Studio CONTEXT at Studio Mumbai: Mutual learning in foreign Context

Studio CONTEXT @ STUDIO MUMBAI

Studio CONTEXT deals with a sustainable architecture based on complexity on all scales of a specific context, that involves geographical, historical, anthropological and social reflections, a cross cultural involvement and mutual learning as well as investigations into the most basic elements to define the core qualities of architecture: space, light and material.

During three semesters Studio CONTEXT engaged in collaboration with the renowned Indian architectural office STUDIO MUMBAI, at the time located under the palm trees of Nagaon near Ali Bagh in Maharashtra. The project aimed to redevelop the centre around a temple, water tank and market place of the nearby village (Nagaon), a site that was in a deteriorated and neglected state in 2013. During three visits and in collaboration with the local community, inspired through the craftsmen and architects of STUDIO MUMBAI, which whom we worked side by side on their premises, we developed proposals for a new square and different typologies of social housing. The projects were then presented for the local council and the community and left with them with the possibility of implementation.

After a thorough phase of preparation in Denmark where anthropological and sociological aspects supported the gathering of knowledge necessary, the studio settled in Nagaon in the workshop of Bijoy Jain's Studio Mumbai. The aim was to get cultural insight into the special working process of Studio Mumbai, with its close relation to the local society and its craftsmanship and use of materials. This method combined with the students’ assignment on a specific site close by was the base for the working program during each visit of the three semesters the program was conducted.
Every time the semester was composed of a training program, which developed from teamwork, preparation, study trip, field studies, 1:1 material investigations and local cultural studies to studio work with theory and scale experiments. The curriculum consisted of different phases: preparation, preliminary project, theory, study trip, site/project, and project/material/detail.

The overall objective of the study program is to train the student in gathering and synthesizing information from theory, research and intensive field studies in a foreign cultural context with empirical knowledge gained on the particular site through mutual learning efforts. On this background the students develop a contemporary architectural project based on the local traditions and on human needs.

The first phase of the semester work was each time completely devoted to the stay and study in India. Preparation included an introduction on the specific working method of studio CONTEXT with reflection boards, red books and individual/team work, the development of an architectural toolbox, long distance research of a foreign culture, theory in anthropology and sociology and practical study trip planning.
Studio CONTEXT distributed the overall architectural task of redeveloping a local village centre in Nagaon, Maharastra, India into smaller tasks. On the background of the material elaborated by previous semester’s students, the project was further developed with the intention of implementation and realization in 1:1. Like in an architectural office the students have their own areas of responsibility but are obligated to integrate their design into a common holistic proposal.

The objective of the working method was to train the students in collective fieldwork, theoretical research and analytical studies in connection with a foreign context to define clear architectural interventions, with the thought of resources, and relying on local Indian people and materials. The method was an exercise in mutual learning, and reflected on the intensive connection with local user groups, craftsmen, and architects in a foreign context.

The second phase built on top of phase one. Through a study trip through parts of India and empirical fieldwork on site, the students adjusted their preliminary work and their long distance research to the actual conditions. Mutual learning with local inhabitants, craftsmen, and professionals influenced the outcome and quality of their design proposals. The working environment was sat in the context of Studio Mumbai. The work was executed in drawings and scale models.
This phase was based on work performed in pairs of students.

The objective for the working method in phase two was to train students in individual analytical studio work and to develop the skills to synthesize information from fieldwork with knowledge gathered through theoretical studies. The task was to integrate the specific site into a new overall architectural design strategy and project proposal presented in drawings/illustrations and models in different scales.

In the third phase the students had to zoom even further into an architectural construction/object developed from the new project proposal on the site. This construction/object had to be detailed through drawings and models. The knowledge from phase one and two about local Indian culture, function, craftsmanship, and materials had to be used and integrated into the process.
This phase was primarily based on individual work.

The objective of the working method was to train the students to reflect and investigate the relation between the overall plan and the detailed construction/object in a specific cultural context and to use the knowledge from the architectural tradition of a site investigated through intensive fieldwork and theory to make a new contemporary and designed architectural intervention.

The students were rated according to the skills shown in the collective work and on the individual working process and presentation.
The ratings took into account on which level the student had been able to put a constructive effort into collective and mutual learning in connection with the cultural context of the assignment.
The rating examined the skills and the understanding revealed for the specific methods introduced by Studio CONTEXT: Toolbox, reflection board, red books and pair teamwork. Also a written reflection curricula was a minor part of the total rating.
It was also considered on which level the student could synthesize existing information into new and contemporary architectural projects and knowledge based on the tradition and on human needs.
The quality with which the architectural idea was expressed through different medias was another important focus point for the ratings of the presented projects.