I’m here to talk about dig­i­tal cul­ture, but a strange, very inter­est­ing aspect of it: how close it has brought us to nature. How much it has brought us clos­er to the dream, to the Holy Grail of all design­ers and archi­tects and engi­neers and you name it, to do it like nature does because nature does it best.

And you know, organ­ic design in his­to­ry has had so many dif­fer­ent notions and forms. If you just look at the col­lec­tion of the Museum of Modern Art it can see the imi­ta­tion of the forms of nature by Gaudi or by Hector Guimard. 

Or, it can also be the trans­po­si­tion of the forms of nature. You see here some images of dig­i­tal in the Museum of Modern Art, lit­er­al­ly dig­i­tal. One of the first exhi­bi­tions about microchips and dia­grams, and then Tetris, that is in the col­lec­tion of MoMA, and the graph­ic user inter­face by Xerox PARC, which we want to grasp for the col­lec­tion. But this is what I want­ed to show you. This is a visu­al­iza­tion designed by Martin Wattenberg and Fernanda Viégas that shows the wind over the ter­ri­to­ry of the United States. Absolutely digitally-founded. It’s about data that is gath­ered by the gov­ern­ment, but ren­dered in a way that makes us feel that real­ly that’s how nature does it. 

And that’s what I love so much about dig­i­tal cul­ture. Even though it used to be Gaudi and Majorelle, it is also now Neri Oxman and Joris Laarman, who par­tic­i­pate in that cul­ture but get clos­er to it by using the com­put­er. Neri Oxman, who is a pro­fes­sor at the Media Lab, is spe­cial­izes in observ­ing nat­ur­al behav­iors and trans­form­ing them, dis­till­ing algo­rithms and laws from them, and we’ll see more of her work later.

Joris Laarman, great Dutch design­er, that’s pret­ty much the same. Uses soft­ware that mim­ics what nature would do if it had to sus­tain a human body in a seat­ed posi­tion. It’s real­ly inter­est­ing because you see it’s so much more than form. It’s think­ing of of the sys­tems that nature par­tic­i­pates in.

These days, we’re real­ly try­ing to move the whole behav­ior of peo­ple and the whole sen­si­tiv­i­ty of peo­ple towards a kind of an ecos­o­phy. You see here our food by Félix Guattari, but there are many oth­er peo­ple that are try­ing to make us under­stand that we have to change our behav­iors if we want to recu­per­ate some sort of bal­anced rela­tion­ship with nature.

Without mod­i­fi­ca­tions to the social and mate­r­i­al envi­ron­ment, there can be no change in men­tal­i­ties. Here, we are in the pres­ence of a cir­cle that leads me to pos­tu­late the neces­si­ty of found­ing an ecos­o­phy” that would link envi­ron­men­tal ecol­o­gy to social ecol­o­gy and to men­tal ecology.
Félix Guattari 1996: 264 [pre­sen­ta­tion slide]

So it’s very impor­tant to do it in a way that is also visu­al­ly con­vinc­ing, not just moral­ly con­vinc­ing. And that’s where design­ers and archi­tects come into play. They’re try­ing to bring togeth­er high and low, com­put­er and nature. 

This is a beau­ti­ful old-style ren­der­ing of elec­tron­ic pieces of equip­ment that look like a botan­i­cal draw­ing from the 18th cen­tu­ry. And in this case instead, today, the con­tem­po­rary draw­ing is a ren­der­ing by Daisy Ginsberg of a new branch of sci­ence, syn­thet­ic biol­o­gy. The abil­i­ty of putting togeth­er dif­fer­ent strands of DNA and then design­ing new organ­isms with them.

So you see, it’s a flow that has begun cen­turies ago but that con­tin­ues today and that has to be under­stood. This is an exhi­bi­tion, that togeth­er with some of the peo­ple that are here in Davos actu­al­ly, I orga­nized in 2008. It was about design and sci­ence, and it looked at all the dif­fer­ent scales in which design­ers and sci­en­tists come togeth­er and work on nature and try to imi­tate nature. From the nanos cale, to the 1:1 scale with facades and build­ings and oth­er details, to the large scale, large com­plex­i­ty. So, it was a way to real­ly look at the algo­rithm which in 2008 was of course already well-known, but not yet. The kind of emper­or that we see today in so many dif­fer­ent dis­ci­plines, and under­stand how it could be used for nat­ur­al purposes.

So, we see here exam­ples of work by a great sci­en­tist, Paul Rothemund who’s at CalTech, that was among the first to do DNA origa­mi. It’s a way to work in biol­o­gy that has intel­li­gent and smart design appli­ca­tions. Here is the work of a nanophysi­cist, Keith Schwab, and you see design­ers start to col­lab­o­rate with sci­en­tists also in the ren­der­ings of sci­ence. A lit­tle paren­the­sis, sci­en­tists usu­al­ly don’t want to appear ele­gant and don’t want to have good slides and good images, oth­er­wise they’re not tak­en seri­ous­ly. Well, they’re start­ing to see the pro­pa­gan­da impor­tance of also hav­ing good images. 

And here, to give you an exam­ple of what was hap­pen­ing in that show is the jux­ta­po­si­tion of work by UCLA sci­en­tists, a new method to mark pro­teins not only with col­or but also with let­ters (an alpha­bet soup of sorts), and instead this great Israeli design­er and artist that had hypoth­e­sized a whole world in which you can put one char­ac­ter into each sper­ma­to­zoa so that each ejac­u­la­tion becomes a poem. So com­plete­ly dif­fer­ent, but the two were next to each oth­er in the exhi­bi­tion and they were hug­ging, so hap­py to final­ly meet for real. So, this is kind of a metaphor of how the future will be. Scientists and design­ers need­ing each other.

This is a work com­mis­sioned for the show. Two archi­tects, ArandaLasch, work­ing with the sci­en­tist, nanophysi­cist Matt Scullin, who’s now an entre­pre­neur in pre­serv­ing ener­gy and who is here. Matt pro­vid­ed Ben and Chris with a nanos­truc­ture based on the num­ber six. And on that, Chris and Ben formed the whole law, this algo­rithm, that is almost like leav­en­ing for a land­scape that could be both a land­scape of a city, or a facade treat­ment. You see here the indif­fer­ence to scale that comes from build­ing an object that can grow itself.

And that’s one of the most beau­ti­ful tenets of today’s organ­ic design. Designers want to grow things. Engineers and archi­tects want to grow things, not to make them. It’s some­thing that starts from a law that is with­in, whether it’s the num­ber six nanos­truc­ture, or whether it’s crys­tal as Skylar Tibbetts does at MIT. So, it real­ly is inter­est­ing this inner growth is so impor­tant to sci­en­tists and to artists.

In the same exhi­bi­tion, there was also this great piece. It was alive. It was called Victimless Leather,” and it’s by a group of design­ers and artists that are based in Perth, Australia that is called SymbioticA. It was a lit­tle leather coat that was done using stem cells of mice. And it was quite amaz­ing because it was lit­er­al­ly done this way. I did­n’t tell my MoMA that there would be an incu­ba­tor in the exhi­bi­tion, you know, I just like, let it hap­pen. Columbia University col­leagues made it go and start­ed it. And then after awhile it became too big and one of the sleeves start­ed dan­gling. There was an incu­ba­tor with nour­ish­ment. So I called the artists in Australia, and I asked them, What do I do?” And they said, Oh, Paola, you have to stop it.”

And I was like, What do you mean I have to stop it?” 

And he said, Just turn off the nourishment.”

And I’m like, What? I have to kill the coat?”

And very inter­est­ing­ly, I start­ed hav­ing this moral dilem­ma. I could not real­ly sleep at night. I thought I’m like the Governor of Texas, I have to make a deci­sion of this kind. It was just real­ly quite amazing. 

But that goes to tell you the moral dilem­ma that is instilled by art when it’s well done, or design when it’s well done. And of course when you’re in a moral cri­sis, what do you do? You talk to the press. And I did. There were some peo­ple from The Economist that were tak­ing a tour, and and I told him about it. And they pub­lished it, and it start­ed this amaz­ing debate.

So that’s tru­ly once again where organ­ic design today is based on sci­ence and based on dig­i­tal cul­ture, but it kind of needs the lat­i­tude of art and of design in order to cre­ate real quan­daries that we dive into in order to progress in the future. 

And there are many many design­ers and sci­en­tists as you know that are work­ing on in vit­ro meat, which is a very inter­est­ing dilem­ma. I know the most basic ques­tion is, if you could grow meat in vit­ro with­out hurt­ing any ani­mal and with a foot­print that is decid­ed­ly less than what is hap­pen­ing today, would you eat it? Is it moral? Is it taste? Is it cul­ture? It’s very very interesting.

And this hap­pens on an on again also with the imi­ta­tion of organs and the mod­eliza­tion of organs. I real­ly like what the Wyss Institute at Harvard is doing. They’re try­ing to sim­u­late organs, like full-fledged human organs on microchips, using some basic cells and some nan­otech­nol­o­gy so as to be able to test some med­ica­tions before they go into tri­al, and speed up the whole phar­ma­ceu­ti­cal pro­duc­tion process. And of course that’s what artists do. They sim­u­late brand new organs that we don’t have yet, right? 

So, you see the jux­ta­po­si­tion. Scientists, quite advanced sci­en­tists that are still kind of test­ing their way…artists. I real­ly like that, because that com­mu­ni­ca­tion is what brings all the dif­fer­ent par­ties to new real­iza­tions all togeth­er. So we go back to this idea of the syn­thet­ic aes­thet­ic, of adding a new branch to the way we build and do things.

This is a project by Alexandra Daisy Ginsberg, the same per­son that did the new dia­gram. And it was a col­lab­o­ra­tion that hap­pened dur­ing I think one of the first iGems. iGem is a com­pe­ti­tion that hap­pens every year at MIT for stu­dents to do some­thing with syn­thet­ic biol­o­gy. In this par­tic­u­lar case, Daisy had worked with the team from Cambridge, England to do this redesigned, re-engineered E. coli milk­shake that would be drunk and then would change col­or depend­ing on the enzymes released by dif­fer­ent pathogens in your gut. So in oth­er words, your stool was the diag­nos­tic tool. 

And it real­ly could hap­pen, and it did hap­pen. They test­ed it. So, a sci­en­tist would not nec­es­sar­i­ly think up some­thing like this, and thank god they use their time in a dif­fer­ent way. But that’s when design­ers and artists come into play and real­ly make things hap­pen. So you see, syn­thet­ic biol­o­gy— [audi­ence laugh­ter] Yeah, that was part of the pre­sen­ta­tion I was telling you—that would be the case. Synthetic biol­o­gy, a col­lab­o­ra­tion— This is kind of a at a dia­gram of syn­thet­ic biol­o­gy. They actu­al­ly call them Lego—you know, syn­thet­ic bricks, and Andy, who’s a biol­o­gist at Stanford that kind of coined that term. And the iGem team’s here.

To the point that Autodesk has also designed a new virus. Andrew Hessel is their sci­en­tist in res­i­dence. So, syn­thet­ic biol­o­gy is very seri­ous, and right now I’m show­ing syn­thet­ic biol­o­gy to you at this kind of rar­efied lev­el. But there are cit­i­zen sci­en­tist labs that are non-profit that are in all cities the also teach chil­dren how to work at this par­tic­u­lar scale.

Of course, the vision­ar­ies go one step for­ward. Some are design­ing for the sixth exten­sion and think­ing up new organ­isms that can help us get rid of the car­bon monox­ide that we release. Others are mak­ing jew­el­ry out of waste. Or we have Stewart Brand that is try­ing to de-extinct ani­mals that don’t exist anymore.

It real­ly is far-fetched, what peo­ple do. And Steward Brand has also inspired this great design­er from London, who decid­ed to pos­tu­late a future in which women can ges­tate not human babies, but rather endan­gered species. And why not?

So, it’s all up for grabs. But the way we build is one of the biggest rev­o­lu­tions. I was telling you before about Joris Laarman and how he builds his chair using this par­tic­u­lar soft­ware. There are oth­er design­ers that are try­ing to cre­ate a new sup­ply chain by hav­ing just made on time objects that are made of recy­cled. These chairs are made of recy­cled refrig­er­a­tor inte­ri­or. So, it real­ly is a com­plete­ly dif­fer­ent way to think also of the sup­ply chain in an organ­ic way.

Look at how, for instance, Joris Laarman is think­ing also of mak­ing chairs in met­als in the future. So you see here it’s a mix­ture of robot­ics, and instead an ancient sen­si­bil­i­ty for shapes that have exist­ed for mil­len­nia. And that’s when I find the most inter­est­ing design hap­pen­ing. When it’s not about mim­ic­k­ing the future, but it’s build­ing the future with­out for­get­ting the past. It’s quite an amaz­ing way to build. This is met­al slurry.

Other mate­ri­als that are used very often are of course plas­tics and all the laser sin­ter­ing mate­ri­als. But Markus Kayser as you see here does 3D print­ing using the sand of the Sahara desert and the beams of the sun, which is quite won­der­ful. If you see the ves­sels that he makes, they look like they could have exist­ed for mil­len­nia, but at the same time you see the hor­i­zon­tal marks of 3D print­ing. And it’s won­der­ful because it’s some­thing ancient and con­tem­po­rary at the same time. It’s some­thing that could have nev­er hap­pened cen­turies ago, but that was hap­pen­ing already.

Ways to build from the ground up, ways to build har­ness­ing col­lec­tive intel­li­gence or even swarm intel­li­gence. You see here a very very Swiss and won­der­ful piece of archi­tec­ture. It’s the col­lab­o­ra­tion between Gammazio & Kohler, two archi­tects and Raffaello D’Andrea, who’s a robot­ic expert. And you see here that this build­ing is built by robots. And the dig­i­tal plan of the build­ing is sent to their col­lec­tive intel­li­gence so that they can build it the way it’s need­ed to be built. 

So it’s a com­plete­ly dif­fer­ent way in which we are approach­ing mate­ri­als. This is more of the work of Neri Oxman that shows how 3D print­ing today can real­ly mim­ic not only more organ­ic shapes, but also more organ­ic ways to build. You know, 3D print­ing has become real­ly the stuff of every­day life for so many, but there are dif­fer­ent ways and dif­fer­ent sophis­ti­ca­tions, and this is one of the high­est ways to mim­ic that kind of organ­ic behavior.

And I want to end by show­ing the amaz­ing work of design­ers that are using mush­rooms to build a lot of dif­fer­ent struc­tures from chairs, of course, to bricks and bridges, to even mor­tu­ary cham­bers. They are using the myceli­um of mush­rooms also to think of new ways to actu­al­ly think of how we mourn and how we bury our loved ones.

And you see here appli­ca­tions of that kind of study. This is a struc­ture that was built in Queens at MoMA PS1 last sum­mer that was all made of bricks made of corn­husk that was kept togeth­er by myceli­um of mush­rooms. And you see the whole tow­er went up, and then it kind of biode­grad­ed in a beau­ti­ful way, as if it were a sped-up decay of a city, of a lit­tle vil­lage in Tuscany. It was quite fan­tas­tic. And here you see instead the work of Ecovative, which is a com­pa­ny that has decid­ed to use—actually they were among the first to exper­i­ment with this material—to have a sub­sti­tute for poly­styrene in packaging. 

There are so many design­ers and archi­tects and sci­en­tists that are work­ing togeth­er, and that are using the intel­li­gence of com­put­ers to insert dif­fer­ent process­es of nature in the way we build so that we will be able to get clos­er to nature in the way we will con­struct the future. Thank you very much. 

Help Support Open Transcripts

If you found this useful or interesting, please consider supporting the project monthly at Patreon or once via Cash App, or even just sharing the link. Thanks.