Extra Extra won’t focus on memes but try to illustrate problems through them. To that end, the looser conditions of a column allow for visible cracks in my positions. Unanswered questions are welcomed. Criticisms formed on a mimetic hunch can be built up. Nothing here is too polished, neither is it expected to be.

As architecture culture breaks into architecture cultures, let's explore the fissures. Tomorrow, we begin together the construction of a constituency.

Architects should get used to seeing a section of a resume titled reposted by, and consider it a legitimate form of qualification. We should be glad about it, too, because reposts are currently referred to under the umbrella term publication, and to quantify a repost at the same level of publication is to misuse the historical baggage of the term. That said, the possibility for architectural work to gain agency and audience through social media should be considered a positive aspect of one’s skill set.

At the most basic level, digital media has measurably changed architecture publication as a total volume of images. Historically, publication was only granted to high profile projects. And — since you only received a magazine once a month or so — the amount of projects one could be exposed to was limited. This limited exposure allowed for a longer period of time for students to legibly digest each project and thoroughly form a response.  

The loss of this possibility is certainly a negative side of contemporary publication, and often the crux of our fixations. But if we allow ourselves to unearth some strengths there exists formidable potential. If we riff on these positives, hopefully some behaviors and platforms will stick out.

The first positive is a decentralization of the power of exposure. This means the operative forces behind publication and their imposed or inherent biases can be exposed. The tools by which one can build an audience are readily available. The result should be a changing of the hierarchical guard that historically kept white men in the architectural spotlight. Results, however, show that there is still some work to do in this regard.

This spreading out of the power of exposure leaves the cracks open for many different narratives to break through (not all of which are considered desirable). This cracking also has its negatives — there are simply too many images and too many stories. This is accelerated by publications like ArchDaily, a platform that pushed for a volume of images not to change the narrative of publication but to monetize publication without expertise. However, lying among this ruin are some shining gems, beginning to break into new territory. These rogue agents include malapartecafe, shitmyarchitecturebosssays, or women_architects. They aren’t full publications, but to be reposted by them is a valid form of recognition and legitimation.

The second positive is often overlooked. Digital media provides a painless method of forming groups. Groups — or discourse communities — play a large part in the contemporary situation for architects. It is vital for a student or young practice to identify with and belong to a chosen sect within architecture. For more discussion about this, see the first column on Extra Extra.

No publication in recent history has done this as well as suckerPUNCH Daily. In its glory days around 2010-2014 it was the gold standard of experimental publication. When I was at Coop Himmelb[l]au it was practically my homepage; I could write a whole column on it alone. This publication had some trouble making the transition to social media, however, it has retained the distinction of being a salient discursive force. It’s reputation waned over the last few years when publications like SuperArchitects began a forceful crusade (powered by the repost, mind you) to skyrocket in popularity, followed along by a cohort of endless copycats now publishing work into the ether. My hunch is that its fanatical obsession with discursive and aesthetic purity combined with reputable expertise could propel suckerPUNCH to once again hold together the formalist avant-garde and serve as a beacon for other sects to carve their own niche.

The third positive result of digital media is that we are encountering an entirely new mode of seeing which includes being seen. It’s as if everyone is carrying the monumental stairway of the Palais Garnier Opera de Paris in their pocket. Nothing changes architecture like new modes of seeing. So how will we evolve representation to meet these modes? This positive is speculative. It would seem we can evolve our relationship with the drawing, the sketch, and the render to enter new territory of the image. My previous post on GIF’s and work with memes hits in this category, but there are others using the medium more directly as it relates to architectural production, some of whom sat on a panel with me hosted by the LA Forum last November. This includes Andrew Kovacs’ Archive of Affinities, Runze Zhang & Alessio Grancini’s Games of Deletion, and Natou Fall’s Shaping Face among a snowballing roster of recalcitrant young designers who are asking what else social media can do.

Our ability to publish, disseminate, and legitimize this work presents a daunting task only beginning to calcify itself into coherency. Recognizing the repost as a distinct aspect of this endeavor yet separate from publication could be a step in the process.