With the development of
technology, many people can use their phones to do everything. Especially in
China, people can use their phone to shop or take the subway. There is no
denying that the phone has brought people closer, we can call our friends
anytime and anywhere. But does it really bring us closer?
So that’s my initial idea
of my project.
Maybe many people don’t know what Phubbing is. In 2002, Macquarie Dictionary created a term ‘Phubbing’ to describes the habit of subbing other people and focus on their phone.
In my project, a TV screen or projector for showing a video about phubbing will be set in the corner of stairs or at the end of the corridor. In the video, two actors sit in two adjacent chairs, they play phones and don’t talk to each other. As the viewer gets closer, the two actors will respond differently, maybe they will look up at the viewer, or turn around and don’t allow viewers to see their phone content, or not responding at all.
I plan to film a lot of videos cut about different response, and play them randomly. An ultrasonic sensor will be used to determine the distance of the viewer and switch different video with different distance.
Distance in this work
In this work, the proxemics theory, which was proposed by E.T.Hall, was used to judge the distance between actors and the viewer. This theory describes people’s use and understanding of spatial relationships in everyday encounters with others.
Hall described the interpersonal distances of man (the relative distances between people) in four distinct zones:
(1) intimate space (0cm – 45cm): For embracing, touching or whispering
(2) personal space (45cm – 122cm): For interactions among good friends or family
(3) social space (1.2m – 3.7m): For interactions among acquaintances
(4) public space (3.7m – 7.6m or more): For public speaking
I divide the distance in this work into four stages, and assume some different actions according to Goffman’s footing. For actors, they sit in the personal space (45cm – 122cm) of each other, sometimes they will whispering or touching intimate space (0cm – 45cm). For viewers, when they are in the public space (3.7m – outside space of work) of actors, actors have no response, just play their phones. But when viewers become closer (1.2m – 3.7m), they react differently – or become anxiety, or looking up at the viewers, or turning around, or putting down the phone and talking to each other, etc. If the viewer enter/close to their personal space, the actors will leave the seat.
This blog record some notes and theory which can be used in my work and dissertation.
Erving Goffman proposed the concept of “footing” in this book Forms of Talk, it refers to some changes happened in people’s conversation – it usually reflected in participants’ alignment, or set, or stance, or posture, etc (Goffman, 1981). For example, when a tourist enters in a conversation of locals, these locals may stop their conversation or change dialects to official languages. These changes range from gross changes in stance to the most subtle shifts in tone that can be perceived, and usually, act as a buffer between two more substantially sustained episodes. A change of footing implies a change in the alignment we take up to ourselves or others, these changes which constantly happened in a conversation are considered a persistent feature of nature talk.
An ideal conversation between two people is one between speaker and hearer, and it is usually inaccessible. In general, both parties have official status as a ratified participant in the encounter. In reality, however, an approved official participant may not listen, and a listening person may be an unapproved participant. Beyond that, a bystander may have been overhearing rather than eavesdropping, but there is no denying that they were part of the conversation.
In an ideal multi-person conversation, none of the participants serves more frequently than others. However, it is difficult to achieve. In an open communication, participants have the right but not the obligation to initiate an utterance, and then the utterance is finally silent. For example, in a party, we can find that participation is obviously unstable, the lost person will be retrieved, and new participants will be encouraged to join. In this conversation, the relationship between each person and the utterance can be called his “participation status” relative to the utterance, and all the people in the utterance at this moment become the “participation framework” of the utterance.
A speech does not divide participants into recipients and non-recipients, but opens up a series of possibilities for structural differentiation. The speaker constructs a participation framework when guiding his delivery.
In addition, in order to define “speaker” more
accurately, he proposed the concept of production framework.
Animator: An individual active in the vocal process, which Goffman called “sounding box” through which utterances are made. Usually, it is simply a human being, but at other times it might be merged with a piece of technology such as a speaker system.
Author: The author is the individual who composes the words uttered by the animator. Sometimes it is the same people as an animator, or it may be other people whose opinion was expressed by the animator.
Principal: the individual or party whose beliefs and viewpoint are represented by the words uttered.
It is easy to think of the term “speaker” as simply refer to someone who speaks, and to assume they speak simply for themselves.
e.g.: I said shut the window.
Shut the window.
Goffman uses production framework to analyses different kind of “speaker”.
Goffman, E., 1981. Forms of talk, Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. pp.124-159
Edward T.Hall perception of space
Before introducing the term “proxemics”, Edward Hall rough classified the way man perceive the world as two different categories: the distance receptors and the immediate receptors in his book The Hidden Dimension.
First of all, the distance receptors refer to
those concerned with the examination of a distant object such as the eyes, the
ears, and the nose. I saw it as a part of the physical way to feel the physical
space, which we can describe it by specific physical ways (e.g. how far or how
big). Those sensory help human to gather information, but there is a great
difference in not only the amount and the type of information but also the
amount of space that those receptors can process. Take the eyes and the nose as
an example, the unaided eye sweeps up an extraordinary amount of information
within a hundred-yard radius and is still quite efficient for human interaction
at a mile. By contrast, the unaided ear can efficiently cover in the course of
daily living is limited. However, man cannot feel the world with a single sense.
Cornell psychologist James Gibson thought the retinal image as “visual field” while
what man perceived as “visual world”. Bishop Barkeley said that man actually
judge distance as a consequence of the interrelation of the sense with each
other and with past experience.
On the other hand, the immediate preceptors are those used to examine the world close up, for example, the world of tough, the sensation we receive from the skin, membranes, and muscle. Nerves called the proprioceptors keep man informed of what is taking place as he works his muscles. People perceive the world through the feedback those nerves provide so that they can move their body or react to other people. Man’s relationship to his environment is a function of his sensory apparatus plus how this apparatus is conditioned to the response. However, some qualities which related to man’s perception of space perceived subtle are commonly overlooked. Take temperature as an example, people can observe other people’s emotion due to our great sensitivity to small temperature, but sometimes people didn’t focus on it. The great sensitive of the skin to changes in heat and texture not only to notify the individual of emotional changes in others, but feed back to him the information of a particularly personal nature from his environment.
Beyond that, this classification can be broken down even further. For example, the skin is the chief organ of touch while it can detect radiant and conducted heat. Hence, the skin is both immediate preceptors and distance receptors.
Hall, E.T., 1969. The hidden dimension, Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday.
Lefebure’s Social space
Let’s discuss the social space. The social space
here cannot be fully explained by the natural climate, the site, or the history
of its past. The behavior, knowledge and ideology of social groups
must be taken into account, including networks or pathways
that facilitate the exchange of material and information. Such an object is not
only a thing, but also a relation. The space produced to serve as a tool of thought
and of action, and it can be shown by means of space itself.
(Social) space is a (social) product.
The proposition was proposed by Henri Lefebure in his book The production of space (Lefebvre and Nicholson-Smith, 2009).
Lefebure thought that the proposition is concealed
by double illusion: from transparency to opacity (realistic). These two aspects
refer back to each other, rein each other and hide back the other.
The illusion of transparency is a luminous and intelligible space, what happens in this space leads a miraculous quality to thought, which becomes incarnate by means of design. The design serves as a mediator between mental activity and social activity, and deployed in space. Therefore, without meeting any unsolvable obstacles, all hidden things can be perceived in this illusion of transparency. That is to see through the appearance to perceive the essence by design. This illusion of transparency is actually mostly concealed or manifested by the emphasis of word (explicitly or implicitly).
The realistic illusion is the illusion of natural simplicity, which is the product of native attitude rejected by philosophers. Based on common sense, it has more existence than “subject” which means thought and desires compared with “thing”. People choose proper and adequate word to express “thing”.
As far as I am concerned, these two illusions refer to the essence and the surface of an object respectively. For example, some people may think a vase which full of flowers is beautiful and delicate, but the other may see it as life or death. It depends on their thoughts and social experiences. These two illusions are in opposition to each other but mutually reinforcing.
Lefebvre, H. and Nicholson-Smith, D. (2009). The production of space. Malden, MA: Blackwell, pp.26-30.
At the first time I knew star and shadow cinema, we were asked to cut five pictures of ouseburn, and put the part we interested in together to make up a new work. We found these pictures not only shows element of nature, but also shows the past and future.
So our group want to show the connection and contrast between nature and city. We did some research such as how nature fights human product. At first we planned to get a small tree, place human lifestyle object inside, and put them all over the concrete floor in the star and shadow cinema.
But we gave up this tree quickly because we found that sometimes it is hard to recognise which is human and which is nature item such as grafted plants. So we changed our ideas. We voted for four natural disasters, and do a lottery to decide everyone’s topic.
Global warming (Kira)
Freeze over/ice age (Laura)
Global/nuclear war (Daniel)
We need to do some research about this catastrophe, and image what it could be after encountering these catastrophes. Justina suggested performing different topics, in these performances we pretend to face different catastrophes. We will set a button for each topics, it is a signal, which represents for the reason of catastrophes. When audience press the button, we use different ways to destroy Ouseburn as imagination (water/snow/collapse/…). Some ideas happened very fast, but some is a long processing. For example, global warming leads to the rise of sea level, so Star and Shadow Cinema will be flooded. Maybe we will control the time of each topic.
3D printers will be used to print some buildings: we chose
Star and Shadow Cinema as the main building and download some other free models
on the Internet. And we try to collect some nature elements in Ouseburn such as
moss or sands. It represents nature, which overwhelms the city.
When audience experience our work, they see a peaceful
Ouseburn first. But when they press the button, everything changed. Sea levels
rise, temperatures fall, and ecosystems collapse, situation get worse when the
button be pressed each time. Finally, Ouseburn will be destroyed by natural
However, we find these ideas are hard to perform. Firstly,
some effect cannot connect with buttons, such as smashing the building (Daniel)
or overwhelming them by nature (Justina). Secondly, we must practise destroying
buildings many times (it needs large quantities of models), and we must pay
attention to the signals that audience pressing the buttons, otherwise the
performance fails. Thirdly, we only can perform once because we cannot repair
We could not take the risk performing, so I suggested filming the processing of destroying models first. We show these videos on the wall by projector, buttons which made from sensors can control them playing and pausing. When video finished, it can restart. The good side of this idea is easier to control and show many times, if we failed, we can film again.
We plan to use this work to warn people protecting natural, because natural is much more fragile than we thought.
Based on some of my ideas, we started to make our own themed films.
For building the Ouseburn, we downloaded some free models from the Internet. Daniel built Star and Shadow Cinema on 3d Thinkercad. And I tried to set the scale in Ultimaker 3 Cura and print them. It took me a week to print out these models.
members film everyone’s version separately. Laura is the first one, she bought
some polystyrene to pretend snow, and use these fake snow cover the city. In my
version, I set a tank in front of model group, and pour water into it. So that
Star and shadow cinema looks to be flooded because of the rise of sea level. Then,
Justina put some moss in her model in her version. Daniel is the last one, he
chose to film the normal version of the model group and do some animations to
describe how city is destroyed by nuclear war.
A very coincidental thing happened during the processing of my shooting. Before I pour water into the tank, Alison boiled the water and I did not notice. So when I pour water into the tank, there was some smoke. It makes the city in video looks very hot. And then when I pour the cold water into the tank, I saw the model in camera lens became twist – because the cold water sank and hot water rise, which makes water refracted. This situation is the same as the idea I write in the blogs.
Before the show, we create a facebook event for our work. Laura designed some posters for different version of topic. We printed it out and displayed them everywhere in the Star and Shadow Cinema for guiding audience to our work.
In our initial idea, 4 videos about different catastrographe topic will play in the show, and audiences will control each videos by press the button. Each group member wear the lab coat, which makes us look like scientists. We walk around the room, do something to the model, for example, pour some snow or moss on the model, and pretend to do some research or explain to audience.
When installing our work we met some problems. We can only use a wall, because the other three walls have glass or whiteboards. It means we can only play two videos at a time.
So we divided into two groups – Justina and me, Laura and Daniel. In a group, one video is looped and another video needs a button to control the playback. In addition to playing video, Justina and Laura also do some performances like sprinkling some snow or moss on the model, while Daniel and me encourages audiences to control video with buttons – so that they can experience the consequences of their decisions.
In my version, I set two buttons which means “yes” or “no”. And I found five questions of life that could contribute to global warming and put them into questions as image in my phone. The phone was put in front of the button, so viewers can interact with video by answering questions. For example, when the audience was asked “do you use disposable products?”, if they asked “yes”, the video will play which means sea level will rise. Otherwise, the video will run back. Happily, my video was not reset throughout the night, which means the Star and Shadow Cinema was not flooded.
In addition, we encourage audience to write some thoughts in the whiteboard. Some audience write down their worries such as “stop killing!”, “Be a vegetarian” and “No global warming”, while other writing their critical thinking about 3D models in our work: “what happened to plastic waste before we started to think about plastic waste? ”
still has many defects. First of all, we did not observe the meeting room which
displayed our work carefully. It leads that we cannot playing four videos at
the same time. The audience can only see half of the work if they didn’t stay
in the room for a long time.
set up buttons for engagement with the public. However, the button on the bread
board was inconspicuous, and there was a lack of information about the button
in the meeting room. I saw that two audiences thought the button was set on the
phone and kept touching the screen of the phone at the beginning of the show.
So we had to explain the work all night.
There’s a lot of imagination about the future in this work, but we’ve only choice 4 different catastrophes as our topic and only showed negative aspect of the future. I think this kind of imagination should not be limited. If I can research this work more deeply in the future, I may add more imagination about different aspects — positive or negative, natural disasters or alien invasion. At the same time, this work cannot be easily understood by the audience because of its settings. I will change the way of interaction. The interaction between the audience and the work is not limited to a small button but other actions or behaviors.
I think we cooperate very well as a group. Despite some language barriers, everyone works hard and was respectful each other. I gained a lot of knowledge during this process, and I am very grateful to have been part of such an understanding and reliable team.
chapter, the author emphasized a dual sense of ‘making-in-public’ and ‘making-with-the-public’
by using some artistic projects. In my opinion, ‘making-in-public’ is something
ready-made but ‘making-with-the-public’ is not. The former is active for the
creator, audiences only see the results; the latter is passive, creator cannot
control the results but audience can participatory in the processing of the
work. So making-with-the-public is a reflection of how to use new technologies
to explore new possibilities. This possibilities are new forms of public
engagement with artist work, and encourage the public understand the deep
meaning of the work.
‘Objects’ ‘things’ and ‘materials’
with, this chapter introduces the change in the concept of collection in
museum. They are not limited in an “object” with fixed meaning, which is locked
in the museum. Facing the long history behind the collection, audiences always
feel bored about dry words or video which introduce them. In creative art
works, these collections are no longer the ‘object’ to be seen but ‘material’
to interacted with audiences. For example, Tim introduced some stone museums in
class and we used different sensory ways to show them rather than simple
displaying. Collections show not only the past but also the imagination of the
future. So it means we can use other ways to understand the meaning of the
collections, bring life to them.
Then, the role
of audience in creative work is also changing. Some creative works value
interaction rather than the classic form of ‘users-oriented’, so audiences are
not only a receiver but also a part of creative work. Participating in creative
work makes audience chance to explore the collection, which can improve
audiences’ engagement and interests. Through making with public, audience will
have a deeper, more varied understanding of the art works.
New engagement with the public
the change of the way engagement with the public is mentioned in this chapter. Now
the technology is highly developed, electronic technology is used to explore
new artistic possibilities. Different from traditional artist work, these
participatory art works collect the data of the artifacts and take some other sensory
details into consideration during the processing of public making. For example, Sonic Microscope and image Sonification
connect sonic with visual textures of rock samples together and make audiences
explore these rocks.
and auditory displays, some projects break the boundaries of time and space. Tim
and John compared live weather data in UK with the weather in the other side of
the world (location), and reconstructions the historical weather from 500AD to
the present (time).
with audiences, creators can receive different reacts. These participatory work
only provide a guide to explore the collections or places, whether the work is
positive or critical depends to audiences’ reaction of the connection established
In this blog, I will discuss about the distinction between ‘quality’ and ‘value’ of the participatory art work and what does this imply for participatory art work.
To begin with, participatory art work values differently since “social turn” appear, Bishop proposed that social turn overturns the role of the art object, the artist and the audience.
Art object: portable commodities to on-going or long-term project with unclear beginning and ending.
Artist: an individual producerto a collaborator or producer of situation.
Audience: viewer, beholder to participant co-producer.
Visual analysis has always been very important in art works.
Yet in 1960s and 70s, some of the participatory art start to find new ways to
analysing arts which is not limited to visual. They tend to an elusive–experience
rather than visual, although it still remains important to art project. Their projects
record people’s affective response by picture.
Today’s participatory art tend to value process of art works, which is usually an invisible change. Therefore these projects rely on first-hand experience. It needs creators or participants took more on-site time, ideally several site visits which spread out over time. So it is easy lose the critical distance: the more one participate in, the harder to be object.
Quality is a contested in the participatory field. Many political
artists refuse to use this word because they think quality is serving the
interest of market. However, Bishop insist that it is necessary as a
value-judgement way to understand and clarify our shared values at given
historical moment. When a talent artist convince a complex work in a specific
place, time and situation, his work always richer than other projects.
Participatory art usually have experience regime as dematerialised conception or performance art. For avoiding aesthetic rejection, social oriented projects need to pay attention to analyse how to contribute to and reinforce the artistic experience being gathered.
Besides, Bishop’s Artificial Hell is taken from Andre Breton’s
post-mortem. Breton’s analyse suggested that some projects were considered
failures at the time, but have resonance in the future. I mentioned Yayoi
Kusama in the lecture. She painted dots on participants’ naked bodies in an
unauthorized performance in her work Grand Orgy to Awaken the Dead (1969). This project was criticized
by the mainstream media at that time, and even her family disowned her. New York
Daily News queried that：“But is it art?” But I think it is these aesthetic rejections
of the time make his work stronger today and are remembered throughout history.
Traditionally, public art refers to the art or performance that displayed in public space. However, since the emergence of electronic networks, public space has become a merging of physical and virtual space. This convergence has redefined the concept of public art.
Surrounding with Christina Paul’s Governance and Agency in the Networked Commons, this blog post shows how the electronic Internet has changed the expression of public art.
From “one to many” to “many to many”
An important feature of public art is the varying degrees of audience participation and agency, and the agency of the creators/public/audiences is highly dependent on the degree of control over the work. And the Internet provides new ways for agency to distribution. In 1960, Max Haunaus redefined the concept of stage for music performances in his instalment of project Public Supply (1996): he established a connection in Public Supply for radio stations and telephone networks, participants could intervene in performances by making calls.
Critical: The Internet has facilitated the implementation of the
many-to-many model, which Christina Paul believes contributed to the
democratization of mass media, but access restrictions still exist around the
world. In addition to the lack of local access, the government or the media
also impose restrictions. For example, since 2002 China has set up the Great
Firewall. Except for monitoring online crime, this system blocks and filters
all transmission content which doesn’t match the communist party of China.
Whether such censorship does not violate freedom of speech has always been a
Participator dispersed around the world, not limit in a specific area.
The Internet redefines environment and boundaries of the physical world. In this article, Paul shows how the creator/audience can remotely control/participate in the work. One of the works, Telegarden produced by Ken Goldberg and Joseph Santarromana, allows participants to remotely control the mechanical arm to look after a garden. It reminds me of a service launched by Alipay app, which allows users to raise a virtual tree in Alipay through walking, subway and other behaviours. When the tree grows up, social organisations, environmental protection companies and others can “buy” the user’s “tree” and plant a physical tree in a real area.
Critical: The network creates a virtual public space for such
projects, where participants follow varied protocols, and the project is driven
by public initiative. However, if something is in the public domain, anyone can
use it the way they want, which leads to a lack of copyright in the public
Art in the network commons
As a new form of art, the Internet collapses the boundaries between the private and the public. In Warren Sack’s Agonistics, players publish their personal opinions, and are connected with other players who publish the same opinions. This project creates the interaction between the individuals. This reliance on the public no longer limits to one person but to the public.
In this post, there are some research about global warming. I will show some data and make some assumptions about how it will influence ouseburn.
Specific data of global warming
As we all known, global warming is a climate change , which is influenced by the greenhouse effect. It is not the future but something is happening. At present, most scientists generally believe that the human activity is the main cause of global warming – cutting trees, emiting large numbers of CO2. According to IPCC’s conclusion, human activities have caused approximately 1.0℃ of global warming, and it will be likely to reach 1.5℃ between 2030 and 2052 if there are no precautionary measure have been taken. If so, sea level will rise and ecosystems and biodiversity will influenced including species loss and extinction on land (IPCC, 2018).
Predictions about global warming
When I was learning the Conceptualising Landscape, my tutor recommended a book Six Degrees: Our Future on a Hotter Planet. It describes the effects of rising temperatures on the earth degree by degree according to the report of IPCC in 2001.
He only listed six degrees, but showed some shocking situations – when the temperature rise 2 degrees, the sea level will rise by 7 meters and flood some coastal cities. And when it rises 6 degrees, 95% of species are going to be extinct. It seems like a disaster fantasy about the future, but some of it has already happened. So I did some drawings to see what the models could be like about global warming.
Reason of global warming in ouseburn
The common reason is tree felling. These trees could save many tones of
greenhouse gas emission and help the fight against global warming, if
they were not be cut.
Another reason is the emission of CO2. I found many cars there. If we can’t figure out a way to curb global carbon emission, we may alter the oceans beyond their ability to heal themselves- at least in ways that will support marine life as we know it.
Some ideas about global warming
I made some assumptions about waht the ouseburn will be, I did some paingtings to show this area looks very hot, and maybe under the sea, because sea level will rise after this catagraphy.
First of all, what interests me most is the white installation on the lawn, which writes Nasa lied the earth is flat.
The effect of melting is used to reflect the rise of temperature. At
first I wanted to paint this hard object like liquid, such as melted ice
cream. Later I found that if I make the original material become
softer, it will more straightforward to make audience feel hot. It is
inspired by La persistencia de la memoria.
And then I took photos of Star and shadow cinema on the opposite side of the road at first.
This painting drew some twisted house. It is the second way that I express global warming, because when it’s hot, everything looks distorted.
Besides, I went to Gaudi’s Casa Battló in April, the glass at the corner of the stairs can also wrap things and make me feel in the sea.
There are several wooden stakes on the side of the road, which reminds me of the driftwood used by fishermen to place fishing nets. So I drew a sea with some driftwood and a skycity.
The consequence of global warming will be the rising of sea
levels, so the lawn may be submerged. And after realizing this problem, people
may try to find ways to solve it. Inspired by the theory of Shanshui city in
China, I assumed that human beings would build a residential area connected
with nature at high altitude.
I will film a video about sea level rising. When audience press the button, video start to play. Water will pour into a tank, where I set models in it. Model will twist and destroyed because of water.
IPCC (2018). Global warming of 1.5°C. Switzerland: World Meteorological Organization.
designboom | architecture & design magazine. (2018). ma yansong / MAD architects: shan shui city at designboom conversation. [online] Available at: https://www.designboom.com/architecture/mad-architects-shan-shui-city-guiyang-china/ [Accessed 30 Dec. 2018].
Jane Bannet analysed the existence of the public in the chapter of political ecology. In this lecture, we discussed the concept of “public” from literrary, social and political aspect.
What is the value of anthropomorphism?
I still remember a Pixar movie I watched when I was young: A bug’s life. The tiny ants fight for freedom from the locust colony. Human is good at use Anthropomorphism to image non-human’s world. On one hand, we have learned from them. Natalie shared some links about inventions inspired by non-human species in her presentation. On the other hand, we use Anthropomorphism to reflect some social ills- in A bug’s life, we saw kind people oppressed by the forces of evil.
In this chapter, I think anthropomorphism is used to reflect worm to human. At the beginning, Jane Bannet showed how Darwin’s worms behave like us: unplanned acting in association and competition with others, and becoming large groups by “accumulated effect”. The behaviour of these worms is not fixed. They usually have some improvisation that overrides normal physiological response, and have unpredictable interactions that even affect the surrounding environment. I think that the behaviour of producing aluminum for improving life is very similar to human.
How do publics arise from problems?
Dewey describes the public as “a confederation of bodies” that have been hurt and pulled together in his book. So we can think that the public problem give rise to the public- People draw near each other for their own interests and seek ways to avoid harm. In this process, they may be hurt again by themselves or other, and influence each other.
Take an example, french people gathered to protest against the rising oil price, and eventually the protest movement spread to many countries and regions around the world.
I noticed that Dewey thought that conjoint actions are human endeavour, and categorised non-human beings into the “environment”. When this anthropocentric view of the world enters the realm of value, it becomes a measure of value for judging human and non-human beings. It takes human interests as the basis of value origin, and believes that only conscious people are the subject, while nature is the object.
” Man is the measure of all things: of things which are, that they are, and of things which are not, that they are not.”
earth’s resources are finite, and the emergence of anthropocentrism has
fostered the idea of human’s unbridled pursuit of nature.
Scientists have observed that the earth is undergoing a dramatic geological upheaval: at the turning point of the industrial revolution, traditional natural environments changes- for example, rivers, earthquakes can shape the landscape- are gradually disappearing. Today, human shapes the landscape and influences the evolution of the earth.