7.1.3 Pangenical Materiality: Living in a Cyclically Material World

“While most animals can choose their environments, seek shelter in a storm... or migrate with the changing seasons, plants must be able to withstand and adapt to constantly changing weather.” Chamovitz, 2013.

Although a common mantra of the biomimicry movement is that ‘materials are expensive and design is cheap’ (Evans-Pughe, 2014; Pawlyn, 2011), the contrary is true, because, as exemplified in the fire-adapted species discussed throughout this thesis [i.e. Pinus contorta and Quercus chrysolepis], the functional traits that enable coexistence with complex planetary processes, such as wildfire, evolved over epochs, therein equate to R&D endeavours many times longer and more varied than humanity could replicate. Furthermore, as illustrated by traits including pyriscence and pyrogermination, even species that have evolved means of the protecting their materiality [i.e. resistors] invest significant resources in protecting the longevity of their informatic legacy [their DNA] [Fig. 83].

As do Native American architectures, this paradigm places greater value on information [i.e. praxis] than material, hence ‘builds to [seasonally] burn’, the approach thereof aligned to that of the faunal kingdom, as exhibited in numerous examples as documented by Mike Hansell (2009). But, disposability has bad reputation in sustainability circles, and for good reason: as evident in the umpteen tons of plastic waste now circulating the planet’s oceans, “designing for destruction” (Kettles, 2008) took a temporary leave of absence from the design table.

However, the cyclically renewable material options, and production methods affiliated thereto of the present are innumerably greater than those of the past. In toto, though a sizeable swathe is published in Bionic City magazine, the sum is too great to cite, but a few compelling examples include:

• Biofabricated materials, which cultivated from living organisms, including fungi and bacteria, may be grown on or off-site, but in both instances, whereupon wildfire passes would reduce to their chemical parts, thereon be absorbed by the landscape, propagate the regeneration thereof, and in turn, the supply of biomass resources as may be used in building. Examples of relevant biofabrication projects include: Bio Ex-Machina (Co-de-iT, 2016), Jessica Gregory’s BiHome (Haeckels, 2018), and numerous IaaC (2018, 2016) and several Urban Morphogenesis Lab projects.

• In-situ recycling, wherein, rather than clear debris away from natural hazard sites it is instead used in the regeneration process. Production methodologies that support on-site recycling of building, and other materials include wide- ranging biotic and abiotic fabrication processes, such as design for disassembly [i.e. kits of reconfigurable parts], 3D printing, and other forms of rapid prototyping as may be enabled with or without open building technologies, such as Wikihouse (2011). In-situ recycling aligns with indigenous local sources practices, such as those of the Pomo, and is operable at multiple scales, from timber to pine needles, as evident in Tamara Orjola’s ‘Forest Wool’ (Schwab, 2016), which transforms the latter into textiles.

• Fire as material process, which, drawing on ancient Eastern arts and crafts narratives that embed chemical transitions, is witnessing a revival, as exemplified by Cai Guo-Qiang’s works including ‘Valley in Heat’, which was created through curation of explosives, and Esrawe’s ‘Ethereal’ lights (2018), which embedded burning in their production process by means of harnessing the material effects thereof (Gibson, 2010). These pyro-technical interrogations are part of a wider transition towards integration of state- changes in experimental design, architecture, and art practice, as illustrated in Rachel Armstrong’s Vibrant Architecture (2013), James Eagle’s Despositional Architectures (2016, 2018), and Ensamble’s Tippet Rise Art Center (2018).

• Organism as architecture, wherein curation of plant growth not merely harnesses the life’s materiality, but its structural properties, of which examples include Giuliano Mauri’s Cattedrale Vegetale (2018), and Full Grown’s chairs, tables, and interior fixtures and décor (2018).

Ashes to Architectural Ashes

Nourishing not polluting landscapes, Panarchitectural genera’s materiality will be devoid of chemicals that upon burning pose harm to the environment, including, but not limited to petrochemical-based plastics, and all such classes of fire-retardant which have been linked to both human and other faunal health issues. As relates to the latter, researchers at NIST have developed bio-based retardants found to reduce flammability of common furniture components to such extent that heat release dropped by 48-77% (Bello, 2014). WUI homeowners will be encouraged to ensure household contents, including furniture and décor, are fabricated of biological materials which, like those cited above, be they natural or synthetic in origin, upon burning, would help not hinder ecological recovery from wildfire. Part of the wider architectural movement towards living and non-living, but life-like materials (Armstrong, 2013; Badarnah Kadri 2012; Gruber, 2011), these and related fabrication developments are posited as extending Max Moritz’s concept of “passive survivability” (2017) to incorporate non-human communities which, resident in and adjacent to the WUI, are harmed whereupon burning of non-biological materials releases toxic pollutants into the food chain.

Cradle to Landscape Cradle

Codification of a trichotomous architectural codex, which accommodates for physically, therein phenomenologically distinct peri-urban landscapes, necessitates a mind-set broadly aligned to that of Landscape urbanism as defined by, amongst others, Peter Connolly (2012), James Corner (1997), Mohsen Mostafavi (1993), and Chris Reed and Marie Lister (2014), and their antecedents, notably Ian McHarg (1992). Not “practices of the wild” (in reference to Corner citing Snyder, 1990), but ‘codes from the wild’, that, sensu Corner, seek to “extend new relationships and sets of possibilities” (2006), fundamental thereto is a symbiogenetical approach (sensu Chu, 2004), which, not merely metaphorically, but practically, delegates a degree of decision-making to buildings, more specifically, via the programmatic potentialities which, be it biochemically or otherwise, are inherent in their materiality. The above- cited materials exhibit properties that illustrate distribution of architectural decisions to non-human entities, which whether biotic, abiotic, or a fusion thereof [Fig. 84], converse with their environment is not a pipe dream, but an unfolding reality.

>Continue to Chapter 7.1.4 here.

The thesis is also available in PDF format, downloadable in several parts on Academia and Researchgate.

Note that figures have been removed from the digital version hosted on this site, but are included in the PDFs available at the links above.

Citation: Sterry, M. L., (2018) Panarchistic Architecture: Building Wildland-Urban Interface Resilience to Wildfire through Design Thinking, Practice and Building Codes Modelled on Ecological Systems Theory. PhD Thesis, Advanced Virtual and Technological Architecture Research [AVATAR] group, University of Greenwich, London.