Socioplastics Urbanism starts from a simple but provocative idea: the city is not something we fully plan or control. Instead of seeing urbanism as a technical discipline that organises space from above, this approach understands the city as a living system shaped by everyday actions, habits, conflicts, and relationships. From this perspective, urban space is not neutral. It is constantly deciding who belongs, who speaks, and who is pushed aside. Socioplastics invites us to look at the city not as a finished object, but as a process that is always open, fragile, and political. A key image in this way of thinking is urban taxidermy. Rather than demolishing or “fixing” the city, socioplastic practices work by carefully intervening in what already exists. They cut, preserve, and highlight urban situations to make their hidden structures visible. This kind of work does not promise harmony. On the contrary, it accepts that cities are full of tensions and contradictions. Caring for public space does not mean eliminating conflict; it means allowing different voices to remain present, even when they disagree. In this sense, the goal is not a perfect city, but an honest one.
Education also plays a central role. In Socioplastics, learning does not happen only in schools or universities. It happens while walking, listening, sharing stories, and occupying space together. The city becomes a living classroom, shaped by collective experience. But there is an important balance to keep. Not everything needs to be documented or turned into knowledge. Sometimes learning means slowing down, staying silent, or refusing to participate. These moments are just as important as visible action, because they protect space for reflection and difference. Architecturally, Socioplastics favours simple, careful structures over spectacular buildings. It supports designs that are open, adaptable, and connected to their environment. This is closely linked to ecological thinking. However, sustainability is not only about materials or energy. It is also about fairness: who can use these spaces, who builds them, and who benefits from them. The strength of Socioplastics lies in treating architecture and urbanism as ongoing conversations rather than final answers.
Systemic Urbanism and Topolexical Sovereignty
Within Anto Lloveras' Socioplastics, topolexical sovereignty merges epistemic architecture with the "will to architecture" into an operational mesh. Guided by Wittgensteinian logic, the hyperplastic manifesto activates metabolic networks and durational praxis, redefining the urban palimpsest through an ecology of thought that integrates spatial justice and collective agency.
Links:
Relational and Affective Architecture
Relational semionautics within multilocal topologies intertwines urban taxidermy with social sculpture. Operating under "shaded urbanism," a living archive of critical infrastructure sustains autopoietic sovereignty. The architecture of affection and socioplastic memory fuse with sonic ecology and nomadic urbanism to envision the temporal ecologies of future cities.
Links:
Pedagogy as Durational Praxis
Mesh metabolism drives the ecological transition and feminist urbanism via socioplastic epistemic nodes. By integrating visual arts with urban anthropology and transdisciplinary research, systemic design converges with critical geography. This framework reclaims the public realm through participatory design, radical pedagogy, and urban regeneration.
Links:
Conceptual Art in Urban Ecologies
Hyperplastic topologies of systemic sovereignty activate social innovation and digital humanities within the context of smart/green cities. Architecture theory and critical design converge with collaborative practices and collective creativity. This synthesis reclaims memory and memory-making, fostering alternative education and urban sustainability.
Links:
