation for complexity that will begin to compete with the social desire for ease that has driven us to today. It may take time, but if we can mature as a culture we can embrace the challenge of repurposing junkspace.
ReplyDeleteI think technology enables us to build faster. Open-source architecture starts to emerge and we all begin to think that we are all architects (of games, buildings, city planning, laws, etc). I think it is safe to say that technology enables us to create junkspace faster, but junkspace is not a result of technology. (It is not an if, then relationship.) That being said, technology has enabled designers to create beautiful spaces. I find it hard to believe that Koolhaas never walked into a piece of new architecture that he was not awed by.
ReplyDeleteI have a hard time with the idea of technology and its relationship to junkspace directly. Builders in the past used the most current or accessible technology of the time. We don't generally criticize classical architecture; instead we are awed by it. A version of Koolhaas's criticism could be applied then - the use of technology allowed for a different type of excess.