Soft Space / Soft Structure

This article outlines the Octopus Pavilion, an interactive pavilion designed and installed by Jordan Kanter and Max Gerthel in 2016 as part of Beijing Design Week. Forthcoming publication in the 2018 Proceedings of the ACADIA Conference, Mexico City: Re/calibration: on imprecision and infidelity




The Octopus Pavilion project engages soft systems in the design of an interactive pavilion in Beijing’s historic neighborhood of Baitasi. Soft systems encompass an intellectual trajectory that challenges linear, top-down approaches, embracing adaptability, modularity, and performativity (Negroponte 1976; Kwinter 1993; Manaugh 2013).1 Installed as part of the 2016 Beijing Design Week, this project employs softness as a strategy to negotiate competing notions of public space and foster dialogue on redevelopment in the old city.

Soft Space

Beijing is both hard and soft. It is marked by extensive physical infrastructure—ring KanterJordan_05roads, megablocks, and monumental architecture—yet it also supports a host of informal, nomadic, spontaneous systems. These include everything from mobile food carts and Weixin payment nodes to the atmospherics of air pollution and data collection. Nowhere is this more evident than in hutong areas such as Baitasi, where complex entanglements of historical, infrastructural, commercial, and social strata overlap with unexpected, often innovative, results. Exhibiting a dearth of formal public places (squares, boulevards, etc.), these neighborhoods nevertheless possess vibrant public space in a fragmented topology of informal gatherings, itinerant market stalls, and outdoor BBQ stands. The ephemeral publics found in the hutong neighborhood and other interstitial spaces in the city not only represent opportunistic and at times innovative occupation of a limited spatial resource, but also foster alternative public spheres that challenge the dominant modes of spatial politics and public discourse (Fraser 1993; Farquhar 2009; Nguyen 2017). Much of the vitality of the hutongs can be traced to the lived experience of this soft space, yet a lack of concrete anchoring makes it vulnerable to disruption.2 Work remains to provide a degree of spatial formality and durability without curtailing its improvisational energy (Leanza, 2017).

Soft Structure

KanterJordan_04.jpgThe goal of this project was to create an architectural assemblage that could respond to this soft space and its need for spatial (in)formality. The octopus, in its morphology, neurology, and behavior, became a key reference for thinking through structures capable of this kind of negotiation. Possessing pliable, boneless appendages with infinite degrees of freedom of movement, octopuses have evolved unique strategies for mapping and controlling their body. With two-thirds of their nerve cells distributed peripherally, and bundled with muscles, sensory receptors, and pigmentation cells, their mind is quite literally in their skin (Hochner 2012). This embodied intelligence, coupled with behaviors such as camouflage, mimicry, and tool-use, allows octopuses to forge highly specific, improvisational, soft affiliations with their environment (Godfrey-Smith 2016).

Simulation of elastic propagation across canopy

Inspired by the octopus, this project engages soft structure on the level of organization, behavior, and tectonics. Employing a Kersher-type pentagon tiling system3, each of the 29 identical modules integrates a pneumatic pillow with sensors, controllers, and inflation/deflation fans. This modularity and distributed control system allowed the allowed the pavilion to be deployed either as individual cells distributed across the neighborhood or as a unified body at a single location, in any number of arrangements to conform to complex sites. Each module was programmed to react to movement and sound, cycling through a program of inflation/deflation and LED color/intensity modulation. Adaptive programming allowed self-calibration to match the activity in the plaza, from everyday wandering to event crowds. The pneumatic, nylon construction allowed for a lightweight, pliable structure that could be quickly installed with minimal disruption to the neighborhood. This “soft tectonic” generated variable structural rigidities during inflation and deflation, creating an indeterminate, always adapting form. Modules reacted independently, but tied together as an elastic surface, their responses propagated across the canopy with macro-scale effect, deforming to the public space beneath it.

265363036592145675Installed over a two-week period, this project transformed a previously fenced-off plaza in the center of Baitasi’s market area into a magnet for activity. Children were quick to grasp the interactive potential of the pavilion. They incorporated it into their play, challenging each other to see who could make more modules light up or inflate. This playfulness brought the plaza to life for people of all ages, while helping to open a dialogue on use, ownership, and design of public space.



  1. Soft systems thinking grew out of cybernetics, emerging computational paradigms, and a critique of top-down planning and management regimes in 1960s and 1970s. Reinvigorated by the emergence of pervasive information and computation technologies, as well as in response to rising apprehensions about the capacity of the neo-liberal nation-state to meet the challenges and anxieties of an interconnected, destabilized global condition in the aftermath of the twin crisis of 2001 and 2008, soft systems have found new relevancy, serving as a core paradigm for disciplines from business management to interactive design and robotics.
  2. The tenuous nature of these public spaces was dramatically illustrated in the recent “bricking-up” campaign that effected many hutongs throughout Beijing in 2017. City government-initiated sweeps resulted in wholesale demolition of any construction deemed illegal, including a large proportion of the small shops and restaurants located throughout these neighborhoods. See: Steven Myers, A Cleanup of ‘Holes in the Wall’ in China’s Capital, New York Times, July 17, 2017
  3. The Kersher Type-8 tiling used in this project is one of fifteen tiling solutions so far discovered that will fill a plane with identical pentagons. This one was chosen for its the high degree of pattern variation is can produce.


Farquhar, Judith. 2009. “The Park Pass: Peopling and Civilizing a New Old Beijing.” Public Culture 21 (3): 551–76.

Fraser, Nancy. 1993. “Rethinking the Public Sphere: A Contribution to the Critique of Actually Existing Democracy.” In The Phantom Public Sphere, edited by B. Robbins, 1–32. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Godfrey-Smith, Peter. 2016. Other Minds: The Octopus, the Sea, and the Deep Origins of Consciousness. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

Hochner, Binyamin. 2012. “An Embodied View of Octopus Neurobiology.” Current Biology 22 (20): R887–R892.

Kwinter, Sanford. 1993. “Soft Systems.” In Culture Lab, edited by Brian Boigon, 207–28. New York: Princeton Architectural Press.

Leanza, Beatrice. 2017. “Hutong, A Testing Ground for Modernization.” Arbitare 569, October 27, 2017.

Manaugh, Geoff. 2013. “Soft Serve.” in Bracket 2: Goes Soft, edited by Neeraj Bhatia and Lola Sheppard, 10–16. Barcelona: Actar Publishers.

Negroponte, Nicholas. 1976. Soft Architecture Machines.

Nguyen, Victoria. 2017. “Slow Construction: Alternate Temporalities and Tactics in the New Landscape of China’s Urban Development.” City 21 (5): 650–62.