“Do your attributes really belong to you?”
This is a question posed by Masahiko Sato’s “The Definition of Self” exhibit at 21_21 Design Sight in Tokyo. The aim of the exhibit is to demonstrate that one’s physical attributes, such as fingerprint, iris, height, and weight make one easily identifiable within a society. Without these characteristics, one would not exist. Sato states that one will realize “your existence is not even worth paying attention to” through the exhibit.
This makes one question whether or not true individuality is a tangible objective. Can an object truly be a unique entity when the exact same components make up each “unique” object? Are objects which are made up different combinations of the same matter identical or incongruous? Attributes are aesthetically different, yet are intrinsically alike. Each individual has a fingerprint. The only difference between these fingerprints is the way in which the grooves appear. Although an iris scan can identify an individual, the differences between one’s iris from another is miniscule. Features which make one an individual are identifying characteristics, but do not necessarily set one apart from others because these attributes are universal.
Physical and social attributes are not one of the same. John Clammer discusses how individuals strive for a self-identity which is socially visible. This sense of social individuality is displayed through material items such as clothing and accessories. One has the ability to appear as an individual socially. However, in Japan, most do not stray far from how it is socially acceptable to appear. The streets of Tokyo are constantly littered with businessmen wearing identical dark suit pants and white collared shirts. Taxi drivers effortlessly line themselves up into neatly organized grids while awaiting passengers. These individuals appear to be part of a cult—moving through the city as one giant mass.
In Tokyo not only do individuals present themselves socially in similar manners, but they also move through spaces as if they are one collective whole. The movement patterns are similar to a current, which follows a trajectory with no visible markers. From above, people appear as ants, marching through set paths in their white button-downs.
These paths never cross, nor do the individuals following them ever run into one another. There is some sort of order which is inherently part of each individual, allowing one to move with a group as fluidly and smoothly as possible. Amidst the chaos of a Tokyo metro station, the overflowing amount of people know exactly where they are going, as well as the most efficient way to get there, without ever straying from this route. People appear as cars on marked streets, walking in their lane and adhering to all traffic laws.
Without individuality and the ability to think for oneself, movement as a whole would not be possible. Individuals must contemplate their movement. However, do they deliberate over each move or are they just following the pack? Is this a taught ability or an instinct? Either way, Masahiko Sato’s argument prevails. Although attributes differ slightly on a micro level, each individual is ultimately composed of the same attributes, just with a slightly different coding. One’s existence becomes very small when all social elements are removed.
Individuals are essentially the same, the ability to think sets one apart from others. While physical attributes are primarily the same for each individual, Tokyo exhibits the extreme where in addition to these physical attributes, social attributes are also very uniform. Homogenous dress and collective movement display how a culture thinks and behaves. Both molecularly and superficially, little is left to identify an individual. The ability to change is all that is left to establish one as an individual.
Sara Tenanes
Filed under: AAU, Architecture, attributes, Collectivism, Identity, individuality, japan, self, Tokyo, Uncategorized, Architecture, Tokyo
URBAN GORILLA 