Some people say that concrete, too, is a natural material. Its main ingredients are sand, gravel, iron, and cement, and since limestone is also the principal raw material of cement, the logic is that concrete made by combining those natural materials is itself a natural material.^{（注1）（注2）} (Middle omitted)

The boundary between what is and is not a natural material is extremely vague. We must not rest content with the act of drawing a line there. Nothing is created by drawing boundaries. Drawing a boundary justifies nothing. We have to go ① beyond the drawing of boundaries. Natural architecture does not mean architecture made from natural materials. Naturally, nor does it mean architecture in which natural materials are merely pasted onto concrete.

When something forms a happy relationship with the place in which it exists, we perceive that thing as natural. Nature is relationality. Natural architecture is architecture that forms a happy relationship with its place. A happy marriage between place and architecture produces natural architecture.

Then what is a happy relationship? Some people define a happy relationship as one in which the architecture blends into the landscape of the place. But this definition remains trapped in a view of architecture that treats architecture as representation. When a place is regarded as a representation, that place is called a “landscape.” The idea of harmonizing architecture as representation with the representation called landscape is, in short, the argument of a ② bystander who merely comments on architecture and landscape as though they were someone else's concern.^（注3） When we try to regard architecture as representation, we separate ourselves from the place, become trapped by vision and language, and drift away from the concrete, real existence that is the place itself. By manipulating representation through the method of applying finishes over concrete, we can create any number of buildings said to “harmonize with the landscape.” When I recognized the barrenness of manipulating representation, I realized that landscape theory itself was inadequate.

In order to put down roots in a place and connect with it, architecture must be reconsidered not as representation but as existence. Put simply, every object is made (produced) and then received (consumed). (　A　) is how an object looks, and in that sense it is a way in which the object is received; for human beings, reception and consumption are activities of the same kind. Existence, on the other hand, is the result of the act of production, and existence and production are inseparable and form a single whole. Only when we think not about how something looks but about how it is made do we begin to understand what happiness is. A happy married couple is not one that appears (　B　) well matched on the surface, but one that can create—or produce—something together.

(Based on 限研吾, Natural Architecture, Iwanami Shinsho)

(Note 1) 砂利: small stones, or a mixture of small stones and sand.

(Note 2) 石灰石: a type of mineral.

(Note 3) 傍観者: a person who merely stands by and watches a problem that is taking place.