On Interdependent Metabolic Structures: The Case of Cyborg Garden

  • Zenovia ToloudiEmail author
  • Spyridon Ampanavos
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10921)


This paper revisits the concept of metabolic architecture by introducing the pair of plants and ambient computing, constructing a stage between automation and interaction. By acknowledging a technophilic present, the paper proposes ambient computing to control the metabolic architecture, but together with a vulnerable component, that of plants. This way it develops an interdependent system among technology, people, space, and plants. Assuming that in the future, the role of plants (and potentially people) will depend on computers, the automatic process requires to be thought together with vulnerability and unpredictability, so it is more humane. In this system, there is no redundancy, plants and ambient computing are predominant aspects of the design. The plants paired with ambient computing constitute a mediator for future technoecologies operating both through automation/control and people’s care/interaction. The paper explores this position through a project, which is a provocative statement on ecology, Photodotes V: Cyborg Garden (2015).


Affective computing Cyborg Light art Interaction design  Installation art Sensory architecture Metabolic architecture 


  1. 1.
    Toloudi, Z.: Architecture and living matter(s): From Art/Architectural installations to metabolic aesthetics. In: Terranova, C., Tromble, M. (eds.) The Routledge Companion to Biology in Art and Architecture, pp. 197–217. Routledge Press, London (2016)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bishop, C.: Installation Art: A Critical History. Tate Publishing, London (2014)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Toloudi, Z.: Natural and artificial light as energy: experiments in space. In: Proceedings of ACSA 101: New Constellations, New Ecologies, pp. 219–225. ASCA Press, Washington (2013)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Piene, O.: Lichtballett, Hans Haacke 1967: Artist Talks, MIT List Visual Arts Center website. Accessed 13 Dec 2011
  5. 5.
    Jones, C.A.: Artist/system. In: Dutta, A. (ed.) A second modernism: MIT, architecture, and the ‘Techno-Social’ moment, pp. 506–549. MIT Press, Cambridge (2013)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lally, S.: Potential energies. In: Lally, S., Jessica Young, J. (eds.) Softspace: from a representation of form to a simulation of space, pp. 33–37. Routledge, Abingdon (2007)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jeremijenko, N.: Tree logic, Accessed 21 December 2015
  8. 8.
    Toloudi, Z.: Ordinary Lilli-pot Gardens: Rendezvous in Tokyo. In: Gil, I. (ed.) MAS Context: Ordinary, vol. 23, pp. 130–147. MAS Studio, Chicago (2014)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Toloudi, Z.: The capsule as cyborg bioarchitecture. Technoetic Arts: J. Specul. Res. 14(1+2), 95–104 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kurokawa, K.: Metabolism in Architecture. Studio Vista, London (1977)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bijutsukan, M.: Metabolism, the City of the Future: Dreams and Visions of Reconstruction in Postwar and Present-day Japan. Mori Art Museum, Tokyo (2011)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Galanter, P.: Complexism and the role of evolutionary art. In: Romero, J., Machado, P. (eds.) The Art of Artificial Evolution: A Handbook on Evolutionary Art and Music, pp. 311–332. Springer, New York (2007). Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hughes, J.H.: Citizen Cyborg: Why Democratic Societies Must Respond to the Redesigned Human of the Future. Westview Press, Boulder (2004)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Dartmouth CollegeHanoverUSA
  2. 2.Harvard UniversityCambridgeUSA

Personalised recommendations