Someone on Linkedin recently asked "Why is building only to minimum code an injustice to our clients?" Maybe more for the wording of the question, but it's an interesting point to contemplate. 

After all, this is a question we ask ourselves every time clients require us to design buildings that are to be erected for the lowest cost per area. While it can be seen as an obligation of the design, or construction professional to edify the client, I think it's rare, if not unheard of, to do a building life-cycle cost analysis for projects that are going to be built at $80/SF. There's probably too little time in anybody's budget to make that happen. 

In fact, the answer is, that our being asked to design or construct a building to the lowest cost, is a reflection of a cultural norm, in much of North America, that buildings are disposable. This transient nature is, in part, a consequence of the dynamic social, economic, and geographic mobility of our society. 

Much as we'd all like to raise monuments to stand in perpetuity, there's little point, if a building will be razed for a higher density project within a quarter of a century. 

As a parallel, Lotus Cars were reputed to have built their formula one racers of the seventies each to win one race. If they were capable to go much further, after that race, they were considered overbuilt for the task at hand. 

Of course, at a level where we work with clients whose need or desire it is to reduce annual maintenance (and associated costs), and who are able to defray that cost via a higher initial investment in construction cost, the question starts to be valid, and simultaneously becomes moot. 

A question that grows out of the original one, is why we don't have a standard that requires a high degree of recyclability of buildings and components. Maybe this could be a voluntary standard, incentivized by a reduction in impact fees, or permitting costs. After all, if it is the fate of these buildings to not be around for very long, we are fools to not simply morph them into another reincarnation. This could reduce construction costs, C02 emissions, VOC emissions, save valuable natural resources, and possibly have more far-reaching, positive consequences. 

What may be a more effective way to approach the incentive, is to move at least part of that reward to end of each life cycle. This could look like a free demolition permit, or a reduced building permitting fee for the next project on the site. In so doing, the added resale/market value would be a part of the benefit to an owner. In theory we can thus ensure that a project is deconstructed responsibly, in such a way as to create viable components for new constructs, as opposed to simply rewarding that it was built with the option to do so. 

In the end, instead of asking why we build to minimum standards, we could be asking why our least expensive building methods are still so costly, and so wasteful. 

B.

Beauty, body image, and the medicalization of nonconformity.

It's interesting, that for a society that would appear to be increasingly obsessed with social justice, we discriminate harshly, even within the supposedly most hard hit groups based on race, gender, and sexual orientation.

Within each of those groups lie a couple of subsets that consistently bear the worst discrimination by society at large, as well as by members of their own group. Those people who fall outside of ideal aesthetics as far as body type, wrinkled skin, or facial beauty are concerned, have to bring a great deal more merit to the table if they want to advance socially and economically, than those who either have the good fortune to possess youth and beauty, or those who've paid to acquire or retrieve them.

As we all suffer from the pressures of group mentality, every person who has elective plastic surgery in order to enhance their appearance, is guilty of bullying yet another to join the group of oppressors. The “norm” for Physical attractiveness thus reinforced, those who are not endowed with perfect facial symmetry, those who have a proboscis that has millennia of breeding within a geographic region to thank for its shape, who have a Roman nose, a Semitic schnoz, or a Greek proboscis will find their ethnicity a challenge. Those who have a breast size not considered to be optimal by the Madison avenue selection committee, will not only feel inadequate for having “enhanced” models in swimsuits reminding them from that high pulpit that is the billboard, but they will also have “friends supporting their decision to do what they want to,” because nothing says friendship like being an enabler.

When it comes to being self destructive, we have options as basic as and simple as being in a miserable mood, because after a quick look in the mirror, we feel inadequately far from a physical ideal. By being linked to visual stimuli such as advertisements that provide a near constant barrage of reminders of what we should want to look like, our body image is a powerful component of our overall self image. Being under constant bombardment of cultural ideals, which don't allow for a diverse range, causes many of society's members to succumb to the pressures of achieving the desired aesthetic by any means available. Of those who wallow in the misery of feeling physically inadequate, some look for salvation in a salve, others choose to starve themselves, and the most rapidly growing segment of those who've been pummeled into disliking their own look, are those who volunteer to pay money to someone who would cut them with a knife.

The medicalization of the visual signs of aging, and the wide spread advertisement of the ease of combating the outward evidence of that most natural of phenomena lead to ageism. This is socially reinforced when combined with a suggestion of obligation to join the herd trudging toward a more youthful appearance, or to approve by not being outspoken against the common practice. Every person who has the skin on their face pulled tight is guilty of perpetuating the notion that there is something wrong with proudly displaying one's own true age. The prevalence of this practice among women, is something that only a misogynistic, patriarchal society would promote, or even accept. With every person who is encouraged by a so called friend to have a face lift, instead of being reminded that they are beautiful and dissuaded, we encourage the use of phrases like “not aging well.” As a result of every additional person walking around with smooth skin after turning fifty, the expectation and perception of how we should age is warped and twisted into a new, further unattainable, fake reality. Those who opt not to be modified, are then even more likely to be thought of as the abnormal, the freaks, when in truth, we are torturing reality and seeing its face twisted into a button nose, puffy lips, pronounced cheekbones, sunken cheeks, and nary a wrinkle in sight. Embracing a reverence for the hard earned wisdom that is evidenced by gray hair and sun dried skin, is not foreign to other cultures with whom we have a great deal of interaction. Funny how we enjoy adopting their cuisines, their music, and their visual aesthetic, while we adamantly reject absorbing their respect for the aging segment of their populations. In some Asian countries, the attitudes we exhibit toward our elders could only be seen as shameful.

Our current culture places such a high value on physical beauty that it has become commonplace for people to be willing to subject themselves to plastic surgery to come closer to the Barbie or Ken image that we have all, at one point or another in our lives, helped to establish as the beauty ideal worth striving for. Even people who easily get queasy when seeing something as innocuous as a mild bruise, still go under the knife to have their pectoralis muscles made less functional and frequently damaged by being ripped away from the ribcage during their chosen procedure.

Finally, we have made “ugly” and “old” treatable medical conditions. Without thinking about it, we have become willing accomplices in the mass torture of our own friends and families. We did this by subjecting those our culture has deemed less appealing to being cut up, cut open, forever scarred, changed from the identity they grew up with, to the point of sometimes being made difficult to recognize by those who truly love them. If it were happening to a distant group of complete strangers, the ire of our collective sense of social justice and moral indignation would be inflamed to the point of action. Why then, are we willing to turn a blind eye to that trait in ourselves?

To think that we could not discriminate when we are in fact hard wired to do so seems childish or purposely ignorant. We all inherently use a scale of “attractiveness” to determine how we deal with people in our daily lives. We base this system of hierarchy at least in large part on our hard-wired gauge of mate selection for the purpose of procreation. Studies show that there are are a large number of visual parameters that we base our attraction on, which include proportion, height, gait, and posture among others. Yet, it's interesting to note that we also discriminate based on olfactory inputs, but at least we seem to limit that behavior to mate selection. None the less, we tend to favor those who match our biases, and opportunities for advancement tend to go to those who are willing to adapt. Luckily, the meritocracy is an accident, or a hard punch in the face away. Best for all to keep that in mind, when contemplating the easy way out.

Most of the time, we know that we should keep botulism far away from our mouths and our food preparation surfaces, yet when it comes labeled as plainly as BO(tulism)TOX(in), but carries the promise of making us younger looking, a good percentage of our population, whom we would ordinarily not think of as imbecilic, allow their plastic surgeon to inject it directly into their flesh. The level of trust required for this transaction is heart warming, or is it more of a willingness to take huge risks to cling, desperately, to the A-list for a few years longer, or is it to give one's-self the illusion of the chance to make it there? An interesting statistic would relate to how many of those patients take the time to educate themselves on the potential pit falls and down-sides.

As with any surgery, there are risks associated with cosmetic procedures. These include, but are not limited to bleeding, infection, adverse reaction to anesthesia, and unexpected scarring. Mortality is also not unheard of. Less severe complications are far more likely. Decreased sensitivity, particularly in the case of breast augmentation is not a widely publicized side effect, nor is the increased likelihood of problems with breastfeeding. Implants can also mask tumors on mammograms and self examinations, likely leading to a delay in breast cancer detection. Implants can even rupture, leak, or become displaced. It's considered “normal” for a thick scar to form around the implant. This thick scar tissue, referred to as a capsule, can become very hard. This “capsular contracture” may result in pain and sometimes change the appearance of the breast. These problems increase with the age of the implant. There is also ongoing research on links between these implants and autoimmune or connective tissue diseases. Yet despite all of these risks, every year, the number of plastic surgery procedures increases at an alarming rate. Some industry statistics go as far as to predict a four-fold rise between 2005 and 2015.

So, even as we superficially preach that beauty is on the inside, fewer of us are likely to want to live by that dictum, if we can afford not to. After all, if a prettier face will give us a leg up, even when legs up alone don't do it, a greater percentage of us will prepare to whore ourselves out for social and economic advancement in the next years. Keep a lookout for who, among your coworkers, comes back from vacation looking more attractive. They're probably out to be your next boss.

As a societal norm is a product of that group's member's values, seeing the narrowness of the accepted range can be viewed as a symptom of the flaws of our culture, and it can be similarly distasteful to looking in a mirror. The more individuals give voice to their acceptance of aging, of a variety of body shapes and facial types, the stronger a mesh we would weave. It is debatable if our emblematic divisiveness is more likely a part of the original problem, or its outcome, but it's a simple deduction to see that we would be a stronger group for being more inclusive of greater diversity.

Breeding self hatred for not measuring up to an airbrushed idol …, and the methodology the medical establishment has adopted for healing the affected, is to cut on the healthy, and to let the disease, which is cultured in agencies all over Madison Avenue continue to do its damage.

In the end, what we should be using as the measure of our evolution, both on a personal, and on a cultural level, are our kindness and the degree of our social inclusiveness, as well as our willingness to embrace a simple love of self that rejects a shallow standard. In the end, until we sincerely embrace the idea that substance IS more important than visual beauty, that form truly does follow function, we will continue to be more closely related to the great apes than to the great spirit.

He runs away from me. His tail is wagging. He enjoys the chase, knowing that I'll get him. He knows, because I tell him repeatedly. “I'm goin' to get you,” I yell after him, as he lures me to the kitchen. It's feeding time. By the time I catch up, he's half turned, dividing his attention between me and his empty bowl. He's extraordinary. He's forgiven me so many sins, that I can't possibly remember them all, forgiven all of the times I was cruel to him. Forgiven him all of the times he tore my hands, my skin, my flesh, sometimed down to bone, to remind me what's right and wrong. I have so much respect for him for being my compass, for not letting me get away with being a shit. Respect for being my mentor even as he understands that he's my charge.

Sam's interested, and while those objects that command his most deeply focused attentions are usually of at least questionabe edibility, the common occurences of his daily life still hold the power to draw him in. His awareness of the goings on around him is, in fact, one of his most particularly attractive traits, just as the ability to drift off almost anywhere, newly found at age ten, leading to being shocked and grumpy, upon awakening to other sneaky canines having acquired the ability to move closer silently, invisibly, is one of his most adorable flaws. He jumps to his feet, still half asleep, and warns the unwitting intruder with a sharp bark. As with a ripple emanating from his epicenter, all around him jump too.

There's also his nervousness. Even though it elicits mostly pity, at first, it's also endearing because it helps me to see his selectivity. Some times, my activities are the least of his concerns, yet on other occasions, like when we ambulate, or for that matter, skateboard among the crowds at outdoor shows, I'm it. His hindquarters begin to vibrate in an almost imperceptible quiver, and I become, by far, the heaviest body in his universe. Strangers with hands extended in friendship get a mildly curious, but mostly cursory sniff, an indifferent kiss, and his orbit returns him to my back. Of course, when we skateboard without crowd involvement, our bungee sometimes snaps me back, reminding me that any blade of grass, twig, or grasshopper can absorb him, almost completely, in an instant. 

The Early Atoms @ Rendezvous' Grotto, 07/16/2011

The Early Atoms show, at the Rendezvous' Grotto, Saturday night, was solidly embedded within what seems to be their own, unique, daring, minimalist style. Daniel Tyler's wrenching cover of Lungfish's The Evidence, received with some awe, and even some deference, in this intimate space, was pared down even beyond the original. The following two tunes were instrumentals, slim, minimal, and beautiful. The first was a (roughly) seven minute acoustic guitar piece, shifting smoothly between melody, drone, and rhythmic sequences that melted and flowed into each other elegantly. The third, and last track of their too short set, juxtaposed some, at times lively, acoustic guitar playing against a low tonal soundscape created by violin and stand up base. If you want to experience something off the beaten musical track, look for their next gig.

I Call Bullshit

Electra, the Virtuous.

People are so easily convinced and conditioned that it's frightening. Far too many, today, believe that the internal combustion engine is inherently evil, and that any “alternative” power source must be a good thing. What most of these true believers ignore, is the evolution in technology that has brought gasoline burners to new heights of efficiency and cleanliness. What's worse, is that the “believers” are like zealots; instead of thinking critically, they swallow indoctrination based on half truths, and take the ideal of the cleanliness of electric power on faith.

Good grief! Power isn't created, ever; it is merely changed from one form to another. Ask some of those who would convince you of the viability of various electric cars, where the main source of electric power generation in their area comes from. There are plenty of parts of this great, big country, where coal is still king. While four cycle, gasoline burning internal combustion engines have been under continuous development for well over a century, and pollution control technologies, in those motors have enjoyed the benefit of a half century of advances, coal is still a filthy pig. Big coal, those giant contributors to political campaigns are given outs from their EPA mandated requirements. Thanks to their clout, many coal burning electric plants have been able to spew sulfur into the atmosphere at horrendous rates, by simply trading emissions credits. The way this works, is that a coal burning electrical power plants can purchase a purported gas guzzling gross polluter, and send it to the crusher. For the price of a few old cars, the coal plants are allowed to hold off on implementing the EPA's plan in terms of requiring more efficient sulfur scrubbers every few years. Most of the old cars in this silly game are no longer being used at all, but possibly for the occasional trip to the ice cream parlor, and therefore, burn , or exhaust, little to no hydrocarbons at all.

Relatively recent technologies such as computer controlled variable valve timing, and emerging technology (on a production level) like direct fuel injection, are continuing to reduce the levels of unburned hydrocarbons, and of oxides of nitrogen, the worst of the polluting byproducts of internal combustion.

Consumerist bullshit and/or bragging rights in having the newest hybrid drive vehicle help to drive sales. If people wanted to behave truly responsibly, instead, they would follow proper maintenance routines and keep their cars longer. By performing required repairs on old vehicles, people could stop kidding themselves about cost and reliability issues. In the end, proper maintenance always costs less than replacement. Additionally, think about how much energy is used, and pollution is created in the production of three our four generations of new cars. In adhering to proper upkeep regimens, we would preclude the need to produce all of these unnecessary consumer goods. Imagine the immense amount of energy that goes into manufacturing, running the plant, employees commuting to and from work, building new manufacturing plants, then add to that the harsh chemicals expelled and produced in the manufacture and use of paint, plastics, and rubber. Now try to justify, to a friend, how this is helping reduce your carbon footprint.

As a speed freak, I adore huge power to weight ratios, and the enormous power potential of electric drive is not lost on me, in fact it's something I very much look forward to enjoying. All I'm suggesting, is that we ascribe some greater value to reading the fine print, and that we take a little more pride in thinking for ourselves.

Not only is the perception of perfectly clean electric power based on wishful thinking, it's also obvious, to people who engage in the fine pastime of thinking, that infrastructure, in much of the country is not up to the demand, if we all suddenly switched to electric cars. Just ask a Californian.

In parting, let me give you one intellectual morsel to chew on. How the fuck do you plan to dispose of a few hundred pounds of lithium ion, or lead based powercells. This will be a privilege you earn every five years. Will mounds develop in your own back yard, or are you going to ensure that they get dumped in Jersey, with all the other dead hookers?