unu-physicality ...the full works
A significant part of unu thought is concerned with how little we understand and appreciate our physical surroundings. To truly understand every part of the world around us is an impossible task. But to contemplate and admire its complexity can bring a sense of wonder and a new perspective on life. At present semiology and connotative meanings play a huge – if not universally dominating – role in the circulation of objects. unu-life contests this, and asks whether the world would be a better place (both today and for generations to come) if more people appreciated its physicality.
A world in which products are enjoyed for their physical characteristics and viewed independently of/from social connotations is, unu admits, somewhat idealistic/quixotic and far from our present reality. However, a shift in the way we value things could create both social and environmental benefits. At present, semiology allows us to exchange objects as signs that operate independently of/from their physicality – objects themselves have little or no relevance to the value attributed to them. This produces a society in which physical products are disposable; consumers desire signs rather than objects, so the objects can be replaced at any time; by anything that carries the same immaterial connotations. This continuous and accelerating cycle of production, consumption and disposal not only leads to environmental damage but also leaves the consumer discontented – if our ‘needs’ follow this unlimited interchangeability of signs, they are endless and can never be satisfied.
If society attributed more value to physical properties – and semiology played a reduced role – an object’s value would be based more on its materiality. Our relationships with the objects around us would become less fickle. Allowed to develop and strengthen naturally, owner-object attachment would become greater and greater over time. Such an increase in product endurance would mean huge environmental benefits; reducing not only the waste going to landfill but also slowing the depletion of natural recourses.
unu thinks that increasing the public’s appreciation of our environment’s physicality is one of the most important tasks in the pursuit of a sustainable future. unu aims to highlight (and hopefully generate in others) the pleasure it gets from understanding the wondrous complexities of the world around us.
Although mass-production is often seen as an opposing force to the quest for sustainability, unu-life would like to offer an alternative view and highlight it’s phenomenal technologies. (The question of whether mass-production is good or evil, like any subject, is not that simple! unu-life hopes to address this topic in greater detail in the not too distant future. It is a very relevant query to unu-life, which my dissertation, “Handmade”, also touches upon.) The complexity of a mass-produced object, and the price that it is available at, is quite astonishing. If people were to consider such issues they may view the object in a different light: no longer finding them mundane and indifferent, but rather amazing objects holding incredible stories of complicated production… or at least they may be temporarily surprised, enlightened or perplexed by what they find?
Take the example of a pair of Nike trainers. Some people may think they’re cool and fashionable because their favourite basketball player endorses them. Others may like them for their technical performance, low weight, and durable design. Others may hold a different view and see them as the evil spawn of capitalism, a branding icon, using child labour to make money for the already-hugely-rich. However, I imagine few people would marvel at the amount of work, time and energy that has gone into making that pair of trainers: There is the many weeks, months and years spent designing and developing the shoe. There is the incredibly advanced materials and fabrics that are used (which are themselves products of complex manufacturing processes), and also the multi-part moulding of the composite sole. There is the hugely complicated machinery – feeders, presses, jigs, cutters, moulds, clamps, etc, etc, – which convert the material into shoe parts. Then there is the assembly: a mix of incredibly intricate and accurate machinery and a skilled human workforce. And finally there is also the distribution and transport network to consider but that is a separate – though no less complicated – issue.
I would never expect anyone to actually consider every detail of an object’s production - it would probably take hours and hours to list all the processes and jobs that are involved. Mass production is an immensely complicated chain of events, culminating (more often than not) in the formation of an amazing object, full of stories and the history of its own creation.
These days however, everything is mass-produced. Consumers no longer view it as a wondrous process (as they did at the time of the industrial revolution) and mankind has become unaccustomed to assigning worth to the physicality of our environment. unu believes it is necessary to change this. Next time you go shopping, observe the physical qualities of the object you are buying. Consider what it truely is; not just what it does or what it says.
These shoes were bought (on sale) for £13.49. They are made up of 50 individual pieces of material + the laces + the rubber sole (which is a complex moulding of 4 different rubber compounds) + over 35 meters of stitching.
WOW!
Disclaimer: This is not one of my pairs of trainers – I purchased them purely for the task of dismantling them. I do not wish to be associated to the connotations of style or fashion they hold!?
