Is there any other way for man to interact with the remainder of nature without being arrogant? Many of the processes, and designs throughout history are cerebral in nature, leveraging our inherent natural capacity for defense. The contradiction of mental capacities puts us against nature and through due consideration, above it. Therefore, the most arrogant artifice is that which never recognizes a natural surrounding– a constant engagement against the forces of nature which seemingly can overtake us quite easily.
Tectonically, formally and structurally speaking, this design ignores the natural surrounding. In the vein of leveling of mountains, ignorance of climactic precedence, and the omnipresent parable of the Tower of Babel (quite evident in the race for higher and higher towers around the globe), a structure practically imposed upon the very site it consumes. The design incorporates very little synergy between structure and space, object and site. And, while the common architectural and engineering “challenge” deals with the fight against gravity in nature, that fight normally manifests itself in the vertical (read: tower) or horizontal (read: bridge). This composition fights the rotation through a perilous cantilever along the wall of a harrowing cliff. The immediate presence of the cliff serves as an ever present reminder of the arrogance of the design intent — to fight gravity in another manner.
Arrogance abuts foolishness, separated by the slimmest of margins. Has this design crossed the line? If so, how many other, realized and built designs must also be considered thusly? Hopefully, a deeper look into the design intent and the tectonics of building the meaning of arrogance will induce thoughtful reconsideration of how we interact with nature and how humble we must be moving forward in order to attain a more symbiotic role in nature.