New forms of being ourselves, of relating to others and the environment, this is;
New Forms of Social Reproduction
It is true that after all, if we live in a transient society, providing a space of unlocked resources must happen. Obviously Architecture with all its solidity, and its faint attempts at creating community, mean that it goes against the so called contemporary labour market, and the dispersion of its energy intensive, high need to extract and transform resources. Going against the system cannot happen through resistance as this implies neglect. Resistance can only happen as new forms of living, or doing originate successfully, deeming old prototypes less benign or productive.
But we should stress that benign and productive are not the same, as they attend to the values of the bourgeois and of the working class respectively, and they cannot by any means be reconciliated, since one works towards capital (re)production and accumulation, and the other towards subsistence, which makes it all the more difficult, since our ideals, i.e. bureaucracy, planning, counselling, healthcare, etc. are geared towards the consolidation of the values of the Bourgeois.
This makes radical change impossible, but can there be space for the renegotiation of these forms of subsistence? If all of our judging and thinking stems from Bourgeois thinking and values (and it does), this emancipatory process cannot start in academia, for it was born from their uterus. Emancipation can only start in the imaginary, and needs to be novel, this is; not reactionary.
Imagining new social landscapes can be a difficult task, since their graphic representation can pose several difficulties due to their limitations. Moreover, the production of a graphic representation of modes of sociality, can be descriptive by translating living forms to modes of witnessing. This would be an exercise in representation, this is; picturing the existing. How can we then be novel in the representation of forms?
This is a tricky question, since the design of the new requires foreseeing, and therefore it requires the placing of limitations. The questions are multiple, and pertain the implications of these limitations, and the accommodation of choice, so these structures can accommodate issues around multiplicity, function, and adaptability/habitability in relation to new forms of (co)existing. This exercise in proposing new forms of living, and of relating to others is tentative and should not be seen as a final model, but as follies that questions the current modes of social (re)production by generating new possibilities: what if? How can these new models stir social commentary, or peer review?
That is a whole new question, and something that you will have to answer by yourself.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario