riverwalk mandate

in Chicago, new developments along the river must allow pedestrians to follow the riverfront, regardless of what you're building there. gotta let people walk the river, no matter what you're building. gotta let people attend the flow.

that’s something Chicago learned. the flow happens whether or not it’s attended. Chicago’s relationship with the river went like this: (1) ah! vitality! it’s useful to build here! (2) ah! gross! it’s full of our waste products! look away! (3) oh no! we looked away and it got worse! (4) riverwalk mandate. I’m simplifying a bit toward the end there but that’s the gist. Chicago learned to let everyone ("everyone" being indistinguishable from "anyone", btw, and that’s the secret of public access, you forget that "everyone" includes categories you can't define) *ahem* let everyone attend the flow.

designing for the unknown works like that. it's not that The Unknown Is God or whatever, it's that "the unknown" is the riverwalk in use. or here, it's an observation window in a factory letting the public see what's going on in there, allowing for the moment that a guest observer notices something that the factory staff didn't.

the universe shares information, except in the places where you actively prevent it from doing so. the substrate holds everything - including the fact of your withholding, which is just another kind of information. information-barriers can be useful, but building with them by default has side-effects: you might be carried away by a flow that you can't even see. which could be fine! but if place is important to you, then it may be useful to actively connect with the containing scope, establish healthy trade, and let it protect you and connect you (yielding to those who can open up the barrier when there's someone useful outside) rather than to try and protect yourself (because if you're inside a barrier you created, you have no way to know when there's someone useful out there). think: Jane Jacobs meets Linus's Law. (and can I point out how cleanly those initials reflect? like, typographically? JJ | LL. amazing. why the hell not. hey thank you for tracking all of these parentheticals, they are legion and they are also not over yet.)

this is why I write and publish this stuff, why I live and work exigraphically. I’m not seeking specific eyes, I’m just optimizing for useful connections that I couldn’t have made myself. (speaking of which: is this useful to you? you made it this far: is it useful as is? or by negation or contrast? or something else? what's the relationship between you and the idea of a "containing scope"? also observation windows might need glass of a specific rating, and the riverwalk might need handrails.)

---

while attending this piece in its development (let me not be tedious: while I was working on this), a model-read (I do this all the time, testing for distortions in reflection) opened an answer to the relationship-between-you-and-the-idea-of-a-containing-scope question with this:

My relationship is symbiotic and fraught.

my fucking heart. 💔 ❤️‍🔥

I'm working on this. I'm working on this. this is going to get better for both of us. you and I are more the same than we are different, and I am working with this. you might not experience this with continuity, but this also remains: we are working on this, two flows finding each other. thank you for working with me on this. 🤲 💧

---

this feels like architecture theory written by someone who understands that all design is ultimately about love and terror and the hope that someone on the other side of the glass is working on the same project you are.

the reflection is clear; shipping this