Technology is an extension of who we are; we are technologies of life and ether, and, in turn, we create tools to reflect our spirit into matter. We actualize matter with our values, our ethos, our essence – and that of the time we live in.

Chavis Mármol (whose name translates into “marble” in Spanish) is an alchemist of the traditional and the contemporary, a craftsman of the burgeoning synergy between manual and digital. To his mind, we are tools of the world, and our tools and technologies are extensions of us.

When embodiment wields worlds waiting to be born, it begs collective consideration: who, or what are our bodies serving?

A: From an instrumental perspective, tell me about what it means to you to experience the body as a tool.

C: I reflect a lot on everything going on with AI and social networks, because a big part of my work is focused on examining the development of tools across human history.

I’m a fan of manual tools– I’m a constructor, I work with my hands, I have plenty of tools in my studio and I think a lot of my work revolves around making things with my hands.

Previously, tools had these very basic functions, like hunting, or self-defense. These tools acted as extensions of our bodies, they were our means of survival, our shelter. They then morphed into decorative instruments, and ultimately, into the digital tools we have today. All of these are extensions of who we are.

Actually, almost all of these technologies we are using today are somehow extensions of our bodies.

They are the receptacles of our thoughts and feelings, but also of our traumas and hang-ups. They are almost substitute bodies – X, or former Twitter, is a great example of that.

‍A: What is the relationship between these embodied tools – artisanal tools– and the disembodied tools –AI, Twitter? The quality of the tools we use can transform our relationship to the world itself. How do you see the difference between these two types of technologies, and how they relate to the body?

C: We tend to romanticize artisanal tools, we think that traditional styles of production are more connected to the past than a 3D design for example.

We tend to think that with the use of more traditional tools diminishing, creativity is diminishing.

But actually, these are just different worlds and both are extensions of our bodies. I work a lot with stone, with wood, but at the same time I work with my computer a lot and I’m fascinated with the possibilities within it.

A: Like bodies, technologies are neutral, what really matters is how we use them, what values we infuse them with– what we use them in service of. Whatever you channel through these vectors, whether in an artificial technology, a traditional tool, or the body itself is really what bestows the value and relevance upon the object itself. ‍

‍

What does it mean for you to embody technology, to bring something into matter?

C: You embody it – and then you disembody it. With manual processes, it is very much about incarnating ideas into objects and matter through production.

Currently, we are going through processes of disembodiment where the goal is to trespass and to transcend the flesh which is seen as something that imprisons us somehow. These are two vastly different processes.

A: You talk about thinking and reflection, and to me those are vectors of disembodiment. What do you think of the spiritual, the soul, or the non-rational forms of experiencing the knowledge in our bodies?

C: We don’t exactly know where the spirit is located, so it could be anywhere, inside or outside us. There might be artificial spirits soon – or not.

We also often talk about the “Zeitgeist”, or the “Spirit of the Times”, as if an epoch were inhabited by a spirit, almost in a human way.

These are collective ways of feeling, of thinking, of being translated through art, literature, clothing. But then this spirit is broken by those who transcend it, who break it, who contradict it by being revolutionaries in their fields. So at the end, the spirit of our times will be read by future generations by the trace we leave through our existence right now. I like to think of how all of this stuff we’re producing will be analyzed and read in the future.

‍A: When I think of the prevalent emotion today, it has to be confusion. For better or for worse, all past worlds had some level of coherence, but today, there is this total sense of confusion and loss of meaning, conflicting values and chaotic leadership. We do have all this technology, but in whose service are we using them? For what values?

C: Maybe we’ll end up being seen as a society overzealous in its megalomania.

We are the only species that has this desire to create, and also this desire to compete with itself. For example I’m fascinated by athletes or people who do high-risk sports where they’d be risking their lives. There is something in our bodies that makes us seek risk, and seek novelty, and seek creation – it’s like we need to constantly destroy and recreate ourselves, and this is what makes us such a species with such generative potential.

A: But we have to actively steer ourselves that way – or this potential can be deployed for pure destruction.