Productive Matters:
The DIY Architecture Manuals of Ant Farm
and Paolo Soleri
Catherine D. Smith
Prepare for your exams
Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points to download
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Guidelines and tips
Prepare for your exams
Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points to download
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Community
Ask the community
Ask the community for help and clear up your study doubts
University Rankings
Discover the best universities in your country according to Docsity users
Free resources
Our save-the-student-ebooks!
Download our free guides on studying techniques, anxiety management strategies, and thesis advice from Docsity tutors
DIY Architecture: Exploring the Artisanal Approach through Ant Farm and Soleri's Manuals, Study notes of Architecture
This thesis investigates DIY architecture by examining Ant Farm and Soleri's manuals, which embody the artisanal approach through a play between actual, generalised, and potential materials. The study contributes to contemporary architectural discourses by problematizing the relations between materials and form in architecture.
Typology: Study notes
2021/2022
1 / 228
This page cannot be seen from the preview
Don't miss anything!
Partial preview of the text
Download DIY Architecture: Exploring the Artisanal Approach through Ant Farm and Soleri's Manuals and more Study notes Architecture in PDF only on Docsity!
Productive Matters:
The DIY Architecture Manuals of Ant Farm
and Paolo Soleri
Catherine D. Smith
Productive Matters:
The DIY Architecture Manuals of Ant Farm and Paolo
Soleri
Catherine D. Smith Faculty of Architecture, Design and Planning, University of Sydney
Thesis submitted for the award of the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy, September 2012
I, Catherine Smith, understand that my thesis entitled ‘Productive Matters: The DIY Architecture Manuals of Ant Farm and Paolo Soleri,’ will be lodged in the University Library and be available immediately for use. I agree that the University Librarian (or, in the case of a departmental library, the head of department) may supply a photocopy or microfilm of the thesis to an individual for research or study or to a library.
Author’s Declaration : This is to certify that: I. this thesis comprises only my original work towards the Doctor of Philosophy Degree II. due acknowledgement has been made in the text to all other material used III. the thesis does not exceed the word length for this degree IV. no part of this work has been used for the award of another degree V. this thesis meets the University of Sydney’s Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC) requirements for the conduct of research.
Signature:__________________________________________________________________________________
Name:_____________________________________________________________________________________
Date:______________________________________________________________________________________
Abstract ii
phenomena. One of the key problems identified in the DIY manuals relates to the divergent ways materials and techniques are described: as simultaneously site-specific and somewhat unpredictable, and as generalisable and predictable. By theorising DIY architecture through Deleuze and Guattari’s notion of the artisanal , the thesis suggests that the manuals involve a play between: actual, particular materials directly encountered in project contexts; generalised materials as represented in words, drawings and imagery; and potential materials, actions and transformations yet to come. Importantly, this DIY mode of operation invokes comprehensive transformations in all aspects of a project, including transformations in thought, identities and bodies. These transformations are seen to occur through a productive struggle with matter’s self-organisational capacities. The thesis’s significance lies in its contribution to a critical, material-focused thinking between the disciplines of architecture and philosophy, and to the under-theorised area of DIY architecture.
Contents iii
Acknowledgements vi
List of Figures vii
INTRODUCTION
1 Introduction
1.0 Introduction 1
1.1 Scope 2
1.2 Significance 4
1.3 Method 6
1.4 Chapter structure 8
1.5 Key terms and protagonists 8
DIY architecture 9
Counterculture and countercultural 10
Artisan and the artisanal 10
Matter: matter-flows, the matter-form relation, and action and becoming-matter 12
DIY ARCHITECTURE
2 The discourse on DIY in post-war North America 1940s-1970s
2 .0 Introduction 23
2.1 The emergence of the ‘Do-It-Yourself’ phenomenon in 24
post-war North America
2.2 The discourse on the DIY phenomenon in the 1940s
and 1950s post-war North America 25
2.3 Theories relating to DIY in 1950s post-war North America 27
2.4 The discourse on DIY in the 1960s and 1970s counterculture in
post-war North America 31
2.5 The discourse on DIY and the artisanal in the 1940s-1950s, and
in the 1960s and 1970s counterculture 37
2.6 Summary: DIY and the artisanal in post-war North America 43
Contents
Contents v
EXPLORATIONS
- 5.0 Introduction 5 Explorations of the artisanal in Ant Farm’s and Soleri’s DIY architecture manuals - Ant Farm’s and Soleri’s DIY manuals as instantiations of DIY architecture
- 5.1 Flow, following and DIY
- Inflatocookbook
- ‘Inflatables Illustrated’
- Earth Casting
- 5.2 Matter, form and the communicable format of the DIY manual - Inflatocookbook - ‘Inflatables Illustrated’ - Earth Casting
- 5.3 DIY action, materials and transforming bodies - Inflatocookbook - ‘Inflatables Illustrated’ - Earth Casting
- 5.4 Summary: artisanal, DIY architecture
- 6.1 Summary of the overall thesis aim and approach 6 Concluding chapter
- 6.2 Problems, issues and limitations of the thesis
- 6.3 Thesis outcomes
- 6.4 Implications and possibilities for future research
- 7 Bibliography
Contents vi
This thesis would not have been possible without the thoughtful and patient advice provided by Associate Professor Glen Hill and, in particular, Associate Professor Chris. L. Smith of the University of Sydney: thank you. I would also like to express my gratitude to Professor Elizabeth Grosz of Rutgers University and the University of Sydney, for her insights into the writings of Deleuze and Guattari, and initial suggestions about the direction of this research. Finally, I would like to acknowledge the valuable advice provided during different conferences and symposiums in which various incarnations and evolutions of the present research were discussed, including: the Fourth International Deleuze Studies Conference (2011); the Annual Conference of the Society of Architectural Historians, Australia and New Zealand (2010, 2011); The Right to the City symposium (2011); the Alternative Practices in Design: The Collective - Past, Present & Future symposium ( 201 0); and Writing Architecture: A Symposium on Innovations in the Textual and Visual Critique of Buildings (2010).
Acknowledgements
List of Figures viii
Figure 2.5: A page about Ant Farm in the 1973 edition of the DIY manual Shelter. Source: Kahn (ed.), Shelter, 125. 40
Figure 2.6: The front cover of the 1974 Craftsmen of Necessity. Note that this text was previewed and advertised in the Shelter manual published in 1973. Source: Williams, Craftsmen of Necessity, front cover. 41
3 Ant Farm, Soleri and their DIY architecture manuals
Figure 3.1: Two pages about the ‘Kids’ inflatable within the 1973 bound edition of Ant Farm’s Inflatocookbook: note the same section appears in the 1970 edition. Source: Ant Farm, Inflatocookbook (1973), ‘Kids.’ 60
Figure 3.2: The 1970 edition of Ant Farm’s Inflatocookbook consisted of loose-leaf inserts originally intended for easy update and replacement. Source: Photo by the author. 60
Figure 3.3: The ‘Truckin’ University’ section of Ant Farm’s Inflatocookbook describes a set of scenarios without sufficient detailed information to recreate a particular architectural form. Source: Ant Farm, Inflatocookbook (1973), ‘Truckin’ University.’ 62
Figure 3.4: The ‘’Idea Plumbing’ and ‘Geometry’ sections of Ant Farm’s Inflatocookbook contains more detailed, prescriptive information about specific joints and detail shapes, although no overall architectural configuration is indicated. Source: Source: Ant Farm, Inflatocookbook (1973), ‘Idea Plumbing’ and ‘Geometry.’ 62
Figure 3.5: The ‘Materials’ section of the 1970 and 1973 Inflatocookbook. Source: Ant Farm, Inflatocookbook (1973), ‘Kids.’ 63
Figure 3.6: ‘A Course in Getting Acquainted with Inflatables.’ Source: Ant Farm, Inflatocookbook (1973), ‘A Course in Getting Acquainted with Inflatables.’ 64
Figure 3.7: The images and words featured in the ‘Rasberry Exercises’ section of the 1970 Inflatocookbook were published in another text—Salli Rasberry and Robert Greenway’s 1970 Rasberry Exercises: How to Start Your Own School and Make a Book (shown left). Source: Rasberry and Greenway, Rasberry Exercises, 102-103. 65
List of Figures ix
Figure 3.8: The front and rear pages of the ‘Rasberry Exercises’ section of Ant Farm’s 1970 Inflatocookbook. Source: Ant Farm, Inflatocookbook (1970), ‘Rasberry Exercises.’ 65
Figure 3.9: The ‘Hy-Tek’ and ‘Good Taste Pneumatics’ sections, which appear in both the 1970 and 1973 editions of Inflatocookbook. Source: Ant Farm, Inflatocookbook (1973), ‘Hy-Tek’ and ‘Good Taste Pneumatics.’ 66
Figure 3.10: Opening screen shot from Ant Farm’s ‘Inflatables Illustrated’ video DIY manual. Source: Ant Farm, ‘Inflatables Illustrated,’ 00.18.27/00.23.00. 66
Figure 3.11: Screen shot of Schreier’s ‘Geometry Lesson’ within ‘Inflatables Illustrated.’ Source: Ant Farm, ‘Inflatables Illustrated,’ 00.00.14/00.23.00. 67
Figure 3.12: Screen shot of Schreier’s ironing-seaming demonstration within ‘Inflatables Illustrated,’ in which he joins together two pieces of a domestic plastic bag using the heat of an iron. Source: Ant Farm, ‘Inflatables Illustrated,’ 00.03.12/00.23.00. 67
Figure 3.13: Michels uses a vent tunnel to imagine a large-scale inflatable beam at a different scale, shown on the right ‘occupied’ by toy soldiers. Source: Ant Farm, ‘Inflatables Illustrated,’ 00.09.59-00.10.29/00.23.00. 68
Figure 3.14: Interior screen shot of a large-scale inflatable. Source: Ant Farm, ‘Inflatables Illustrated,’ 00.11.00/00.23.00. 69
Figure 3.15: Interior screen shot of boy inside a small tetrahedral inflatable, possibly sited in a sports hall. Source: Ant Farm, ‘Inflatables Illustrated,’ 00.20.01/00.23.00. 69
Figure 3.16: Children climbing on top of an inflatable sited in an unidentifiable landscape. Source: Ant Farm, ‘Inflatables Illustrated,’ 00.20.23/00.23.00. 69
Figure 3.17: The rear cover of Soleri and Davis’ Earth Casting manual or ‘workbook.’ Note the full title of the text is Paolo Soleri’s Earth Casting: for Sculpture, Models and Construction. Source: Soleri & Davis, Earth Casting, 77. 70
Figure 3.18: A page from Earth Casting , outlining the steps involved in the construction of a particular building—the 1966 Pool Canopy—at the Cosanti complex, Arizona. Source: Soleri & Davis, Earth Casting, rear cover. 70
List of Figures xi
4 The notion of the artisanal
Figure 4.1: Moroccan wood turner, as featured in the 1974 Craftsmen of Necessity. Source: Williams, Craftsmen of Necessity, 170. 112
5 Explorations of the artisanal in Ant Farm’s and Soleri’s DIY manuals
Figure 5.1: Inflatocookbook : ‘A Course in Getting Acquainted with Inflatables’. Source: Ant Farm, Inflatocookbook (1973), ‘A Course in Getting Acquainted with Inflatables.’ 145
Figure 5.2: Inflatocookbook : ‘Air Supply.’ Source: Ant Farm, Inflatocookbook (1973), ‘Air Supply.’ 147
Figure 5.3: ‘Inflatables Illustrated:’ video still of Schreier’s iron-seaming demonstration. Source: Ant Farm, ‘Inflatables Illustrated,’ 00.03.12/00.23.00. 149
Figure 5.4: ‘Inflatables Illustrated’: inflatable occupation. Source: Ant Farm, Inflatables Illustrated,’ 00.11.00/00.23.00 151
Figure 5.5: Earth Casting : excavating the architectural interior after casting the concrete shell on soil formwork. Source: Soleri & Davis, Earth Casting, 88. 152
Figure 5.6: Inflatocookbook : the ‘reader feedback’ section of the 1970 edition. Source: Ant Farm, Inflatocookbook (1973), ‘Feeeeeeeeeeeedbaaaack….’ 157
Figure 5.7: Inflatocookbook : ‘Input 12’ of the ‘Truckin’ University’ project. Source: Ant Farm, Inflatocookbook (1973), ‘Truckin’ University.’ 159
Figure 5.8: Inflatocookbook : the step-by-step format of the ‘Kids’ bubble project. Source: Ant Farm, Inflatocookbook (1973), ‘Kids’ bubble. 160
Figure 5.9: ‘Inflatables Illustrated:’ occupation of the exterior envelope of an inflatable. Source: Ant Farm, ‘Inflatables Illustrated,’ 00.20.30/00.23.00. 162
Figure 5.10: Earth Casting : a ‘five-step process’ for earth-casting. Source: Soleri & Davis, Earth Casting, 16. 165
Figure 5.11: Earth Casting: the coextensivity of designing and making within an artisanal mode. Source: Soleri & Davis, Earth Casting, 88. 166
List of Figures xii
Figure 5.12: Inflatocookbook : ‘Rasberry Exercises. Source: Ant Farm, Inflatocookbook (1973), ‘Rasberry Exercises.’ 169
Figure 5.13: Inflatocookbook : Ant Farm’s nomad. Source: Ant Farm, Inflatocookbook (1970), ‘Good Taste Pneumads.’ 170
Figure 5.14: ‘Inflatables Illustrated:’ adjusting a fan tunnel element, which is reimagined as an inhabitable structure. Source: Ant Farm, ‘Inflatables Illustrated,’ 00.03.24/00.23.00. 173
6 Concluding Chapter
Figure 6.1: ‘Inflatables Illustrated’: DIY inflatable architecture as a conflux of materials, bodies, fabric, actions and transformations. Source: Ant Farm, ‘Inflatables Illustrated,’ 00.11.16/00.23.00. 198
Chapter 1 1
1.0 Introduction
This thesis develops a theoretical account of DIY (Do It Yourself) architecture through an exploration of the DIY architecture manuals of Ant Farm and Paolo Soleri, the countercultural discourse on the ‘artisanal’ and the philosophical notion of the artisanal.^1 Although the association of architecture with DIY and the ‘artisanal’ is uncommon, it can be charted in the discourse of post-war North America, including Ant Farm and Soleri’s manuals. Based on their experimental work of the 1960s and 1970s in North America, their manuals function as instantiations of a particular DIY mode of operation in architecture.
There is minimal scholarly discourse on DIY as a practice, nor explication of what constitutes DIY in relation to architecture. Much of the discourse on DIY stems from post-war North America, which is where DIY emerged as an identifiable phenomenon in the 1950s. In this discourse, DIY is generally used as an ill-defined umbrella term associated with diverse and divergent social and cultural issues. DIY is also discussed in relation to an ‘artisanal’ approach to materials in a manner that (at least superficially) resonates with Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari’s philosophical notion of the artisanal.
To understand the connection between DIY and the ‘artisanal’ with more depth and clarity, there is a detailed exploration and theorisation of Ant Farm and Soleri’s DIY manuals using the discourse and notion of the artisanal—countercultural and philosophical. The philosophical notion is distilled primarily from Deleuze and Guattari’s writings. Deleuze and Guattari discuss the artisanal within their collaborative text, A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia.^2 Their artisanal mode of operation is characterised by an attendance to the dynamic, self-organisational capacities of materials. Importantly, this philosophical notion is not tied to a particular material, technology or skill set and is therefore potentially useful for exploring DIY as a mode of operation which is also focused on material processes, rather than the hierarchical distinctions between the expert and the amateur. Deleuze and Guattari also draw attention to potential problems associated with the artisanal mode, and the inevitable interactions between this mode and other operative models and procedures. In the present thesis, reference will also be made to other writings on matter, form, action and transformation drawn from philosophy, cultural and architectural theory. These writings also discuss the dynamic nature of materials and artisanal operations, and connect transformations involving matter to broader transformations and flows in life.
Chapter 1: Introduction
Chapter 1 2
The exploration of Ant Farm and Soleri’s manuals in the present thesis reveals divergent approaches to materials and techniques. On the one hand, the manuals convey a sense that all material phenomena are specific to a site, time and project context. Accordingly, the DIY manuals suggest that the readers must develop their own DIY projects specific to their circumstances. On the other hand, the manuals also generalise and predict material behaviours and project opportunities, to encourage and incite readers into a DIY mode of action. This play between the particular and the generalisable establishes tensions in all three of Ant Farm and Soleri’s manuals. By using the philosophical notion of the artisanal to theorise the manuals, it will be argued that the manuals capture something of the productive tensions and complexities invoked in Deleuze and Guattari’s own writings.
The theorisation of artisanal, DIY architecture emerging in this thesis draws attention to a DIY mode of operation in architecture involving different engagements with ‘matter’ to that of conventional architectural practice. These engagements with matter involve a play between; actual, particular materials encountered in real-life; materials as generalised and represented in drawings, words and photographs, and; potential materials (and actions) to come. It will be argued that this DIY mode of operation facilitates a following of materials and their experimental potentialities in architectural project sites, in a manner which is relatively uninhibited by the conventions of architectural representation: conventions that otherwise bind the potentialities of materials to preconceived forms and spatial qualities imagined in advance to the occupation of sites. The comprehensive approach of DIY architecture advocated in the manuals is also seen to invoke transformations in all aspects of a project: thus materials, tools, architectures, thoughts, identities, communities and bodies enfold into a continuum.
1.1 Scope
The scope of this thesis is limited to: the DIY discourse associated with a specific time period and geographic location; the DIY architecture manuals of Ant Farm and Soleri, and; the specific philosophical notions of the artisanal. In relation to the discourse on DIY, the focus is on the discourse that emerges in post-war North America, where DIY was recognised as an identifiable phenomenon. This post-war discourse is organised into two discursive streams associated with different time periods: the early discourse on DIY in the 1940s and 1950s, and; the discourse on DIY associated with the counterculture of the 19 60s and 1970s. The movement between the discourse streams establishes a ‘historical’ context for this study. In the present thesis, reference will be made to journals and texts associated with DIY and published during the periods in question. Reference will also be made to contemporary and critical accounts of the DIY phenomenon. In response to the nebulous and ill-defined nature of DIY as a general practice—and as a practice associated with architecture—the intention is to develop a very particular exploration of DIY architecture. Specific focus will be on the DIY architecture
Chapter 1 4
for ‘nomadic thought’.”^11 Beyond this superficial allusion to the DIY sensibility of a ‘toolbox,’ it will be argued that their notion of the artisanal provides a productive framework for exploring the DIY architecture of Ant Farm and Soleri.
For the purposes of this study, there is a deliberate conjunction of Deleuze and Guattari's philosophical notions and the DIY discourse. The intention is not to produce a general theory or model of DIY architecture, but is instead to create a specific exploration of artisanal , DIY architecture particular to Ant Farm and Soleri’s DIY manuals. While the thesis refers to discourse relating to the ‘history’ and emergence of the DIY phenomenon in post-war North America, the intention is not to make a specifically historical argument nor provide a complete overview of the DIY phenomenon. Other issues could have been brought to the fore in the present thesis—for example, exploring and positioning DIY architecture in relation to craft as a social practice.^12 However, the scope was intentionally limited to the notion of the ‘artisanal,’ which emerged as a specific issue in relation to the DIY discourse of post-war North America, and; involves an attendance to materials and processes in the manner that appears to resonate with Deleuze and Guattari’s philosophical writings on the artisanal.
1.2 Significance
There are four key reasons the present thesis is significant: first, through its contribution to research on the undertheorised areas of ‘DIY’ and ‘DIY architecture;’ second, through its contribution to the scholarly research on Ant Farm and Paolo Soleri, and their DIY architecture; third, through its articulation of a material-focused DIY mode of operation within post-war North America, and; fourth, through its demonstration of a way to theorise architecture, by using the philosophical discourse to explore specific examples of architectural practice.
First, this thesis is a response to the undertheorisation of both ‘DIY’ and ‘DIY architecture.’ Even though there is minimal scholarly discourse on DIY, the thesis identifies and charts a discourse on DIY architecture which is associated with ‘artisanal’ methodologies. A detailed examination of the post-war North American discourse suggests that both forms of DIY are associated with an artisanal attendance to materials and operations within project sites, although this association is under-developed. The conspicuous under-theorisation, and frequently ambiguous accounts, of DIY and DIY architecture reinforce the need for a specific theoretical examination.
Second, even though the work of Ant Farm and Soleri is important—both having received professional awards and citations—neither have been consistently included in significant historical accounts of the discipline.^13 In spite of this lack of disciplinary recognition, architectural historian Felicity Scott argues that Ant Farm’s countercultural practices reveal the discipline’s potential “to forge an ongoing political
Chapter 1 5
(and aesthetic) practice, a contestatory practice.”^14 This ‘contestatory practice’ is evident within Ant Farm and Soleri’s DIY architecture manuals which act as a challenge to a range of hierarchical distinctions typical of conventional architectural practice, including the distinctions between: the expert architect and amateur; between the different phases of designing, making and occupying architecture, and; between planned architectural projects and spontaneous, experimental constructions in actual project sites.
Third, the present thesis is significant because it contributes to contemporary architectural discourses that problematise the relations between materials and form in architecture.^15 The thesis distils, articulates and troubles a DIY mode of operation within Ant Farm and Soleri's DIY manuals which is action-focused, and plays out the interactions between actual, represented and potential material transformations. Due to the focus on materials and their self-organisational capacities and processes, this thesis contributes to the broader and expanding architectural discourse on material-focused architectural practices,^16 including architectural discourses referring to the philosophy of Deleuze and Guattari.^17 In the emerging field of contemporary, material-focused architectural discourse, several edited texts concentrate on experimental design and production approaches, including: Robert Sheil’s 2005 Design Through Making;^18 Kolarevic and Klinger’s 2008 Manufacturing Material Effects: Rethinking Designing and Making in Architecture ,^19 and; Gail Peter Borden and Michael Meredith’s 2012 Matter: Material Processes in Architectural Production.^20 These texts are specific to the architectural discipline and building production contexts, and have a significant focus on digital production techniques. The aforementioned texts make no specific reference to the philosophical discourse dealing with matter and form; focusing instead on contemporary design and production methodologies that more closely link architectural representations of form and materials to their fabrication techniques, including digital visualisation and CNC fabrication. Even though there appears to be an awareness of material self-organisational capacities, these texts do not generally explicate a philosophical or conceptual understanding of materials. For example, Borden and Meredith’s comprehensive text Matter is explicitly concerned with a conception of materials as distilled from specifically architectural practices and discourses.^21 Accordingly, there is minimal explicit examination of how contemporary fabrication techniques in themselves challenge or problematise established conceptions of the matter-form relation. Architectural theorist Katie Lloyd Thomas argues that unless the conception of materials and their formations in architecture is explicitly addressed within architectural discourse, production methodologies may simply extend and replicate traditional assumptions about matter and form, particularly form’s conceptual dominance over matter.^22
Finally, this thesis is significant because it demonstrates a way to theorise architecture. The thesis particularises the philosophical discourse through reference to processes and procedures evident in specific examples of architectural practice. It is important to acknowledge that there is a difference