Anthropocene Idea in Modern Avant-Garde Architecture: a Retrospective Discussion on Wright and Fuller

Home , Buckminster Fuller

ITU A|Z • Vol 14 No 2 • July 2017 • 105-117 Anthropocene idea in modern avant-garde architecture: A retrospective discussion on Wright and Fuller

Can BOYACIOĞLU1, Gülçin PULAT GÖKMEN2, Nezih AYIRAN3 1 [email protected] • Department of Architecture, Faculty of Architecture, Gebze Technical University, Kocaeli, Turkey 2 [email protected] • Department of Architecture, Faculty of Architecture, Istanbul Technical University, Istanbul, Turkey 3 [email protected] • Department of Architecture, Faculty of Fine Arts, Design and Architecture, Cyprus International University, Nicosia, Northern Cyprus

Received: October 2016 • Final Acceptance: October 2016

Abstract The idea of nature is one of the main debates in social sciences since ecological problems are firstly discussed. Recently, theoricians in several majors claim a new geographical era named Anthropocene. It means there is no autonomous natural system left on Earth. In that perspective, the main idea behind sustainable architecture needs to be re-discussed. The aim of this article is to clarify the idea of nature in architecture before and after the new description of Anthropocene. To maintain this purpose, article uses modern avant-garde roots of architecture in the idea of nature with discussing the theoretical debates of Frank Lloyd Wright and Buckminster Fuller. The relationship between avant-garde architects’theories and designs could clarify the architectural point of view in the new possible An- thropocenic situation.

Keywords Anthropocene, Architectural philosophy, Buckminster Fuller, Ecological doi: 10.5505/itujfa.2017.27870 doi: architecture, Frank Lloyd Wright. 106

1. Introduction These are urban utopias which aim to Contemporary ecology is in the radically change the society from the middle of a paradigm shift triggered cultural roots to the smallest details by the theoretical inquiry of the mean- on production. These utopias envisage ing of nature. Recently, contemporary new urban spaces that has never de- philosophers like Zizek, Latour and scribed or discussed before that time. Clark joined the debate with their so- Avant-garde architectural forms were cial scientific ideas about nature and its generated from modern avant-garde’s autonomy. The question is if there is an perspectives for the future of the so- autonomous being other than human ciety. Easy to predict, these theoretical left as described as nature, or today hu- discussions and urban utopias need man action is the only hegemonic force to include a perspective for the nature on Earth. Even though the answer of (Anker, 2010). After all, the position of that inquiry has its own significance nature became one of main discussions to change architecture fundamentally, in the intersection of architecture and the question itself is very important to urban space. For designing a “modern re-discuss contemporary ecological ar- city”, position to nature was a subject to chitecture. solve. In that context, the question was The relationship between nature and what kind of action is needed to create architecture is a longtime discussion. that utopian cities; recreating the na- Especially right after the industrial rev- ture with “human intelligence” or na- olution, architecture theory began to ively believing that nature is originally discuss about problematic urban space healthy and safe for those new modern and generate ideas that rehabilitate or cities in the utopias of avant-garde ar- recreate it. Quickly modern architec- chitecture. ture defines its own mission about cit- The ideas about nature in modern ies that aims a safe and healthy human avant-garde architecture are not only life. It was the theory of modern archi- a change for that period’s urban land- tecture to create a contemporary just scape, but also an extensive change civilization with changing urban space. for contemporary architecture’s rela- As Howard (1902) insists in his book tionship with nature. Contemporary “Garden Cities of To-morrow”, English architecture creates its own identity cities in that period were unhealthy on being agree with or oppose to that landscapes that feature homelessness, periods avant-garde architecture and excessive density and crime. Moreover design the theory of architecture with most of other western cities had simi- the ideas which are re-discuss the lar problems. In that context, modern avant-garde ideas and forms of ear- avant-garde architects began to share ly 20th century modern architecture, an optimism to save the society with again and again. Consequently, mod- the tools of architecture. The opti- ern avant-garde architecture’s ideas on mism was about the transformation of nature are still important for rethink- the society with modern architecture ing the relationship between architec- from an unhealthy society to a modern tural theory and nature and to form a healthy one which lives in “well de- contemporary ecological discussion in signed” cities. architecture, parallel to paradigm shift Modern architecture’s main top- in the social scientifical meaning of ics on new urban space were about “nature”. the interaction of changing urban life and building idea. That subject needs 2. Contemporary architecture multiple perspectives and actions to and nature solve about politics, architecture and Especially after the “Our Com- technology. Consequently, “mod- mon Future” report of United Nations ern architect” became some kind of World Commission on Environment “avant-garde” that creates radical and and Development (WCED) in 1987 pioneer political ideas, inventions, that describes “sustainability” as the theoretical discussions and utopias key factor between production and na- for designing urban spaces for newly ture, architecture shifts the discipline’s modernizing urban life of that period. relationship with the idea of nature

ITU A|Z • Vol 14 No 2 • July 2017 • C. Boyacıoğlu, G. Pulat Gökmen, N. Ayıran 107 from a more ethical and theoretical tors. Modern avant-garde used science discussion to a more pragmatic one. and technology for creating a design In the report, it was clearly described, perspective and method to change the humanity is in a path that has an un- society to a modern civilization, on the sustainable relationship with nature contrary contemporary sustainable ar- and the end of the path is predicted as chitecture tries to solve the ecological catastrophic. In this perspective of the crisis without changing the society or report, contemporary society needs to economical system at all. It can be de- react to change total human actions for scribed as a rather post-modern posi- a more sustainable relationship with tion, an acception for the continuity of nature. In addition to this, industri- status quo. al development must not be harmed. Nearly thirty years after the decla- Thus, sustainability idea describes a ration of Our Common Future Report society that simultaneously economi- of the WCED, today, ecological crisis is cally growing and rehabilitate the en- still one of the most urgent problems of vironment for the sake of next gener- contemporary society. Climate change ations. The project was simple enough researches show that last ten years of to track: creating a society that spend the Earth were the hottest years of the the natural resources with the ratio of planet surface and Human actions are the regeneration of ecosystem. This the main cause for the ecological cri- idea quickly changes the architecture sis. Moreover, studies show that it is to a discipline what counts the energy nearly impossible to change the situ- and natural resources that it spends ation without radical changes in the and recycle them for the reuse of the consumption habits of the society. Sit- industry. McDonough and Braungart’s uation could be seen as a failure for the (2002) “cradle to cradle” theory was a paradigm of sustainability (Engelman, good example for that, which envisag- 2012). That points out architectural es buildings made by environmentally point of view embedded to sustainabil- full-cycling construction materials that ity paradigm also becomes a question generates an industry with no output of mark now. The agreement between waste. By the way Parr (2009) describes green society and social construction that kind of a sustainable architecture mentioned by Parr seems to failed to as a new agreement between green so- create a sustainable future. ciety and construction industry. In the perspective of the uncertaini- The new theoretical consensus after ty of the condition on ecological crisis, the report theorizes the relationship Latour’s (2014) point of view becomes with nature and architecture with engi- much more important for architecture. neering tools like LEED and BREEAM Latour reminds that ecological crisis is certificates which describes environ- unique in one point: there is no outside mental ratings for architectural designs of the problem on Earth, so evidently with energy consumption, sustain- there is no outside of this context for ability of the landscape, environmen- contemporary architecture. In other tal quality and recycling of the used words, being outside of this topic for materials. These building certification architects describes a position on the systems become very popular in archi- context. A position that is like ignor- tecture theory and praxis. Architecture ing a metaphorical leviathan comes for slowly changes its point of view from crush the (human) being. Architecture a more philosophical way to a more needs to find a theoretical background engineering way about understanding for current ecological situation. A situ- the nature (Swyngedouw, 2006). Re- ation that society needs to change ur- sult of this change, contemporary ar- gently. chitecture mostly tries to understand and redesign the relationship between 3. Anthropocene idea society and nature with an optimism Even though ecological architecture to rehabilitate it with technological follows a rather linear path in last ten advancement. However, sustainable ar- years, being practical with certificate chitecture’s optimism is very different systems and consumption based pres- from their modern avant-garde ances- ervation techniques; ecology as a sci-

Anthropocene idea in modern avant-garde architecture: A retrospective discussion on Wright and Fuller 108 ence field is experiencing a quick para- standing human action is not enough digm change. A while ago, Crutzen and for understanding the impact. Most Stoermer (2000) claim that, current of the time the impact is hard to seen geographical epoch, Holocene era of by the spectator of the action. That de- the Earth system is over. That means, scription changes the perspective of the the relatively stable nature of the planet ecological idea from the sustainability is demolished by massive effect of hu- perspective to a new blurry state simi- man behaviour now. Today, ecological lar to the theories of Castree or Zizek. theory is in a discussion about if Holo- However, sustainability idea’s main cene is over or not. problem is about minimizing the hu- According to Castree (2014a), Holo- man effect rather than eliminating the cene period began with the end of last remaining disturbance of the human ice age that blocks the development of action. On that account, Latour (2004) human civilizations with natural barri- suggests to focus on politics of nature, ers and emergence of natural boundary instead of trying to solve the ecologi- conditions that make planet surface cal problems with techno – ecological available to the rise of human culture. analysis and acts. As another sugges- Zalasiewicz et al. (2008) describe that tion, Clark (2010) defines a new green boundary conditions as a “holocenic perspective to “embrace inhuman” be- plateau”. Metaphorically human cul- cause human is not only a creature but ture lives on that plateau which is de- an “earthly creature” and the being of scribed with the stability of sea level, the human is depend upon the survival global temperature, atmospheric car- of the autonomy of the nature. On the bon dioxide level, denudation rate and other hand, with the definition of the human population. As a result, Zala- Anthropocene, “a world without na- siewicz et al. (2008) claim the unsta- ture” becomes a theoretical framework bility of that measurements mean the which is began to discuss. As an exam- end of Holocene epoch and the end of ple, Ellis (2011) describes the new phe- boundary conditions. Similar to Crut- nomenon as an escape from the fear of zen and Stoermer (2000), Zalasiewicz’s exceed the natural limits and theorizes theory means a new epoch that human a new point of view that describes a full culture is not naturally protected by human controlled globe with artificial environment, vice versa environment living systems, controlled faunas and is mainly controlled by and fragile to floras. Clearly, it means a dissolution of human actions. Crutzen and Stoermer the autonomy and originality of the na- (2000) named that new human centric ture and redeveloping it with a human epoch after Holocene as “Anthropo- oriented perspective from the size of cene” which means “human age”. the sub-atomic level to the ecological Quickly, Antropocene becomes balance of the Earth. Castree (2014b) both a scientific and a cultural phe- named this kind of pro-Anthropocene nomenon. Different scientific works theories as “hyper-modernism” and begin to clarify the new age with their clarifies that kind of situation with hy- own perspectives. Castree (2014a) de- brid and post-human situations. scribes Anthropocene situation as a The debate on Anthropocene idea new theoretical separation between clearly offers a new perspective for eco- natural and cultural. Similarly, Davison logical architecture. Though sustain- (2015) claims the autonomy of human ability, as a contemporary paradigm, is changes its identity to the autonomy of not enough to understand the new blur- nature. Philosophically, Zizek (2010) ry state of being in Anthropocene or describes a blur between natural and not. Sustainability originally depends cultural built by Anthropocene situa- on an understanding of an unlimited tion. Theoretically a new meaning for self-rehabilitating nature whenever ecology could be described with the the disturbance of un-ecological forces idea of Anthropocene. and materials are reduced. Despite the Szerszynski (2012) describes the fact that Anthopocene theory defines Anthropocene with the remaining of an inquiry to a possible or already oc- the human action rather than the ac- cured catastrophic total dissolvement tual action. In that perspective, under- of the homeostatic act of nature.

ITU A|Z • Vol 14 No 2 • July 2017 • C. Boyacıoğlu, G. Pulat Gökmen, N. Ayıran 109

Theoretically, architecture needs to “...man, thus caricatured by himself change its perspective the newer scien- – nature, thus violated – invaded even tific debate about nature. On that ac- national forest parks by a clumsy rus- count, architectural discussion should ticity false to nature and so to archi- be about the action related to the emer- tecture. The environment of civilized gency of nature to an anthropocenic mankind was everywhere insulted by situation. In a perspective about the such wilful stupidity.” situation could re-describe ecological Wright (1957) describes environ- architecture either as a pro-anthropo- mental problems as “misconception or cenic action or an act against the an- no conception of art and architecture”. thropocenic path. Interestingly, that In his point of view, the problem in en- discussion could be retrospectively vironment is a problem in architecture, discussed on modern avant-garde ar- and interestingly he identifies “the ma- chitecture. Frank Lloyd Wright and chine” as the solution of that environ- Buckminister Fuller, theoretically dis- mental problematic. cussed the autonomy of nature in their Wines (2000), subjectively, identifies respective works and use their point of Wright as the only green architect of his views in their designs. The ideas and period. According to Wright (1930), a designs of them could show the rela- modern man is a whole with his house tionship between anthropocene idea and also the landscape. House is a part and theory of architecture. of the land, a complementary for the whole being, universe. Man–House– 4. Wright’s debate Nature trio defines a gradual holistic One of the most important modern approach that describes the relation- architects, Frank Lloyd Wright has a ship between man and nature. Wright theoretical framework strictly related (1908) names the design approach as with the idea of nature. In his idea, na- “organic architecture”. It defines a pure ture is a “poetical” phenomenon and articulation of design, manufacturing the relationship between man and na- and landscape. In his book “The Fu- ture could only be reorganized with ture of Architecture”, Wright (1953) a “poetical” method. In his autobi- describes his idea about house design ographical book “A Testament”, Wright as below: (1957) identifies his ideas about nature “Human houses should not be like and man with a discussion about Wil- boxes, blazing in the sun, nor should we liam Blake’s poem “exuberance is beau- outrage the machine by trying to make ty”: dwelling-places too complementary to “He who knows the difference be- machinery. Any building for humane tween excess and exuberance is aware purposes should be an element, sym- of nature of the poetic principle, and pathetic feature of the ground, com- not likely to impoverish, or impov- plementary to its nature-environment, erised, by his work. The more a horse belonging by kinship to the terrain.” is Horse, a bird Bird, the more a man is That articulation could be seen in Man, a woman Woman, the better? The the designs of his two Jacobs houses. more a design is creative revelation of Wright’s first Jacobs House was made intrinsic nature, whatever the medium by precast materials that did not cov- or form of expression, the better.” ered by any finishing paint or plaster. Parallel to Wright’s idea about poet- He uses the brick walls’ junction points ry and understanding the nature, Zevi to create a grid for elevations, on the (1950) describes Wright’s architectural other hand he uses a 2 x 4 feet (61 x idea as “being human before human- 122 cm) grid for plan section (Lind, ist”. As it is seen, according to Wright, 1994). According to Lind (1994) proj- “nature” is actually the intrinsic nature ect’s main idea was about the need of of the being even if the being of a hu- an economical housing concept for the man or something else. So, the idea American middle class of the period. of nature is the intrinsic nature of the Wright idea was different from his co- natural. In the same page of his book, evals. He thinks that a modern afford- Wright (1957) clarifies the idea with able house must be a new solution for environmental perspective: the blooming modern life with stan-

Anthropocene idea in modern avant-garde architecture: A retrospective discussion on Wright and Fuller 110 dardization, prefabrication and the nature of the materials, even though his coevals tries to minimize their period’s house design to an affordable ratio. Wright’s second Jacobs House was different from the first house because of its semi-circular form. It uses the landscape for preventing from the winter wind of the Wisconsin and form creates a sunken court for humid summers. According to Steele (2005), the building is the first “passive solar house” in history. Satler (1999) claims, in Wright’s architecture, a design problem is pointed Figure 1. First Jacobs house (Lind, 1994). a sociological problem. A design is as important as how it liberated the society. In that perspective, Wright’s utopian city planning project Broadacre City was grounded with that socio-technological problem. His perspective about American cities has a big role about the design: “...social necessity had already forged a mortgage on the landscape of our beautiful American country- side while all our buildings, public and private, even churches, were senseless Figure 2. Second Jacobs house (Lind, 1994). commitments to some kind of expedi- ency instead of the new significances of formation for contemporary architec- freedom we so much needed.” ture, his perspective could be a debate Wright (1957) thinks American against an Anthropocene point of view citizens needed to liberated from un- in architecture. Banham (1969) identi- natural, unliberal, land lord owned, fies Wright’s architecture as a liberation non-modern landscapes of American of the limits of static architecture and Cities. Consequently, Wright identifies an approach to form a natural flow of car and television as important tech- being. It could be described as a rec- nical devices that dissolve hegemon- oncile between modern human and ic city fabric and liberate human and nature. Wright (1957) thinks native space altogether. Broadacre was a proj- American life is more free and natural. ect that tries to create enough space for He describes being native with being man to create his own free relationship with nature: with being on landscape (Hall, 2002). “Our human environment may now Wright’s Jacobs Houses could be be conceived and executed according seen as early experiments of the idea to nature: the nature of time, place and of Broadacre City, so technical prop- man: native as was always natural to erties of the projects are not simple cultures whatever life in the past was ideas about efficiency or economy but strongest, richest and best. The level al- they are socio-technical experiments ways highest when native.” of settling to Earth. Man is as free as After that description of being na- freedom of his land(scape) and he be- tive, he begins to discuss about the na- comes the part of society with his land tivity problem in modern man. Wright becomes the part of the nature. (1957) tries to solve the nature of mod- Figure 3 : Broadacre City Perspec- ern man with architecture that influ- tive Drawing by Wright (Pfeiffer, 2009) enced by the harmony of relationship Even though, Wright’s Jacobs Hous- between native man and nature: es and Broadacre City, technically, are “What is this life of ours today, is mostly old and already well known in- man in his new place in time? What

ITU A|Z • Vol 14 No 2 • July 2017 • C. Boyacıoğlu, G. Pulat Gökmen, N. Ayıran 111

5. Fuller’s Utopia of Nature Fuller’s idea of nature is totally different from Wright’s idea of nature that become a whole with mankind. His ideas were about Shumpeter’s economical point of view which defends design and engineering are the key methods for overcoming economical and environmental problems (Anker, 2010). Fuller builts his point of view about Figure 3. Broadacre city perspective drawing changing the industrial systems upon by Wright (Pfeiffer, 2009). efficiency. According to him, efficiency . could be reached by not only changing the design but changing the whole system as responsive to the design. In Fuller’s book 4D Time Lock (1928), he criticizes housing industry of his age as under-developed and describes the situation with a custom car design metaphor. In Fuller’s story, a man wants to buy a car, so he invites Figure 4. 4D Tower house design of Fuller a car designer to his garden. After that (Gorman, 2005). man describes the design which he wants to use with the images of Venice gondolas and French fiacre (Gorman, 2005). In Fuller’s (1970) point of view these kind of requests by the users are pre-industrial and inefficient for housing industry. House must be a pure efficient tool for sustainability of the individual. His method for housing design was understanding the minimum necessities to survive and consequently he portrays his house designs as a protection from the in, out and in-be- Figure 5. Dymaxion House Design Façade tween variants. of Fuller (Baldwin, 1997). Fuller’s (1928) first phenomenal con- kind of Man is this man of today? What ceptual housing design was 4D Tower of his civilization? Nature is how now? House. It was a light aluminum pre- What is Man as he is? Where does this cast building that carried with a zep- activation of life-force apply to old or pelin to the ground that “smoothened” new form, and what is substance as he with bombs. In his first design, land- represents it to be God or Devil? ... in scape clearly means a handicap for cre- short, in what does man really consist ating efficient architecture and some- as he exists in our native civilization?” thing to demolish. On the other hand, As a result, Wright’s architecture is house is a monolitic pre-fabricated a challenge for an ecological-demo- product that delivered to the customer. cratical space that human and land(s- One year later, Fuller (1929) improved cape) liberated altogether. In his point his idea of house with his famous de- of view, the liberation is understand- sign, Dymaxion House. It was also an ing the nativity of human being on aluminium precast industrial housing the land(scape). In his point of view, design. Dymaxion House is a hexagon machine is only a tool of modern man planned project that could built in 24 for that reason. Therefore architecture hours. The structure of the house was a is not a machine design but a poetic - metal column at the center that carries sociological design that uses machine floor and ceiling parts suspended with as tool. steel ropes (as cited in Anker, 2010). According to Anker (2010), the design

Anthropocene idea in modern avant-garde architecture: A retrospective discussion on Wright and Fuller 112 od Dymaxion House is a perfect exam- Mind apprehends and comprehends ple of the allegory of Le Corbusier: “a the general principles governing flight machine to live in”. and deep sea diving, and man puts on Contradictory to Wright’s designs his wings or his lungs, then takes them that unify land and house as a whole, off when not using them. The special- Gorman (2005) characterizes Fuller’s ist bird is greatly impeded by its wings designs as temporary objects on Earth. when trying to walk. The fish cannot The interaction between human and come out of the sea and walk upon nature becomes indirect with the use of land, for birds and fish are specialists.” technology, human lives in a machine According to Fuller (1968), the prob- about efficiency. As another example lem of sustainability is specialization for that purpose, in his book “Utopia of the design like the specialization of or Oblivion”, Fuller (1972) describes the body of bird or fish to a one specif- a life in a capsule design that flowing ic purpose. Contrast to specialization, between outer space and surface of the design must be generalized with the Earth: efficiency and adaptability of the whole “...once produced and successfully system. In this integrated perspective, “operative”. Its (a rocket capsule con- Fuller (1968) describes a design as a tains a miniature artificial ecosystem growing child. How a child’s body does and house) replicas may be mass-pro- not need an instruction for growing, duced for $2 per pound, i.e. for $600. design must be emerged with the grow- With such an integrated chemical-en- ing of technology and the sociological ergy regenerator taking care of all sani- system. That metaphor directs him to ty and energy-generating requirements the idea of “Spaceship Earth”. of family living, man may deploy al- Odum and Barrett (1971) describes most invisibly to the remote beauty a closed ecosystem as a system that spots about the Earth in air-delivered does not interfere to another system. geodesic enclosed dwelling machines Similar to that description, Fuller and survive with only helicopter and (1968) designs his point of view with TV intercommunication at luxuriously the idea that Earth is a closed ecosys- simplified high standards of living-op- tem, metaphorically similar to a space- erative at negligible land-anchor- ship. Therefore, on Earth all the people age cost similar to telephone-service are astronauts of Spaceship Earth. Peo- charges.” ple are responsible to the Earth as as- Cleary, Fuller’s concept about tronaut is responsible to the spaceship. “house” is hidden from his description Fuller (1968) discusses that responsi- about that “dwelling machine”. In his bility as a mission to a “metaphysical point of view, house is not about dwell- mastering”: ing in a community or on a landscape “If the present planting of humanity but it is about to survive at ecological upon Spaceship Earth cannot compre- and economical conditions, “luxuri- hend this (ecological and economical) ously”. Consequently, the theoretically inexorable process and discipline itself base of his projects are technologi- to serve exclusively that function of cal abilities instead of an interaction metaphysical mastering of the physical with community or nature. When the it will be discontinued, and its potential starting point of the project becomes mission in universe will be carried on the technological abilities, the project by the metaphysically endowed capabi- needs to be a part of a greater techno- lites of other beings on other spaceship logical network. This point of view was planet of universe.” well-explained in Fuller’s (1968) fa- The metaphysical mastering in the mous book named “Operating Manual theory of Fuller is some kind of a pur- for Spaceship Earth”. He describes the suit to evolutionary completeness. In situation with the evolution differences this pursuit, technology has a nearly between human and other kinds: mythical role as a guide. Fuller (1964), “What nature needed man to be was in his book “Education Automation”, adaptive in many if not any direction; mentions physical and technologi- wherefore she gave man a mind as well cal knowledge as “eternal principles” as a co-ordinating switchboard brain. which are the main factors on how year

ITU A|Z • Vol 14 No 2 • July 2017 • C. Boyacıoğlu, G. Pulat Gökmen, N. Ayıran 113

2025 will be: ical idea in Anthropocene perspective “We humans were given this ca- is about the idea of nature, its state pability to function as local Universe and the socio-ecological idea about problem solvers. We are here to solve it. Wines (2000) describes ecological evolutionary occuring, unprecedented, architecture as an architecture of an metaphysical, as well as physical prob- ecological society. Both avant-garde lems. We can do so by means of our architects, Wright and Fuller are con- unique access to the thus-far discov- sistent to this idea. They aim to find ered inventory of eternal principles.” environmentally consistent societies As a consequence, human mind is for new relationships with nature in not only responsible for surviving or their respective utopias. For both of protecting the Earth but also responsi- them, technology and design are tools ble to change it with the eternal prin- for shifting the design paradigm and ciples. However, Fuller (1968) thinks sustainability of the contemporary sys- that like as limited thermodynamic tem is simply not important. Their uto- knowledge is enough for being an as- pias are inclusive ideas that aim to shift tronaut; only limited technical knowl- point of view on every single aspect of edge is needed for being an astronaut / design. In the perspective of their uto- citizen in “Spaceship Earth”. In Fuller’s pias, architecture is responsible to the (1968) description Spaceship Earth is a life in universe as a whole. kind of machine: According to Wright, there is a hi- “One of the interesting things to me erarchical dependency between man, about our spaceship (Earth) is that it land and nature, so that being consis- is a mechanical vehicle, just as an au- tent is about being in harmony with tomobile. If you own an automobile, the origin of the universe, earth and you realize that you must put oil and finally landscape. In the point of view gas into it, and you must put water in of the contemporary ecological debate the radiator and take care of the car as that could be said, he describes his a whole.” theory as a holosenic dependency that Thus, in the perspective of Fuller, protects the autonomy of both human people needed to obey the operating and nature. On the contrary, according manual of Earth written by engineers to Fuller being consistent is creating a and architects. On the other hand, that harmonical design from the minimum kind of mechanical Earth is open for scale to the scale of the whole economi- “upgrades” to the “metaphysical mas- cal system. It points, Fuller understand tering” of human from the engineers nature as ground for a more import- and architects who know the “eternal ant economical level in his theoretical principles”. Actually, Fuller (1964) de- background. A consistent economi- scribes that kind of a techno-centric cal system and the individuals living democracy utopia which architects and in that economical system are the key engineers calculate the prospective re- factors of the sustainability of Fuller’s sults of the decisions of the community architecture. In Wright’s architecture for a right for citizens to change them. man and universe are a whole that free from any requirement of a system, so 6.Wright and Fuller’s ideas in that there is no sustainability in the anthropocene perspective idea of Wright because there is no sys- Even though, sustainability idea in tem to sustain at all. There is only the architecture is mainly about energy poetic relationship between man and and material efficiency, especially after nature. the description of the Anthropocene Wright clearly thinks man is per- era, ecological theory mainly focuses manent on the land(scape). Design on dependency, resilience and auton- and construction are about the settle- omy of natural systems on Earth. As ment of the man to the land(scape) Latour (2014) mentioned, the “story” with his house. Thus, a house design about the Earth is in a challenge be- is only relevant for the original owner tween man and nature and now nature and the original landscape. A house is threatens the mankind with withdraw- a (human) nature to live in. In Fuller’s ing the challenge. As a result an ecolog- perspective, system and the efficiency

Anthropocene idea in modern avant-garde architecture: A retrospective discussion on Wright and Fuller 114 of the design are stable, house and man a spaceship and an organic closeness are temporary. House design is for an like a growing child. In Fuller’s meta- anonymous man and not for settling phorical world, an arm is a technical to the landscape but for escalating on device which has a purpose even it is a ground. However his idea simply did an arm of a child or an arm of a fac- not answer what is happening about tory robot like in an anthropocenic the leftovers from that temporal esca- world the originality of the nature of lating. the arm is not a question. In Wright’s Even if, theoretically Wright seems world, the idea of nature is the catalyst like more conservative to radical inter- of the design, a landscape is the ground ference to the landscape; other than the that the human-story needs to be on destructive bombing idea for “smooth- it. Even though the landscape could be ing” in 4D Tower House project, Full- changed, nature keeps its identity as it er nearly never touches the landscape is, so that a child’s arm is not a device at all in his projects. For example, in but the being and its technical specific- Wright’s projects roof of house could ities are only important with the very be soil, garden, nature in the compo- own story of the metaphorical child. It sition of man and landscape but in is open to the being but also needs to Fuller’s perspective nature is a fragile be protected in the same time like the machine that ordinary people should openness and the protection of the na- never touch or be a part of. So that, in ture in his theoretical perspective. Wright’s utopia, man and land are col- The blurry state of Anthropocene laboratively liberated from status quo which Zizek (2010) mentioned, in- of pre-modern life which man is forced cludes unpredictability and incom- to live as either a villager or in a city prehensibility inbetween nature and without any interaction with nature. mankind. Interestingly, Latour (2014) On the other hand, Fuller’s man is lib- mentions nature “take the control” erated from the land with techno-eco- in the exact moment of withdrawing nomical design and when he liberates from the challenge. In that perspec- himself, he loses his rights about in- tive, He describes the blur and the terfering to the being. The mankind is unpredictability of possible ecological astronauts now. catastrophy as a “geo-story” and sug- As astronauts, according to Fuller, gests two options for a solution to the nature of human is his minimum re- ecological crisis. The options he sug- quirements to live: eating, sleeping, gesting are; a new total anthropogenic excretion etc. The life is a technical “human-story” and a limited, ecologi- problem. A technical device is import- cal autonomy preserved “human-sto- ant as solving economy and efficiency ry”. Inspite of a geo-story that limits problems in life. In Wright’s perspec- human action with unpredictable nat- tive, life is a socio-psychological phe- ural disasters, an ecological autonomy nomenon. In the virtue of that, nature preserved human-story is accepting of man is originally the identity behind the capabilities of the stability of nature his social and psychological actions. and limit human action on it. By the For this kind of a point of view, tech- way, an anthropogenic human-story nical device is important as it liberates is totally diminishing the stability of the owner’s identity from hegemony in nature and creating an anthropocenic society and land. A similar perspective stability on Earth.In this context, the difference could be seen in these two question is which of these avant-garde modern avant-garde architects’ ideas architects’ approaches meet which of about nature. When Fuller compares the stories. Fuller’s utopia seems like an design as a growing child, the design anthropocenic human-story that sta- phenomena he mentions also includes bility is constructed with technological nature and even the whole universe. If devices. On the other hand, his point his two metaphors could be combine of view about the fragility of system in a weird example: a spaceship grow- creates a new status quo for the culture ing like a child, there is no outside of and becomes the main problem about the design from the beginning till the human nature. On the other hand, end. It has a very specific purpose as Wright’s utopia is the other, autonomy

ITU A|Z • Vol 14 No 2 • July 2017 • C. Boyacıoğlu, G. Pulat Gökmen, N. Ayıran 115

Table 1. Ecological and architectural subjects in Wright and Fuller’s perspective.

preserved human-story. In his utopia, ture. Today, architecture faces a new nature is autonomous with the man. challenge in Anthropocene era and a However mankind did not limit them- definition of the situation is needed for selves with the capabilities of the na- architecture that described by the the- ture or push the limits of the nature to ory of architecture. Zizek and Latour find the solution but shifting the lim- redefines the situation in philosophy iting paradigm. Consequently, design with the hints of the idea in geograph- and technology are not tools for push- ical theory. Their philosophical defini- ing the limits but tools for dwelling to tions are different than the geographi- the land(scape) and changing the par- cal definition because of the idea “there adigm that disturbs the autonomy of is no nature now” is too much certain man or landscape and dominates the for the meaning of nature in the phil- being. The difference between the ideas osophical point of view. Architecture of Fuller and Wright is the autonomy also needs to find out its own meaning of nature. While Fuller envisages an in Anthropocene. Perhaps this mean- utopia that nature controlled by tech- ing is hidden in the questions of “what no-centric human systems, Wright’s is the ground without the meaning of sociology oriented utopia creates an ar- nature?” or “what is the nature of the chitecture that respects the originality architectural space in Anthropocene?” of the relationship of man with auton- now. omous nature. Fuller’s technologically Wright and Fuller’s utopian ideas are controlled system and Wright’s socio- free from their contemporary society’s logically controlled land creates the rituals and explores the potentials of main question marks between the new being in the very natures of mankind, theoretical perspective in ecological ar- landscape and matter. One way or an- chitecture in the Anthropocene era. other, they are both radicals for the idea of nature and their designs are the 7. Conclusion experiments of that avant-garde natu- Wright and Fuller’s utopian ap- ral utopias. Contemporary ecological proaches create an alternative way of architecture needs to be critical and thinking for contemporary architec- free in a that kind of perspective, even

Anthropocene idea in modern avant-garde architecture: A retrospective discussion on Wright and Fuller 116 it becomes dilemmatic. Zevi’s (1947) Fuller, B. (1968). Operating man- description of “human before human- ual for spaceship earth. Zurich: Lars ist” is important today. Architect needs Müller Publishers. to be choose between becoming an Fuller, B. (1970). Universal require- “earthly creature human” or a “hyper ments of a dwelling advantage: teleo- modern humanist”. As Latour (2014) logic schedule. In J. Meller (Eds.), The mentioned, there is no outside of the buckminster fuller reader (pp. 245-253). problem now. Ann Arbor, MI: Cape. Fuller, B. (1972). Utopia or oblivion: References the prospects for humanity. Zurich: Anker, P. (2010). From bauhaus to Lars Müller Publishers. ecohouse: a history of ecological design. Gorman, M. (2005). Buckminister Baton Rouge, LA: LSU Press. fuller: designing for mobility. Ann Ar- Baldwin, J. (1997). BuckyWorks: bor, MI: Skira. buckminster fuller’s ideas for today. Hall, P. (2002). Cities of tomorrow: New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons. an intellectual history of urban plan- Banham, R. (1969). The wilder- ning and design in the twentieth cen- ness years of frank loyd wright. In M. tury. West Sussex: Wiley. Banham, P. Barker, S. Lyall & C. Price Howard, E. (1902). Garden cities (Eds.), A critic writes: selected essays by of to-morrow. London: Swan Sonnen- reyner banham (pp. 137-141). Berke- schein. ley, CA: University of California Press. Latour, B. (2004). Politics of nature. Castree, N. (2014a). The anthropo- Cambridge, MA: Harvard University cene and geography I: the back story. Press. Geography Compass, 8(7), 436-449. Latour, B. (2014). Agency in the Castree, N. (2014b). The anthropo- times of anthropocene. New Literary cene and geography II: current con- History, 45(1), 1-18. tributions. Geography Compass, 8(7), Lind, C. (1994). Frank lloyd wright’s 450-463. usonian houses. Washington, DC: Clark, N. (2010). Volatile worlds, Pomegranate Art Books. vulnerable bodies: confronting abrupt McDonough, W. & Braungart, M. climate change. Theory, Culture & Soci- (2002). Cradle to cradle: remaking the ety, 27(2-3), 31-53. way we make things. New York, NY: Crutzen, P. & Stoermer, E. (2000). North Point Press. The anthropocene.Global Change Odum, E. & Barrett G. (1971). Fun- Newsletter, 41, 17-18. damentals of ecology. Philadephia, PA: Davison, A. (2015). Beyond the Saunders. mirror horizon: modern ontology and Parr, A. (2009). Hijacking sustain- amodern possibilities in the anthro- ability. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. pocene. Geographical Research, 53(3), Pfeiffer, B. (2009). Frank lloyd wright 298-305. 1943 – 1959: the complete works, P. Ellis, E. C. (2011). Anthropogenic Gössel (Ed.), Köln: Taschen. transformation of the terrestrial bio- Satler, G. (1999). The architecture of sphere. Philosophical Transactions of frank lloyd wright: a global view. Jour- the Royal Society A, 369, 1010-1035. nal of Architectural Education, 53(1), Engelman, R. (2012). Giriş. In E. 15-24. Assadourian & M. Renner (Eds.), Dün- Steele, J. (2005). Ecological architec- ya’nın durumu 2012: sürdürülebilir re- ture: a critical history. London: Thames faha doğru. (Ayşe Başcı, Trans.), (pp. & Hudson. xxi-xxiv). İstanbul: Türkiye İş Bankası Swyngedouw, E. (2006). Met- Kültür Yayınları. (Original work pub- abolic urbanization: the making lished 2012). of cyborg cities. In N. Heynen, M. Fuller, B. (1928). 4D time lock. Al- Kaika & E. Swyngedouw (Eds.), In buquerque, NM: Biotechnic. the nature of cities: urban political Fuller, B. (1964). Education automa- ecology and the politics of urban me- tion: comprehensive learning for emer- tabolism (pp. 21-38). New York, NY: gent humanity. Zurich: Lars Müller Routledge. Publishers. Szerszynski, B. (2012). The end of

ITU A|Z • Vol 14 No 2 • July 2017 • C. Boyacıoğlu, G. Pulat Gökmen, N. Ayıran 117 the end of the nature: the anthropo- York, NY: Rizzoli. cene and the fate of the human. Ox- Wright, F. L. (1953). The future of ford Literary View, 34(2), 165-184. architecture. Madison, WI: Horizon World Commission on Environ- Press. ment and Development. (1987). Wright, F. L. (1957). A testament. Our common future. Oxford: Ox- Ann Arbor, MI: Horizon Press. ford University Press. Zalasiewicz, J., Williams, M., Wines, J. (2000). Green architec- Smith, A., Barry, T. L., Coe, A. ture. P. Jodido (Ed.), Köln: Taschen. L., Bown, P. R., ... & Gregory, F. J. Wright, F. L. (1908). In the cause (2008). Are we now living in the an- of architecture. In F. Gutheim (Ed.), thropocene?. Gsa Today, 18(2), 4-8. On architecture - selected writings Zevi, B. (1950). Towards an or- 1894-1940 (1941). Duell, Sloan and ganic architecture. London: Faber Pearce. & Faber. Wright, F. L. (1930). The card- Zizek, S. (2010). Living in the end board house, In B. Pfeiffer (Ed.), times. New York, NY: Verso. Collected writings (1992). New

Anthropocene idea in modern avant-garde architecture: A retrospective discussion on Wright and Fuller