Having spent my career thus far, designing data centers and similar communication technology projects I have been increasingly interested in the future relationship of technology and its architectural host as concordant forms of singular recognition. In the same way a ‘glasshouse’ maintains the growth of a sprout, the archetype for e-communication facilities often assume a transparent presence whose subjugated mission is a continuous delivery of the fruit sheltered within. It is this fruit of 1’s and 0’s, bits and bytes, which through decades of fermentation, has intoxicated the human psyche with omnipresence. Perhaps ‘intoxicated’ is too strong a term but I do believe our vision of civilized expression has become impaired as we attempt a balanced stagger, ‘heal to toe’ towards the next computerized guide post…and beyond….but where is beyond? Are we synthetically speaking faster than we can biologically listen? What is the compass to guide our technological language?
Hoping answers to these questions could satisfy my afore mentioned curiosity I googled Technology as Architecture and was provided a litany of help wanted ads for enterprise architects (which made me curse my high school guidance counselor for a moment), advertisements of firewall software and numerous white papers on cyber warfare across the G.I.G. Not the response I was expecting from the universal answer machine. Frustration led to epiphany, as I realized my inquiry couldn’t be shaped with absolute clarity and thusly technology couldn’t respond with teleological expression. The purpose and form of the answer can only be conveyed through the perception of the question…Hmm???…the avatar of ‘archi’ – ‘tech’.
Before the seemingly endless structure of digital memory the architecture of the question was answered through the technology of sticks, stones and the like. With empirical purpose, sacred geometries were organized to express the form of truth. Within this moment architecture and technology exist symbiotically. Pyramids and obelisks navigated the celestial science for earthly incarnations, circular megaliths planned the sequential events of linear time and windmills channeled elemental force. All are unmistakable forms engaging technology without servitude. All are forms that remain contemporaneous with then, now and beyond. Gizah’s trigonometry still invokes mystery within the most moderate astronomer, Stonehenge is routinely adorned in modern Celtic ceremony and the sustainable energy of wind farms must pay homage to the early dynamism of a medieval mason.
The legacy of monumental technology should not be realized as neighborhoods of ‘green’ roofed buildings. Nor should its namesake inherit a pile of wires and scrap conduit, when our virtual world emerges from the bonds of terrestrial infrastructure. I have nightmares of waking within a cube trekking around the cosmos absorbing kindred civilizations as I communicate through electronic thoughts with my Borg crewmen. Is this the construct of our technological vision? Will the sacred geometry I desire to create be that of a biomechanical cell? Technically speaking… I guess I am still seeking an answer, but this is only due to the absence of poetic vision within the question.
- Jack Bajadek, Senior Manager at DBI's DC office.