I propose to draw from biology and ecology to reconsider the “object” or “thing” - or even “place”. Natural processes operate not through the innate characteristics of an individual artefact or species, but through the interactions between individual elements. Relationships are the “thing”. Thomas Halliday, for example, argues that preserving an ecosystem involves preserving not individual elements but the functions and connections of the wider system. The emerging science of holobiontics demonstrates that the symbiotic relationships between an organic host and microbial “symbionts” enables the host to out-perform its germ-free peers; germ-free organisms may fail completely. In this sense, there is no such thing as the individual; the idea of the “original” is also questionable. Bruno Latour and Jane Bennett have argued that the relationships between objects (or between people and things) catalyse a sense of agency, enabling change. Rom Harré has argued that intangible phenomena such as property ownership or marriage are “things” just as much as their material counterpart (a piece of paper; a ring). This system thinking could be applied more rigorously and routinely to spatial practice. Such thinking could apply to anything from a work of art (cultural value is as much about institutions and story-telling as it is about any original artefact) to cities (“London” is as much idea and connections as it is location). Inspired by natural processes, we might reconsider the narratives which underpin ideas of authentic things and places, focusing instead on relationships, networks and their emergent properties. |