When looking at urban development a lot of times we see glorious cities. Strong, metal, tall buildings lining the map, filling the skyline around us. So much so, it might seem like that’s all there is in the world, but there is more than just what humans have created and some artists are starting to recognize this. Nature has not always been at the center of urban development, it often is considered last when building something new. Some people believe that as humans we need to connect with nature to continue to grow as a species and yet as I found through my artifacts sometimes that connection is interpreted differently. When looking at my first artifact, a photographic series called Wild Concrete, a photographer named Romain Jacquet-Lagreze studied the way nature endures through destruction. While my second artifact that deals with this same concept, challenges this idea. Whether or not it is ok to believe in the commonplace that nature will always endure through that destruction. 

The photographic series, Wild Concrete by Jacquet-Lagreze enhances and focuses on the belief in this commonplace. Lagreze has had many series focused on how nature evolves and changes but with this particular one he focused on how nature endures and even grows with urban development as its strengths. The artifact I am focusing on is what appears to be a run down apartment building. It is falling apart at the seams, there are cracks in the foundation that run up the sides. There are windows missing and pieces of concrete here and there. Yet, as you view the artifact you also see this bright green tree growing from it. The leaves are wrapping around it and at the very top you can see the tree almost seemingly as healthy as it could be. Lagreze when photographing the artifact is wanting to send out the message to whoever is interpreting it; nature will endure. Even when humans eventually leave, or die, nature will still be here no matter what. The photograph itself is being viewed and taken through a temporal lens. It has the audience asking questions about the present of the environment around us. If we are actually impacting it with our development of cities or it just seems like it. Also, the future of the environment, what is the future of cities and nature together and apart and what role does urban development play in all of this. Through these are introspective questions about time, it has viewers commonplace solidified, reassuring their widely held belief. If that blossoming tree surrounded by the destruction and deterioration of what humans built around it could endure, then why cant nature as a whole. [going to develop further on the image, look more closely of elements in the photo] 

Looking at the artifact even closer we can address it through the element of pathos that it creates. Though the photograph is not really viewed through an ethos and logos lens as it does not rely on knowledge nor builds up a sense of trust it does provoke certain emotions in the viewer. Reassurance is the first emotion the audience might feel viewing the artifact. Reassurance that what the news is reporting, what their peers are saying about the state of the environment is not necessarily true. Urban development isn’t ruining the planet, and that everything will be just fine. Whether that is actually the case or not is up for debate but the fact that even the photo itself has symbolism in it that the pathos comes out of. [going to develop more on the symbolism and how it is shown] It is this wonderful picture of a tree seemingly growing out of the building rather than on the side or on top of it. The tree is thriving, it is growing in an environment we don’t usually see trees survive in. It is hope for the future despite the circumstances and conveys a feeling that not everything is as bad as it seems. The pathos of the artifact impacts the decisions that architects and city planners are making day to day, though it might not leave a huge impact it whispers in the back of the mind of the audience and influences the course of urban development and nature. 

When it comes to my second artifact, it is a photo of Chernobyl after the nuclear explosion that challenges instead of encouraging the commonplace that nature will endure. The photo depicts what seems to be an abandoned and run down fairground.  The seats on the attraction are rusted and broken and the ferris wheel is barely holding on. Even the ground where the cement isn’t, it is lifeless. There is no grass, and the trees are bare bones with no green in sight. In contrast to the Wild Concrete artifact this photo is jarring. It visually pulls your eyes to so many places, leaving you with a despondent feeling. Taking in the rhetorical situation that this artifact takes place in it is clear that at the time… [going to expand on the pathos and examine the image even further]