The "Augmentation" of Reality
Can the convenience of a metropolis really replace what we
know to be the reality of life? In the three examples Koolhaas refers to, there
is an example of architecture replacing and improving upon what was already a part
of the naturally occurring world. This “augmentation of reality” and “one-stop
shop” is as much of a curse as it is a blessing. There is no replacement for
the experience of a true sunset, there is no replacement for the experience of
a sunny day on the beach or a moonlit excursion, and a week in the country
would be far more beneficial than a night in the theater – and good Lord, who
in their right mind would want to eat oysters in boxing gloves? (I know it’s
just an idea.)
I agree with you on the idea that there is no replacement of a real sunset, as I think most would. However, if we all agree that the original is better, why do we try to imitate it in the first place? Is our man-made attempt just to prove to ourselves that we can imitate the original or do we do it to try to improve on the reality?
ReplyDeleteMaybe the imitation is an attempt at mass marketing an item. Not everyone can see a sunset over water each evening. Commercialization of a unique entity. I think it's an attempt to converge all things good into one location where they don't naturally exist.
ReplyDeleteI hope those oysters are shucked before you get them.
I agree with you that there could be no replacement for the beauty of nature but with architecture it is hard to not try and take from these natural phenomenons and let them inspire in places where one might not be able to get the full effect of the real thing.
ReplyDeleteThe idea of the sunset doesn't bother me as much as the idea of replacing playing golf at an actual course. Either way, I agree with your notion. I think Koolhaas has some very valid and interesting points, when it comes to the utilization of constraints to his advantage; but when it comes to replacing for the sake of replacing, the question is why and what is too much?
ReplyDeleteThe idea that there is no replacement for certain experiences holds truth today. But as fast as technology is advancing, what if, sometime soon, our senses can be fooled so much that the augmentation is a 'reality'? For example, the quality of electronic screens has exponentially improved over the last 5 years, think about the possibilities coming over the next 10 or 20 years if we continue on the same path.
ReplyDeleteI believe that one day, reality will be able to be replaced…maybe to the point that we won’t know reality when we experience it. Our brains are severely limited in comparison to technology (in most ways...not all), and the human mind is too easily misled.
But I suppose it helps us sleep if we remain hopeful.