KOOZ Let’s start with the name (snobs._) is evidently a provocative invitation around social and societal values. Can you expand on the name and what in particular are you addressing?

SNOBS The name (snobs._) is indeed a provocation, a reflective measure and a petition to the privileged few. The conventional understanding of (snobs._) is associated with a person or persons without nobility who is convinced that their conviction rests on a moral, intellectual and emotional superiority, relative to the majority.

(snobs._) aims to acknowledge, reclaim and repurpose the comfort of the privileged few. Privilege is provided by our station in society. Inciting access to means and methods comes with a responsibility beyond the personal comforts and measures that maintains the current state of affairs.

(snobs._) refers to Walter Benjamin's parisian Flâneur, and to Mary Shelley’s The Last Man to embody virtues that define meaning for snobs, while trying to evoke the image of Roman statesman Lucius Quinctius Cincinnatus in relation to larger societal values. (snobs._) is an intentional contradiction in character.

(snobs._) are complacent. (snobs._) are also acutely positioned as the primary characters inside the world proposed by our conception of ‘happiness fantasy’, implying an epistemological and sociotechnical plasticity. Plasticity does not imply the absence of a constant: ‘happiness fantasy’ takes two forms — the sacred ‘temple’ and ‘garden’ to be the only mode of ‘homo’ habitation. (snobs._) specifically aim to address the citizens or occupants of the two archetypal and exemplary versions of ‘happiness fantasy’, that is to say citizens privileged by station, class and supposed financial and intellectual competence.

KOOZ For you, the city is considered and understood according to ideas discussed by the late Bruno Latour and — to use the phrase cited from Sheila Jasanoff — in terms of 'sociotechnical imaginaries'. Can you talk about how these theoretical ideas are invoked in your work?

SNOBS In our work ‘happiness fantasy,’ the city is conceptualised as a constellation of ‘networks’ and ‘nodes of concentrations' that retain their characteristics regardless of scale. In this way, ‘nodes of concentrations' can be described as an individual, institution or a municipality. In ‘happiness fantasy,’ we invoke Bruno Latour's ideas by presenting the city as a dynamic and intricate network where various actors (people, buildings, technologies, infrastructures, information, etc.) continuously interact and influence one another in what is referred to as co-production or co-construction.

This perspective allows us to explore how the physical imprints or (monument) of a certain convention are constructed, reinforced and legitimised by established 'sociotechnical imaginaries’ — as described by Sheila Jasanoff. Interaction governs the “collectively held, institutionally stabilised, and publicly performed vision of desirable futures, animated by shared understandings of forms of social life and social order”.

‘happiness fantasy’ as a project and (snobs._) in general are interested in the gravity of influence and role of each actor in the system when constructing and maintaining systemic structures, referencing Latour’s Actor Network Theory. In this sense, (snobs._) is not a static entity but rather an active participant in shaping social behaviours and cultural norms. Participatory observation is a method to better understand the relationship between ‘nodes of concentration' and the ‘networks’ that maintain their management.

Citing Jasanoff’s 'sociotechnical imaginaries’, implied consensus in shaping social behaviours and cultural norms are the regulating tactics embedded in the service of ‘happiness fantasy’. In practice, ‘happiness fantasy’ employs a dual approach. We engage directly with the environment or selected case study and its inhabitants, capturing real-time interactions and the 'sociotechnical imaginaries’ within different ‘nodes of concentration’.

Non-participatory observations allow us to step back and analyse the broader structures and systems at play, providing a critical lens to assess how sociotechnical imaginaries shape and are shaped by the environment of its conception and the ones it aims to influence and manage. The architecture of ‘happiness fantasy' is “an intentional hyper-design object that aims to render an environment of control and manageable predictability”.

KOOZ The notion of a ‘happiness fantasy’ has within it a hint of danger — namely in the fantasy element — as well as something that sounds idealistic and aspirational. Can you talk about the relationship between an attractive utopia, identity politics and individual fulfilment against the tensions of social and material desires?

SNOBS ‘happiness fantasy’ as a naming convention has no pretence to cynicism or optimism. ‘happiness fantasy’ has recognised the ambivalence of its conception in the imagination that conceived a perfect rendition of its meaning. ‘happiness fantasy’ as an interpretive definition is a matter prescribed by station, class and supposed financial and intellectual competence of its intended and undocumented inhabitant.

We have attributed our success within the system as evidence to support this claim. We provided the optics and preformative model without consequence or commitment. The service that we provided the system is an integral part for maintaining the illusion of change or responsive measure to the modality of contemporary culture.

‘happiness fantasy,’ in its simple formal and conceptual explanation, defines its characteristic attribute as an ‘intentional hyper-design object’ that aims to render an environment of control and manageable predictability. ‘happiness fantasy’ is employed and delivered by means of our modern affordances. Contemporary examples are well-known and understood as tools or “opportunities for communication, interaction, networking, discussion, participation, and collaboration.” They are tools reasoned on the premise of an abundant stream or collection of data. Needs and entanglement that create the augmentation of service networks pair with tangible infrastructures. This has the potential to create a ‘hyper_happiness fantasy’, catering to an illusion of individual agency while offering a mirage of collective consensus.

‘happiness fantasy’ as a project aims to challenge the notion that “utopia” is purely benign and universally beneficial. Instead, we argue that these visions are often shaped and are in service of dominant ‘sociotechnical imaginaries’ that reflect and reinforce existing power structures. Thus ‘happiness fantasy’ as a project argues that the contemporary conventional understanding and application of "utopia" is intrinsically “dystopian” because it can only re-enforces one version of ‘sociotechnical imaginaries’ or desirable future.The established normality that is manifested in ‘happiness fantasy’ as an environment is contingent on means and methods to construct, decimanate and maintain its influence.

By striving for a particular utopia, societies will inadvertently marginalise alternative perspectives and perpetuate social inequalities. This tension becomes particularly evident when considering current questions around identity politics, where different groups seek recognition and fulfilment within the same societal framework.

On the surface (snobs._) have been operating in the manner described by Olúfẹ́mi O. Táíwò in "Elite Capture". Our predisposition to a particular political view, and individual fulfilment in conjunction with perceived social and material desire are in effect governed by this relationship to the system. Each ‘node of concentration’ imagines and promotes its ‘sociotechnical imaginaries’ to be the arbiter of a utopian vision or desirable future, by forming the notion of a respected ‘other’ or the dystopian counterpart to a dream deferred.

KOOZ You have used the phrase "Physical Realms Synthetic Realities" to describe social projects that we historically turn into architectural objects — such as monuments and temples. Can you explain the relationship between iconographic impulse and narrative impulse in the city?

SNOBS The phrase "Physical Realms Synthetic Realities" aims to capture the essence of how the physical imprints that we inhabit aim to be the manifestation of ‘sociotechnical imaginaries’ in tangible forms. The physical imprints are not merely buildings or parks; instead they are imbued with deep cultural and social significance, acting as vessels that creates, hold and manage collective narratives and identity.

The two archetypal and exemplary versions within ‘happiness fantasy’ — marked by the sacred 'temple’ and ‘garden’, mediated by ‘homo’ — move from the synthetic reality of a social project to the perceived physical realm in the form of constructed interiors and exterior artificial space. The relationship between the iconographic impulse and the narrative impulse are fundamental to understanding how physical imprints function within the construction of ‘happiness fantasy’. The iconographic impulse refers to the human tendency to create symbols and icons that embody collective values, beliefs, and historical memories. These are the primary tools and regulating tactics for the procurement of ‘happiness fantasy’.

While the iconographic impulse seeks to create lasting symbols that define a community’s identity, the narrative impulse ensures that these symbols are infused with meaning and context. This relationship is evident in how ‘monuments’ are prescribed as sites of commemoration and reflection. These physical imprints provide a stage for collective memory. Such physical imprints serve as focal points within ‘happiness fantasy’, representing static shared experiences and ideals that transcend individual ‘nodes of concentration’.

The impulse to create such icons is driven by a desire to project a cohesive and recognizable image or narrative of and for the community, one that can be easily communicated and understood both within and outside the society. ‘happiness fantasy’, explores how these impulses can sometimes create tension and conflict, particularly when dominant narratives overshadow or exclude alternative perspectives. ‘monuments’ marked by the sacred ‘temple’ and ‘garden’ are the prime examples of this impulse, and are designed to stand as enduring symbols. They also sustain and reinforce cultural identity bound in a particular time frame within the linear historical narrative.

‘happiness fantasy’ as a project suggests and asks if it is possible to design with meaning, respond to the need of time but be humble enough to accept our ignorance to future discoveries to create a physical imprint of plasticity instead of one that reinforces. For example, we reimagine Isamu Noguchi’s unbuilt A-bomb cenotaph by altering the monumental staircases — one of the defining architectural features of the project. The reinterpretation of iconic project allows us to question and challenge the established narratives.

The Capitol Crawl, referenced by David Gissen in his book ‘The Architecture of Disability’ concisely illustrates the static nature of the sacred monument, and its inability to reflect or respond to an ever-changing modality of social norms. In the construction of the model for our project, we intentionally left the celebratory ramp that we designed unfinished, to signal ignorance about the future.

However, because of the sacred nature in remembering the shift in ‘sociotechnical imaginaries’, provoked by a new yield in the capacity to harness energy, and which culminated in the horrific events of August 1945 — our alteration was considered to be sacrilegious.

KOOZAccording to your statement, ‘Architecture is a corporeal imprint of human adaptation and intellectual consciousness'. How does (snobs._) position its practice in architecture, moving forward?

SNOBS (snobs._) positions its practice by embracing the concept that architecture is the corporeal imprint of human adaptation and intellectual consciousness. This philosophy underscores our belief that architectural practice is not just about constructing buildings but about capturing the essence of human experience, societal cognitive evolution, and intellectual endeavours of its time. Moving forward, (snobs._) aims to challenge conventional architectural paradigms by integrating this holistic perspective into our projects, ensuring that our work reflects a deep understanding of both physical and sociocultural dimensions, while advocating for its intended temporality.

(snobs._) sees architecture as a dynamic interplay between the tangible and the intangible, where buildings and spaces become embodiments of temporary collective memory, cultural identity, and societal aspirations. (snobs._) is also committed to exploring the potential of modern technologies in enhancing architectural practice. We believe that technology, when thoughtfully integrated, can amplify the human experience within built environments and offer new modes of operation for contemporary practice. However, (snobs._) notes and accepts the plasticity of ideas and convention to reflect the time. Therefore our physical imprints should lend themselves to accept possible alteration, adaptation and repurpose as the conditional modality themselves evolve.

(snobs._) have also launched a collaborative platform called (snobby._) institute, for our ongoing collaborative practice to ensure and provide more agency to our collaborators. (snobby._) institute will also operate as an enclave for bridging different mediums and collective experimentation. (snobby._) institute will aim to model and mirror the efforts for its research method after The Program on Science, Technology and Society at Harvard University’s John F. Kennedy School of Government. We are grateful to Gazit Horizons for their generosity in providing the space for our first intervention in discovering the potential and creation of (snobby._) institute.

Bios

Pin Sangkaeo and Benson Joseph — who call themselves (snobs._) — are designers and creative directors who share a (snobby) desire to pursue experimental research that bridges academia with the public sphere through the existing infrastructures of consumer culture. (snobs._ ) could stand for Snide and Nefarious Opposition to Basic Society, or Stupid Noisy Offensive Bullsh*t, or Sensitive and Obnoxious Bunch of Superiors, among many many others. (snobs._ ) have taken on several independent and collaborative (snobby) projects using various mediums which have included public intervention, exhibition design, sculptural installation, set design, graphic design, collage art, video art and symposiums. (snobs._ ) studied at Syracuse University and the Harvard Graduate School of Design.Their work has been exhibited and featured internationally in Thailand, Switzerland, Serbia, and the United States, at venues including the Museum of Modern Art, Metropolis, and Lausanne Underground Film & Music Festival.

Federica Zambeletti is the founder and managing director of KoozArch. She is an architect, researcher and digital curator whose interests lie at the intersection between art, architecture and regenerative practices. In 2015 Federica founded KoozArch with the ambition of creating a space where to research, explore and discuss architecture beyond the limits of its built form. Parallel to her work at KoozArch, Federica is Architect at the architecture studio UNA and researcher at the non-profit agency for change UNLESS where she is project manager of the research "Antarctic Resolution". Federica is an Architectural Association School of Architecture in London alumni.