During these four days together we interrogate the act, methods and processes of notation and documenting our research and make a start on your individual “Dynamic Glossaries” that will continue to expand, morph and be defined throughout the workshop. Through introductions, small lectures, group discussions and practical tasks we will acquaint ourselves with different methods of documentation and notation used by artists, designers, and researchers across many disciplines. From here, we will “try on” their methods, applying them to our areas of interest and research topics, and begin to develop our own individual forms and methods of research documentation and notation that will underpin our own practice as designers. Taking into consideration both the aesthetics and legibility of how we make notations and documentation of ideas, observations, experiences and inspirations we will begin to explore the possibility of research as outcome within our practices.

Architectural Ethnography

Inspired by the WORK, BODY, and LEISURE project the intervention #4 addresses ‘the spatial configurations, living conditions, and notions of the human body engendered by disruptive changes in labour ethos and conditions’. Students work on their individual fascination within the theme ‘technological sensibility versus sensibility’. The human – machine interface, the quantification of the body, privacy matters and the influence of technology and the internet of things on the relationship between human and space. Their work and progress is monitored, curated and put into context by the first CiRC* curator, Jorn Konijn. In addition their process is informally discussed with an international committee of leading international experts in both the working field as academia. In collaboration with Het Nieuwe Instituut, the commissioner of the Dutch Pavilion at the 16th International Architecture Exhibition of La Biennale di Venezia.

*Corpo-real Curator in Residence

In a three day workshop Corpo-real explored the relation between time, complexity, and stories in architecture. Three lectures, by different professionals related to the field of architecture open up the discussion on time, storytelling and space. How does time relate itself to architecture? And how can we deal with different timeframes while designing for future spaces? We travel through architectonic spaces and in time, although the architect seems unable to influence the notion of time and impact upon a building. It is a continuous progress of existence that will not bend or break, speed up or slow down. Authors on the other hand have the ability to work with different time frames. A novelist can build up a storyline that contains the entire history of the universe in 432 pages, or 1076 pages that solely consist of the activities of one day at one specific place. Time in storytelling is flexible, it can speed up or slow down, depending on the rhythm and details of the written or oral communication. In collaboration with Writingplace Laboratory for Architecture and Literature. www.writingplaces.org

HOW DO WE SOUND? This workshop from Fritz Faust attempts to explore the relationship between body and sound in spaces. The way we listen is somehow informed by the history and anthropology of our flesh and our environments. We listen to the body and space. Then, in performances, we explore how to uncover and disrupt the acoustics and our way of listening.

Nourish by cultural similarities and the student's own fascination, we started a search around the theme [HOME]. A search that started with investing in thinking together. Thinking together as an umbrella method that takes you further together, gives you more depth and ultimately sharpens you in your own position as a designer, and in relation to the discipline and society. Other research methods that were discussed during the different units in relation to thinking and making were: theoretical research, survey research, empirical research, participatory observations and design thinking strategies.

In order to anchor the method of joint thinking in the two units, we started reading books. Specific books that enter into a direct relationship with the subject and the phase of studying within the units. In unit I, the focus was more on broadening (making) research and in unit II on in-depth (making) research. Students were expected to read part of the book every week and (critically) relate to that text and reflect on it from their own personal experiences. This resulted in wonderful conversations that were rich in anecdotes.

Thinking dialogue In unit I, the broadening unit, we started with the book Species of Spaces and other Pieces, by George Perec. In his book, he examines the question ‘what is space’? I chose this book in particular because I think that George Perec has a unique view of space and that his observations could inspire the students to look- and think differently about space. But also, to become aware of their own capacity in creative thinking and making. To be released from presuppositions and to continue to cherish one's own fascination.

Thinking through making Unit II, the in-depth unit, is much more about precision. Experiencing what it is to be precise, to formulate precisely, to make precisely. In this unit we have read the book The Craftsman by Richard Sennett. This book is mainly about the (undervalued) role and value of the maker. That thinking and making are complementary and that there is a surprising value in making itself.

Both the personal development of the students as a spatial designer and also the relationship with the world were central in units I and II. Students were encouraged to reflect constantly on their own developments and on that of their fellow students from different treated methods. Equipped with this intrinsic knowledge, they are asked to perform interventions, interceptions and changes. It is a continuous search for the questioning of space, in which all kinds of (making) disciplines are used to find future answers to various (social) topics. Henri Snel Publication on ISSUU: https://issuu.com/artezinteriorarchitecture/docs/19_unit_report_def

SPATIAL ANNOTATIONS, Or How Prototypes Frame our Surroundings Curated by Josh Plough

December 2018 the public of Zwolle was invited to interact with and experience the experimental prototypes created by the second year Corpo-real MA students of ArtEZ. While subjects vary from Creolisation to the apparatus of imagination, the overall theme that becomes apparent is the de- and re-construction of space. It is with this act that the antagonism between Public and Private is made apparent. Many of the frameworks on show ask us to develop new sensitivities towards the environment around us. Through the act of dissection, literally and metaphorically, the students’ work proposes a new and widened space in which walls become porous and users become actors.

The prototypes shown are described as annotations because they’re often treated as subservient to the final outcome. However, they support the finality of the students’ research as they provide the structure from which they can make their bold and challenging statements. There is agency to be found in this positioning of the work, as it exposes us to the invisible processes before the reification of theory and research. This approach removes the ‘glass case’ of exhibition making and swaps the clean white of a vitrine for a blue, stained carpet.

Spatial Annotations creates a scenario in which the usual confidence of a finished ‘product’ is superseded by the more open ended and precarious nature of research. We, the participants, become aware of the mechanics behind the built environments we interact with everyday. This exposure can hopefully result in an alternative way of seeing, one that treats vulnerability and permanence as equal partners.

When confronted with the performance of a brick wall it’s hard to imagine the fluidity of the thought behind it. But the exhibition does exactly that. “Building are not erected without plans, but must first be present in plans and construction drawings. As a rule, the first steps consist of free presentations like sketches or perspective drawings, intended to establish the form and design of the building… These drawings provide an image of what will emerge in terms of design or construction, and their detailing process is thus an essential resource of the way to a finished building”. So says Bert Bielefeld, co-editor of Basics, Fundamentals and Presentation, Technical Drawing. This is the logical step for curator to take. To see the model as something to display, as something the public can interact with on a scale that fits them. But what comes before the plan? Hatching Theories is an exhibition that takes the rigid structure of the architectural model and drawing as its starting point. And then subverts its archetypical nature to show the maelstrom of theories and influences that create and influence the foundations of our built environment. Corpo-real Research Workshop: The first and second year students of Corpo-real MA Interior Architecture spent a day researching what Home meant to them during a workshop in ArtEZ’s library. During this workshop the students were asked to interrogate what Home meant over the timeframes of one minute, one hour, one day, one week, one month and one year. The results of this temporal analysis confirmed what we already knew: that everybody – no matter what part of the world they’re from – wants to feel warm and safe the first minute they’re Home. However new words started to appear when the research became more in-depth. Terms like scar, damage, toothpaste, tribe and lover surfaced. It was these terms that were then used to search: ArtEZ’s library database. The reason for this was to make the direct link between a designer’s sensitivities. i.e. their cultural and social contexts, with the books and theories they pick from the shelves. Once these books were chosen and red thread was traced from its position on a bookshelf to a specific location in the library. The students had to work together to contextualize that piece of theory in the immediate built and quite alien environment. The word safety saw a thread trail from the chosen book to a lock in a door and our universal need for warmth saw another lead to a radiator. Soon the student’s bodies had to contort in the space as threads crisscrossed through it. Disserting the space through theory and praxis the theme of Home tuned their emotions and research into an assault course that forced the body into different and quite difficult positions.

During this case study students did research into many different topics. To summarise this research, we developed three theories:

1 TIME
At the beginning of mankind, communities were greatly based around physical space. When the first religious groups came about, communities became connected in a spiritual way as well. Having been invented in the 50’s the computer became a piece of technology that was inhabited by different communities. Starting around the second decade of the 2000’s a sense of longing for more personal connections has brought about a wish for the integration of digital, spiritual, and physical communities.

2 SPACE
Communities are created through the combination of aspects on the spiritual, physical, and digital spectrum. Spiritual communities congregate around a shared belief or idea about life. Physical communities come together because they share the love of a given place, background, or because they simply ended up being in close physical proximity to others in the same group.
Digital communities are together in spirit in the sense that they communicate online, through digital devices and within a physical-digital space.

3 MAN
 From the dawn of mankind, people have been drawn to the creation of communities in order to survive. With the rise of industrialisation, people became fonder of individuality. We are now reaching a period where our high- tech culture is rediscovering the value of the global as well as local community.

At the beginning of this project we asked ourselves what a community is. After researching and experimenting we realised that we were not aiming to define what a community is per se but were trying instead to under- stand how a community works. We concluded that communities are backbones of society and are found in every shape and form. We realised that a community can be temporary, forced, accidental, or even unwanted. The definition of what a community is depends on the community itself and the way people associate with it. There is little virtue in attempting to define what exactly a community is or endeavouring to lay down ground rules that force the creation of a community.

In the early days of our case study, we all sat down with our tutor, Irene Müller, and discussed the importance of rituals. Irene suggested to sit in a circle, close our eyes and make few noises to exercise our existence towards each other. Somebody suggested that each school day we bring in a present to exchange with others and discuss themes of possessions and belongings. Participating in these rituals brought us together. After doing research on different community types we moved towards experimentation. Some students were interested in activating public spaces by means of different experiments while others focussed on testing theories on themselves.

D/DOCK, our client, and the symposium helped us to experience how theory can be put into practice, how to receive and utilise feedback from critics, interact with other people in public space, examine our perceptions towards community and test our willingness to share and to interact. Finally, we decided to visualise our perception by making a documentary about what we have learned about community. The symposium helped us to look back and reorganise our information before we exhibited our work.

During this last year we have come to understand how a community works by building one ourselves. Using the case study as a backbone, we experimented on ourselves and played with different aspects of co-existence. We found that one of the essential ingredients of a community is willingness. When we are willing to communicate with others, share with others and interact with others, we forge bonds that last. We are constantly trying to find ways of bringing people together to make this willingness present within our communities. In the process of building up our case study, we created and tested many ways of communicating with each other. We created rituals like making daily sketches that we shared on Instagram and wrote blogs to share our research. We experimented with space and groups; we had a picnic at the train station, lived everywhere, did yoga together, planted herbs in canteen, lived in the train for a day, and drew our ideal working space. By building up a compendium of methods and theories, we tried to make public space attractive as well as active for people, in order to share knowledge, share space, and ultimately, connect people.

The publication of this Case-Study can be found on ISSUU: https://issuu.com/home/published/case-study_7.0.2018_issuu

Commissioned by the Association Amersfoortse Parkhuis. How could multiple parties make use of the old boiler house which in the past used to be a part of the Saint Elisabeth Hospital complex in the city of Amersfoort. The primary task was to develop a blueprint based upon which the Parkhuis could be transformed into an active work- space for people to work and meet together. Rather than strictly separated rooms, the students created a plan which offers an open and accessible structure. The idea for this plan is to create a key to connect people, thereby laying the basis for, intensifying and keeping contacts among them. This open concept demands a design task with which the role of the owners and the utilization by third parties are completed in a new manner. Publication on issuu: https://issuu.com/artezinteriorarchitecture/docs/case-study_6.0_parkhuis_2017

mapping nomadic work

Connecting people, see also the publication on issuu. In collaboration with NS, the Dutch railway system. https://issuu.com/artezinteriorarchitecture/docs/connecting_people_pages_small

building a new school from the inside out

research on designing methods for listening practitioners

Nina Glockner introduced us in this workshop to the theories of Laban and Bartenieff, by exercises, challenges and building spaces in collaboration.