5.3 - DEVELOPED DESIGN CRITICAL REFLECTION
R01 – The Philosophical Approach The Developed Design outcome engaged RO1, the Philosophical Approach, through rhizomatic frameworks. By structuring experimentation in Chapter 4 with key rhizomatic characteristics and attributes, design outcomes had a reasonably strong reflection of RO1. Critically reflecting on the rhizomatic frameworks explored in Chapter 4, 'deterritorialised experimentation' using existing concepts resulted in outcomes with the strongest reflection of RO1. Re-applying 4 Preliminary Design outcomes once more to a rhizomatic framework, created a Developed Design outcome that had a stronger reflection of RO1 than Preliminary Design outcomes. The 'detteritorialised experiments' allowed for a wide range of possible outcomes, while the Preliminary Design outcomes they were derived from, helped to focus the experimentation. The resulting Developed Design outcome had a higher degree of complexity than the previous design outcomes in Chapter 4. Its degree of complexity was reflected in the tower artefact, and the system it was a part of, closely representing the complex nomadic growth of the rhizome, which has no clear beginning or end. R02 – The Ecological Approach The second research objective is represented reasonably well by the Developed Design outcomes. There is an immediate and clear relationship between anthropogenic waste
228
and the design outcome that engages both the anthropogenic waste and the ecology. Importantly, this built upon critical reflections from the Preliminary Design experiments. The waste flows were predominantly controlled by relics, and the manipulation by the ecocentric artefacts was implied. The Developed Design outcomes explicitly communicate the method in which the ecocentric artefact can manipulate waste. It shows segments of the artefact, rising from below ground, redirecting water and waste flows ejected from the base of the artefact. The artefact’s influence over the biosphere even extends beyond anthropogenic waste manipulation by manipulating the ecology and landscape around it by creating a series of synthetic rivers. The creation of new ecological systems (the river system) creates a theoretical enigma that challenges dogmatic anthropocentrism. As components of the built environment, the non-human artefacts’ interference with the biosphere could be viewed as unnatural from an anthropocentric perspective. Yet, as the non-human artefacts’ existence represents non-human/natural agents, they invoke important questions of what is and is not natural interference in natural systems. A mountain is built from natural tectonic agencies, yet it is not accused of interfering in natural systems when it redirects a river.
