On Plastic Plants

We like having plants around us. We've evolved that way. Plants transform a grungy concrete jungle urban hellscape into a modern, fresh, user-friendly, brutalist yet cosy setting. So, naturally, humans found something lower maintenance. Fake plastic versions, which, under the right light, are convincing simulacra. Because apparently, perception is everything. No further second-order thought is involved; no consideration for sustainability nor bad taste when the plastic nature of things inevitably reveals its kitch face.

The deep irony of a cheap-smelling plastic construction, which reflects an acrylic gamut, being the source of microplastics that seep into the environment, becoming part of the circulation of ever-shrinking natural ecosystems, entering the veins of real plants, colonising and gentrifying them, making them a tiny bit more plastic. The abstract-minded might be tempted to claim this is the plastic's way of becoming "a real boy", like Carlin's half-joke that humans are just Gaia's way of producing plastic (and maybe some AIs on the side). But our good sense and solid aesthetic values shut down such nonsensical thought patterns and make clear that this is all just the good ol' usual dynamics: humans playing a short game, being the paperclip maximisers they always have been.

In fact, plastic plants distill everything wrong with this current version of humanity. One must zoom out and consider large-scale factors. A trivial example is the emissions resulting from producing and transporting such bad imitations. The irony obviously is that, in stark contrast, real plants absorb CO2 instead. Given that a human acting out the overly-represented social role of a short-sighted member of this so-called society is in dire need of a fragile plant, say a rose, they resort to its plastic devilish cousin, which is preferred due to its resilience. But the level of absurdity maximises when we encounter the ultimate impostor, a fake plastic cactus. The fact that even such most resilient, almost-zero-maintenance plants also enjoy plastic twins points to the fact that this is not about practicality anymore.

It's not just about neoliberal capitalist feudalism, or whatever late-stage capitalism is called this year. It's about beauty and aesthetics, and how low priority it is in the value system. It's not like we observe the rich and powerful owning the real plants, while the poor plebs are desperately left with the plastic ones. Even people who go on hikes in nature, enjoy parks in the cities, go camping in the forest, and covet a house with a view over the mountains and the sea, would still go on Amazon and order a 1-day delivery of an artificial Monstera.

The true reason plastic plants exist, and actually claim a large market cap, is that humans do not live in the real world any more, plus some cognitive dissonance with a dash of denial. They have turned the real world into a Baudrillardian simulation. But it's a lo-fi simulation, and not the stylish, nostalgic kind of lo-fi! Cyberpunk warned us that we would get a dystopia, but at least it would be nice to have a stylish dystopia, with neon, miniskirts, and lab-grown fur. Instead, we get what a handful of super-lame billionaires decided they like this quarter. This rant is not even just about plastic plants. Such a large majority of services, shows, businesses, scientific projects, and even art pieces are second-rate versions of what they could, not even should, be.

Similarly, the goal of plastic surgery—whether for lips, breasts, butts, noses, eyelashes, chins, thighs, or bellies—is to "pass" as "real." But our current "bio-simulation" technology isn't advanced or cheap enough to be truly convincing; the only way to be convincing is to be the real thing. We can usually tell the simulation from the "natural". A real simulation would involve editing at the fundamental level of the biological organism, not just butchering away or augmenting with plastic clones. The human analogue of plastic plants is the AI robot girlfriend, the advanced version of the blow-up doll or wifu pillow. Each to their own, but if the simulation isn't convincing—like in Blade Runner, for example—then it's just embarrassing. To be clear, I'm only focusing on bio-edits motivated by purely aesthetic reasons, not due to medical reasons, body dysmorphia or dysphoria, and so on. In such cases, I would argue that only advanced simulation tools can be helpful, as the current level at which modifications can happen is not adequate for full trashumanist-approved fluidity, which can lead to dissatisfaction, regret, and worse.

But at the same time, this rant is indeed about plastic plants, in the sense that they represent and capture so much of the Zeitgeist. Some products seem hard to do without. Other products are luxuries, but in a techno-utopia of abundance, we can imagine their moral existence within the constraints of the natural order of things. However, some products are simply monstrous inventions that should be banished to the depths of the most supermassive of black holes. This attack, of course, targets plastic plants, up to isomorphism.

If the Wittgensteinian meaning of an object is its use, plastic plants get their meaning from how other objects, real or simulacra, relate to them, a la Yoneda lemma. It seems that they can become most real in an ironic context, such as an art installation. Perhaps the only true purpose they can serve is to be art or at least part of an art piece. After all, when a painter uses oil paint, ie the grandfather of plastic, or acrylic paint, ie plastic goo, to make "Still Life with Sunflower No.42", they are creating plastic plants of sorts. And what if an AI generated the painting (here, ChatGPT and Gemini)? Are the flowers less or more fake? In any case, the environmental impact is not ideal.

Plastic plants are more than just a benign decorative choice; they are a symptom of a deeper societal malaise. They reflect our disconnect from the natural world, our acceptance of inferior simulations, and our willingness to prioritise convenience over aesthetics and sustainability. But at least I am inconvenienced; my eyes hurt, and I have microplastics in my brain, lungs, intestines, and balls. We live in a world where the Real is increasingly replaced by the Artificial, and plastic plants are a stark reminder of this trend. And I am not making the natural equals good fallacy. But it is indeed time to reclaim our connection to mama Nature, or at least to rewatch Koyaanisqatsi without looking at our phones.