Antoine Picon, "Robots and Architecture: Experiments, Fiction, Epistemology", Architectural Design, May-June 2014, pp. 54-59. (original) (raw)

Abstract

sparkles

AI

The paper examines the cultural reception of robotics in the field of architecture, oscillating between techno-utopianism and techno-pessimism. It discusses how robotics encourages architects to rethink design processes and emphasizes the necessity of reimagining human-machine relationships. Through examples such as Richard Buckminster Fuller and the Vertical Village project by Gramazio & Kohler, the implications of digital fabrication and flying robots on architectural innovation are explored.

Figures (6)

technological progress that he saw as a means to redesign society. According to Fuller, the Dymaxion house, car, and prefabricated bathroom that he developed in the 1920s and 1930s were not only ingenious devices meant to revolutionise the building industry, transportation and everyday life; they were also intended to pave the way for a radically different future in which men would roam free on the surface of the globe, live everywhere and fully take advantage of their intellectual capacities.'In contrast to techno-utopianism, the opposing view, techno-pessimism, is not that prevalent. It is largely limited to domains like literature and philosophy. You have only to think of the condemnation of railways by so many 19th-century writers, or the distrust expressed by 20th- century phenomenologists, such as Martin Heidegger, in the power of technology to improve the human condition. A more nuanced assessment of the real impact of technological innovation on the structures of production and society is far more common. Wary of discourses, which they often perceive as crude simplifications, historians have specialised in a more subtle and perceptive take on innovation. In his book The Shock of the Old: Technology and Global History Since 1900, British historian David Edgerton has tried, for instance, to reassess the respective roles of traditional techniques and highly visible breakthroughs like nuclear power in our contemporary world. His line of argument is that everyday techniques have been more instrumental in shaping what lies under our eyes than more widely and highly acclaimed innovations.” How ready are we to receive robots on our building sites? Antoine Picon, G Ware Travelstead Professor of the History of Architecture and Technology at Harvard Graduate School of Design (GSD), highlights the mixed cultural reception that robotics in architecture has received, veering from techno-utopianism to techno- pessimism. Is the greatest value in robotics for architecture in fact contained within the discipline, residing in the way that it forces architects to think differently, shifting their mental landscape and making them design truly three-dimensional space? Are we, though, in danger of neglecting to explore and re-imagine the fundamental relationships between men, designers and workers, and machines, computers and robots?

technological progress that he saw as a means to redesign society. According to Fuller, the Dymaxion house, car, and prefabricated bathroom that he developed in the 1920s and 1930s were not only ingenious devices meant to revolutionise the building industry, transportation and everyday life; they were also intended to pave the way for a radically different future in which men would roam free on the surface of the globe, live everywhere and fully take advantage of their intellectual capacities.'In contrast to techno-utopianism, the opposing view, techno-pessimism, is not that prevalent. It is largely limited to domains like literature and philosophy. You have only to think of the condemnation of railways by so many 19th-century writers, or the distrust expressed by 20th- century phenomenologists, such as Martin Heidegger, in the power of technology to improve the human condition. A more nuanced assessment of the real impact of technological innovation on the structures of production and society is far more common. Wary of discourses, which they often perceive as crude simplifications, historians have specialised in a more subtle and perceptive take on innovation. In his book The Shock of the Old: Technology and Global History Since 1900, British historian David Edgerton has tried, for instance, to reassess the respective roles of traditional techniques and highly visible breakthroughs like nuclear power in our contemporary world. His line of argument is that everyday techniques have been more instrumental in shaping what lies under our eyes than more widely and highly acclaimed innovations.” How ready are we to receive robots on our building sites? Antoine Picon, G Ware Travelstead Professor of the History of Architecture and Technology at Harvard Graduate School of Design (GSD), highlights the mixed cultural reception that robotics in architecture has received, veering from techno-utopianism to techno- pessimism. Is the greatest value in robotics for architecture in fact contained within the discipline, residing in the way that it forces architects to think differently, shifting their mental landscape and making them design truly three-dimensional space? Are we, though, in danger of neglecting to explore and re-imagine the fundamental relationships between men, designers and workers, and machines, computers and robots?

This dual regime is even more pronounced when automating construction through the use of robots. On the one hand, following the pioneering experiments of Fabio Gramazio and Matthias Kohler at ETH Zurich, where they share the Chair of Architecture and Digital Fabrication, robots appear as a key element of future architectural development. Many schools of architecture are now equipped with robotic arms that are used for structural investigations as well as for research on surfacing and patterning. On the other hand, it is easy to measure the limitations of the use of robots on ordinary construction sites, beginning with the innumerable problems linked to security and maintenance that they raise. In addition, they still possess an unassailable association with science fiction; a connotation that is especially marked in the experiments involving flying robots led by Gramazio and Kohler.’ The aerial ballet of their insect-like machines assembling blocks with superhuman precision is evocative of aerial traffic patterns in cities of the future where flying vehicles have become common. Already present in Albert Robida’s late 19th- and early 20th-century engravings and novels, this vision of the urban future would Despite its attempt to distance itself from techno- utopianism, the narrative of the industrialisation of construction remained permeated by utopian concerns such as the desire to reconcile nature and technology, the project to free man of unnecessarily harsh work, or the ambition to enable man to live everywhere on the planet, the latter being especially present in Buckminster Fuller’s approach to industrialisation. In many respects, the advent of robotics in architecture is marked by the emergence of a similar type of narrative. On a certain number of points, this new narrative appears as the direct

This dual regime is even more pronounced when automating construction through the use of robots. On the one hand, following the pioneering experiments of Fabio Gramazio and Matthias Kohler at ETH Zurich, where they share the Chair of Architecture and Digital Fabrication, robots appear as a key element of future architectural development. Many schools of architecture are now equipped with robotic arms that are used for structural investigations as well as for research on surfacing and patterning. On the other hand, it is easy to measure the limitations of the use of robots on ordinary construction sites, beginning with the innumerable problems linked to security and maintenance that they raise. In addition, they still possess an unassailable association with science fiction; a connotation that is especially marked in the experiments involving flying robots led by Gramazio and Kohler.’ The aerial ballet of their insect-like machines assembling blocks with superhuman precision is evocative of aerial traffic patterns in cities of the future where flying vehicles have become common. Already present in Albert Robida’s late 19th- and early 20th-century engravings and novels, this vision of the urban future would Despite its attempt to distance itself from techno- utopianism, the narrative of the industrialisation of construction remained permeated by utopian concerns such as the desire to reconcile nature and technology, the project to free man of unnecessarily harsh work, or the ambition to enable man to live everywhere on the planet, the latter being especially present in Buckminster Fuller’s approach to industrialisation. In many respects, the advent of robotics in architecture is marked by the emergence of a similar type of narrative. On a certain number of points, this new narrative appears as the direct

Throughout the 20th century, machines used to prefabricate or customize, and to assemble parts, had been interpreted as tools radically distinct from the mind that put them in motion. Equations and flows of data seem to constitute, in contrast, a fluid milieu that tends to unite the human brain and its mechanical extensions. This new intimacy could be described as the advent of a cyborg designer whose intentions are materialised through the action of powerful artificial arms. But this perspective may be misleading insofar that the best way to envisage what robots do is not necessarily to consider them as extensions of the human mind and body. For they do not exactly replace human arms and hands; they follow principles of their own, often different from the rules that govern human productive gestures. Coupled with the readiness with which they obey the designer's instructions, such difference increases their epistemic potential, as we shall see towards the end of this article.

Throughout the 20th century, machines used to prefabricate or customize, and to assemble parts, had been interpreted as tools radically distinct from the mind that put them in motion. Equations and flows of data seem to constitute, in contrast, a fluid milieu that tends to unite the human brain and its mechanical extensions. This new intimacy could be described as the advent of a cyborg designer whose intentions are materialised through the action of powerful artificial arms. But this perspective may be misleading insofar that the best way to envisage what robots do is not necessarily to consider them as extensions of the human mind and body. For they do not exactly replace human arms and hands; they follow principles of their own, often different from the rules that govern human productive gestures. Coupled with the readiness with which they obey the designer's instructions, such difference increases their epistemic potential, as we shall see towards the end of this article.

Loading...

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.