Transdisciplinary fields are not born through linear descent, disciplinary purity or the sovereign authority of a founding figure; they emerge from the force of mixture, from the intensified contact between heterogeneous bodies of knowledge that, once brought into relation, begin to generate concepts, methods and problems that none of their parent traditions could have produced alone. Socioplastics exemplifies this mode of emergence: it does not select cybernetics, media archaeology, archive theory, architectural thought, ecology, decolonial critique and feminist theory as ornamental genealogies, but as active substances whose friction produces a new epistemic density. The field therefore arises when Turing’s computational abstraction can converse with Warburg’s mnemonic atlas, when Lefebvre’s production of space meets Haraway’s multispecies entanglements, or when Fanon, Spivak and Wynter unsettle the colonial assumptions embedded in architectural and technological systems. A specific synthesis appears in LAPIEZA-LAB, where artistic practice, spatial research, pedagogy, ecological thinking and computational culture are not simply juxtaposed, but rendered mutually operative through projects, archives, diagrams and collective experiments. This is how transdisciplinary fields are born: not by adding disciplines together, but by subjecting them to a transformative pressure that alters their internal grammar. Their legitimacy comes from the capacity to hold difference without neutralising it, to compose without homogenising, and to convert intellectual mass into methodological invention. Socioplastics thus names a field whose origin is not a point, but a turbulent convergence.
Lloveras, A. (2026) Socioplastics. LAPIEZA-LAB.
