Placeholder Image

字幕表 動画を再生する

  • Good evening.

  • My name is Pierre Belanger.

  • I'm co-director of the MDes program with Kiel Moe.

  • We'd like to welcome you to the spring annual event of the MDes

  • program.

  • And we really appreciate you taking time out

  • of your schedules.

  • We're always trying to figure out

  • what is the sweet spot that you can

  • have a lecture in the spring, where

  • people don't start falling off and start getting exhausted.

  • So we really appreciate you taking time out

  • of your schedules to be with us, also

  • for a special lecture with Keller Easterling.

  • We'd like to provide a brief introduction

  • to Keller's lecture, and also in the context of the MDes program

  • that Kiel and I, as well as a group of coordinators

  • have been really working with Mohsen over the past few years,

  • developing a postgraduate research vision.

  • We've been trying to ask a few questions

  • over the past couple of years with a number

  • of different speakers.

  • The central one is this idea of what does support urban life.

  • And I'm going to try to capture your attention

  • against the background of these really repugnant images.

  • You don't have to look at me.

  • You can just listen.

  • What's been particularly important also

  • is to be able to answer this question in really

  • practical, and also at the same time, undisciplined ways.

  • Pedagogically, we've also been exploring

  • the role of representation as part

  • of the role of research as a way to advance

  • the postgraduate environment conducive to advance research

  • studies dealing with what we could consider the design

  • arts and the design sciences.

  • In that light, we're also looking

  • to try to understand how do we extend

  • and also stretch knowledge from the platform

  • of the core disciplines themselves.

  • Towards this effort, last year, we received blogger Jeff Menaw,

  • as well as designer Christien Meindertsma,

  • who spoke about her book PIG 05049.

  • And they both captured our imagination, as well as

  • our attention, asking fundamental questions

  • about the mediation of our environments

  • and the measures of our research methods--

  • how do we do research in design?

  • This year, we also advanced these pursuits

  • with films and filmmakers, including

  • the work of Jennifer Baichwal and Ed Burtynsky.

  • Almost the same time last year, their film Watermark

  • that was screened for the first time in Boston.

  • They explored the scales, technologies, infrastructures

  • of urbanization.

  • And earlier this fall, with filmmaker Raoul Peck

  • with this film Fatal Assistance, which

  • profiled the failure of international humanitarian aid

  • following the 2010 earthquake in Haiti.

  • So through these creators, innovators, Kiel and I,

  • along with the coordinators of the MDes program,

  • have been trying to explore also how video, film,

  • time-based representation factors a pivotal role

  • in the communication of research and dissemination of design

  • across the world, this possibility of being

  • able to make design and the communication of it

  • searchable and scalable.

  • Launching our 30th anniversary year

  • since the creation of the MDes program in 1985 and 1986,

  • we were fortunate to receive Keller Easterling this evening,

  • who will be in conversation with Charles Waldheim,

  • chair of the Department of Landscape Architecture;

  • John Irving, professor of Landscape Architecture,

  • as well as founding coordinator the urbanism landscape

  • and ecology concentration of the MDes program in 2009, 2010.

  • I'd like to say a few words about the context

  • of Keller Easterling's work over, really, the past two

  • decades.

  • There was a long list of reasons to invite you.

  • So Shantel asked me to contain this to five minutes.

  • So I'm going to try.

  • I think it's important to understand the work of Keller

  • Easterling over the past two decades

  • as emerging out of an extremely turbulent era

  • of the early 1990s and the late 1980s,

  • where the shock of digitalism and deconstructivism

  • that mark a kind of a [speaking french] transition

  • was nothing short of both structurally turbulent and also

  • at the same time, surprisingly, has

  • been overlooked as an era of tremendous exhaustive and

  • exhausting transformation.

  • As one of its most reflexive as well as preemptive thinkers,

  • Keller Easterling's work transcends

  • this groundbreaking change that was

  • occurring in the early 1990s.

  • Not only did she live in or did she

  • pass through this major period of transformation,

  • but in hindsight, she can be seen

  • as the soft heroine of a spatial avant garde

  • that we're now just beginning to understand two decades later.

  • As writer, urbanist, and architect at Yale,

  • we can argue that her work belongs not only in the fields

  • and forms of professional disciplines as we know them,

  • but we could also propose that her work belongs in an entirely

  • different time zone.

  • Influenced by early collaboration

  • with film archivist Rick Prelinger in New York,

  • her collaboration on the laser disc on suburbia, Call it Home.

  • Keller Easterling's preemptive work

  • on the landscape of interconnectivity

  • was later compiled in a book, Organization Space,

  • published by MIT Press in 1999.

  • It profiled researchers Patrick Geddes,

  • Benton MacKaye, which remarkably,

  • yet not unsurprisingly, comes out

  • of the shadows of the school of deconstructivist

  • though of the early 1990s that essentially marginalized

  • and overlooked environments, overlooked ecologies

  • and infrastructures, scales at which

  • can be recognized in her contemporary adoption

  • of landscape as support and system

  • for contemporary urban life.

  • Today, Easterling's observational empiricism

  • is not only accelerated algorithmically

  • over the past two decades; it's grown in significance and kind

  • with two follow-up books, Enduring Innocence, which

  • chronicles the rise of new spatial products,

  • as well as the rise of infrastructural effects

  • in the book that she'll speak about tonight, Extrastatecraft.

  • Retroactively-- and I realize-- I turned the page-- I only

  • have a half a page left-- retroactively,

  • the importance of Keller's work can also be seen on two levels.

  • She's attempted to overtly and indirectly correct

  • the course set in motion more than 40 years

  • go by so-called revolutionary architecture

  • of the 20th century, a course that, according to postmodern

  • theorist Charles Jencks proposed, and I quote,

  • "has not been healthy or good for the environment."

  • I'm quoting out of an article from Architectural Review

  • that Charles Jencks did on the evolution of architecture.

  • Reporting on the sexist and dogmatic arrogance

  • of the 20th century architect, according to Jencks in 1999--

  • and I quote again-- "the revolutionary century

  • has been dominated by men, and there are very few women

  • among the 400 protean creators gathered from other writers."

  • He's specifically referencing the diagram

  • that has been so famously recycled and been reiterated

  • in four or five different occasions as part of his work.

  • Moving forward-- and this is a rare moment of self-reflection

  • as part of Jenck's work on his own work-- Jencks

  • proposes-- and I quote again, from 1999--

  • "an urbanism both more feminine and coherent

  • would have been far superior to the over-rationalized and badly

  • related boxes that have formed our cities."

  • That's the end of the quote.

  • So between the bank art traditions of geography,

  • once considered, early beginning of the 20th century,

  • as girl science, and American cultural geographers,

  • such as Denis Cosgrove, JB Jackson,

  • Keller's work can be seen as injecting the field of urbanism

  • and the system of landscape as geographic subject

  • of critical importance by making a transitive, transdisciplinary

  • leap into the fields of design.

  • This leap is extremely important to understand

  • as part of her work over the past two decades.

  • And if her work seems to fall in between certain cracks,

  • it's only because of the distance

  • that certain divides have between disciplines

  • of architecture, economy, ecology, anthropology,

  • and engineering.

  • Easterling's eye crystallizes as what

  • preeminent human geographer Carl O'Sauer saw in 1963 in his book

  • Land and Life as the value of, what he quotes,

  • "being unspecialized," where her synthetic and telescopic

  • optic has enabled us to see urbanization

  • as both the stratification or the strata

  • and synthesis of power relations expressed

  • through different skills and spaces of information.

  • And we can see that as a transition

  • from her work dealing with organization space

  • to infrastructure space.

  • In some total, her work elucidates urbanism's chaos

  • and complexity, translating it for us-- and again,

  • quoting Sauer-- into a vocabulary of wider

  • and clearer intelligibility and where

  • power forms its foundations.

  • So I guess we can say, as the dean

  • of infrastructural thought, Keller's work

  • reveals the very nature and essence of infrastructure

  • that's realized as part of the process

  • of infrastructural products and effects

  • in her latest book Extrastatecraft-- The

  • Power of Infrastructure Space.

  • I'd just like to finish off with a quote from her book, which

  • I think captures both the work that she's

  • done over the past two decades, but also at the same time,

  • if you listen carefully, one can begin

  • to understand how to be able to predict the next two decades.

  • I'm quoting directly from her book Extrastatecraft.

  • "Infrastructure space is a form, but not

  • like a building is a form.

  • It's an updating platform unfolding in time

  • to handle new circumstances, encoding

  • the relationships between buildings or dictating

  • logistics.

  • There are object forms, like buildings, and active forms,

  • like bits of code and the software

  • that organizes building.

  • Information resides in the often undeclared activities

  • of this software-- the protocols,

  • the routines, the schedules, choices it manifests in space.

  • Marshall McLuhan's meme, transposed to infrastructure,

  • might be "the action is the form."

  • Please join us in welcoming Keller Easterling.

  • [applause]

  • Thank you, Pierre, for that introduction.

  • It's a pleasure to be here at this excellent place

  • with these exceptional faculty and exceptional students.

  • I'm showing you a bit of urban porn here.

  • And I'm sorry that was so distracting.

  • And in many ways, the book that I just finished

  • is meant to be a book in dialogue with people like you.

  • Some of my books and writings have really been reportage.

  • But Extrastatecraft is hoping to be an adventure in thinking,

  • and one that rehearses a habit of mind about design.

  • So you all probably know that I have long

  • been working on unfocusing eyes to see not only buildings

  • with shapes and outlines, but also the almost

  • infrastructural matrix space in which buildings are suspended.

  • That's not an infrastructure of pipes and wires

  • into the ground, but something like an operating system

  • for shaping the city.

  • And it's coded with laws and econometrics and informatics

  • and global standards and formulas

  • for making spatial products.

  • You know it.

  • You know it.

  • It's the cartoon of skyscrapers and turning radii and malls

  • and resorts and franchises and parking lots and golf courses

  • and airports and airport lounges and free zones.

  • Again, not an infrastructure that's hidden, far from it--

  • Something that's pressing into view

  • and looking the same, whether it's in Texas or Taiwan,

  • and telling emotional stories about Arnold Palmer golf

  • and Beard Papa cream puffs.

  • And this is, as you know, inner Mongolia.

  • And some of the most radical changes

  • to the globalizing world have been

  • written in the language of this matrix space,

  • so much so that it's become a de facto medium of polity.

  • And you know this space is currently

  • coded by org men and World Bank yes men

  • and 28-year-old McKinsey consultants and quality

  • management specialists.

  • It's the secret weapon of some of the most powerful people

  • on Earth.

  • And sometimes, it seems like it's

  • a secret that's best kept from those of us who

  • are trained to make space.

  • No one's leading, really, with spatial variables.

  • So however unlikely it may seem, I'm

  • arguing that this space brings to our art another relevance,

  • as well as another set of aesthetic pleasures

  • and political capacities.

  • Also, for many of the most interesting thinkers

  • in the arts and sciences who are looking

  • for a more complex context in which

  • to test some of the assumptions of their supposed science

  • or their master narratives or methodologies,

  • this book offers infrastructure space

  • as a kind of test bed, a fresh test bed of evidence.

  • So not to make the mistake of seeing interdisciplinarity

  • as a diluting of our discipline, but rather

  • to see spatial studies as a crossroads of other disciples,

  • that what we know is something that those disciplines are now

  • quite curious about.

  • So the book is asking, with all those other thinkers looking

  • on, what if the world could use from us for making

  • in another register or gear?

  • We're largely trained to make object forms, like buildings,

  • and to assess them for their outline and shape.

  • And so we should.

  • And so we always will be doing that.

  • And it's a perfectly reasonable choice

  • to just only make object form, to choose that.

  • But what if there is also an artistic curiosity

  • about the active forms that are, as Pierre was

  • saying, like little bits of code in a software that actually

  • work with and empower object form

  • to determine how those objects will be organized

  • and multiplied and circulated.

  • And precisely because it's a moment where

  • we are focused on the ubiquity, even the political treachery,

  • of digital information systems, I'm

  • looking at space itself as an information system,

  • in the same way that Gregory Bateson would

  • say a man, a tree, and an ax is an information system.

  • So what if we actually do know how to hack the operating

  • system with the equivalent of a spatial software,

  • an active form of interplay that's

  • manifest in the head of the bulk of urban space?

  • And what if the more formulaic this matrix space,

  • the more difficult it is to design meaningful object form?

  • And maybe it may even be easier to design active forms,

  • to exploit the existing multipliers in that matrix

  • with amplifying effects.

  • And does this matrix space even tutor an expanded repertoire,

  • not only an expanded repertoire of form making,

  • but an expanded unorthodox approach to political activism

  • that's finding political capacities

  • latent in organization and underexploited in governance?

  • So I want to return to those questions.

  • But I just want to put some evidence on the table first.

  • Of all the spatial softwares that are currently

  • circulating around the globe in the spatial operating system,

  • a dominant software is the free zone.

  • It's the infrastructural technology

  • that the world now uses to make cities, the promotional videos

  • that are always the same.

  • They just zoom from outer space, that drop down through clouds

  • and locate a position on the Earth, which is now

  • the new center of the Earth.

  • And a deep movie trailer voice comes on

  • to list all the requisite features.

  • And stirring music accompanies a swoop

  • through cartoon skylines and resorts and suburbs and sun

  • flares.

  • This zone, what is it?

  • It's a relatively dumb enclave form.

  • And nobody really knows why we use it,

  • except that the world has become addicted to its special form

  • of incentivized urbanism.

  • It is the world's most popular contagious form, world city

  • paradigm.

  • But as a software, it's more primitive than MS-DOS.

  • But the wild mutations of this form over the last 30 years

  • I find strangely inspiring because they make a world

  • look insanely impenetrable.

  • But of course, it has ancient roots and pirate enclaves

  • and free ports.

  • But the zone mutated in the early 20th century,

  • as a US term, from an early 20th century warehousing compound

  • for storing custom free trade to a UN-promoted formula

  • for jump-starting the economies of developing countries.

  • This export processing zone, as it was called,

  • set up authorities independent from the domestic laws

  • of the host country.

  • So it provided incentives like tax exemptions

  • and foreign ownership of property

  • and streamlined customs, cheap labor, deregulation of labor

  • and environmental law.

  • And those are the same mantras that you hear the deep movie

  • trailer voice repeat, the neoliberal mantras that

  • are describing sort of someone else's freedom.

  • And while it remained in the backstage,

  • zone growth accelerated exponentially

  • after China adopted it as a market experiment.

  • And now China is kind of its own zone category,

  • employing the largest number of zone workers in the world,

  • making the zone a kind of self-fulfilling prophecy.

  • UNIDO thought that the zone would just

  • dissolve back into the economy of the host country.

  • But the opposite happened.

  • Everything wanted to locate in the zone--

  • why wouldn't it-- to enjoy this kind

  • of lubricated economic condition and the kind

  • of political quarantine.

  • The zone is kind of the perfect island

  • of corporate externalizing.

  • So then, having sort of swallowed selected programs

  • and ejected others, it's become a germ

  • of an urban epidemic that reproduces

  • glittering mimics of Dubai and Singapore and Hong Kong all

  • over the world.

  • So the zone that used to look like this or this-- this

  • is a maquiladora in Tijuana-- or this now

  • looks like this or this or this.

  • And while in the '60s there were a handful of zones in the world

  • today, there are thousands, some measured in hectares, some

  • measured in square kilometers.

  • It's still treated by the global consultancies

  • as the Shibboleth, the essential signal of entry

  • into the global marketplace.

  • It's the nexus of every global technology,

  • the place of headquartering for every global player, always

  • described as a sort of clean slate, one-stop entry

  • into the economy of a foreign country.

  • Meanwhile, in its sweatshops and dormitories--

  • and this is a particularly cleaned

  • up one-- they are still hidden, legally stabilized

  • sites of often quite grisly labor abuse.

  • And it still fails to deliver on its economic promises.

  • And yet, the zone now more and more longs to call itself,

  • or does call itself, a city.

  • Now, perhaps even more than China, you all

  • know-- you've studied it-- Dubai has

  • used the zone to distinct advantages, as you know.

  • It's an aggregate of zone enclaves

  • for almost every imaginable program, and many of them

  • calling themselves a city.

  • You know this-- Dubai Maritime City, Dubai Knowledge Village,

  • Dubai Media City, Dubai Health Care City.

  • And each has a raft of different exemptions and laws.

  • In Dubai Media City, there's something like free speech

  • for some people.

  • Dubai international city-- but it's

  • the same right around the world.

  • I've been collecting urban porn, like I showed you

  • at the beginning.

  • And I've collected hours of it as these forms

  • travel around to 130 countries in the world.

  • This is HITEC city outside of Hyderabad.

  • And now, surpassing irony, even major cities

  • and national capitals want to have their own zone

  • doppelgangers that allow state and non-state actors to use

  • each other as brand or proxy or camouflage--

  • you probably know there's this new Songdo

  • city, a kind of double of Seoul in the Incheon free trade zone,

  • based on Venice, New York, Sydney, Central Park, Canal

  • Street, World Trade Center.

  • Or really surpassing irony, Astana,

  • the newly minted capital of Kazakhstan,

  • as supposedly the center of law now in a zone.

  • This is President Nazarbayev, sort

  • of paleoGenghis competition with Dubai.

  • So the zone is a very vivid vessel

  • of extrastatecraft, the title of this book,

  • where the "extra" means outside of and in addition

  • to the state.

  • Extrastatecraft doesn't describe a post-national world,

  • but a world where the nation has a new set of sneakier partners

  • and multiple nested forms of sovereignty.

  • So the zone emerges from this as a kind of-- I

  • was just in dialogue with Saskia Sassen-- you can see it

  • almost as a kind of gear of the expulsions that she describes.

  • And it kind of emerges from that,

  • what she calls, economic cleansing,

  • as a kind of strange form of intentional community

  • with colored fountains and faith in golf.

  • And it's a place where everyone speaks

  • the esperanto of standards of quality management ease.

  • And it has fantasy resorts and palaces where petrodollars

  • can get away to relax.

  • And the videos get more and more delirious

  • as the imagery becomes more and more

  • contagious around the world.

  • [video playback]

  • -Nothing is as rare and desirable as diamonds.

  • Diamond Palace attracts magically,

  • fascinates inside and out with its scintillating architecture.

  • The inner design of the palace transforms

  • the image and emotion of the diamond onto the visitor,

  • letting them become a part of the myth of the diamond.

  • [helicopter]

  • [end playback]

  • And the organizational and political constitution

  • of the zone is always portrayed in this kind

  • of, if not extreme luxury, openness, relaxation, freedom.

  • But maintaining an autonomous control

  • over a closed loop of circumstances,

  • the zone embodies an inherently violent,

  • isomorphic disposition.

  • It's in an information paradox.

  • An enormous amount of information

  • is pulled down in these trade centers,

  • but an enormous amount of information

  • to remain information poor, a kind of special stupidity

  • that is the common tool of power.

  • And while it's extolled as an instrument

  • of economic liberalism, the zone often

  • trades a kind of state bureaucracy

  • for even more complex layers of extrastate governance

  • and market manipulation.

  • And for all its efforts to be apolitical,

  • it's in the crosshairs of global conflict.

  • And this supposed tool of economic and logistical

  • rationalization is really a perfect crucible

  • of irrationality.

  • And the next poorest country wants its mirror tiled skyline

  • at any cost.

  • We could look at another huge shift in global infrastructure

  • space by dropping down into East Africa, specifically Kenya.

  • It was one of the last places on Earth

  • to receive international fiber optic cable

  • and one of the places that's now poised

  • to experience some of the most explosive telecommunications

  • growth.

  • So in 2009, it looked like this.

  • And now it looks like this.

  • And now there are three international submarine cables.

  • The country's flush with broadband.

  • It's serving a dense population of cellphones.

  • And their cellphone ads, the telecom ads, look like this.

  • And as you know, but just to say it again, in 2000,

  • there were 750 million cell phone subscriptions

  • in the world.

  • Now there's 6.8 billion.

  • And 3/4 of them are in the developing world.

  • Mobile telephony is the world's largest shared platform.

  • Broadband infrastructure is a resource

  • that's treated like water.

  • And in Kenya, there's plenty of those 28-year-old

  • McKinsey consultants and bankers on the ground.

  • And the development expertise is spoken

  • in the languages of business and technology

  • and informatics and econometrics, all kinds

  • of metrics to link broadband to GDP to predict

  • the impacts of broadband on what they called development 2.0.

  • It's filled with jargon that you would expect.

  • And there's plenty of new entrepreneurs writing software

  • for billions of cellphones.

  • And those entrepreneurs, now that's

  • where the business models are coming from.

  • And there are entrepreneurs who know

  • how to use the cellphone as a multiplier

  • and carrier of all kinds of relationships that

  • have enormous spacial impact.

  • But the spacial consequences are somehow

  • treated as a kind of accidental byproduct of these networks.

  • Probably any urbanist worth their salt

  • would know about the relationship of a highway

  • and a railroad to the city.

  • They would know how those infrastructures territorialize.

  • But we're under-rehearsed in understanding

  • the spatial consequences of broadband and mobile telephony,

  • the fixed fiber that territorializes not

  • unlike a highway or a railroad, the atomized cloud

  • of cellphones and microwaves, and then all

  • of the switches in between, any one of which can become

  • a choke point or monopoly.

  • So digital technologies have spatial consequences,

  • but spatial technologies also have consequences

  • on digital networks.

  • And yet, no one's deliberately writing

  • the protocols that start with space

  • in the broadband technoscape.

  • And all you find is a kind of generic, outmoded zone

  • on offer.

  • So Kenya's getting that, the same-- Konza Techno

  • City or LAPSSET is treated like a good idea.

  • It's a transportation corridor between Lamu and Juba,

  • the capital of South Sudan, as will

  • be studded with zones and resorts

  • and deliver oil for refining to the coast.

  • So in a country that's poised to change the terms of urban

  • around infrastructure, they are adopting an old, potentially

  • dangerous development formula around heavy resource

  • extraction.

  • And there's more of it, more plan,

  • like Machakos New City or new Kenya-China Economic Zone

  • or somewhere else in Africa-- you can maybe turn the volume

  • up a little bit--

  • [video playback]

  • -Lean forward to the Golden Coast.

  • KELLER EASTERLING: --Nigeria.

  • -Lekki Free Trade Zone is receiving

  • every day the warm breeze from the Atlantic.

  • The German philosopher Hegel once said,

  • the breeze from the ocean is a call for trading.

  • Similarly, the breeze blowing over Lekki Free Trade Zone

  • is sending you a warm and a faithful invitation

  • for investment and trade.

  • Please accept this warm invitation and call.

  • Go to Lekki for investment.

  • Go to Lekki for development.

  • KELLER EASTERLING: Anyway--

  • -Let us join hands in cooperation

  • to create a beautiful tomorrow.

  • [end playback]

  • KELLER EASTERLING: Yes, yes.

  • Wipe the tears from your eyes.

  • So that used to be the end of my talk.

  • But in Enduring Innocence, I was largely

  • reporting on what was out there.

  • But in Extrastatecraft, I'm trying to mix--

  • and you'll see if you think this works--

  • but I'm trying to mix evidentiary segments

  • with contemplative segments in a book that's

  • rehearsing a habit of mind, rehearsing

  • for an encounter with the space.

  • So again, we know that we can contribute object form

  • to this matrix space, and that would

  • be an exceptional experiment.

  • There have been exceptional experiments in object form

  • in these environments.

  • But if there is an artistic curiosity

  • about designing not only object form, but active form,

  • the active form that's like the little bits of code

  • in the software that would allow us to kind of hack

  • into some of the world's most powerful spatial softwares,

  • how do you do it?

  • How does one begin to design a spatial interplay that's

  • like software, that's like a little machine for producing

  • space?

  • Well, if I've done my job in this book,

  • there should be the sense that we already know how to do it,

  • that it's only a skill or a talent that's

  • been under-rehearsed or, I would say, under-indulged,

  • because in this field of nearly identical suburban houses,

  • we see object forms, but we also know that there's

  • a simple software or operating system there

  • that is doing something and that that agency is

  • decoupled from stories about home ownership and patriotism.

  • In other words, it's saying something

  • different from what it's doing.

  • And we know what it's doing.

  • It's doing something that makes some things possible

  • and some things impossible, just like an operating system.

  • There's a bit of simple code here.

  • And it's the simplest of active forms that's at work here.

  • It's a multiplier.

  • It's generating multiple slabs and frames and roofs

  • in this almost agricultural matrix space.

  • And we can design the single house, the single object form.

  • We can rush up to one of those and fix it with all our skills.

  • But it would extend our power to be able to also design it

  • as an active form, another multiplier or contagion that

  • uses the organization as a carrier, a multiplier that

  • potentially changes this landscape,

  • like the elevator changed urban morphology.

  • And we were just talking about the cellphone, which

  • is, in some ways, an elevator, will have that much impact.

  • We're less accustomed to the idea that space can be an actor

  • and that it can be a carrier of information, that's

  • it's an information system even if it's not coded with sensors

  • and information technologies.

  • Space, however static, possesses agency.

  • And that information resides in what we can only

  • call disposition, the character or propensity

  • of an organization that resides in the activity

  • or the potentials latent in the organization.

  • And there's nothing mysterious about that word "disposition,"

  • word in common parlance.

  • A ball on an inclined plane, through its geometry

  • and relative position, it possesses disposition.

  • And we already know something about the topology or wiring

  • of an organization as a marker of its disposition.

  • Network topology begins with an urban question,

  • like the Koenigsburg bridge problem,

  • which, I'm sure you know, began with a sort of bet in a bar,

  • that you couldn't get back to that bar

  • without crossing one of the bridges of Koenigsburg

  • more than once.

  • We know about that disposition, the latent potential

  • in typology, in sequence, relationship linkage.

  • And these relationships in space that are almost so patently

  • obvious to us are not obvious to some 28-year-old

  • McKinsey consultants and bankers and org men who are currently

  • manipulating this space.

  • We know the disposition of these organizations.

  • We even know something about their political temperament,

  • which adds yet another power, skill to what we know.

  • Where they concentrate power or authority or violence,

  • we know how to adjust that.

  • We know which one is a smuggling ring.

  • We know which one is mainframe computing.

  • We know which one is like a railroad.

  • We know which one is like buried fiber, which one's

  • like clouds of microwaves.

  • We know which one's like the zone in disposition, which

  • one was like FireChat, the little protocol

  • that the protesters in Hong Kong used to avoid the central kill

  • switch.

  • And one simple example of a spatial software that I always

  • use-- and forgive me if you've heard me

  • say this before-- but one simple software is Savannah.

  • It's an 18th century American city that Oglethorp designed.

  • He didn't design the plat as an object form,

  • but rather as a software, as a kind of growth protocol.

  • The town would grow by wards.

  • And those wards provided explicit instructions

  • for relationships about quotients

  • between public or private or green space,

  • as well as agricultural space beyond.

  • So when you had a ward, you also would reserve a quotient

  • of agricultural space beyond.

  • He didn't design a thing, but an instruction for relationships

  • between things.

  • And you didn't know the shape of the town's outline,

  • even though you had an explicit measured spatial instruction.

  • I would say it's like a governor,

  • like a thermostat as a governor, an interplay

  • between counterbalancing variables

  • or a time-released instruction for the ongoing activities

  • of urban space.

  • So it's pretty simple.

  • We can design a multiplier.

  • We could design a delta.

  • We could design a valve, a governor, a switch.

  • We can tune a topology.

  • And all these things are like-- they're not the only one,

  • but they're like little markers or bits of code

  • or active forms that are kind of like the spatial equivalent

  • of software.

  • So they're shaping not a single object form,

  • but a stream of objects.

  • And I just hasten to say-- I guess I've said it already--

  • but I just hasten to say again, this

  • is a non-modern proposition.

  • Active form does not replace.

  • Object form works with it, propels it,

  • hopefully into a kind of redoubled territory

  • of operation, again, with different aesthetic pleasures

  • and political capacities.

  • But the aesthetic pleasures of active form and interplay,

  • if they're dispositional, if they're time-released,

  • they're often less about knowing that and more about knowing

  • how, which I'm borrowing from Gilbert Ryle.

  • So in some ways, the aesthetic pleasures,

  • if they involve knowing-- I'll slow way down-- if they involve

  • knowing how, they're about exceeding intellection.

  • It's a habit of mind that's capable of working

  • with changing unfinished process for which there can only

  • be dynamic markers.

  • So it's a mind like a chess master,

  • so I could see many moves ahead, except that this game

  • can't be rationalized.

  • I would say, in this world, confidence games trump game

  • theory, or cybernetics of behaviorism

  • or any of the other kind of determinant frameworks

  • that our discipline has gotten stuck on at various moments,

  • snagged on.

  • The markers are indeterminate-- sounds contradictory--

  • but the markers are indeterminate to be practical.

  • Like one can only know how to navigate a river by observing

  • the ripples and dimples that are changing on the surface.

  • You can only know how to kind of correlate card

  • combinations in poker against the changing

  • faces of the players.

  • You can only know how to feel for the potentials in bread

  • and dough or land a plane in high wind or sling

  • plaster or hustle or kiss or tell a joke.

  • There's things you can only know how to do.

  • And active forms and the dispositions they generate

  • are markers or diagnostics in the fluid politics

  • of Extrastatecraft.

  • So that used to be maybe another place where the talk could end.

  • And this book talks less about what to do and more

  • about how to do it.

  • But maybe it's useful to sort of back to the zone

  • or go through a few examples.

  • If we return to the zone, in addition

  • to designing the skyscraper, we can take advantage of the fact

  • that the zone is itself a contagious

  • platform, as it's obvious.

  • We could design something to multiply within the zone

  • and potentially change it as radically as it's

  • changed over the last 30 years.

  • And you see things like those coloredy fountains that race

  • through a population of zones.

  • Many things become contagious within it.

  • So a hack might release a germ.

  • And the aesthetic pleasures there

  • are not about I finished the master plan.

  • The aesthetic pleasures are about exploiting a contagion,

  • about population effects.

  • Or a hack might establish a kind of time-released interplay.

  • For instance, given a zone's ambition to be a city,

  • it may already even carry the genetics of its own reversal,

  • its own antidote.

  • One way to hack the zone-- and if there

  • is a one-liner in the book, it might be this--

  • but one way to hack the zone is to map selected zone incentives

  • back onto existing cities rather than ex urban enclaves,

  • return the zone to the rule of law

  • when it comes to the oversight of labor,

  • and more directly, return financial benefits

  • to the domestic economy.

  • It's what UNIDO thought would actually happen.

  • And just as there is an interdependence

  • between something like public and private space in Savannah,

  • a zone incentive can become part of a time-released

  • counterbalancing interplay.

  • In Nairobi, for instance, if zone centers

  • were located in Nairobi instead of a new Kenya-China Economic

  • Zone or something, zone incentives

  • could be linked to any number of things-- for instance, transit.

  • And that machine for generating space

  • develops infrastructure while also delivering workers

  • to business.

  • So what the work would be-- again, not the master plan, not

  • the thing, but the identifying of counterbalancing linkage.

  • Digital variables, as we said before, influence space.

  • But the spatial variables also influence digital networks.

  • So if the constant desired outcome in Nairobi,

  • the outcome of broadband urbanism,

  • is to access information, then crucial

  • is access to the information of the digital systems,

  • but it's also crucial to access the information of the city.

  • Even outside Nairobi, an active form

  • might place broadband and roads in an interdependence.

  • Seems unlikely.

  • But dialing up broadband for the fixed service

  • that attracts university and tourism might result

  • in dialing down roads, roads that would disrupt

  • the wilderness and indigenous culture,

  • the information carried in space that's

  • important to universities and tourism.

  • Dialing up broadband also makes roads less essential.

  • And roads can interrupt the spatial information of the city

  • by inflating spaces and distances for vehicles,

  • information, again, embedded in the city that's

  • made more immediate by walking or transit or bicycle.

  • So an architect who can make active form

  • as well as object form-- into another example--

  • can think about even not only making

  • the development lurch forward, but making it go into reverse.

  • If object form usually results in the addition of more stuff,

  • does an active form let you do even the opposite,

  • put the building machine into reverse?

  • Can we use the interplay of counterbalancing forces

  • to target or contract or even delete development

  • in the floodplains of New Orleans or Bangkok,

  • in the Amazon rainforest or in McMansion suburbia?

  • And I won't go into detail, but one software,

  • like Savannah in reverse, or if you

  • play Go-- I don't know if you play Go--

  • but like a reverse game of Go, is a subtraction protocol--

  • I'll just race through here-- but something that

  • is about making not walls, but clearings,

  • making an interplay between properties that may even

  • be remote to each other.

  • And less important than the details

  • of this little software-- that's another lecture-- but it's

  • just the idea, the habit of mind about designing interplay

  • itself.

  • This is another one, which is about retreating

  • from floodplain by using a set of levers

  • to do with insurance and mortgage.

  • So I won't go into detail about it.

  • There are not only different aesthetic pleasures, but also

  • different political capacities of active form

  • and infrastructure space.

  • And they're different from the familiar scripts

  • of political activism, where you usually find

  • strongly held, forthright beliefs that galvanize around

  • declaration, a fight for solidarity, decency, justice.

  • And an activist may fight and die for these principles

  • using techniques that at many junctures in history

  • have required enormous courage to enact.

  • David must kill Goliath.

  • That's the sort of classic script

  • that we are equipped with.

  • And yet, many powerful players in infrastructure space

  • survive on fluid, undeclared intentions.

  • And it's pretty easy for them to toy with and trick descent

  • if declaration is considered to be the only thing that

  • registers as information.

  • So when targeted, they wander away from the bullseye.

  • Or Goliath finds a way to come dressed as David.

  • Or they're saying something different from what

  • they're doing.

  • The story is discrepant from the real disposition

  • of the organization, which I keep arguing we would

  • be very good at detecting.

  • But it's in these situations that dissent is often left

  • shaking its fists at an effigy.

  • It showed up to the proper barricade or border crossing.

  • But the real violence is happening over your shoulder.

  • The real violence is happening somewhere else

  • and can only cure the problem with another purification

  • ritual.

  • And there's surely moments when dissent

  • must stand up and name an opponent

  • and assume as kind of binary stance of resistance.

  • But I'm trying to think about a kind of auxiliary,

  • some way of supporting this dissent

  • with the dispositional capacities of infrastructure

  • space that are more performative than prescriptive.

  • So they offer a dissensus that's harder to target, less

  • interested in binaries, and less interested in being right,

  • a shrewder, cagier counter to the stealthy global players,

  • an alternative extrastatecraft, where the declared intention

  • may be less important than the undeclared disposition

  • and where righteousness may be less

  • consequential than the discrepant or the fictional

  • or the sly.

  • So I'm sort of describing a sneakier David, who would never

  • bother to kill Goliath, but a David who

  • could be a secret partner to the righteous activist,

  • maybe even soften up ground to increase

  • their chances of success, maybe an unwelcome, unwitting partner

  • to that righteous activist.

  • And that auxiliary activist works, again,

  • less on knowing that or knowing what,

  • knowing what to righteously oppose,

  • and works more on knowing how to oppose it.

  • So consider what are the political capacities

  • of something like a switch or a remote

  • that benefits from remaining not only indirect,

  • but maybe also undetected or at a distance, reconditioning

  • at a remove in space and time.

  • For activists here, we often long to directly confront

  • and cure a problem, just as the designer often

  • longs to address urban issues with object form,

  • get our hands dirty, go to the actual place.

  • But often, the real toggles of urbanity may be elsewhere.

  • And active form maybe allows you to adjust the capacities

  • of entire network by altering the repertoire of one's switch

  • within it.

  • Also, infrastructure spaces is not a duel.

  • And in this dispositional register,

  • one doesn't square off against every weed in the field

  • when you can remotely change the chemistry of the soil.

  • The multipliers that make up infrastructure space

  • can be accelerated by all the irrationality

  • that I've been showing you, by narrative active forums,

  • like a rumor.

  • Rumor is one of the most successful

  • political techniques, rumor and gossip.

  • And maybe only a design that combines

  • organizational active forms with narrative active forms

  • has any chance of successfully engaging

  • the world's spacial products.

  • A couple of years ago, I was invited to a conference

  • of zone developers.

  • And I gave them fair warning that I

  • was a critic of the zone.

  • And they were-- oh, Professor Easterling.

  • They were so nice about it.

  • But I sort of realized it was the perfect place

  • to spread a rumor, to tell a little lie,

  • to tell a rumor that the next smart report,

  • that the next smartest zone operators were doing what

  • we were just talking about, locating zone incentives

  • in existing cities to avoid all kinds of costs and to find--

  • and I went through the whole thing.

  • And there were plenty of people, almost everyone who

  • bit on that hook.

  • And in some ways, it doesn't matter.

  • It's like an anecdotal thing.

  • What does become the new contagious symbolic capital?

  • It's what is obviously fueling this.

  • It can't be more unlikely than buildings that are shaped

  • like diamonds or dolphins.

  • Or in addition to kind of binary resistance,

  • the tense resistance of the binary,

  • consider the power of non-oppositional inflections

  • of active forms, like the gift or the panda

  • or forms of exaggerated compliance.

  • The panda, as you know, is a sweet, sort

  • of arm-twisting gift, like China's gift

  • to Taiwan of two pandas, their names, when translated,

  • meant "reunion" or "unity."

  • And we have running through our fingers pandas.

  • The zone incentives or broadband capacity

  • might be just such a leveraging gift.

  • But they're often not used to leverage anything.

  • They're not part of an active interplay.

  • Or in Domination and the Arts of Resistance,

  • James C. Scott provides this great example

  • of exaggerated compliance that he

  • finds in a portion of Milan Kundera's The Joke.

  • In that novel, you remember, the prisoners in the story

  • are challenged to a foot race against the guards.

  • And so they know they have to lose.

  • And the prisoners decide to run very slowly

  • against the sprinting guards.

  • So their compliance disarms and delivers independence

  • from authority.

  • And in Extrastatecraft, it's the same thing.

  • Picking one's submissions rather than one's battles

  • is an almost invisible, noncontroversial means

  • of gaining advantage in a field.

  • Sometimes it allows you to do it without drawing attention

  • to your larger strategy.

  • The binary dispositions of head-to-head conflict

  • are often marked by competition, by symmetrical mimicry, that

  • leads to escalating violence.

  • But another kind of mimicry, the double,

  • can be a source of confusion or disguise or trickery,

  • the doubles to shill or the proxy,

  • like the twin siblings that fool the world.

  • The double can hijack the existence of its counterpart.

  • And you see that already in the doubles that I showed you.

  • Rather than engaging in a fight with the risk of escalating it

  • or being drawn into its vortex, all of the active forms

  • might be politically enhanced by distracting from the fight.

  • Meaninglessness that is considered

  • by the forthright activist to be a complete evacuation

  • of principles can be the opposite.

  • It can be incredibly politically powerful.

  • Misdirections and distractions can lull and redirect

  • the most intractable political situations.

  • Obfuscations, irrational desire, circuitous stories

  • are lubricants with enormous political instrumentality.

  • It's all I see.

  • And like the comedian who learned

  • to tell jokes to keep his parents from fighting,

  • that's part of not knowing that, but knowing how.

  • An architect might even know how to deploy a spatial variable

  • to reduce the violence of binaries

  • or dissipate monistic concentrations of authority

  • as they are embedded in space.

  • So in infrastructure space, it's routine to deal

  • with the irrational, the discrepant,

  • and the indeterminate, because it's

  • not only more practical, but more vigilant,

  • than righteousness.

  • With active forms of interplay, a snaking chain of moves

  • can worm into matrix space and gradually generate leverage

  • against intractable politics.

  • So maybe when we pan back over this matrix space,

  • we see nothing but artistic opportunities,

  • an additional kind of pleasure, artistic pleasure,

  • and excess and power in the art of infrastructure space.

  • Infrastructure space may be the secret weapon

  • of the most powerful, but two can play at this game.

  • Thank you.

  • [applause]

  • So if you'd like to hold on for a few minutes,

  • Charles Waldheim is joining us in conversation

  • with Keller Easterling.

  • We have 15, 20 minutes for conversation, a few questions.

  • We thought that it'd be appropriate to kind

  • of transition to questions, that we could in many respects

  • invite Charles to share a few reflections.

  • And also, at the same time, I was thinking maybe Kiel and I--

  • I'm not sure whether or not, after the lecture,

  • we should invite Richard Branson to lecture or not next year.

  • But we can consult with the dean afterwards.

  • But thank you very much, Keller.

  • I'll leave you with the floor, Charles.

  • Thanks, Pierre.

  • I'm sure that Beth Kramer in developmental

  • would welcome Richard Branson.

  • I'm sure we can see him on a poster soon.

  • Pierre has given me the enviable but impossible task

  • of following Keller's prose.

  • So I just want to begin by just taking a moment and pausing

  • and just saying, I don't know about you,

  • because I could sit there and listen to that all night.

  • It's kind of you to be here.

  • And I know that we want to spend the bulk of our time

  • continuing to her Keller elaborate her thoughts

  • and hearing from you with your questions.

  • It's striking to me that, among other things,

  • one could begin by saying, Keller,

  • your work has been so impactful for so long, for so many of us.

  • And at the same moment, I think it's

  • timely to reflect on it in the context of the MDes

  • specifically.

  • We have this luxury of these round-numbered anniversaries.

  • And I'm thinking of the MDes 40-year anniversary, but also

  • the 50th anniversary his year of the founding of the laboratory

  • for computer graphics, which we'll be commemorating

  • in a couple of weeks, as well.

  • So with those kind of legacies in mind,

  • for me, I think one of the most interesting questions

  • to begin with would be the shift that you signal over the two

  • most recent books, which really work as a set of paired

  • complementary between Enduring Innocence and Extrastatecraft.

  • From what you described as reportage to something

  • that's, on the one hand, meant to be

  • more directly political, but also a bit more

  • of a disciplinary formation, it's

  • been a bit more challenge for us in these buildings.

  • And I just want to hear you say something a little bit more

  • off script about that and the evolution of your thinking.

  • What caused you to think that moving beyond reportage

  • was timely and important to do?

  • Well, I found it always so strange

  • that the questions after Enduring

  • Innocence that I would be asked, but what are your politics?

  • And I didn't understand the question.

  • How could you say what your politics are?

  • I mean, obviously, we are all opposed

  • to the abuses of other human beings and the environment.

  • That's the easy part.

  • But how to do those things, how to approach them,

  • seem to be the--

  • [phone ringing]

  • --question.

  • That's not my phone.

  • Might be.

  • Sorry.

  • It's calling.

  • Branson.

  • It's Branson.

  • So sorry.

  • Sorry about that.

  • And I'm a designer.

  • I'm a designer.

  • And I work with students on design.

  • And so it also seemed to me that many of these things which

  • we have long regarded in our discipline

  • as something that's outside of the discipline, that

  • has nothing to do with our art, it

  • becomes so clear that it's possible

  • that it amplifies our powers, that the very pervasiveness

  • of this space is this something that potentially

  • amplifies our powers.

  • So it seemed that then design studios

  • and so on could be rehearsals for that.

  • So it's maybe just starting to reflect the ongoing work

  • with these spaces.

  • In that context, I think many of us here have been,

  • over the last several years, and I suspect maybe

  • in other schools or architecture, as well,

  • still struggling with the question of, on the one hand,

  • the desire for autonomy, cultural autonomy

  • of the architect, the role of the architect

  • and their purview, their agency, the space of their activities,

  • relative to the petered externalities that you

  • and I and others are so interested

  • in, in a kind of debate around, on the one hand,

  • rehearsing a kind of Gesellschaft,

  • Gemeinschaft debate interminably.

  • But at the same moment, if these externalities

  • are within the purview of the agency of design,

  • then a whole host of questions appear immediately that you

  • begin to address, I think, in both books,

  • and certainly in the most recent one most forthrightly.

  • So on the one hand, I think you make a very clear argument

  • for how this epistemology, this way of seeing the world,

  • this way of understanding the world, producing

  • knowledge in it, might position the architect on campus

  • with a renewed sense of centrality, or at least

  • a renewed relevance for audience.

  • And that seems fairly clear in what you said this evening,

  • but also in the book itself.

  • I remember just recently, in the last couple

  • of years, when a variety of people at the Kennedy School

  • realized that our students know how to map things really well.

  • All of a sudden, we started getting a lot more invitations

  • to things.

  • And with a great deal of enthusiasm, of course,

  • we all accepted them.

  • And then, after a year or so, we began

  • to realize, well, we're just illustrating

  • what's going on in the Jordan Valley and these other forces

  • and flows that you describe.

  • And so could you say something more about that,

  • the introduction of these topics for the architect

  • or those in the design sphere and their centrality

  • within the play of disciplines on campus?

  • And beyond simple illustration, beyond reportage, what role

  • does the education of the architect

  • play in kind of recentering the design disciplines on campus?

  • That's such a good question.

  • Well, I have been trying in a small at Yale

  • to elevate spatial studies among the other disciplines

  • from global affairs to health to environment to forestry and art

  • and so on.

  • I think Yale probably is the place which

  • is training the 28-year-old McKinsey consultant or CIA

  • agent.

  • I don't know.

  • And their global affairs are still

  • about nation state and very mid-century sort of training.

  • So it's become very clear to me that for them

  • to be able to have a chance to think

  • about the power of spatial variables is important.

  • I don't know how successful I've been in making it more central.

  • But it is a way to sort of trip the lock on that conundrum

  • or the ongoing perennial argument

  • that we often have in our disciple, some kind of fear

  • of losing disciplinarity, some kind of fear of diluting.

  • But that is not the problem.

  • But it's more that there are other disciplines

  • outside of ours that could use our knowledge

  • and could use our special skills and our correlative thinking

  • and on and on.

  • It's a persuasive argument.

  • I think, in some ways, your intellectual project

  • more broadly, by reclaiming space, all of space

  • and the production of space, as the [inaudible] of our fields,

  • I think your longer term intellectual project speaks

  • to that even beyond just these two books.

  • So staying with the disciplinary relationships,

  • I have a moment where I was thinking

  • it would have been interesting if Neil Brenner had been here

  • this evening.

  • And I won't be able to do his precise intonation.

  • But I want to suggest if Neil were with us,

  • he might say something like, OK, so

  • extrastatecraft-- your formulation of extrastatecraft

  • implies, at least, among other things,

  • that what goes on within the FTC, within Free Trade Zone,

  • is really outside the state's monopoly

  • on a certain set of jurisdictional and operational

  • protocols.

  • But I have a sense that if Neil were with us,

  • he would ask something like, is it

  • in fact precisely through the power

  • to deliver the Free Trade Zone that the state is inscribing

  • its power?

  • Isn't this just a re-inscription of state powerfulness?

  • And in what ways is it external to that?

  • It is another power of the state.

  • But it's the state, as I was saying,

  • with a new set of sneakier partners.

  • It's a longstanding oscillation, a historical oscillation.

  • The state gets pirates.

  • The state gets another set of more powerful pirates.

  • It was interesting in dialogue with Saskia last week,

  • because she talks about a kind of de-nationalizing process

  • that is about empowering some selected players

  • and disempowering others in that process.

  • It doesn't erase the power of the nation.

  • It makes the nation powerful in another way

  • and delivers that power to, usually,

  • a select few who are in partnership with the state.

  • So yeah, outside of and in addition to the state.

  • And so in that regard, your call for habit of mind,

  • a propensity for and ability to respond to,

  • to not simply describe, to be prepared

  • to hack, to intervene upon, to throw some sand in the years,

  • if not a spanner.

  • All of that are really about the audiences in this building

  • and about how we might be able to get

  • beyond the simple empirical after a couple of decades

  • of empirical work.

  • It strikes me that it would be fair also

  • to situate your work in this regard in a lineage

  • of the last couple of decades.

  • I'm thinking of work that Pierre was referencing

  • from the 1990s of people like Alejandro Zaera-Polo or Alex

  • Wall, in which logistics, operating

  • protocols, infrastructure were seen as a kind of other.

  • And in that work, there was an appropriation

  • into our field that had a sense of diversification,

  • of expanding the realm, the agency of the architect.

  • But I think, having participated in that myself a little bit, I

  • think, overwhelmingly, that economy

  • has been in one direction.

  • That is, we in architectural culture

  • have been learning from these forces and flows and processes

  • and changing the terms of reference for our own work,

  • changing the context for our own cultural production.

  • At the same moment, it's challenging enough

  • to come upon examples of that economy working

  • in both directions.

  • And so I think it would be fair in this context

  • to draw you out a little bit more on,

  • are there cases, examples, we could point to

  • from your work for this audience in which it's not simply we

  • fetishizing the operational performance and condition

  • and political economy of infrastructure,

  • but in fact, where the architect was kind of upstream

  • far enough to hack the system?

  • Yeah.

  • It's tricky to know where to place yourself in that.

  • And it is something that has to be rehearsed.

  • Almost one wants to rehearse your reactivity

  • to different situations rather than

  • to say, this is the way to do it,

  • that there is only one way to do it.

  • But there would be many ways to do it.

  • And I agree with you that it concerns me

  • when architects seem less powerful than they are,

  • than they should be.

  • So you might think, oh, well, the way

  • to do that is to learn to work with an NGO

  • or something like that-- and that's absolutely not what I'm

  • saying-- or that there's some proper way to enter politics,

  • to learn about policy.

  • That's not what I'm saying.

  • And in fact, in the book, there's a story about ISO

  • and other kinds of proper parliaments of the NG-ocracy.

  • And so I'm sort of suggesting that one

  • doesn't go get that second degree in global affairs,

  • necessarily.

  • That's not what I'm saying, but that we have ways of-- well,

  • I don't know how to do this, because you need sort

  • of like 20 examples or none.

  • But there are many ways in which we can hack that system.

  • And I don't know if you want me to give examples.

  • So here's an analogy that comes to mind.

  • I wonder if this would fit the bill for you.

  • So in the last several years, within the MDes,

  • there's been quite a lot of enthusiasm

  • for what we generically refer to as border studies,

  • the role of the architect and returning

  • to mapmaking, cartography, in revealing

  • the spaciality of a certain political economy

  • or a certain set of political choices.

  • And so that's one set of examples

  • that would be available.

  • In that regard, I do think that there

  • is something recurring about the architect's ability

  • to organize and manage information

  • with a certain professional identity.

  • But I think a part of what's really so impactful for me

  • in the last two books has been the notion

  • that the spatial metier is itself always inherently

  • political.

  • And it seems to be consistently, throughout both books, the idea

  • that the material that we're working with, the media itself,

  • is itself political.

  • It inscribes a set of political relationships.

  • And that in some ways-- I'm inferring, and correctly me

  • that I get this wrong-- in some ways,

  • I take your position to be that by reaching out and getting

  • the third degree in political science or joining the NGO

  • or externalizing all of its social agency

  • neglects the inherent politics of space itself.

  • Is that a fair reading?

  • Well, it's just that you all are--

  • and the work that you do here, is exceptional.

  • And the work of architects at this level

  • is so information rich.

  • I could tell you, in studios that we work on at Yale,

  • where we were actually-- so we're actually

  • rehearsing these things, and rehearsing both object

  • form and active form.

  • Why would you give up?

  • Again, it's a non-modern proposition.

  • It's adding skills to the repertoire,

  • but heavily reliant on object form.

  • But we do studios which are not kind

  • of masterpiece studios, where you design your finished

  • masterpiece, but studios where you

  • are allowed to test your reactivity

  • to different conditions.

  • So there are studios that are more like an improv class

  • in a drama school.

  • And the students design more and more and more.

  • I mean, I'm at Yale, so the dean has

  • to look sort of with half-closed eyes from six feet away

  • and see lots of object form.

  • And it answers all of those things.

  • But there is throughout the test a series

  • of forks in the road and decisions

  • where students are allowed to test their political savvy,

  • make forms on all different kinds of level,

  • from irrational desires to technical details, highly

  • technical details.

  • If you don't have that technical skill, it's not going to work.

  • And some of those students have been successful.

  • They're actually doing it.

  • Parenthetically, still set in every mid review,

  • I recall this about-- it's, to my mind, quite remarkable.

  • So one of the things I want to press on a little bit

  • has to do with our context here in the reception

  • or in the wake of Ferguson.

  • We've had a number of conversations in this space,

  • in this building, about the implications

  • of the conversations that are taking

  • place about race and space and social justice

  • and social agency.

  • And among other things that came out

  • of those discussions was that for many of our colleagues,

  • many of our cohort, a sense that what was really immediately

  • most pressing and available wasn't spatial, necessarily,

  • a sense that, well, there are courses on campus,

  • maybe at the Kennedy School, maybe at the law school,

  • and a sense that the real traction, the real street

  • credibility, the real issues had to do

  • with the nexus of media, popular opinion, law, governance.

  • And I, for one, at least, have participated

  • in many of those conversations.

  • I think it's been a very important set of conversations

  • for us.

  • And at the same moment, I feel as though we are only just now

  • beginning to come to terms with, well, what

  • are the special implications?

  • What do we have by way of knowledge in these areas that

  • don't fall directly into immediately social justice

  • post '68 in planning as opposed to the autonomy of design

  • culture?

  • And that's pretty far afield from your talk tonight.

  • And so don't hesitate to wave me off.

  • But any thoughts about that as it pertains to your interests?

  • Well, the obvious social justice issues in infrastructure space

  • have to do with labor and how labor is treated-- environment,

  • as well.

  • But I'm always amazed that, again,

  • in the NG-ocracy that speaks in informatics and standards.

  • Even the activist NGOs speak in terms of standards,

  • like kind of mimicking the ISO 9000 quality management,

  • because it's a habit within the corporate world.

  • But I see that there are often things like standards,

  • there's a currency of something like that.

  • And often, there are new standards

  • to do with environment.

  • That's an easy one because it comes

  • with-- I'm sure you talk about this all the time-- because it

  • comes with another kind of asset for a corporate culture.

  • But there is nothing about labor.

  • There's one standard that I've found in ISO about how long

  • a man can stay in a refrigerator.

  • But there is nothing, there is nothing, to-- and as you know,

  • most of the global superpowers have signed no compact

  • about how labor will be treated.

  • And this goes on for decades.

  • There's no hope that somehow-- or there may

  • be hope when one works on the legal side

  • and on the standard side.

  • But in the meantime, part of the idea about infrastructure space

  • and what we know about a city, we

  • know that a factory that's in the middle of Nairobi

  • or a factory that's way out where no one can see it,

  • we know the power of a city.

  • And it's an undeclared power.

  • But again, what you know about urbanity is incredibly powerful

  • and can be a kind of undeclared power.

  • It doesn't seem dangerous to anybody.

  • Or at least there's that potential.

  • There's that potential in space to-- if we were doing

  • as I was suggesting, locating factories back

  • in cities instead of ex urban enclaves,

  • we know the power of a city to bring some more surveillance

  • or potentially to return the oversight of that labor

  • to the rule of law.

  • So those are the kin of issues that are out there

  • in infrastructure space.

  • And again, space could be a powerful, undeclared point

  • of leverage in it.

  • I know that there are questions in the audience.

  • As you're getting your questions teed up--

  • I think we have a couple of microphones--

  • I can't help but take the self-indulgent opportunity just

  • to talk to you just about writing.

  • Apart from what the subject matter or the content

  • is, the implication for these fields

  • and what we've been discussing, this is an observation--

  • and I'm happy to be dissuaded-- but my perception

  • has been, as a reader of your work,

  • that there has been a longstanding interest

  • in the writing for its own sake.

  • That may be overstating it, but the idea of writing as such.

  • But with these two most recent books in particular,

  • my sense of it is, well, you've always been

  • in command of the material.

  • You've also in these two books been

  • in control of a sense of the craft, if I could

  • put it that way, and not only the symmetry

  • between the spoken word here and what's in print,

  • but equally, moments when the language, the Barthian sense

  • of the rustle of language pushes back.

  • And if you could say a little-- I

  • know that many of us in the building

  • spend our days and nights writing

  • or thinking about writing or reading about writing.

  • And given that that's a sizable proportion certainly

  • of the MDes activity, advice to writers?

  • It seems always like a complete struggle.

  • And Enduring Innocence was-- the world

  • was making it very easy for me in Enduring

  • Innocence in some ways because I had decided to write

  • a kind of footnoted fiction.

  • And it was easy, since there was so many irrational tales

  • to be told.

  • This book was a lot harder because I

  • was supposed to write for a general audience.

  • And it's what I wanted, without writing in that kind of Malcolm

  • Gladwellian teaser language--

  • Where you gloss very quickly over a dozen academics

  • sort of toiling away.

  • Yeah.

  • Yeah.

  • Or any of the other TED Talk locutions or something.

  • How could you develop a kind of quiet voice

  • that would be talking about something for which you need

  • a book, for which you need something that lasts as

  • long as a book, to be with a reader for awhile

  • or to be with a reader and make a short segment that one might

  • need to read.

  • You might have to have a different relationship

  • with the reader to go quiet, to slow down.

  • But there was quite a lot of resistance

  • with having a book that was experimenting

  • with evidentiary segments and contemplative segments.

  • And it did get kind of flattened into something like chapters

  • that are just parallel.

  • So I don't know about-- I don't have any advice because I

  • feel like such a novice myself.

  • But the--

  • So for any of my doctoral students that are here, first

  • of all, it's really hard, and it takes two decades

  • to be a novice.

  • So maybe you have questions.

  • Yeah.

  • Keller, thanks for a beautiful talk-- very beautiful,

  • but suspiciously beautiful.

  • And I want to talk about maybe aesthetics.

  • I was struck by the comment you made at the beginning

  • about describing the images as porn.

  • And I wasn't quite sure why you meant porn.

  • But I assume because it was a rather tacky, glitzy,

  • postmodern architecture.

  • And I'm wondering what would happen

  • if it was, say, Peter Zumthor or Herzog and de Meuron whose

  • buildings were there.

  • But it strikes me that there's a danger

  • that we as designers focus too much on the visual,

  • on the formal.

  • On my understanding, the future of the city

  • is going to be governed less by form and more

  • by informational systems.

  • I think the way that we think Uber or Lyft are operating

  • today or some other kind of-- Nest

  • or those kind of control systems that are controlling our homes

  • and things, that's the kind of intelligence that's

  • going to be part of the thing.

  • And it strikes me that, really, the problem

  • that we have as designers is we have marginalized ourselves

  • by focusing precisely on the design as such.

  • You talk about hacking into the zones, this new system.

  • Well, I don't think we need to hack into it.

  • The system's been there in its different guises

  • for many years.

  • And we simply left ourselves out of the equation

  • because we come in at the very end,

  • and we just put the icing on the cake.

  • And I would want to just draw the distinction between, say,

  • urban planners and urban designers.

  • Urban planners are there at the very beginning.

  • They're involved in all the strategic decision

  • making by policymakers, by politicians.

  • If there is any designer at all, it's

  • probably some civil engineer who's

  • going to design the roads and so on.

  • And we've left ourselves completely out of the equation

  • because we just wait till the very end and do the final bit.

  • It strikes me that really what we

  • should be doing as designers is redesigning what

  • we do as designers and really focusing ourselves

  • on those strategic aspects and locking into that.

  • We've simply marginalized ourselves.

  • There's no reason why we can't be part of that process.

  • Is that fair?

  • I agree.

  • And showing you this porn is just cheap.

  • But I want to show it to you.

  • Some of it is so odd.

  • And I end up wanting to show it.

  • And at least it makes it clear that the world is not somehow

  • run off of cast iron economic logics or law or something.

  • It's clear that those supposedly serious things

  • are being buffeted about by the most ridiculous desires.

  • And that I find empowering.

  • So that's a little bit why I show it.

  • But I agree completely with what you're saying.

  • I'm trying to say that the object of our design

  • might be slightly different, that what we might

  • be designing, instead of as that urban designer,

  • not be delivering the master plan to Nairobi or Kitow

  • or Guadalajara and congratulating ourselves

  • on what a genius work it was.

  • And if they don't adopt it, then it's

  • just because they just weren't clever enough

  • to see the purity of the design and how perfect it was.

  • That happens over and over and over again.

  • It's so incredibly tedious that it

  • seems like the very thing that we are designing

  • is the wrong thing.

  • So what would it be like if, in addition to that, what

  • we were designing was something like an interplay, something

  • like an interdependence that was time-released,

  • that could be changed, that required incredible vigilance,

  • that wasn't over, that wasn't finished,

  • that was more about tools for steering a process,

  • identifying toggles and levers and linkages.

  • Thank you for the talk.

  • You show us the porn twice.

  • And at the end, it was on a slightly more optimistic note.

  • But given the inscrutability of this extrastatecraft,

  • I wonder what sort of criteria do

  • you think it can be used to distinguish, to put it naively,

  • good from bad, right from wrong, extrastatecraft

  • and to actually enact it in a sort of optimistic way?

  • I don't really talk that much about what

  • would be good or bad.

  • But I think that the criteria is whether it releases

  • more information or not.

  • I think it is about somehow assessing the disposition

  • of an organization.

  • Is it an isomorphic disposition that locks down

  • on information, which I find inherently violent,

  • or is a system that releases information?

  • I know that sounds incredibly abstract.

  • But it was also what I was trying

  • to talk about as the theory of productive or criminal piracy.

  • When does piracy release information,

  • like breaks a blockade, and when is it

  • just kind of a criminal theft or something that

  • increases violence?

  • So reducing violence, increasing information, reducing abuse,

  • increasing information, what are the acts that do that?

  • What are the organizational dispositions that do that?

  • Hi.

  • I'm up here.

  • Hi.

  • I'd like to push you a little bit more

  • and following on the first question,

  • a lot of the discussion you had about how we hack

  • and how we get from where we are and how designers get there

  • into what's going on, maybe in terms of the zone,

  • because what I see right now and what occurred to me while you

  • were talking is maybe one step or one end

  • point is that the 28-year-old McKinsey consultant is replaced

  • by the 27-year-old MMARC or something like that.

  • And maybe that's totally wrong.

  • But from what we've seen so far, maybe we as designers

  • aren't doing a very good job of that right now.

  • I think of the opportunity that, say,

  • Zaha Hadid had to say something about the labor

  • practices of building a World Cup stadium in Qatar,

  • which maybe is a ridiculous thing for her

  • to be doing anyway.

  • But when it came to it, she said,

  • I have nothing to do with the labor practices.

  • And I think that wasn't very good.

  • But for us, I'm not maybe asking a career question.

  • I'm asking maybe a political question

  • because you have to get into the power,

  • and you have to participate.

  • But then you have to switch at some point

  • and maybe show your true colors, or else you just

  • won't be invited back to participate

  • or you won't be able to participate in the first place.

  • So I guess that's my question is, how do you do that?

  • Well, the protagonist that you're describing

  • or the sort of character that's moving through this world,

  • as I'm understanding you, might be

  • somebody who is already a little bit more downstream

  • in the system, in which case, it becomes

  • quite difficult to do anything.

  • But the kinds of work I'm talking about

  • are not necessarily deploying spatial studies or spatial

  • variables in a kind of fee-for-service practice

  • situation.

  • But we've been kind of rehearsing

  • alternative modes of practice, other kinds

  • of entrepreneurial modes of practice, social, political,

  • but also commercially entrepreneurial forms

  • of practice.

  • I don't think that what's implied

  • here is that one has to work from within

  • or be a kind of double agent in these situations,

  • but really that what you might be doing

  • is really manipulating it from the outside, which

  • looks a little bit like from within,

  • but in the sense that it's not just

  • standing with a placard saying, I am against this.

  • It's starting to work with it, manipulate it, con it.

  • There was something else I was going to say.

  • This is what I was going to say.

  • This is not for everybody.

  • There's no reason why you should be artistically interested in

  • is.

  • There's no "ought to," like, oh, you ought to be.

  • It just is this something that is exciting to you

  • artistically or not.

  • It's not as if this is wagging a finger at the profession

  • to be more interested in this or that.

  • It occurs to me, in relationship to this question,

  • the dean of the business school at the University of Toronto,

  • a fellow called Roger Martin, has

  • been saying for many years-- and it's

  • a part of what he's done at the school there--

  • is he wants to train his MBAs, his brand managers,

  • to think and act and work more like architects.

  • And when I was driving, listening to the CBC,

  • I almost drove off the road.

  • On the one hand, of course, what have we

  • been waiting for all these years with that kind of traction

  • and centrality and oxygen.

  • And at the same moment, inherent in that formulation

  • is a kind of ambivalence.

  • On the one hand, I immediately imagine,

  • well, you mean less well capitalized, without health

  • insurance, small, flexible.

  • We're all free agents at 27.

  • And so yeah, I think there's a version where

  • the way in which we are organized

  • as a professional body or as a set of disciplines

  • certainly can be found attractive

  • for a whole variety of reasons.

  • At the same moment, there are so many

  • other interesting examples.

  • I was just thinking of one of Pierre's students

  • from Toronto who then came and taught for us here,

  • Kelly Doran.

  • So he's had a practice for many years working in West Africa

  • in and around sites of extraction.

  • And what his practice is doing is

  • dealing with the relocation and settlement and accommodation

  • of existing populations.

  • And you can say, on the one hand,

  • because he's embedded in a process of infrastructure,

  • extraction, all the things we've been

  • talking about this evening, then he's

  • complicit on the one hand of enabling that activity.

  • But what you see in the work is not so much that.

  • What you see, really, is dealing with the reality

  • that there are populations and cultural heritage questions

  • and issues of community directly in the crosshairs of that flow

  • of capital and infrastructure.

  • And so projects like that, practices

  • like that, that don't necessarily

  • project an enormous moral implication for the entirety

  • of the field, but rather ways of constructing one's body of work

  • through.

  • So maybe we have time for-- what do you think, Pierre, one more?

  • Two more?

  • One more?

  • Please.

  • Keller, thanks for your talk.

  • It was wonderful.

  • I really appreciate this word "how" in the discourse

  • that we're talking about.

  • And I especially appreciate it as you're

  • talking about it as we think about forms of practice

  • and modes of practice.

  • But I'd also like to relate it back

  • to what I was very intrigued when you said,

  • at the academic level, you're trying to teach this

  • in a studio or how that's sort of rehearsed at the level

  • of academy where we start to pick up these sort of biases,

  • I guess, in how we do things.

  • And I'm wondering if maybe you could just more specifically

  • give some concrete examples or describe further

  • how you run your studio, how that impacts the pedagogy,

  • and perhaps a project in which a student was

  • successful in marrying the formal to the social political,

  • in a more concrete example.

  • Sure.

  • Well, some of the studios that I've been playing around with

  • are-- it's nothing new-- but where the students start out

  • and they identify the place where they want to work,

  • sometimes in a collective site.

  • One of the last collective sites we did was in Las Vegas.

  • And we did a book about it.

  • I could show you.

  • So each student developed what they wanted to work on.

  • But after they started working into their course of work,

  • they would get messages.

  • And they were messages from me.

  • But they would get envelopes delivered to them.

  • And those envelopes had in them any number of things.

  • Sometimes it was very bad news.

  • Sometimes the envelope was, like, burned or something.

  • Or sometimes it was just that they

  • were-- there were all kinds of things

  • in the envelope, all kinds of forks in the road.

  • There was no directive within it.

  • They were collaborators that were passing through,

  • they were people who were angry, they were laws that changed,

  • they were people who were protesting.

  • You had to somehow wriggle through or accept

  • some advantage that had come to you.

  • Some of the worst news was, you've been wildly successful.

  • Now what do you do?

  • And so there would be sort of three of those

  • in the course of a semester.

  • And it was unbelievable how great they did.

  • I couldn't believe how smart they were

  • and how they redoubled their efforts throughout and invented

  • things.

  • So one of those that was successful in the Las Vegas

  • project, it just won the Holson prize

  • this past fall, which is a lot of money.

  • And it was a project that was a construction detail in concrete

  • that would deal with flash floods in Las Vegas.

  • But then it was also a system.

  • So it went from a detail, a kind of porous detail

  • that was based on biomimicry, to something

  • that was a giant tank about the size of the turbine hall.

  • So it was about infrastructure also

  • as a kind of new civic space.

  • So it was construction detail, persuasion, civic space.

  • And they're prototyping it now.

  • They're meeting with people in Las Vegas and things like that.

  • One more if we have it?

  • Hi.

  • Thank you, Keller.

  • This was absolutely amazing.

  • You showed us a lot of zones that

  • were crafted with economic logics behind them.

  • I'm wondering if you also looked at territories

  • that were crafted with a political agenda,

  • like the settlements in the West Bank or temple towns in India.

  • And I'm wondering what are the kind of frameworks and codes

  • that govern these?

  • I have not worked on things like settlements in the West Bank.

  • I think maybe something that's kind of close to what you're

  • talking about are the work on subtraction, on how

  • to kind of subtract buildings.

  • And this maybe answers a little bit

  • to the social justice question that Charles was talking about

  • before.

  • Some of the work on subtraction has

  • been dealing with the possible impacts

  • for informal settlement, informal settlement that's

  • always at the other end of the bulldozer,

  • in a subtraction that's about tabula rasa.

  • So the subtraction work that we've

  • been working on is about not a tabula rasa,

  • but again, an interplay between properties, a way

  • to develop an interplay between some formal and informal areas

  • so that no property's ever worth zero, no property

  • can ever be completely devalued, or that there's

  • a certain kind of interdependency

  • between properties.

  • And that can be applied to kind of a McMansian suburbia area.

  • But the idea is that it could also

  • be applied to places where people are disenfranchised.

  • Some of the zone work naturally drifts into those geographies.

  • There's work about qualifying industrial zones in Jordan,

  • which have become embroiled in Middle Eastern politics

  • with issues of labor.

  • So those might be two examples.

  • So thank you so much, Keller.

  • It was just occurring to me-- and I

  • was wondering if you could give me

  • some sense of if you would agree with this sentiment-- I was

  • just thinking about the lab for computer graphics,

  • 50 years ago founded in part by a fellow called Howard Fisher.

  • So Howard Fisher was an architect, postwar architect,

  • in Chicago who was deeply interested in mass production,

  • steel housing, and was on the kind of industry

  • side of things, and over the course of his career,

  • found himself then moving increasingly

  • upstream to the systematization of growth

  • and then eventually came here to do

  • this kind of foundational work in mapping that

  • would completely re-characterize the system with which suburbs

  • got cast.

  • So that's one narrative.

  • That's one arc of one person's storyline

  • that begins with some of these obsessions with respect

  • to mass seriality, but then works its way upstream,

  • as it were, to really get at the operating

  • system behind the thing itself and moving away from, you know.

  • Would that kind of arc be something of interest, maybe?

  • Is that something that we could pursue in greater

  • detail, do you think?

  • Absolutely.

  • I don't know about this.

  • I'd be curious to talk about it.

  • I guess we always just want to be--

  • our discipline is a love of universals and determinants,

  • which was maybe not necessary in the trajectories you describe.

  • But I'd love to talk about that over drinks, maybe.

  • 50th anniversary of labs, coming up in a couple weeks.

  • Keller Easterling, thanks so much.

  • [applause]

  • I'd just like to thank everyone.

  • I also hope that perhaps in two decades

  • we can look back at this year in terms of a turning point, also

  • in terms of if we were to ever engage issues of space

  • and power, that potentially this is--

  • I couldn't think of a better way that we could do this.

  • Thank you very much, Keller, Charles, Mohsen.

  • [applause]

Good evening.

字幕と単語

ワンタップで英和辞典検索 単語をクリックすると、意味が表示されます

B1 中級

ケラー・イースターリング「エクストラステイトクラフト (Keller Easterling, "Extrastatecraft")

  • 161 4
    王小晏 に公開 2021 年 01 月 14 日
動画の中の単語