Where others have become obsessed with speed and trends, Sergio Membrillas has built a career on slowing down and staying true to his craft. Over 13 years as a professional illustrator, he's evolved a distinct style – bold, graphic, and quietly playful – that feels both timeless and entirely his own. But this evolution, as he's quick to point out, wasn't something he forced. "I believe evolution is essential for every artist," Sergio reflects. "Change is not something I resist; it's something I enjoy and welcome as part of the creative journey." His work, initially influenced by a love of Mid-Century graphic design, has gradually absorbed references as diverse as Etruscan art, Mesopotamian motifs, and early 20th-century traditional tattoos. It's a portfolio built on curiosity, not conformity. Despite his stylistic clarity, Sergio's process remains refreshingly analogue at its core. He still begins each project with pencil and paper, leaning into the tactility of drawing by hand. "I've always valued having a physical relationship with art," he says. "There's something essential about feeling the wood of the pencil, manually erasing mistakes, rather than simply double-tapping a screen." His philosophy of working slowly, attentively, and with purpose shows in the balanced compositions and confident use of negative space that has become his signature. Sergio credits his background in graphic design for this instinctive sense of structure. "There has always been a strong graphic sensibility within me," he says, noting that the discipline of design continues to inform his illustration practice, particularly in editorial and poster work where clarity and storytelling must co-exist. Yet, like many creative careers, his path into illustration wasn't plotted from the start. Initially, Sergio imagined illustration would complement his design projects, not become the main event. "At first, I thought I would incorporate my illustrations into my graphic design projects – but in the end, it turned out to be the other way around." A commission for EasyJet's in-flight magazine marked a pivotal moment that reframed illustration from a hobby to a profession. "It made me realize that being an illustrator is a real profession, just like any other." Fast-forward to today, and Sergio's client list reads like a who's who of publishing and design, from The New Yorker to Pentagram. While the calibre of collaborators has changed, what matters most remains the same: trust. "When a client trusts your work and approaches projects with an open mind, collaboration flourishes," he says. It's in these open, trusting relationships that Sergio finds the space to experiment and further develop his ideas. Unsurprisingly, editorial work holds a special place for him. "Editorial projects offer wider creative margins, allowing for greater flexibility and innovation," he explains. Compared to the tighter confines of advertising, editorial illustration offers the opportunity to tell nuanced stories, and Sergio is clear that he views every assignment, regardless of format, as a collaborative effort. If one thing is clear, though, it's that he's not that he's afraid to say no when needed. Maintaining a strong personal voice is non-negotiable. "I always strive to stay true to myself and ensure that every project I undertake reflects a clear personal signature," he says. For Sergio, authenticity isn't just a matter of artistic pride; it's what differentiates an illustrator in a saturated, increasingly automated industry. Valencia is home for Sergio, a city he credits with much of his creative energy. "Oh, Valencia! It's a beautiful city that inspires me and brings me joy," he says, describing it as a European cousin to Los Angeles with its sun-soaked streets and vibrant cultural scene. The blend of tradition and modernity fuels his practice, offering constant inspiration without the sensory overload that often accompanies larger creative hubs. Given the pressure many creatives feel to keep pace with shifting trends, Sergio's approach feels almost radical. "I'm not particularly interested in trends," he says. "What truly matters to me is the feeling of having done something meaningful and fulfilling by the end of the day." Instead of chasing what's fashionable, he draws inspiration from a surprisingly eclectic bookshelf, mixing everything from Wim Crouwel's graphic design classics to studies on Scandinavian tattoos and Alec Soth's photography. It's a reminder that fresh ideas rarely come from looking where everyone else is looking. In the era of AI and content overload, the role of the illustrator is changing, but Sergio remains optimistic. While machine learning might churn out images at record speed, it can't replicate the nuance and emotional intelligence that underpin great illustration. "Illustrators can tell stories, evoke emotions, and create meaningful connections that machines simply cannot replicate," he says. "Our role is shifting, but the value of authentic, thoughtful illustration remains indispensable." That insistence on authenticity carries through to the advice he offers younger illustrators navigating a commercial landscape. "Create work that makes you happy when you go to sleep at night," Sergio advises. "It's important to find projects that align with your values and passions so your artistic voice remains authentic." It's an ethos that has carried him through more than a decade of creative highs and industry shifts. Perhaps it's the real secret behind the clarity of his practice, which he has built not on chasing trends or algorithms but on careful craft, deliberate evolution, and the simple, enduring joy of a well-made pencil and a blank piece of paper.

Missing the big picture US science is being wrecked, and its leadership is fighting the last war Facing an extreme budget, the National Academies hosted an event that ignored it. John Timmer – Jun 4, 2025 6:00 pm | 16 Credit: JHVE Photo Credit: JHVE Photo Story text Size Small Standard Large Width * Standard Wide Links Standard Orange * Subscribers only   Learn more WASHINGTON, DC—The general outline of the Trump administration's proposed 2026 budget was released a few weeks back, and it included massive cuts for most agencies, including every one that funds scientific research. Late last week, those agencies began releasing details of what the cuts would mean for the actual projects and people they support. And the results are as bad as the initial budget had suggested: one-of-a-kind scientific experiment facilities and hardware retired, massive cuts in supported scientists, and entire areas of research halted. And this comes in an environment where previously funded grants are being terminated, funding is being held up for ideological screening, and universities have been subject to arbitrary funding freezes. Collectively, things are heading for damage to US science that will take decades to recover from. It's a radical break from the trajectory science had been on. That's the environment that the US's National Academies of Science found itself in yesterday while hosting the State of the Science event in Washington, DC. It was an obvious opportunity for the nation's leading scientific organization to warn the nation of the consequences of the path that the current administration has been traveling. Instead, the event largely ignored the present to worry about a future that may never exist. The proposed cuts The top-line budget numbers proposed earlier indicated things would be bad: nearly 40 percent taken off the National Institutes of Health's budget, the National Science Foundation down by over half. But now, many of the details of what those cuts mean are becoming apparent. NASA's budget includes sharp cuts for planetary science, which would be cut in half and then stay flat for the rest of the decade, with the Mars Sample Return mission canceled. All other science budgets, including Earth Science and Astrophysics, take similar hits; one astronomer posted a graphic showing how many present and future missions that would mean. Active missions that have returned unprecedented data, like Juno and New Horizons, would go, as would two Mars orbiters. As described by Science magazine's news team, "The plans would also kill off nearly every major science mission the agency has not yet begun to build." A chart prepared by astronomer Laura Lopez showing just how many astrophysics missions will be cancelled. Credit: Laura Lopez The National Science Foundation, which funds much of the US's fundamental research, is also set for brutal cuts. Biology, engineering, and education will all be slashed by over 70 percent; computer science, math and physical science, and social and behavioral science will all see cuts of over 60 percent. International programs will take an 80 percent cut. The funding rate of grant proposals is expected to drop from 26 percent to just 7 percent, meaning the vast majority of grants submitted to the NSF will be a waste of time. The number of people involved in NSF-funded activities will drop from over 300,000 to just 90,000. Almost every program to broaden participation in science will be eliminated. As for specifics, they're equally grim. The fleet of research ships will essentially become someone else's problem: "The FY 2026 Budget Request will enable partial support of some ships." We've been able to better pin down the nature and location of gravitational wave events as detectors in Japan and Italy joined the original two LIGO detectors; the NSF will reverse that progress by shutting one of the LIGOs. The NSF's contributions to detectors at the Large Hadron Collider will be cut by over half, and one of the two very large telescopes it was helping fund will be cancelled (say goodbye to the Thirty Meter Telescope). "Access to the telescopes at Kitt Peak and Cerro Tololo will be phased out," and the NSF will transfer the facilities to other organizations. The Department of Health and Human Services has been less detailed about the specific cuts its divisions will see, largely focusing on the overall numbers, which are down considerably. The NIH, which is facing a cut of over 40 percent, will be reorganized, with its 19 institutes pared down to just eight. This will result in some odd pairings, such as the dental and eye institutes ending up in the same place; genomics and biomedical imaging will likewise end up under the same roof. Other groups like the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Food and Drug Administration will also face major cuts. Issues go well beyond the core science agencies, as well. In the Department of Energy, funding for wind, solar, and renewable grid integration has been zeroed out, essentially ending all programs in this area. Hydrogen and fuel cells face a similar fate. Collectively, these had gotten over $600 billion dollars in 2024's budget. Other areas of science at the DOE, such as high-energy physics, fusion, and biology, receive relatively minor cuts that are largely in line with the ones faced by administration priorities like fossil and nuclear energy. Will this happen? It goes without saying that this would amount to an abandonment of US scientific leadership at a time when most estimates of China's research spending show it approaching US-like levels of support. Not only would it eliminate many key facilities, instruments, and institutions that have helped make the US a scientific powerhouse, but it would also block the development of newer and additional ones. The harms are so widespread that even topics that the administration claims are priorities would see severe cuts. And the damage is likely to last for generations, as support is cut at every stage of the educational pipeline that prepares people for STEM careers. This includes careers in high-tech industries, which may require relocation overseas due to a combination of staffing concerns and heightened immigration controls. That said, we've been here before in the first Trump administration, when budgets were proposed with potentially catastrophic implications for US science. But Congress limited the damage and maintained reasonably consistent budgets for most agencies. Can we expect that to happen again? So far, the signs are not especially promising. The House has largely adopted the Trump administration's budget priorities, despite the fact that the budget they pass turns its back on decades of supposed concerns about deficit spending. While the Senate has yet to take up the budget, it has also been very pliant during the second Trump administration, approving grossly unqualified cabinet picks such as Robert F. Kennedy Jr. All of which would seem to call for the leadership of US science organizations to press the case for the importance of science funding to the US, and highlight the damage that these cuts would cause. But, if yesterday's National Academies event is anything to judge by, the leadership is not especially interested. Altered states As the nation's premier science organization, and one that performs lots of analyses for the government, the National Academies would seem to be in a position to have its concerns taken seriously by members of Congress. And, given that the present and future of science in the US is being set by policy choices, a meeting entitled the State of the Science would seem like the obvious place to address those concerns. If so, it was not obvious to Marcia McNutt, the president of the NAS, who gave the presentation. She made some oblique references to current problems, saying, that “We are embarking on a radical new experiment in what conditions promote science leadership, with the US being the treatment group, and China as the control," and acknowledged that "uncertainties over the science budgets for next year, coupled with cancellations of billions of dollars of already hard-won research grants, is causing an exodus of researchers." But her primary focus was on the trends that have been operative in science funding and policy leading up to but excluding the second Trump administration. McNutt suggested this was needed to look beyond the next four years. However, that ignores the obvious fact that US science will be fundamentally different if the Trump administration can follow through on its plans and policies; the trends that have been present for the last two decades will be irrelevant. She was also remarkably selective about her avoidance of discussing Trump administration priorities. After noting that faculty surveys have suggested they spend roughly 40 percent of their time handling regulatory requirements, she twice mentioned that the administration's anti-regulatory stance could be a net positive here (once calling it "an opportunity to help"). Yet she neglected to note that many of the abandoned regulations represent a retreat from science-driven policy. McNutt also acknowledged the problem of science losing the bipartisan support it has enjoyed, as trust in scientists among US conservatives has been on a downward trend. But she suggested it was scientists' responsibility to fix the problem, even though it's largely the product of one party deciding it can gain partisan advantage by raising doubts about scientific findings in fields like climate change and vaccine safety. The panel discussion that came after largely followed McNutt's lead in avoiding any mention of the current threats to science. The lone exception was Heather Wilson, president of the University of Texas at El Paso and a former Republican member of the House of Representatives and Secretary of the Air Force during the first Trump administration. Wilson took direct aim at Trump's cuts to funding for underrepresented groups, arguing, "Talent is evenly distributed, but opportunity is not." After arguing that "the moral authority of science depends on the pursuit of truth," she highlighted the cancellation of grants that had been used to study diseases that are more prevalent in some ethnic groups, saying "that's not woke science—that's genetics." Wilson was clearly the exception, however, as the rest of the panel largely avoided direct mention of either the damage already done to US science funding or the impending catastrophe on the horizon. We've asked the National Academies' leadership a number of questions about how it perceives its role at a time when US science is clearly under threat. As of this article's publication, however, we have not received a response. At yesterday's event, however, only one person showed a clear sense of what they thought that role should be—Wilson again, whose strongest words were directed at the National Academies themselves, which she said should "do what you've done since Lincoln was president," and stand up for the truth. John Timmer Senior Science Editor John Timmer Senior Science Editor John is Ars Technica's science editor. He has a Bachelor of Arts in Biochemistry from Columbia University, and a Ph.D. in Molecular and Cell Biology from the University of California, Berkeley. When physically separated from his keyboard, he tends to seek out a bicycle, or a scenic location for communing with his hiking boots. 16 Comments

House of the Future | 1956 Photograph Exhibited at the 1956 Ideal Home Exhibition in London, the House of the Future by Alison and Peter Smithson is a visionary prototype that challenges conventions of domesticity. Set within the context of post-war Britain, a period marked by austerity and emerging optimism, the project explored the intersection of technology, material innovation, and evolving social dynamics. The Smithsons, already recognized for their theoretical rigor and critical stance toward mainstream modernism, sought to push the boundaries of domestic architecture. In the House of the Future, they offered not merely a dwelling but a speculative environment that engaged with the promise and anxieties of the atomic age. House of the Future Technical Information Architects: Alison and Peter Smithson Location: Ideal Home Exhibition, London, United Kingdom Client: Daily Mail Ideal Home Exhibition  Gross Area: 90 m2 | 970 Sq. Ft. Construction Year: 1956 Photographs: Canadian Centre for Architecture and Unknown Photographer The House of the Future should be a serious attempt to visualize the future of our daily living in the light of modern knowledge and available materials. – Alison and Peter Smithson 1 House of the Future Photographs 1956 Photograph © Klaas Vermaas | 1956 Photograph 1956 Photograph 1956 Photograph 1956 Photograph 1956 Photograph 1956 Photograph 1956 Photograph Design Intent and Spatial Organization At the heart of the House of the Future lies a radical rethinking of spatial organization. Departing from conventional room hierarchies, the design promotes an open, fluid environment. Walls dissolve into curved partitions and adjustable elements, allowing for flexible reinterpretation of domestic spaces. Sleeping, dining, and social areas are loosely demarcated, creating a dynamic continuity that anticipates the contemporary concept of adaptable, multi-functional living. Circulation is conceived as an experiential sequence rather than a rigid path. Visitors enter through an air-lock-like vestibule, an explicit nod to the futuristic theme, and are drawn into an environment that eschews right angles and conventional thresholds. The Smithsons’ emphasis on flexibility and continuous movement within the house reflects their belief that domestic architecture must accommodate the evolving rhythms of life. Materiality, Technology, and the Future Materiality in the House of the Future embodies the optimism of the era. Plastics and synthetic finishes dominate the interior, forming seamless surfaces that evoke a sense of sterility and futility. Often associated with industrial production, these materials signaled a departure from traditional domestic textures. The smooth, malleable surfaces of the house reinforce the Smithsons’ embrace of prefabrication and modularity. Technological integration is a key theme. The design includes built-in appliances and concealed mechanical systems, hinting at a utopian and disquieting automated lifestyle. Bathrooms, kitchens, and sleeping pods are incorporated as interchangeable modules, underscoring the house as a system rather than a static structure. In doing so, the Smithsons prefigured later discourses on the “smart home” and the seamless integration of technology into daily life. This material and technological strategy reflects a critical understanding of domestic labor and convenience. The house’s self-contained gadgets and synthetic surfaces suggest a future in which maintenance and domestic chores are minimized, freeing inhabitants to engage with broader cultural and social pursuits. Legacy and Influence The House of the Future’s influence resonates far beyond its exhibition. It prefigured the radical experimentation of groups like Archigram and the metabolist visions of the 1960s. Its modular approach and embrace of technology also foreshadowed the high-tech movement’s fascination with flexibility and systems thinking. While the project was ephemeral, a temporary installation at a trade fair, its theoretical provocations endure. It questioned how architecture could not only house but also anticipate and shape new living forms. Moreover, it crystallized the Smithsons’ ongoing interrogation of architecture’s social role, from their later brutalist housing schemes to urban design theories. In retrospect, the House of the Future is less of a resolved design proposal and more of an architectural manifesto. It embodies a critical tension: the optimism of technological progress and the need for architecture to respond to human adaptability and social evolution. As we confront contemporary challenges like climate crisis, digital living, and shifting social paradigms, the Smithsons’ speculative experiment remains an evocative reminder that the architecture of tomorrow must be as thoughtful and provocative as the House of the Future. House of the Future Plans Axonometric View | © Alison and Peter Smithson via CCA Floor Plan | © Alison and Peter Smithson, via CCA Floor Plan | © Alison and Peter Smithson, via CCA Section | © Alison and Peter Smithson, via CCA Section | © Alison and Peter Smithson, via CCA Section | © Alison and Peter Smithson, via CCA Section | © Alison and Peter Smithson, via CCA Section | © Alison and Peter Smithson, via CCA House of the Future Image Gallery About Alison and Peter Smithson Alison and Peter Smithson were British architects and influential thinkers who emerged in the mid-20th century, celebrated for their critical reimagining of modern architecture. Their work, including projects like the House of the Future, the Robin Hood Gardens housing complex, and the Upper Lawn Solar Pavilion, consistently challenged conventional notions of domesticity, urbanism, and materiality. Central to their practice was a belief in architecture’s capacity to shape social life, emphasizing adaptability, flexibility, and the dynamic interactions between buildings and their users. They were pivotal in bridging the gap between post-war modernism and the experimental architectural movements of the 1960s and 1970s. Credits and Additional Notes Banham, Reyner. Theory and Design in the First Machine Age. MIT Press, 1960. Forty, Adrian. Words and Buildings: A Vocabulary of Modern Architecture. Thames & Hudson, 2000. Smithson, Alison, and Peter Smithson. The Charged Void: Architecture. Monacelli Press, 2001. OASE Journal. “Houses of the Future: 1956 and Beyond.” OASE 75, 2007. Vidler, Anthony. Histories of the Immediate Present: Inventing Architectural Modernism. MIT Press, 2008. Canadian Centre for Architecture (CCA). “House of the Future.”

Mauricio Rocha | TaAU | Alejandro Castro | OMA | Michel Desvigne | Robert Moses | El Equipo Mazzanti | ContraFuerte |  Batlleiroig | Christian Kerez Earlier this year, news broke that levels of fine particulate matter in Paris had dropped by an astounding 55 per cent since 2005. Through a combination of regulation and public policy, the city has vastly reduced the number of cars on its streets, introducing bike lanes and public green spaces in the place of around 50,000 parking spaces. This issue is dedicated to roads and the architectures that support them. Cities around the world are reckoning with 20th-century car-oriented urban planning, as epitomised by Robert Moses’s New York (p36). Existing roads are increasingly repurposed for broader uses, prioritising pedestrians, cyclists and other forms of movement. São Paulo’s Minhocão has been gradually reclaimed by residents, and the restoration of a historical promenade in Reus is inclusive for all. Meanwhile, OMA’s new bridge in Bordeaux is designed to host public events – as well as six lanes of motorised traffic. Elsewhere, automobile infrastructure continues to expand; in Bahrain, four new car parks stand largely empty, and a roadside service station in Colombia is yet to be occupied. Roads promise prosperity and progress, often with expansionist ambitions; as Nadi Abusaada writes, ‘The road is both the myth and mechanism of the colonial frontier’.  Electric vehicles are now heralded as the future of transport, but as Nelo Magalhães writes in this issue’s keynote, ‘EVs do nothing to change the mass of roads or the issue of their maintenance’. The shift needed is more radical and wide‑reaching.  1522: Roads cover (above)Highway #5, Los Angeles, California, USA (2009) is part of Edward Burtynsky: The Great Acceleration, an exhibition on view at the International Center of Photography in New York City until 28 September. In it, a motorway bulldozes its way through suburbia, sending out smaller branches that further subdivide it. Credit: © Edward Burtynsky, courtesy Flowers Gallery, London folio (lead image)Home follows a family living in a house next to an uncompleted motorway, who reclaim it, temporarily, as an extension of their home. Credit: Album / Alamy keynote How much does your road weigh? Nelo Magalhãesbuilding Malecón de Villahermosa by Taller de Arquitectura Mauricio Rocha, TaAU and Alejandro Castro in Villahermosa, Mexico Laure Nashed building Simon Veil bridge by OMA and Michel Desvigne Paysagiste in Bordeaux, France John Bingham-Hall reputations Robert Moses Andy Battlebuilding Control and operations centre by El Equipo Mazzanti and ContraFuerte in Bolombolo, Colombia Felipe Walter essay Cape to Cairo Sara Salem essay A short history of the roadblock Jan-Werner Müller outrage The Amazonian road to COP30 Martha Dillonrevisit Schlangenbader Straße estate in Berlin, Germany Sophie Lovell essay Living with the Big Worm Richard J Williamsbuilding Passeig de Boca de la Mina by Batlleiroig in Reus, Spain Blanca Pujals essay Taking Norway’s scenic routes Tomà Berlanda building Pearling Path car parks by Christian Kerez in Muharraq, Bahrain Oliver Wainwright typology Petrol station Tom Wilkinson essay The road is the frontier Nadi Abusaada

Scholars of gender and sexuality have been exploring ‘queer spaces’ for over six decades. While for many years homes and domesticity remained out of focus or at the margins of queer space research, a recent ‘domestic turn’ has brought queer people’s homes to the foreground. Queer Spaces (2022), a recollection of case studies of queer domestic spaces edited by Joshua Mardell and Adam Nathaniel Furman, is just one significant work within the recent shift to explore the intersection of queer identities and domesticity, for example. Disobedient Dollhouse No.1, 2023, Photography by Sophie Percival Over the past four years I have documented the homes of LGBTQ+ people and come to understand how they inhabit them through interviews, detailed spatial drawings and the creation of dollhouses. This methodology deliberately subverts traditional architectural model-making conventions, emphasising narrative over spatial clarity, interior qualities over façades, and incorporating elaborate details that standard architectural models typically avoid. While this may feel like a rather unusual pursuit for an architect, it’s also one I feel is necessary and urgent. Disobedient Dollhouse No.1, 2023, Photography by Sophie Percival My current research builds upon years of professional practice in London and scrutinises the limitations of standardised design approaches. Through interviews and detailed spatial surveys, I am examining how queer families navigate living spaces designed according to the London Plan’s Housing Design Guide.Advertisement Early findings from my field work show a chasm between the queer daily lives of some of London’s LGBTQ+ families and the rigid homes the standard produces. In cases where spatial flexibility is available within domestic architecture, wonderful, innovative, caring and radical uses of domestic space emerge, enabling queer forms of raising children or coexisting with current and former lovers. These are not just joyful nice-to-haves, but essential for my participants to live their queerness at home, in full. Homes should not just be where queer folk feel safe; they must also be spaces where our queerness flourishes. Disobedient Dollhouse No.1, 2023, Photography by Sophie Percival The housing emergency in the UK and most of the Western world has urged architects, planners and developers to focus on an increased delivery of ‘units of housing’. Perhaps unsurprisingly, my early findings suggest that this sense of urgency risks under-delivering on quality and space. Housing standards have codified aesthetic, functional, and spatial homogeneity. They reproduce conservative ideals of housing and family at a time when families are growing more and more diverse. All the while, with the expansion of permitted development rights, they are failing to deliver an overall improvement in size and quality of the UK’s housing stock. Disobedient Dollhouse No.1, 2023, Photography by Sophie Percival The need for an alternative, open-ended and, perhaps, queer toolkit to design homes – one that expands the ethical and aesthetic horizons of housing design – has never been more urgent. I am therefore also working on developing my ‘disobedient dollhouse making’ as a design tool. One that puts future users at the centre, allowing them to fabulate a different horizon for housing design. My aim is to use dollhouses as a ‘serious’ design game that enables participants to explore the true possibilities of housing beyond the ‘straightjacket’ of the standard. Follow Daniel Ovalle Costal’s research at @QueerDomCanon on Instagram 2025-06-03 Fran Williams comment and share

Brett Ryder / Alamy First popularised by the bestselling New Age book The Secret, manifestation has remained a cultural phenomenon for decades, championed by people from Oprah Winfrey to Deepak Chopra. Advocates claim you can attract whatever you want — whether that’s a romantic partner, a new business opportunity or even a material object — by asking the universe for it and believing that it can deliver. Some practitioners propose physics-defying explanations that evoke mysterious vibrational forces to explain its effectiveness. This article is part of a special series exploring the radical potential of the human imagination. Read more here. This is clearly nonsense, but neuroscientist Sabina Brennan was nevertheless intrigued. What might be the real reason that the practices involved in manifesting can benefit people’s lives? She realised that there were several fascinating, evidence-based explanations for why such interventions can rewire the brain in ways that help you achieve what you desire. In her new book, The Neuroscience of Manifesting, Brennan unpacks some of the mechanisms behind this enduring practice. Helen Thomson: Can you start by telling me what manifestation is?  Sabina Brennan: Manifesting is the practice of transforming thought into reality by visualising your goal and then developing the discipline to stay focused on and take action to achieve that goal. You can’t magically make things happen — you can’t defy physics — but you can change your reality and your future through focused action. Manifestation is easy to disregard as unscientific nonsense – why did you think differently?  There are a few reasons why manifesting is dismissed by some academics. One is the misconception that manifesting is just wishful thinking rather than the…

New York City’s Brooklyn-Queens Expressway is falling apart. Built between 1946 and 1964, the urban highway runs 12.1 miles through the heart of the two boroughs to connect on either end with the interstate highway system—a relic of midcentury car-oriented infrastructure, and a prime example of the dwindling lifespan of roads built during that time.  The degradation is most visible—and most pressing—in a section running alongside Brooklyn Heights known as the triple cantilever. This 0.4-mile section, completed in 1954, is unique among U.S. highways in that it juts out from the side of a hill and stacks the two directions of traffic on balcony-like decks, one slightly overhanging the other. A third level holds a well-loved park, the Brooklyn Heights Promenade.  This unusual layer cake of a freeway was a marvel of engineering in its day, though not without controversy. Masterminded by Robert Moses, the city’s all-powerful, often ruthless city planner for more than four decades, the roadway bisects working-class and immigrant neighborhoods that grapple with the health and environmental fallout to this day. Like the reputation of the man who built it, the triple cantilever has aged poorly. Its narrow width, (33.5 feet for the roadway in either direction) has made all but the most basic maintenance incredibly difficult, and its 71-year-old structure is constantly battered by the ever heavier automobiles and trucks. Designed to accommodate around 47,000 vehicles per day, it now carries more than three times that amount. Deteriorating deck joints and failing steel-reinforced concrete have led many to worry the triple cantilever is on the verge of collapse. An expert panel warned in 2020 that the triple cantilever could be unusable by 2026, and only then did interim repairs get made to keep it standing. [Photo: Alex Potemkin/Getty Images] The mounting concern comes amid a 50-year decline in direct government spending on infrastructure in the U.S., according to a recent analysis by Citigroup. Simply maintaining existing infrastructure is a challenge, the report notes. Meanwhile, the American Society of Civil Engineers’ grade for the country’s infrastructure has improved, from a D+ in 2017 to a C in 2025. Now even private credit firms are circling: As reported in Bloomberg, Apollo Global Management estimates that a boom in infrastructure deals help could grow the private debt market up to a staggering $40 trillion.   Independent urban designer Marc Wouters has an idea on how to fix BQE’s cantilever. He’s been working on it for years. “My process is that I always interview people in the community before I do any drawings,” he says. “So I really have listened to pretty much everybody over the past few years.” Unsolicited and developed in his own spare time, Wouters has designed an alternative for the triple cantilever that he named the BQE Streamline Plan. BQE Streamline Plan [Image: courtesy Marc Wouters | Studios/©2025] His concept, based on decades of experience in urban planning, infrastructure, and resilience projects in communities across the country, is relatively simple: extend the width of the two traffic-bearing cantilevers and add support beams to their outside edge, move both directions of traffic onto four lanes on the first level, and turn the second level into a large freeway cap park. Instead of major rebuilding efforts, Wouters’s proposal is more of a reinforcement and expansion, with a High Line-style park plopped on top. Though he’s not an engineer, Wouters is confident that his design would shift enough strain off the existing structure to allow it to continue functioning for the foreseeable future. (What actual engineers think remains to be seen.) “What I’ve done is come up with a plan that happens to be much less invasive, faster to build, a lot cheaper, and it encompasses a lot of what the community wants,” he says. “Yet it still handles the same capacity as the highway does right now.” So what will it take for this outsider’s idea to be considered a viable design alternative? This idea had been brewing in his mind for years. Wouters, who lives near the triple cantilever section of the BQE in Brooklyn Heights, has followed the highway’s planning process for more than a decade.  As complex infrastructure projects go, this one is particularly convoluted. The BQE is overseen by both the state of New York and New York City, among others, with the city in charge of the 1.5-mile section that includes the triple cantilever. This dual ownership has complicated the management of the highway and its funding. The city and the state have launched several efforts over the years to reimagine the highway’s entire length. In winter 2018, the city’s Department of Transportation (NYC DOT) released two proposals to address the ailing cantilever. Not seeing what they wanted from either one, Brooklyn Heights Association, a nonprofit neighborhood group, retained Wouters and his studio to develop an alternative design. He suggested building a temporary parallel bypass that would allow a full closure and repair of the triple cantilever. That proposal, along with competing ideas developed under the previous mayoral administration, went by the wayside in 2022, when the latest BQE redesign process commenced. Wouters found himself following yet another community feedback and planning process for the triple cantilever. The ideas being proposed by the city’s DOT this time around included a plan that would chew into the hillside that currently supports the triple cantilever to move the first tier of traffic directly underneath the second, and add a large girding structure on its open end to hold it all up. Other options included reshaping the retaining wall that currently holds up the triple cantilever, moving traffic below grade into a wide tunnel, or tearing the whole thing down and rebuilding from scratch. Each would be time-consuming and disruptive, and many of them cut into another well-loved public space immediately adjacent to the triple cantilever, Brooklyn Bridge Park. None of these options has anything close to unanimous support. And any of them will cost more than $1 billion—a price tag that hits much harder after the Federal Highway Administration rejected an $800 million grant proposal for fixing the BQE back in early 2024. BQE Streamline Plan [Image: courtesy Marc Wouters | Studios/©2025] Wouters is no highway zealot. In fact, he’s worked on a project heading into construction in Syracuse that will replace an underutilized inner-city highway with a more appropriately sized boulevard and developable land. But he felt sure there was a better way forward—a concept that would work as well in practice as on paper. “I just kept going to meetings and waiting to see what I thought was a progressive solution,” Wouters says. Unimpressed and frustrated, he set out to design it himself. Wouters released the Streamline Plan in March. The concept quickly gathered interest, receiving a flurry of local news coverage. He has since met with various elected officials to discuss it. But as elegant as Wouters’s concept may be, some stakeholders remain unconvinced that the city should be going all in on a reinterpretation of the triple cantilever. What might be more appropriate, critics say, is to make necessary fixes now to keep the triple cantilever safe and functional, and to spend more time thinking about whether this section of highway is even what the city needs in the long term. A group of local organizations is calling for a more comprehensive reconsideration of the BQE under the premise that its harms may be outnumbering its benefits. Launched last spring, the Brooklyn-Queens Expressway Environmental Justice Coalition wants any planning for the future of the BQE to include efforts to address its health and environmental impacts on neighboring communities and to seek an alternative that reconnects communities that have been divided by the corridor. One member of this coalition is the Riders Alliance, a nonprofit focused on improving public transit in New York. Danny Pearlstein, the group’s policy and communications director, says implementing a major redesign of the triple cantilever would just reinforce car dependency in a place that’s actually well served by public transit. The environmental justice coalition’s worry is that rebuilding this one section in a long-term fashion could make it harder for change across the length of the entire BQE and could increase the environmental impact the highway has on the communities that surround it. “This is not just one neighborhood. This is communities up and down the corridor that don’t resemble each other very much in income or background who are united and are standing together for something that’s transformative, rather than doubling down on the old ways,” Pearlstein says. [Photo: ©NYC DOT] Lara Birnback is executive director of the Brooklyn Heights Association, representing a neighborhood of roughly 20,000 people. Her organization, which worked directly with Wouters in the past, is circumspect about his latest concept. “It’s certainly more interesting and responsive to the kinds of things that the community has been asking for when thinking about the BQE. It’s more of those things than we’ve seen from any of the designs that New York City DOT has presented to us through their engagement process,” she says. “But at the end of the day, it’s still a way of preserving more or less the status quo of the BQE as a major interstate highway running through the borough.” She argues it makes more sense to patch up the triple cantilever and use the extra years of service that buys to do a more radical rethinking of the BQE’s future. (For example, one 2020 proposal by the Brooklyn-based architecture studio Light and Air proposed a simple intervention of installing buttresses on the open-air side of the triple cantilever, propping it up with a relatively small addition of material.) “We really strongly encourage the city to move forward immediately with a more short-term stabilization plan for the cantilever, with repairs that would last, for example, 20 to 25 years rather than spending billions and billions of dollars rebuilding it for the next 100 years,” Birnback says. Birnback says a major rebuilding plan like the one Wouters is proposing—for all its community benefits—could end up doing more harm to the city. “I think going forward now with a plan that both embeds the status quo and most likely forecloses on the possibility of real transformation across the corridor is a mistake,” she says. NYC DOT expects to begin its formal environmental review process this year, laying the necessary groundwork for deciding on a plan for what to do with the triple cantilever, either for the short term or the long term. The environmental process will evaluate all concepts equally, according to DOT spokesperson Vincent Barone, who notes that the department is required to review and respond to all feedback that comes in through that process. There is technically nothing holding back Wouters’s proposal from being one of the alternatives considered. And he may have some important political support to help make that happen. Earlier this month, Brooklyn’s Community District 2 board formally supported the plan. They are calling for the city’s transportation department to include it in the BQE’s formal environmental review process when it starts later this year. [Photo: Sinisa Kukic/Getty Images] Wouters argues that his proposal solves the pressing structural problems of the triple cantilever while also opening resources to deal with the highway’s big picture challenges. “The several hundred million dollars of savings is now funding that could go to other parts of the BQE. And there are other parts that are really struggling,” he says. “I’m always thinking about the whole length and about all these other communities, not just this one.” With a new presidential administration and a mayoral primary election in June, what happens with the triple cantilever is very much up in the air. But if the environmental review process begins as planned this year, it only makes sense for every option to fall under consideration. What gets built—or torn down, or reconstructed, or reinterpreted—could reshape part of New York City for generations.

Gamers everywhere know the thrill of the Nintendo Switch—its blend of portability and modular play is the stuff of legends. But as rumors swirl around the next generation of the console, some fans have quietly wished Nintendo would take bigger risks. The current design is familiar and beloved, but what if the Switch took a wild leap into uncharted territory? That’s the question behind an eye-catching new concept design that feels like the Switch from an alternate universe. Forget the boundaries and practicalities of actual production; this modular handheld concept, dubbed the ISEKAI Deck_01, envisions a gaming device with no limits on imagination. The fun starts with visuals: bold lines, bright colors, and a sense of experimentation make it look like something plucked from a sci-fi anime. The modular approach is front and center, inviting players to tinker, tweak, and make the system their own. Designer: Braz de Pina The most striking departure from the original Switch is the radical rethinking of detachable controllers. Instead of the flat, rectangular slabs we’re used to, this concept gives us chunky, cylindrical controllers that are almost reminiscent of futuristic batons. These round grips could offer a more natural feel when held, especially if you’re playing for extended periods, although their layout does demand some rethinking of traditional button placement. A clever twist happens with the screen, literally. In this design, the console’s display isn’t fixed in place but can be rotated and tilted even when the controllers are still snapped on. This could open up a new world of ergonomic play, letting you find the perfect viewing angle for handheld sessions or desk play. Such a feature would require a total overhaul of the way controllers attach and communicate with the device, but that’s the beauty of a “no rules” concept. Of course, experimenting with form can come with trade-offs. The cylindrical controllers, while comfy to grip, lose the dual-functionality magic of the Switch’s Joy-Cons. You might find them a bit unwieldy if you want to share them for multiplayer, as holding them sideways isn’t as smooth or natural. But as a reimagining, the ISEKAI Deck_01 dares to ask: what if modular gaming were about comfort, bold shapes, and physical playfulness before anything else? This concept may never make it to shelves, but it’s a joyful reminder that gaming hardware can still surprise us. For those who daydream about the future of play, the ISEKAI Deck_01 is proof that the Switch spirit can be bent, twisted, and reimagined in dazzling new ways. If you’ve ever wanted to see what happens when you throw the rulebook away, this alternate reality console delivers the eye candy and inspiration to keep you guessing what might come next. The post This Wild Nintendo Switch Concept Turns Modular Gaming Into Sci-Fi Fantasy first appeared on Yanko Design.

Outlets 8, Conghua | © Wu Siming In the landscape of contemporary Chinese urbanism, few typologies encapsulate the contradictions of late-capitalist development more vividly than the pseudo-European commercial complex. These replicated enclaves, constructed en masse in the early 2000s, were once marketed as symbols of international sophistication. Over time, however, many were abandoned, becoming architectural vestiges of speculative urbanism. Outlets 8 in Conghua, Guangzhou, is one such project that has undergone a radical architectural reinterpretation. Originally completed in 2018 but long dormant, it has been reimagined by E Plus Design in collaboration with URBANUS/LXD Studio. Through a precise, light-touch intervention, the project avoids wholesale demolition and reprograms space through color, rhythm, and landscape strategy. Outlets 8, Conghua Technical Information Architects1-14: E Plus Design Central Plaza Design: URBANUS / LXD Studio Location: Conghua District, Guangzhou, China Gross Area: 80,882 m2 | 870,000 Sq. Ft. Project Years: 2022 – 2023 Photographs: © Wu Siming This approach is like a contemporary remix of classical music. The four blocks correspond to four movements. Without extensive demolition or altering the European-style architectural rhythm, we reinterpreted the emotional tones, chords, and cadenzas. Through a blend of color and modern gestures, the outdated and disproportionate ‘faux-antique’ complex has been reorchestrated into a contemporary architectural symphony. – Li Fu, Chief Architect at E Plus Design Outlets 8, Conghua Photographs Aerial View | © Wu Siming © Wu Siming © Wu Siming © Wu Siming © Wu Siming © Wu Siming © Wu Siming © Chen Liang Liu Shan © Chen Liang Liu Shan © Chen Liang Liu Shan Outlets 8 Context and Typological Challenge Outlets 8 was initially conceived as a 110,000-square-meter faux-European outlet village. Despite its scale and investment, it struggled to resonate with local cultural dynamics and remained idle. The typology itself, rooted in nostalgic mimicry, was already facing obsolescence. The challenge, then, was not only architectural but also conceptual: how to resuscitate a typology that had become both spatially and culturally inert. The design team chose a strategy of minimal physical intervention coupled with maximal perceptual impact. Rather than demolish or drastically reconstruct, they aimed to re-signify the existing structures. This approach reflects a growing trend in urban renewal across China, where sustainability, cost-efficiency, and cultural specificity take precedence over spectacle. Spatial Transformation Through Chromatic Reprogramming After | © Wu Siming Before | Original Facade, © E+ At the intervention’s core is using color as a spatial and psychological agent. The ornament-heavy facades were stripped of their polychromatic excess and repainted in low-saturation hues. This chromatic cleansing revealed the formal rhythms of the architecture beneath. By doing so, the design avoids mimicry and opts for abstraction, reintroducing clarity to the site’s visual language. The design framework is structured as a musical metaphor, with each of the four blocks conceived as a separate movement in a visual symphony. The street-facing facades, now unified through a golden “variation,” establish a new urban frontage that is both legible and symbolically rich. A ribbon-like golden band traces across the main elevations, creating continuity and contrast between old and new volumes. In contrast, the sports block adopts a cooler, blue-toned palette, offering a different spatial and functional rhythm. New architectural insertions are rendered in transparent materials, signaling temporal and programmatic distinctions. At the center, the elliptical plaza becomes a spatial crescendo, defined by a sculptural intervention inspired by Roman aqueducts. This feature functions as a landmark and a temporal break, juxtaposing historical references with performative landscape elements. Rewriting Landscape as Urban Ecology After | © Wu Siming Before | Original Facade, © E+ Water, derived from the nearby Liuxi River, serves as the thematic and material backbone of the landscape design. Its integration is not symbolic but functional. Water flows through constructed channels, interactive fountains, and sculptural cascades that encourage observation and participation. These elements create a multisensory environment that enhances the spatial experience while reinforcing ecological awareness. The planting strategy emphasizes native species capable of withstanding Guangzhou’s subtropical climate. The design maximizes greenery wherever regulatory conditions allow, particularly along the main entrance, central corridors, and arcaded walkways. The result is a layered landscape that balances visual density with ecological resilience. Integrating landscape and architecture as a singular design operation, the project shifts away from ornamental greening toward environmental synthesis. This approach foregrounds interaction and immersion, aligning with broader shifts in landscape architecture toward performative and participatory ecologies. Programmatic Rebirth and Urban Implications After | © Wu Siming Before | Original Facade, © E+ Beyond formal and material considerations, the project redefines the programmatic potential of large-scale retail environments. Positioned as a “micro-vacation” destination, Outlets 8 is a hybrid typology. It combines retail, leisure, and outdoor experience within a cohesive spatial narrative. This reprogramming responds to changing patterns of consumption and leisure in Chinese cities, particularly among younger demographics seeking experiential value over transactional efficiency. Statistical metrics underscore the project’s social impact. In its first nine days, the outlet attracted over half a million visitors and became a trending location across multiple digital platforms. While not the focus of architectural critique, these figures reflect a successful alignment between spatial renewal and public resonance. More importantly, the project offers a replicable model for dealing with the vast inventory of misaligned commercial developments across China. The intervention avoids nostalgia and cynicism by foregrounding perceptual clarity, ecological integration, and cultural recontextualization. Instead, it offers a clear path forward for reimagining the built remnants of a prior urban paradigm. Outlets 8, Conghua Plans Elevations | © E Plus Design Floor Plan | © E Plus Design Floor Plan | © E Plus Design Floor Plan | © E Plus Design Floor Plan | © E Plus Design Sections | © E Plus Design Outlets 8, Conghua Image Gallery About E Plus Design E Plus Design is a multidisciplinary architecture studio based in Shenzhen, China, known for its innovative approaches to urban renewal, adaptive reuse, and large-scale public space transformations. The firm emphasizes minimal intervention strategies, spatial clarity, and contextual sensitivity, often working at the intersection of architecture, landscape, and urban design to create integrated environments that are both socially responsive and experientially rich. Credits and Additional Notes Chief Design Consultant: Liu Xiaodu Master Plan, Architecture, and Landscape Schemes: E Plus Design Lead Architects: Li Fu, Coco Zhou Project Managers (Architecture): Guo Sibo, Huang Haifeng Architectural Design Team: Wang Junli, Zhang Yan, Cai Yidie, Zhu Meng, Lin Zhaomei, Li Geng, Stephane Anil Mamode, Liu Shan, Zhou Yubo Central Plaza Design: URBANUS / LXD Studio Architect of Central Plaza: Liu Xiaodu Project Manager: Li An’hong Facade Design: Song Baolin, Li Minggang Lighting Design (Concept): Fang Yuhui Lighting Consultant: Han Du Associates Client: Guangzhou Outlets 8 Commercial Management Co., Ltd. Client Design Management Team: Yin Mingyue, Zhao Xiong Landscape Area: 29,100 m² Chief Landscape Architect: Gao Yan Project Manager (Landscape): Zhang Yufeng Landscape Design Team: Yu Xiaolei, Li Zhaozhan, Liu Chenghua Landscape Construction Drawings: E Plus Design Project Manager: Wang Bin Design Team: Wang Bin (Landscape Architecture). Huang Jinxiong (Greening Design). Li Gen (Water & Electricity Design) Structural Design Team: Wang Kaiming, Yang Helin, Wu Xingwei, Zhuang Dengfa Electrical Design Team: Sun Wei, Yang Ying Interior Design Concept Design: Shenzhen Juanshi Design Co., Ltd. Chief Interior Designer: Feng Feifan Project Manager: Liu Hongwei Design Team: Niu Jingxian, Shi Meitao Construction Drawings: Shenzhen Shiye Design Co., Ltd. Project Manager: Shen Kaizhen Design Team: Yao Yijian, Yang Hao, Liu Chen Wayfinding Design Studio: Hexi Brand Design Co., Ltd. Curtain Wall Design Firm: Positive Attitude Group (PAG)