In a recent post, we delved into the concept of an ecological civilization, which envisions a new era of humanity, one that prioritizes human and ecological flourishing alike. Perhaps it shouldn’t have surprised us, but what most captivated readers were the images.
there's a kind of aesthetic convergence to the solarpunk movement that I am curious about. Do the rammed earth walls need to be pretty? How is untidiness part of the purpose of the movement? Does being Instagram friendly make practical acts of solarpunk in the present more compelling? And if that's what it takes to build solarpunk now, what will it be in the future? Would love to read some reflections on this if you have them!
This is such a great question and something I’d love to write out my full thoughts on. In short, I think the solarpunk aesthetic should resist convergence where possible but there has definitely been a sort of flattening partly due to AI generated art and the sort of “green growth” utopia that dominates western concepts of a sustainable future. Dana Hudson has a wonderful part of his essay dedicated to this topic, where he reminds us that a lot of these visions seem to world build off a blank canvas instead of the reality: most places have already been built out and solarpunk will have to fill and repurpose those spaces. That is more of what I got into in my recent essay although it would be nice to just address it directly. But i think it would be really helpful to highlight the less Instagram-ready aspects of solarpunk. Which brings me to your second question... does the future, strategically, need to be *cute*? And is it almost an imperative that SolarPunk activism be cute/ Instagram friendly. I sort of wrote an essay on this titled “Is #thriving a moral imperative for climate activists?” And I think that’s sort of the vibe being our project at solarpunk farms, but I think we need to be very careful about placing substance before aesthetics in the pragmatic constructive part of solarpunk. Anyway! Great questions and I feel inspired to take more time with this and write something proper.
Yes totally! I think something that appeals to me most about solarpunk is the idea that the resources to build our ecological civilisation are here already, but it's about fixing what we have and repurposing what we can't fix, and sometimes that might be messy or at least hard to photograph. Keen to read more about this and thanks for a substantial reply!
Great article!
there's a kind of aesthetic convergence to the solarpunk movement that I am curious about. Do the rammed earth walls need to be pretty? How is untidiness part of the purpose of the movement? Does being Instagram friendly make practical acts of solarpunk in the present more compelling? And if that's what it takes to build solarpunk now, what will it be in the future? Would love to read some reflections on this if you have them!
This is such a great question and something I’d love to write out my full thoughts on. In short, I think the solarpunk aesthetic should resist convergence where possible but there has definitely been a sort of flattening partly due to AI generated art and the sort of “green growth” utopia that dominates western concepts of a sustainable future. Dana Hudson has a wonderful part of his essay dedicated to this topic, where he reminds us that a lot of these visions seem to world build off a blank canvas instead of the reality: most places have already been built out and solarpunk will have to fill and repurpose those spaces. That is more of what I got into in my recent essay although it would be nice to just address it directly. But i think it would be really helpful to highlight the less Instagram-ready aspects of solarpunk. Which brings me to your second question... does the future, strategically, need to be *cute*? And is it almost an imperative that SolarPunk activism be cute/ Instagram friendly. I sort of wrote an essay on this titled “Is #thriving a moral imperative for climate activists?” And I think that’s sort of the vibe being our project at solarpunk farms, but I think we need to be very careful about placing substance before aesthetics in the pragmatic constructive part of solarpunk. Anyway! Great questions and I feel inspired to take more time with this and write something proper.
Yes totally! I think something that appeals to me most about solarpunk is the idea that the resources to build our ecological civilisation are here already, but it's about fixing what we have and repurposing what we can't fix, and sometimes that might be messy or at least hard to photograph. Keen to read more about this and thanks for a substantial reply!