Reaction: A Monumental Crisis
How one of our podcast episodes, about rock cutting robots, opened up a philosophical discussion about what world we want to live in - and how we are already stuck
For The Aesthetic City Podcast, I interviewed a master craftsman (Patrick Webb, Real Finishes, episode #33) who I greatly respect - for his insight in what craft means on a deeper level, and his views on the monstrous problem we face as humans: modernity.
And he’s not talking about the bland, ugly buildings we all so despise, it’s about far more than that: it’s about the system that produced this ugliness in the first place. Modernity can be seen as the gargantuan monster that appears all around us, from the rivers of cars that stream through our cities and countryside, to the millions of chimneys that churn out smog choking our children.
That’s Patrick Webb, and he wrote a blog post about another episode I recorded, with Micah Springut of Monumental Labs, a company producing stone carving robot systems. In this episode (#38) Micah tells about his product, which promises to revolutionise the way we build by allowing for cheaper ornament.
In Patrick’s article, named ‘Monumental Mistakes’, he observes how Micah and I are mouthpieces for the monster of modernity. And I don’t blame him. In fact, I agree with Patrick! Because I can’t take away the fact that I am excited about what Monumental Labs does. I’m a sucker for technology - all my life it has brought new miracles, new shiny gadgets. Call it a addiction, maybe. Or call it my generation.
In his article, Patrick makes a point that makes me doubt all of it.
Feeding the beast
When we zoom in on the potential of a single technology, we miss out on the bigger picture: how technology, and all the systems that enable it, are all part of Modernity. By increasing our technological prowess, we ‘feed the beast’ - even though having a new tool that disrupts the industry might feel like a victory, it might prove to be a pyrrhic one by taking away our humanity in the end. Because, as Patrick writes, there is more to craft - what does it add socially, culturally, ecologically?
Robots are an invention of a high-energy, high-tech civilisation. They take worldwide supply chains to build and to maintain. As Patrick writes, his simple tools do everything without a single line of computer code, last for generations and only take a hearty breakfast, lunch and dinner to operate. When all technology crumbles around us, the combination of skill and a set of simple tools will survive - and will be absolutely necessary to build that what we need.
All advanced inventions that are built on the worldwide system of industry, commerce and finance that might seem to solve a problem, are often part of the problem: they feed the monster that created them. And that is where Patrick has a good point, and makes me wonder: are there any alternatives?
Escaping & humane beauty
What we want, ideally, is humane beauty, brought forth by skill and simple tools that do not require ‘just-in-time deliveries’, container ships and worldwide communications systems. But how do we escape the monster? First of all, we can prevent the use of machines and computers as much as possible. It activates our hands and brains, it forces us to think, to practice. It makes us more human, it brings us to mentors to learn from and friends to share with. It brings joy in our lives by being hard and eventually rewarding. Escaping sure sounds good!
But there is a problem: our society itself is also a product of the beast of modernity. Modern freighting and industry, mass production of everything - from fertiliser to smartphones, combined with an endless web of highways, railways and airports sustain our modern way of living. The many billions of souls on this planet depend for a large part on this enormous, yet very fragile system.
Housing & the Monster
The same counts for housing: we have created a monster, which has created monstrous living circumstances. The idea of ‘Economies of scale’ has permeated everything, and now we are its slave. We are more or less forced by the laws of economics to obey this monster in every way, and we can only play by its rules. Want to build a beautiful home, instead of the drab mass housing that is forced on us? Well, it can’t be for everyone, as mass industry and mass education has all but wiped out craftsmen. So what do we do? We build robots to emulate the craftsman, but these robots are built with & use the same systems that keep us captive: mass industry, worldwide transportation and telecommunication. Or we build modular homes, using factories that glue brick strips onto concrete plates to imitate brick cladding.
I have no answer
The result of Patrick’s article is that I’m in a very uncomfortable position. Because I do feel the pragmatic need for solutions like Monumental Lab is offering, and I see how it doesn’t solve any problems on a deeper level - instead, probably makes them worse.
The only thing I could do was to write a response on X (find it here) and this article.
Probably the only other thing I can do, is to think. Because I don’t have a real answer. I sure hope we can defeat the growing monster that our world is becoming somehow, and to establish a new order in which we can do things on a smaller scale, use provably effective low-tech solutions (a world view like Wrath of Gnon’s).
But I’m not sure if this would be possible, especially on a larger scale. Large scale: that’s where the monster excels at. It’s what it thrives on. So the alternative will always stay small, and with it, the humane beauty we all want.
Perhaps we are ‘saved’ by armageddon, perhaps we will all be so totally jobless after AI takes every last job that we have no other options but to take up the chisel.
Until that time, I will think. And perhaps try and pick up a chisel myself.
Hi Ruben,
I'm a big fan of your YouTube channel and I recently happened upon your Substack while taking a break from YouTube. I want, if I can, to offer some advice given that in this article you appear to be happening upon, quite accidentally, a philosophical point I've been thinking about a lot recently over the past few months.
The reason I believe you have been challenged by this is that Patrick is making a point that is fundamentally reactionary, (that is, against modernity in the deepest sense) and the position you seem to hold is at heart liberal/modern (I mean this in the broadest possible since, that is, in the vein of the enlightenment). Many of the ideas you have touched on in your videos are already of a reactionary sentiment (though I doubt you intend it) as you advocate for parochial architecture, sensitive to time, place, and people. Since your position about technology is at heart a modern/liberal argument and your position on architecture parochial, I do not think you can reconcile this. Personally I think you would either have to accept modernity and embrace these robots or embrace reaction and reject robotics.
I don't want to sway your opinions in any way, but I suggest you explore this deep and the many other criticisms of modernity from various different angles and perspectives. It is my personal belief that the battle against modernity will define whether we survive as something recognisably human. I hope this helps