Project Details
Description
Within the field of planning, an important task is the creation of a common
understanding of the issues at hand. Over the course of 7 years, we have been studying
how architectural and anthropological methods can contribute to this. Our studies
interchange between experimental practice and theory.
Most of our experimental work has been realised within the framework of one or several
partnerships. We see these partnerships as a necessary aspect of context. Recent articles
have pointed towards a new understanding of context, not as something finite and static
but as a fluid state “made of the many dimensions that impinge at every stage on the
development of a project: “context” is this little word that sums up all the various
elements that have been bombarding the project from the beginning.”1 Without the
social and economic realism our partners have offered, there would be little for us to
find.
How does one describe and discuss this fluid context? We have drawn on a number of
sources, among them, among them Dada and Situationist practices, Bernhard Tschumi’s
and Nigel Coates’ work with narrative architecture from the 1980’s2, Muf3 Fluid4 and an
unpublished international survey of community planning practices5.
Our – tentative – conclusion is that architecture, art and design can provide methods,
primarily alternative ways of seeing, thinking and knowing, which can be useful for
creating a common ground among the very diverse stakeholders in a planning process.
Mapping and measuring are obviously part of this, but importantly: so are proposing new
elements and reassembling found objects, entering new ways of thinking found
conditions into the discussion.
To this end, we have developed a methodology of exploration based on anthropological
and architectural practices, including 24-hour field surveys, walkabouts, focused
searches, and mapping in the primary phase, followed by user-engagement with the use
of narratives (booklets, boards, films) and gift-giving.
We have explored this methodological approach in a number of different situations:
rural development, community planning in dense urban environments, pre-planning
large scale brown-field development, understanding the homeless, and developing spaces
for children. Since students have been contributing vastly to the experimental work, it
has been given that interpretations and even misunderstandings of the methodology
were part of the process. Over the years, we have discovered that this is a positive factor,
often opening new, poetic readings of the context.
understanding of the issues at hand. Over the course of 7 years, we have been studying
how architectural and anthropological methods can contribute to this. Our studies
interchange between experimental practice and theory.
Most of our experimental work has been realised within the framework of one or several
partnerships. We see these partnerships as a necessary aspect of context. Recent articles
have pointed towards a new understanding of context, not as something finite and static
but as a fluid state “made of the many dimensions that impinge at every stage on the
development of a project: “context” is this little word that sums up all the various
elements that have been bombarding the project from the beginning.”1 Without the
social and economic realism our partners have offered, there would be little for us to
find.
How does one describe and discuss this fluid context? We have drawn on a number of
sources, among them, among them Dada and Situationist practices, Bernhard Tschumi’s
and Nigel Coates’ work with narrative architecture from the 1980’s2, Muf3 Fluid4 and an
unpublished international survey of community planning practices5.
Our – tentative – conclusion is that architecture, art and design can provide methods,
primarily alternative ways of seeing, thinking and knowing, which can be useful for
creating a common ground among the very diverse stakeholders in a planning process.
Mapping and measuring are obviously part of this, but importantly: so are proposing new
elements and reassembling found objects, entering new ways of thinking found
conditions into the discussion.
To this end, we have developed a methodology of exploration based on anthropological
and architectural practices, including 24-hour field surveys, walkabouts, focused
searches, and mapping in the primary phase, followed by user-engagement with the use
of narratives (booklets, boards, films) and gift-giving.
We have explored this methodological approach in a number of different situations:
rural development, community planning in dense urban environments, pre-planning
large scale brown-field development, understanding the homeless, and developing spaces
for children. Since students have been contributing vastly to the experimental work, it
has been given that interpretations and even misunderstandings of the methodology
were part of the process. Over the years, we have discovered that this is a positive factor,
often opening new, poetic readings of the context.
Status | Active |
---|---|
Effective start/end date | 30/06/2010 → … |
Funding
Keywords
- Situationist practice
- Community planning
- Narrative
- Gifts