Fig. 288:

Pop-up Store

Architecture & Commodity

Jai & Jai Gallery, 2017

Fig. 288 explores the tension between architectural mass production and the subtle variations that emerge through repetition. Utilizing nine custom cutting tools, 288 figure variations were produced and displayed at Jai & Jai Gallery, with corresponding framed drawings. The installation asks viewers to consider how seemingly identical yet uniquely different architectural objects provoke new understandings of production and reception. Fig. 288 blurs the boundaries between architecture, art, and commerce by pushing a critical engagement with repetition, consumerism, and the viewer’s role in constructing meaning.

“Each object defies and confirms its mass-produced origin.”

The Politics of Repetition

Fig. 288 is a deliberate provocation, confronting the industrial processes behind architectural production. By embracing repetition, the project questions architecture’s complicity in commodification while exploring how creative differentiation can emerge within the framework of mass production. The project hypothesizes that architectural tools can generate objects that transcend their commodity status, revealing how architectural production itself can subvert traditional notions of singularity and value.

Manufacturing Difference

In a field that often separates the hand-crafted from the mass-produced, Fig. 288 aligns itself with architectural practices that embrace digital and parametric fabrication. However, it goes beyond these approaches by critically examining the cultural forces that shape how we engage with mass-produced objects. The project opposes the idea that architecture must be singular to be meaningful, positioning the gallery space as a site where industrial processes and creative production collide.

Tools of Disruption

Nine parametric cutting tools, each designed to produce specific variations, were employed to create the 288 figures. The materials and processes were identical, yet the outcome was a collection of subtly differentiated forms that demanded individual attention. This method underscores the tension between control and variation, between the uniformity of production and the singularity of the result.

Architecture and Commodity

Fig. 288 complicates the notion of mass production in architecture, revealing how repetition can produce differentiation that resists commodification. As viewers engage with the figures, they are asked to categorize and differentiate the objects, transforming the process of architectural reception into an active and critical task. The project’s essential contribution lies in its ability to turn the mechanisms of mass production into tools for generating architectural meaning, subverting the commodifying forces at play.

Toward a Post-Singular Architecture

Fig. 288 points to a future where repetition is embraced as a core architectural strategy. By leveraging industrial processes to create objects of difference, the project disrupts traditional architectural authorship and value ideas. The next step is to explore how more complex parametric methods might continue to challenge the commodification of architectural objects, opening new possibilities for the field.