Project: Everybody in the Place
Part One: Observing and Participating in Social Space
Design Workshop 1
21. 07. 20
Today in class we were introduced to the notion of ‘Everybody in the Place‘ focused on exploring space not only through aesthetic or haptic qualities but through actions and interactions, understanding how “spaces are created, altered, modulated, and interfered with when something happens”. The various actions that take place within a space ultimately leads them to have vastly divergent atmospheres, feelings, meanings and contexts.
How the actions, experiences and alterations that occur within these spaces are ephemeral as they are not permanent qualities of a physical space, but are instead “shifting social spaces that might exist anywhere, intervening in other structures or disappearing altogether”. The concept that spaces are centred on the relations and relationships between people is an underpinning idea that this design project will further explore and investigate. Focusing on how social relationships are altered through and within space, the re-emergence of ‘The Commons’ as a political idea within the aesthetic realm, and how we might consider designing in public / for the public / with the public.
We began by breaking down and enveloping the concepts of Social Space and ‘The Commons’ in relation to our brief, order to understand what they both mean. As Henri Lefebvre describes in The Production of Space, social space is “always, and simultaneously, both a field of action and a basis of action”. It interrelates “everything that is produced either by nature or society” – “living beings, things, objects, works, signs and symbols”.
As Silvia Federici and George Caffentzis express in Commons against and beyond Capitalism, “the commons are not only the means by which we share in an egalitarian manner the resources we produce, but a commitment to the creation of collective subjects, a commitment to fostering common interests in every aspect of our life”. Essentially our spaces have affected the way we relate to each other, and so affecting the way we make spaces, and on and on and on…
However for the purposes in this brief we are using the phrase ‘social space’ to emphasise our focus upon relationships and behaviours that happen within spaces and to de-emphasise the ‘built environment’. Also thinking about how spaces are mobile, how space follows and forms relations and doesn’t have to be fixed to a physical point or moment.
Beginning our own exploration into this concept, we were asked to choose three social spaces, assigning each site 2-3 words from the list on the paper guide. We needed to visit each site making some notes and images about each space, to then organise, compile and arrange these notes + images on A5 pieces of paper to discuss in the next class workshop. Featured below are my three A5 documents from my site visits.
For each of my A5 documents, I decided to chose three social spaces that I am familiar with, spaces that I visit frequently. The three social spaces I selected were the supermarket, a cafe and the dog park. All of these sites have completely different actions and interactions that go on within them which I was intrigued to compare and contrast within my A5 documents. The diversified components that make up each of these sites is so influent to the behaviours, meanings and atmospheres that it creates.
Design Workshop 2
23. 07. 20
Starting off todays session we began by all gathering our three collective A5 documents, organising and arranging them around the room in association to which word from the paper guide list best represents that particular chosen site. We were able to walk around the room observing and discussing about other peoples chosen sites and the words they associated to them. As a class we all had a collaborative discussion and reflection on our A5 documents, the various sites and words we all chose, as well as the importance of our documentations and how we choose to present or showcase certain elements of a space.
Following on from these discussions, we were introduced to Part One of this design project focused on Observing and Participating in social space. We are asked to choose a social space to observe/participate in, a place that we will return to repeatedly in the next few weeks. As reflected in the brief ‘space’ here is considered in an open sense – as situated across the spectrum of physical/non physical, permanent/ephemeral, fixed/mobile. The ‘social’ part of this term means that the space we choose should be one where people and their relations to one another are our main focus. In this space, we are asked to consider the full range of actions and interactions that occur, and to identify how they create and affect the feeling/ meaning/ understanding/ purpose of the space itself. As part of this practice we are asked to document our observations/participation in a range of different ways, considering how written notes, video, sound, interviews, diagrams, photos, collages, and/or notated drawings might differently express the relations we have seen/felt/heard. By the end of this part we would have made and accumulated 50 + documentations.
Once we were briefed on Part One of this design project, we were asked to consider what a ‘document’ is, how would we define something to be a ‘document’. In our table groups we all proposed our own opinions and meanings of what we deem a document to be, collaboratively debating over a synthesised definition. My groups final definition was varying types of evidence in a physical form, however our group found it really difficult to create one definition as a document can uphold such open ended meanings. As a class we all gathered our definitions to share what each table group considers a ‘document’ to be. Everyone had very different interpretations and definitions which was really interesting to hear and consider.
As part of this weeks task, we needed to choose our social space that we wish to observe/participate in + assigning to it a couple of the words from the paper guide list, visit the site and spend at least an hour there making notes of what we observe, write 100 words about our ‘gravitational pull’ to the space we have chosen, as well as read the text Species of Spaces and Other Pieces by Georges Perec.
I began by reading the text excerpt which I found incredibly interesting as it opened and broadened my perceptions towards observation and how to truely observe and participate in a space. Where Perec consistently works through ‘layers’ of meaning + context within a site and how to deeply unpack it through all differing angles and perspectives. My favourite quote from the text reads “you must set about it more slowly, almost stupidly. Force yourself to write down what is of no interest, what is most obvious, most common, most colourless”. I also decided to note down some key ideas in relation to observing a space in order to help me within my own observations.
The social space that I chose to observe/participate in is the Monte Cecilia Dog Park, a social space that I visit frequently, a place that represents routine and regularity for me. The actions and interactions that occur within this social space, as well as the different people (and non people) that go there are extremely different to any other social space I visit, which is why I am very intrigued to further observe, participate, explore and document this exisiting site. Over the weekend I visited this social space twice spending over an hour there, each time noting down my observations both whilst at present at the site and from memory. Featured below are my Observational Notes of the Monte Cecilia Dog Park, a list of things I observe within the space.
Reflecting on my observational notes of the site, I proceeded to write about my ‘gravitational pull’ towards the space, beginning to consider and gather my thoughts surrounding ‘why did I choose the space I have?’ and ‘what is the connection for me?’ Written below is my 100 word reflection about my ‘gravitational pull’ towards the Monte Cecilia Dog Park as being my chosen social space.
Design Workshop 3
28. 07. 20
In todays class we began by having a collaborative class discussion around Georges Perec’s text, talking over our various impressions, responses and meanings provoked within the piece of writing and what we each took away from it. We also as a class read an excerpt from Jenny Odell’s book How to do Nothing, that speaks about how lists can function well at the beginning of ‘listening’, but how after a while the concrete categories of a list can turn fuzzy, and that when this happens we are immersed into the site, into ‘context’. Following on from this we were shown Pierre Huyghe’s project Streamside Day, a work which follows a path through interest, site and event.
As a continuation from these discussions, we were introduced to the concept of Intuitive Mapping and how to create a ‘visual map’ of how we see our relationship to our chosen social space. We are to construct a drawing that positions our world of contexts in relation to the attributes of our social space and the language we have used to assess it. Use the map to build a visual connection between yourself and your chosen social space. How can you draw this so that others can understand how and why the social space (and the actions that took place within it) were meaningful to you in particular?
As part of prepping, planning and gathering my thoughts, ideas and observations of my chosen social space, I wrote out a ‘language focused’ mind map exploring all the different aspects of the site that I am either interested in, connect with, associated too or deem important. Elements of the park that hold purpose and meaning both for me personally and in relation to the actions and interactions that take place there.
Once I had brainstormed out all my ideas and connections relevant to my chosen social space, I constructed my intuitive map using selective language from my initial mind map and observational notes. As the main visual for my intuitive map I wanted to portray a landscape drawing of the park, showcasing its vast, open fields and greenery, along with the main actions that occur within this social space, an interaction between both people and dogs.
As part of further development and by using our intuitive map as a guide, we are to begin establishing a written statement that locates ourselves in relation to our social space, as well as where we are and where our practice is sitting in relation to our site and the contexts/ideas that we have identified within it. Within my written statement I want to identify the gravitational pull of my chosen space, exploring why did I choose the space I have and what is the connection for me? Featured below is the first iteration of my explorative written statement about my chosen social space.
Written Statement (First Iteration)
The Monte Cecilia Dog Park, an open, outdoor communal space that holds considerable routine and regularity, one that gets frequently visited by many common park goers. The main purposeful reason we visit this social space so often is due to our golden retriever puppy Tess, a dog that has a lot of energy and needs to be well exercised daily. Ever since she has come into our lives, visiting this specific dog park has become a habitual practice.
For this particular type of shared space, I was intrigued by the behaviours, interactions and movement patterns that transpire between both humans and dogs, exploring how they utilise, occupy and assemble within the park environment. An exploration and observation of the erratic, transitory movement that occurs within this communal space. Understanding how the intrinsic behaviours of humans and dogs are inherently very distinct, therefore influencing how they choose to associate themselves within the park. I am fascinated by these varied behaviours/actions, with dogs being the intermediate point of connection in which interaction occurs. How dogs are influences in determining the way people socialise together and the kind of relation they have to one another at the park.
Yet I begin to question what the park would be like if there were no dogs present? Considering what dogs bring to this particular social space and how it would be impacted and changed if they were removed from this setting. How would human behaviours and interaction be affected? Would we still choose to interact with people or instead be fully independent?
Design Workshop 4
30. 07. 20
Starting off todays session we began by having a table group discussion, sharing our intuitive maps and written statements with each other. It was really interesting to see how we each differently illustrated our social spaces and what particular aspects of them we were drawn, connected too or interested in. The maps were a real indication and helpful method to expressing and understanding each others social spaces and our individual observations of them. The written statements were also a great reflection of our personal ‘gravitational pulls’ to our chosen social space and the kind of relation or connection we each had established to it. As a whole class we were then introduced to two different works by Rirkrit Tiravanija, one titled Untitled (Free) an exhibition created in 1992 and the other titled The Map of the Land of Feeling, 9m long prints created from 2008-2011. Getting to see some differential ways an artist creates documentation and why they choose to use certain methods and techniques to portray their ideas, findings or interests is extremely interesting. The way we choose to document our work, its materiality, layout and other considered visual features, are all very important factors into how someone views, understands and interprets your work.
As part of this design workshop, we were asked to produce a series of ‘material sketches’ based from words extracted from our intuitive map and writing. Firstly we had to select 12 words from our intuitive map and written statement, choosing words that we feel might be key for our site. Once we had established our 12 words, we had to seperate them onto 12 different cards, dealing our cards into 6 pairs to create two word relationships. Using these two word relationships we then we asked to make small drawings/collages/models/sculptures that think through the word pairing materially in relation to what we had observed in our site. While creating these models we gave ourself a time limit in order to efficiently create ‘sketches’ without over thinking it, to instead just be creative and experimental.
The 12 words I selected for my chosen site were socialisation, assembling, rewarding, wellbeing, active, occupying, hidden sanctuary, playful, mindful, routine, invigorating and interaction/connection. Featured below are my six model sketches and their associated two word relationship.
Creating these ‘sketches’ through a quick, efficient iterative process was a great way to be experimental with my four materials. All the models were constructed from materials either relevant or reflective of my chosen site. The materials I used were dog disposable bags, wire, leaves and malleable metal. For each two word relationship I wanted to explore their connections and meanings through utilising these materials in multiple different ways. Each model explores its relative two word relationship through my four chosen materials. This activity was a really interesting method to thinking about our site observations in a new way. How can the way we have been thinking about and observing our social space be reflected through materiality, beginning to analyse the Monte Cecilia Park in a more expansive and conceptual way.
As part of preparation for nexts weeks design workshop, as well as beginning to think about the different kinds of documents I will produce relevant to my chosen site, I started writing down possible ideas for further exploration of my site. What key observations did I make whilst visiting my site multiple times? What did I notice that was interesting or intriguing, particularly in relation to behavioural interaction, social connection and movement within the space.
Design Workshop 5
04. 08. 20
In todays class we began by having a collaborative class discussion around the works Maintenance Work by Mierle Laderman Ukeles, American Lawn by Diller Scofidio + Renfro and Palisade by Fiona Jack. All these works explored and expressed documentation in such differential, multi media formats. Documentation can be employed in such extensive, open ended ways where the creative possibilities are limitless. Through my own documentation I wish to also explore a variety of documents, through not only their contextual or informative details but through their materiality and composition outcomes.
As a class we also conversed over what makes for a useful and insightful critique, and how might we define the parameters of critique so that our feedback (both which we give and receive) is directed towards what the brief is asking us. Critiques are a great way to not only showcase our own individual work with others to receive feedback but also to see others work and share findings, insights and creative methods/techniques. It is such a beneficial way for us as designers to grow our knowledge, learn from each other and gain confidence in what we produce and create.
Following on from this class discussion, we were then arranged into various groups where we were each asked to share our chosen social space, any interesting observations made and any documentation of that space we had so far produced. Within my group we each went around the table explaining our social spaces and what observations we had made, followed by a collaborative group feedback discussion of possible further explorations that we could each look into in relation to our site. My group had some really interesting insights and perspectives towards my social space and different aspects I could consider investigating into. Everyone in the group was really intrigued and interested in my observations on behaviours and the various interactions within the space, both between humans and dogs, so they all highly encouraged me to progress forward and dive deeper into these observations. Getting to discuss our ideas in smaller groups was really beneficial, to not only help others with their ideas but to get new opinions and inputs on our own individual work. Overall from this exercise I was able to generate new explorative outlooks towards my site, ones which I had not yet concentrated on or even considered.
After todays session I went home and began planning out all the diverse approaches of documentation methods I could explore that would best reflect my observations, interests and connection to Monte Cecilia Park. I had an abundance of ideas with some being generated whilst I was at the site and others from feedback discussions and peer reflection. Whilst designing and developing these documentations, for further guidance particularly in relation to innovative ways of showcasing my documents, I utilised the class Areena Channel as there were so many helpful examples of how you could creatively approach the meaning of ‘documentation’. I was mainly interested in how each artist combined imagery such as sketches, drawings or photography with text to create a ‘document’ that was not only visually engaging but also insightful and perceptive. Shown below is my ‘documentation ideas page’, a place where I could write down or note any thoughts or ideas of ways of documenting my site. As I had so many ideas floating around in my head I needed to jot them all down. This list I kept on adding to whenever I contemplated a new idea or concept.
As I began developing and creating a range of documentation, my explorative ideas towards the site were becoming more purposeful as I started to clarify which aspects of the social space I was fully interested in and intrigued by based on my previous observations and research. Due to this I reflected back over my exisiting written statement and proceeded to iterate, develop and refine my statement. By establishing my main ‘gravitational pull’ to the site, this allowed for the creation and development of my documents to be much more meaningful, as they were a direct reflection of my statement and both the words and documents could complement each other. Featured below is my current written statement.
Design Workshop 6
06. 08. 20
For todays design workshop we used the knowledge we learnt on Tuesday surrounding what makes for a useful and insightful critique to guide us in giving written feedback to each others selective documents. We all carefully positioned our documents out on the table, walking around the room viewing each others work and writing feedback notes. It was really interesting to see everyone else’s work and how broadly diverse all of our documentation approaches were, along with our variations in social spaces chosen. For my collected documents I chose to display some observational notes/entries, movement patterns, models, photographs, maps and abstract drawings, all a study of Monte Cecilia Park. Once we had viewed everyones documents and written some feedback, we headed back to our tables and began to look over the responses and critiques about our individual work. Featured below are all the feedback notes I received.
Getting to see a minor glimpse into each of our individual documentation series was extremely beneficial as it enabled us to learn from each other, sparking new insights, methods, techniques and practices that we could employ within our own documents. Overall all the feedback I received was really positive and encouraging where people were really fascinated and interested in my observations and the array of documentation I was producing. I also obtained valuable, constructive feedback for possible ideas and further explorations that I could make within my documents. Some of the feedback I received that I will take into consideration or wish to implement and further develop or employ within my documentations are – Considering implementing something raw from the site (would add a good contrast against the ‘refinedness’ of my other documents – Further exploring my own dog and her behaviours whilst at the park – How do the dogs socialise? As they are so different to humans yet they are still given a space which is purposefully created for them to socialise – Exploring the relationships between dogs and their owners, as well as the interactions between different owners – Imagining from a dogs perspective (POV) as well as including more written ideas. This kind of feedback was so incredibly helpful as it allowed me to develop documents that were extensive and explored other aspects of the site that I hadn’t yet considered. Doing this activity in class was not only a useful way to gain insightful feedback from others but to also practice giving feedback to others and the different types of comments to make to ensure the critique is helpful to them and their work.
Before concluding todays session, we were asked about what type of space would be most appropriate for our individual presentations of work. What specific location in the room (near the door, window etc), what type of space (on a tabletop, wall, floor etc) and even the approximate dimensions of space needed for our work. It is important that we consider not only the positioning and layout of our documents in relation to each other but also to the studio space itself, as these two components are influential to how your work is read and understood by others. For my documents I requested a tabletop near the window in order to gain natural light as I felt that would be an appropriate location in the studio space for my work to be displayed.
Gathering material from all my site visits, ones which consisted of making observations, writing notes, talking to people, accumulating materials and capturing numerous photographs of various features of the park, I continued exploring the site through consistent creation, iteration and experimentation of new documents in order to build up my collection. Featured below are a selection of photographs taken over many different visits to my chosen site. While at the park I wanted to make sure I was capturing its overall atmosphere, the interactions that occur there and any interesting observations relevant to either the dogs or humans occupying and assembling within the outdoor space. All these photos were inclusive within my documentations.
Design Workshop 7
11. 08. 20
For todays session we were asked to bring in our 50 + collated documents that are a representation, reflection and exploration of our chosen site. For Part One hand in of this design brief we all carefully laid out our 50 documents in our selected locations within the studio space. Once we had all arranged our documents accordingly, we proceeded to walk around the room writing feedback for different people within smaller groups. Getting to observe and read everyones final 50 documentations with the array of approaches we all had to creating them and the methods and materiality we each used was so interesting and compelling to see. Even if some of us had similar social spaces we each established a different gravitational pull to the space and focused on such varied aspects of it which was incredibly fascinating. Along with how we each design, compose and create our documentations and the materials we employ are so diverse. Featured below is my final layout composition of all my documents, as well as up close, detailed aspects of some of my collated documents exploring Monte Cecilia Park.
From this critique session I received such positive, encouraging feedback surrounding my documentation, observations and insights. People were really interested in my social space and the different explorations I had made, along with my diverse range of multi media documents and materiality choices. Consistently throughout my feedback comments people were drawn to my work because of the coordination, display and consistency across my work, as well as the array of differing materiality and variety of media such as hand drawn, images, notes and physical objects “it brings a great interactive feel” which was really reassuring. From this critique I do however wish I arranged my documents so they were slightly more spread out, as a lot of them (especially ones apart of a series) were stacked on top of each other and heavily layered due to a lack of table space. This mean’t that some documents got a bit lost in the overcrowded table and therefore couldn’t fully be showcased properly. Shown below are all the feedback notes I received.
Following along from our Part One Hand In and Critique Session, we were then introduced into Part Two of this design project focused on Modulating an already exisiting social space.
Part Two: Modulating an already existing Social Space
We are asked to choose an already exisiting social space and intervene/interfere within it. This intervention/interference should modulate the space in some way, and be largely focussed on action, but might involve objects, ephemera, publications, frameworks. The intervention/interference of the space will be short term, one-off, or even momentary – it will happen but soon be gone. As part of this practice we are asked to propose 5 possible interventions/interferences of your chosen space, and then put 1 of those proposals into action. We must be able to describe how each proposal modulates/changes the space, identifying the contexts relevant to the space we have chosen. After we have interfered/intervened in our space, we will then create documentation that shows what was planned, what occurred, and what are some of the surrounding contexts of our intervention/interference. This documentation is a designed artefact that materially reflects some of the contextual and conceptual concerns that we have connected with our intervention/interference.
Design Workshop 9
18. 08. 20
Starting from this week, with the exclusion of Design Workshop 8, we transitioned back into online learning where all workshops and classes are to be taken directly at home. We began todays design workshop by discussing the brief and any variable expectations that may possibly change due to the existing circumstances. We talked over how the brief is essentially remaining the same by working towards our 5 proposals (with the possibility that our intervention may have to be speculative in nature, rather than enacted for the second half of Part Two’s brief). Shown below are some consideration and highlight notes taken from the session.
As part of this session, we were also introduced to the publication Working With What You’ve Got which given the current circumstances is extremely relevant and relatable. This publication thinks through ways to adapt our own creative practice to working at home and online, through various artists and designers own interpretations and personal experiences. We were asked ‘Can you identify someone in the document whose philosophy/methods of working/creative approach resonates with you?’ Once reading through this publication, the artist/musician Olivia Webb I fully identify with as she explains (with regards to her discipline and practice) “how without external timetables and with multiple other things taking up your time and energy, its important to be disciplined with your time and as best you can and to take control of your timetable. Identify the time of day that you work best (or works best for you), and mark this time out as ‘practice/making time’ – schedule it in your diary and keep this time sacred”. This approach works incredibly well for me too as I need to set aside distinct timeframes to complete tasks, otherwise I feel overwhelmed, unproductive or simply procrastinate to get started and be dedicated towards what I’m doing. One tip she describes is to leave something unfinished at the end of each day, in order to carry your momentum through from day to day and get your body/brain/heart/soul back into work each day. She also explains how to a perfectionist like herself, this would seem counter-intuitive as she loves to tick stuff off and finish things (which I completely connect with), yet it works so well for her so I’m going to try adopt this tip. She also reiterates the importance of non-related ‘practice’ things to make sure you incorporate into your routine such as exercise, meals, family, breaks, down time and sleep – all things that are extremely important as we need to look after ourselves properly during this time.
We finished off the session by talking about making inventories of what we have around us that can help in making, thinking, designing etc. We are to make a ‘list’ of what we have available to us that we can use to make, think, experiment, draw, construct, note down etc – thinking about materials, methods, processes, time, space and where they might be found, being exhaustive and imaginative. Shown below is my ‘list’ of possible explorative inventories that I have at reach.
For my inventory list, I decided to note down every spatial environment and elements of the house that I have available to me at this current moment. As my site is located outdoors, utilising the various aspects of nature, the garden and the external streets could be really beneficial towards progressively exploring and deepening my understanding of the site and what it obtains. Spaces such as my bedroom, the kitchen and communal living spaces also offer a range of materials, tools and resources at my disposal which I can consider adopting within my practice in a multitude of differing creative ways, depending on the kind of exploration I am undertaking.
Design Workshop 10
20. 08. 20
We began todays design session by all sharing our inventory ‘lists’ that contain a range of materials, methods, processes and spaces in which we all have available to us. We established one collective document where we each added our lists, drawings, photographs and diagrams. As everyones current situation and the environments in which we are all situated is so different, this mean’t that the resources we each have accessible were both similar yet quite broadly varied. It was really interesting getting to see what others classified and focused on as their direct inventories and the different materials, processes and spaces they noted down. Some materials and methods that others jotted down I hadn’t even considered, so it was extremely helpful to get to build on my own inventory list and explorations through others imaginative ideas and suggestions. Following on from our class discussion and the collective gathering of our inventory lists, we had a context talk surrounding the concept of ‘rationing’, not only as a historical process but also a mindset that can be widely applied to design and design thinking. How can we use these parameters and restrictions to shape our outcomes in exciting, creative and imaginative ways?
Beginning to think about and consider the notion of proposals, what it means too ‘propose’ or ‘pitch’ an idea and the various approaches one could take to do so. As a starting introduction into proposals, we talked specifically about the differing proposal documents of some design precedents and how diverse their methodologies are. The two examples we looked at were the works of Christo and Jeanne-Claude whose focus is on sculptural interventions, and Allan Kaprow whose drawn to action by establishing ‘Happenings’. Featured below are my descriptive notes for each artist and their distinguished practice.
What is a Proposal?
In order to set out our proposals, there are two main questions to consider: What is it that you are proposing? (physically, actually) and why are you proposing it? (conceptually, contextually).
Along with these considerations, it is also important to ‘Lay out the Map’ and set our own parameters. When we set ourselves some specific parameters (guidelines, areas of interest, focusses) and then make these known within our written statements, the viewer will come to our project already ‘on the map’. That is, we have provided them with an ‘area’ within which to view/read/understand/experience/explore our work. We have also described some of the terrain (concepts or contexts) and plotted out some related locations (precedents).
It is important that I begin to identify some of the parameters for my own possible interventions by questioning: Did something come out of the documentation that might drive my proposals? Any hunches, intuitions, gravitational pulls? Has something emerged from the documentation of others, that might shift the direction of my project? Do I want to extend social activity that occurs, or introduce? Are there connections between these ideas and the materials in my inventory?
As further progression and development, I need to set myself some new parameters – where these can be some written text, notes, a diagram, a map, it just needs to be specific and detailed. In addition, I need to assemble some ‘like-minded’ projects/practices/practitioners/readings around my ‘hunches’.
Featured below are my ‘Set of Parameters’ in which I have developed based on the contexts, interests, focusses and gravitational pulls underpinning my work.
As my main contextual interests and focusses towards the site are primarily based on behaviour, interaction and movement patterns, I wanted to conduct some deeper, more analytical research into dog park behaviours and the kinds of actions that occur in that particular social space. One resource I analysed was written by The Association of Professional Dog Trainers whom explain ‘the good, the bad and the ugly‘ of the common dog park, its users and the behavioural actions that occur. Featured below are my notes annotating the main components of the article in which I am interested in.
Another research paper I looked into was written by Patrick Jackson, whom conducted a study examining how people engage with the dynamic environment of the dog park, along with human and animal interaction and relationships. Featured below are my notes annotating the main components of the article in which I am interested in.
Both these written texts explore and analyse the diverse array of actions, behaviours and interactions that take place, along with studying in greater depth the reasons behind these occurrences with regards to differential dog and human genetic behavioural manners. By having a better overall understanding of the behavioural actions that take place at the park and why these eventuate, it will allow me to formulate and compose an intervention or interference that is more direct, meaningful and thorough to the specific parameters I have chosen to draw attention too.
Design Workshop 11
25. 08. 20
Today in class we began by collectively discussing any questions we had in relation to the brief and our proposals. Some key prompters to consider in order to help develop and progress my proposals are: Have I reflected on how Part One went? My response should be based on What did I find out? What did I notice/observe? What did I find interesting? By beginning to further research into the Areena Channel and discover other practitioners work whom my own practice relates, responds or connects too in some way. Who is working with the ideas that I am choosing to look at or could instead help develop and expand on my own insights? Who is working in my field or neighbourhood? Researching into like minded practices to help me identify who is working in the same neighbourhood as me, not just visually but conceptually. Where I start to situate myself in relation to other practitioners.
Some other prompters, approaches and considerations too potentially unravel or explore within my proposed intervention/interference into my chosen social space are: How is intervention a form of action? How can I change, alter, cause something to happen – focusing on the social response it creates (causing some kind of thing to happen in the social realm). Considering the durational time in which a series of things happen, a short term, one off moment in time. What has potential to occur there? Where are the opportunities for me to intervene in the site in a small, minimal or subtle way? What do I want people (and even the dogs) to see, feel, experience in the space? How does it change their relation to the site and each other? Where I could also start to think about what happens when I work against the common grain of what occurs at the park and how it is occupied? What etiquettes govern how the park is used and what would it mean to question these rules?
We then proceeded to talk specifically about two differing design precedents and how diverse their approaches are too intervening or interfering within an exisiting site. Their interests within the space dictated the kind of inclusion or alteration they made to the site, minor, subtle changes that have both been done in such contrasting ways. The two examples we looked at were the works of Kate Newby whose interventions are ‘a light touch’ where she is in tune with the requirements of the site and gently modulates the things that happen there, and Layne Waerea whose work centres around being seen to break the rules of engagement. Featured below are my descriptive notes for each artist and their intervention approaches.
By ‘Setting my Parameters’ for my chosen social space, it made synthesising my thoughts with regards to developing my written statement much easier. From this I decided to elaborate and expand my written statement to express these new notions and considerations I am making towards the site. Shown below is the updated iteration of my written statement.
Design Workshop 12
27. 08. 20
For todays workshop we each had a scheduled one to one session with one of the lecturers to get some comments, feedback and guidance for our work so far. Some general comments made for everyone was to consider carefully how and why we would put our proposed interventions in our chosen sites. It is important that we are specific about what this intervention is responsive to within the particular place. For my own individual 1:1 some of the conceptual notions in which I should continue exploring and developing within my proposals is this idea of ‘redirecting movement’. Through my interventions how am I able to change, alter or influence this aspect of my social space? By considering and recognising the propensity of dogs and their owners and just how distinctive they can be within this environment. The inclinations of animals and people, how dogs perceive these natural instincts of definite social interaction compared to humans, whom are much more organised, methodical and thought through with their socialisation or behavioural decisions.
As part of evolving not only my conceptual thinking in relation to my social space but my own design practice, I conducted research to further investigate and discover further practitioners, situating myself and my notions towards the space in association with their fields of work. Researching into like minded precedents whom my conceptual work and practice relates, responds or identifies with in some way. The design precedents shown below I have selected to help develop and progress my own ideations and proposals of meaningful or intriguing interventions within Monte Cecilia Park.
Once I established the field of practitioners that I believe explore similar ideas and conceptual thinking to my work and the kinds of interventions I may propose, I began formulating my various ideas by creating a brainstorm to write them all out. While developing these proposal ideas, I wanted to focus on the behaviours, actions and movement patterns I observed while visiting the park, focusing on how my proposed interventions could change, alter or influence these aspects in some way, whether its through a physical intervention or a more action based one.
All the ideas explored within my mind map were the ones that I found to be most relevant and connected to my interests and insightful observations of Monte Cecilia Park. For my proposed interventions I wanted to chose five diverse ideas that all focused on a certain aspect of the site through differential approaches. The dominant ideas that I decided to progress with which I believe best change, alter or influence my chosen space is through the orchestration of a walking group, a collective gathering, both a water and treat driven experimental action and an interactive game.
As part of my documentation I wanted to also research and gather various precedents for design layout ideas of how I could compose my proposals. The three practitioners of Robert Smithson, Allan Kaprow and Claes Oldenburg, all who present their work very differently to each other, I want to utilise and combine their contrasting elements and ideas within my own documentation. All of these practitioners showcase their work in very uniquely different ways to one another. By implementing loose, iterative sketches within my work, bold handwritten text and details, along with photographs and informative drawings, I will be able to obtain effective, communicative and comprehensive documents for my proposed interventions.
Robert Smithson 
Allan 
Kaprow 
Claes 
Oldenburg
Once I had selectively chosen my five main proposal ideas and gathered some precedents and ideas for my documentation layouts, I started to sketch and plan out each of their individual documentations by considering the information that they should include as well as what they may potentially look like. It was important that each document showcased all the necessary information for the type of intervention it was proposing, such as the location, duration, material objects and audience or participants. Once I figured out all the key pieces of information that needed to be included, I then started thinking about any contextual photos, drawings, explorative sketches, descriptions or details I could additionally incorporate into the documentations. Shown below are the planning pages for each of my proposed interventions, the document layout and its differing inclusions.
For the development of my proposal documents, by establishing a detailed plan of the design layout and each proposals inclusions, it made formulating and constructing the documentations much more thought through. While making the documents I made sure to revisit and utilise my written inventory list and all the tools and materials I have available to me at home, such as various papers, drawing equipment and craft kits. Featured below are my five completed documents for my proposed interventions into Monte Cecilia Park.
Design Workshop 13
01. 09. 20
For todays design workshop we had a collective class feedback session where we each posted our five proposal documents and iterative written statements into a shared document. Once we had all put our proposals onto the document, we then proceeded to write and give each other feedback and comments surrounding our individual work which was very helpful to hear others understandings of and suggestions for your own work. Getting to read and understand others work was also so beneficial and insightful to see as we are all producing such unique work distinctive to our own chosen social spaces. Everyones proposed interventions are so creative and personal to their associations, connections and observations of their social spaces.
The feedback I received was really helpful as they were asking explorative questions that I could consider investigating further within my work. Where they were wondering if the particular characteristics of the park could be investigated further such as landmarks that the dogs or owners gravitate towards and why this might be. I also received feedback about my ‘Connection’ proposal and how the walk would be interesting in light of the history of the park, creating maps that highlight key areas or interest on the walk. What would a dog eye view of the park be like and how would this be different from a person – could there be two different types of maps? All of these suggestions are really thought provoking, where I can use these to help decide which proposed intervention I will proceed forwards with.
Within this lesson, we were also introduced to the next part of the brief which is surrounding the documentation of our intervention. As part of this documentation we need to include our 300 word written statement as well as visual material related to our intervention. We all discussed specific aspects in which we must include in our images/writing as well as aspects that we might choose to include. It is also important that we think about which aspects and requirements will be covered by our writing and which will be covered through visual material. Our document of our selected proposed intervention must be a ‘designed artefact’ such as a pamphlet, guide, calendar, postcard, map etc. It is expected that this designed artefact materially reflects some of the contextual and conceptual concerns that we have connected with our intervention.
As apart of my proposal documentations I also wanted to revisit, iterate and develop my written statement to make sure it is clearly relevant to the work showcased within my proposals. It is also important to make sure it is up to date as my overall ideas are continuously progressing and evolving throughout this creative process. Shown below is my current written statement.
For each of my proposal documents I also wanted to add a written description and outline of the relevant conceptual and contextual information of my intervention ideas, just to ensure that each idea is clarified and easily understandable of its intentions, influences and purpose. Featured below is the final documentations and written explanations of my five proposed interventions. The documents below were also accompanied by my written statement displayed above.
Design Workshop 14
03. 09. 20
For todays session, as we were due to hand in our five proposals and current iteration of our written statement, we had scheduled 1:1’s as a quick opportunity to show our progress and the ideas in which we are thinking about with regards to our social spaces. In my 1:1 we briefly discussed about the importance of documentation, particular for the next part of this investigative development as by having care and a designerly eye for how it is documented will allow our work to be more comprehensive and effectively communicated. We then proceeded to talk about my social space and how it has an abundance of historic value such as the trees, walkways, buildings. Where I could start to think about why this park? What makes this park different, unique or special in some way compared to other parks? Where I could research into the nature of the trees and the past of the exisiting social space. One of my proposed interventions was to organise a walking group – playing on this idea to ‘construct a narrative through walking’, almost establishing a combination of both real and a ‘made up’ history. Thinking about what a walk would be like narrated through a dogs perspective (what elements of the park they engage with), and how this would differ to a human. Having the 1:1 discussion was really beneficial as it helped me to begin to think about which proposal ideas I should consider implementing and moving forward with, as well as potential ways it could be documented.
By taking on all my investigative observations, insights and beneficial feedback, I decided to select my Proposed Intervention One Idea ‘Connection’ to be my chosen intervention for my social space Monte Cecilia Park. This intervention idea I was really interested in exploring further, particularly in relation to how it can be documented through a designed artefact. This proposal idea was highlighted and heavily discussed within my feedback sessions as it allows for plenty more exploration into my chosen site. Where through this walk a can develop and construct a narrative through walking, for both dogs and humans and document their various encounters along with specific important aspects of the park. It also began to create some insightful questions and considerations in which I would be able to explore further and uncover through this certain intervention type. This proposed intervention allows for connection between people, dogs and the beautiful natural environment of the park itself, all features of Monte Cecilia that I wish to showcase within my designed documentation.
Once I had chosen which intervention I wished to proceed forward with, I began thinking about what type of ‘designed artefact’ I could create, as a means to visually represent and reflect the contextual and conceptual concerns relevant to my social space and what aspects of it I have been exploring. As my selected intervention is a composed walking route, I decided to document it in a map format as it will allow me to include all the necessary information within a clear, coherent layout that is both detailed and relevant to what I have been exploring. It is important that both my writing and visuals include and explore both explanative and contextual information about my intervention, as well as uphold a more conceptual analysis.
As a means of preparing and planning for my documentation and ‘designed artefact’, I jotted down all the inclusions in which my writing and visuals needed to have. Particularly they needed to include information surrounding what my intervention was and its details, as well as contexts and conceptual information relevant to my intervention and social space.
By utilising the documentation and design layout of a map, it will enable me to highlight all the relevant components of the park, especially in relation to my chosen intervention of a walking group where I can map out various pathways, all while showcasing the parks features. For my designed artefact, I decided to create two distinct maps one narrated through a dogs perspective highlighting their key areas of interest and engagement on the walk, as well as one narrated through a humans perspective. Through this I would be able to clearly indicate both a dogs connection and association to the park as well as a humans, all through the intervention of a proposed walking group.
Over the mid semester break my selected proposed intervention was put into motion on the 16th of September as it was an appropriate day to do so and the weather was permitting. The walk lasted around an hour, however the walk itself was reasonably quick pace, the stopping, chatting, encounters and dog distractions extended the timeframe. Shown below are some photographs I captured of the intervention taking place at Monte Cecilia Park.
Once the intervention had taken place, I proceeded to plan out what will be included within each map and what I wanted my designed artefact to show and represent about not only my intervention but my social space. Both maps will portray key areas of interest and engagement (what aspects of the park they would encounter or choose to encounter on their walk), two perspectives that are very different and contrasting for humans and dogs. The ‘human’ focused map will include more factual information relevant to the sites rich historic value such as its stunning, heritage building and array of tree species present. These features of the park are a major part to what makes it so special, unique and pleasant to visit and be apart of. The ‘dog’ focused map will include more perspective viewpoints and areas of the park in which they heavily engage with, as well as explorative investigative studies of their movement patterns whilst participating in the intervention walk. It was also important that I planned out and considered the visuality of each map as this plays into not only how my work will be showcased but how it will be read and understood. However I knew I wanted to maintain similar aesthetics to my proposal documents so that they all incorporated well together.
I drew up at plan writing down all the visual elements of my designed artefact that I need to consider, its tactile nature, use of colour, materiality, layout and organisation. By establishing my two maps visual design it will allow me to better organise all the information that I wish to include and arrange within my map composition. Featured below is a layout drawn up plan of my two designed maps.
Once I had established a clear and concise plan, it made for the creation of my designed artefacts to be much more easier, purposeful and straightforward where I know what is going to be incorporated into each map. Featured below are my designed artefact maps of my intervention at Monte Cecilia Park.
Design Workshop 15
24. 09. 20
From todays class we were now able to head back into the design studio for in person design workshops. Before beginning our Part Two Hand In and Critique Session, we were firstly introduced into the final part, Part Three of this design project focused on Staking our ground in relation to ‘The Commons’.
Part Three: Staking your ground in relation to ‘The Commons’
Calling, Protesting, Murmuring, Staking, Claiming, Proclaiming, Underlining, Tendering, Announcing, Seeking
Now that we have documented our social space and created an action within it, we need to reflect upon what we have learnt about ‘The Commons’ and our role as a spatial designer within it. Part three invites us to investigate how your research findings might assist you in reprogramming/modulating/changing other social spaces similar to your own. By doing this you will develop your understandings of how social spaces can be understood and how they can be enhanced, changed, modulated, and/or affected through designed interventions.
We have been asked to produce a Manifesto that positions us as a designer, relative to The Commons and the social space that is of interest to us. Firstly we need to reflect on where we have been so far by reflecting upon our engagement with each part of the brief and the opportunities we see to develop our thinking and making in the studio paper. Drawing on our work from Part One and Two, we are asked to produce a Manifesto. Our manifesto will be our contribution to ‘The Commons’, in that it should consider its possible impact beyond the site we have been working with. You have moved from observation of space (part one), to localised intervention (part two). In Part Three you will be consolidating this process with a document that can guide yourself and others in the alteration/modulation/re-programming of similar spaces, and which outlines why you are motivated to do so. This manifesto will be a document that considers the consequences of how you have altered/modulated/re-programmed the space in Part Two, how your thinking might be expanded to affect other social spaces like it, and why you as a designer want to do that. It is expected that your Manifesto will be a Designed Artefact that materially reflects some of the contextual and conceptual concerns that you have connected with your thinking around social spaces and ‘The Commons’.
Continuing with this session we were asked to bring in our five proposal documents for our different intervention ideas, our final designed artefact that showcase the contextual and conceptual concerns of our chosen intervention, as well as our written statement. For Part Two hand in of this design brief we all carefully laid out our documents and artefacts on the tables within the studio space. Once we had all displayed our artefacts accordingly, we proceeded to walk around the room writing feedback for five different peoples work. Getting to observe, read and understand everyones final designed artefacts with the array of approaches we all had to composing them and the methods, designs, layouts and materiality we each used was so interesting to see. It was really fascinating to see, based on our Part One documentations of our social spaces, how we each have developed our initial ideas and explored them further through our interventions. Along with how we each design, compose and create our designed artefacts and the various materials and compositions we employ and how they are so diverse. Featured below is my final layout of my designed artefact maps.
From this critique session I received such positive, encouraging feedback surrounding my designed artefacts and intervention action, as well as my overall ideas and insights into my chosen social space Monte Cecilia Park. People really liked the aesthetic, layout and design of my artefact maps and the different explorations I made within each one. Consistently throughout my feedback comments people expressed how my artefact was relative, well presented and easily clear to understand both my intervention and conceptual ideas surrounding my social space. One particular comment mentioned how it would look if the dog edition map layout was a bit more informal, to help convey the differences in human and dog behaviour. This design idea I did try to implement through layout, typography and information, however I should have developed a greater contrast between the two maps, in order to really express and highlight their variances. For the next part of this brief and for my final designed artefacts, I wish to really emphasise what I have learnt about dog/human behaviours through how I next choose to present my final findings and insights. Shown below are all the feedback notes I received.
Design Workshop 16
29. 09. 20
In todays design workshop, we began the session by discussing and revisiting this notion of a ‘manifesto’ and all the various aspects that go into creating and developing one, from the details to the visual layout and tone of voice within the text. In order to begin considering the development of our own manifesto, it is important that I explore, research and analyse into a range of manifestos exemplars as it will allow me to review and read into how I may wish to construct and compose my own. In class we had the opportunity to view an archive of manifestos and analyse a selection of ten of our favourites, whether we were drawn to its tone of writing, layout, design, fonts, ideas or simply any aspect of it that captured our attention and engagement. Featured below are the array of different manifestos that I was drawn too in some way and the reason for it.
An Archive of Manifestos
I was drawn to the design layout and composition of this particular manifesto. Its contrasting, yet striking word placement of utilising a ‘stamp like’ bold text against the written manifesto itself, it gives off an authentic, hand crafted appearance that I find really captivating and attention grabbing. It makes the writing (title) stand out more. I was also drawn to the overlapping and layering of text where the sporadic tiling of letters have been placed directly overtop of the text, making it slightly more difficult and intricate to read.
I was drawn to the simplistic, symmetrical layout of the manifesto text and how the title placement has been laid directly on top of the writing. The prominent text captures your attention and draws you into reading the details that lie in amongst the large, semi visible letters. The tone of this manifesto is narrative yet poetic with its choice of language, it engages the viewer and makes you want to keep reading more.
I was immediately drawn to the design and overall layout of this manifesto, how it has been written through various statements all composed in a list format with different sized, bold fonts. The use of these fonts and their contrasting sizes really captures your attention, as it is easy to read and understand what the overall message is. The repetition at the beginning of each statement also reinforces the intent of this manifesto.
This manifesto utilises text and imagery by incorporating both design aspects. The manifesto is divided into two clear sections, with one side containing the written manifesto and the other side containing a selection of composed images and diagrams. This layout is extremely clear and easily understandable as the photographs support what is being discussed in the text.
The compositional layout of this manifesto I was particularly drawn too as one side contains hand written text that appears smudged and is difficult to read, and the other contains the written manifesto organised into distinctive paragraphs. The tone of the manifesto is poetic meaning each statement easily flows into the next. The use of the hand written text element captured my attention to this manifesto as it made me want to read into what it was about and try to discover the hidden messages within the ‘messy’ writing.
For this manifesto in particular I was immediately drawn to it because of the sporadic, hand drawn scribbles and sketches placed overtop of the writing. The thick, black ink contrasted against the brown paper makes the manifesto document stand out completely. The layered sketches make the text more difficult and intricate to read, which I was really intrigued by, it made me want to keep reading down the composed list. The layout has been designed into two components, each mirrored against each other to emphasise the two distinctive characters: The Reader and The Author. This layout along with the bullet point format made the manifesto easily understandable and most influential to the viewer.
I was drawn to the simplistic layout of the manifesto text and how the title placement has been laid directly on top of the writing. The prominent text captures your attention and draws you into reading the details that lie in between the large, designed title. The font choices for this manifesto are representative of what is being reflected in the writing itself, which is especially visible in the title ‘The Old Aesthetic’.
The entire layout of this manifesto directly captured my attention as the consistent black highlights layered on top of the text make you want to read into what is being discussed. It makes you want to see what words are left visible and the relation they have to one another. The author has decided to hide and cover certain words in order to emphasise the ones that remain. I particularly love how the highlights appear hand drawn as the lines aren’t crisp or straight, they are slightly wobbly and bendy in shape. Also the simple, textured shapes layered in the background add to the overall design of the document making the writing stand out that much more.
This manifesto document incorporates both hand written and printed elements. I love how it has utilised a contrast between components of the manifesto writing to be hand written, a raw hand crafted appearance against text that appears to be stamped onto the page, as if it has been directly printed from an old dictionary book. Each element has been repeated three times down the page in a juxtaposed order. This kind of variance in text font, size and materiality appearance really captured my attention.
The design and layout of this manifesto is very minimal with text, as the title is spread across two thirds of the page with the writing being compacted towards the top of the page. The easy to read manifesto writing was extremely captivating, the direct yet questionative, straight to the point tone engages the reader from start to finish. I love how the text (and layout) isn’t overwhelming as I could understand exactly what was being discussed. It made the writing more influential, memorable and thought provoking.
For this manifesto in particular, I was immediately drawn to it because of its bold use of text placement, font choice, vibrant contrasting colours and its use of tone. This manifesto utilises a strong sequence of numbered statements all beginning in the same way. Its tone is instructional, direct and straight to the point, as each sentence is clear and concise about what it is trying to say. The layout of the page and positioning of the text allows your eye to move across the page reading down along each line. I love the precise font choice as well as capital letters as it captures and demands your attention to be read.
For my own manifesto document, two of the main important elements to consider are the tone and layout, as well as the relationship and connection between the two. These aspects will not only impact the visual design and layout of my document but also how it is read, understood and the overall intention of it. I decided to note down a range of different types of approaches I could have towards both the Tone and the Layout of my manifesto document.
As part of my own manifesto progression and development, I began writing down key reflection notes based off my observations, intervention and insights made from Parts One and Two. These reflections allowed me to start thinking about which aspects I could explore further, what insights could I implement into my manifesto writing and ultimately how I wish to ‘stake my ground in relation to The Commons’.
As part of this reflection process, along with all the manifesto research I had previously conducted, it gave me greater confidence to start noting down and generating ideas for my own manifesto document, as I had investigated into a range of approaches for how it could be created. By collecting and analysing an archive of manifestos it has been extremely beneficial towards helping me establish the kind of approach to take, both in relation to the structure and tone of my writing but also through its overall design layout.
Design Workshop 17
01. 10. 20
For todays design workshop we had a collaborative class sharing session where we laid out any manifesto documents we have in progression. These documents could be any beginning developments we have made towards constructing our own manifestos, such as the consideration of tone and design layout. Getting to observe a range of developing manifesto documentations was really interesting and beneficial to see, as you could begin to understand the array of different approaches people were taking through both their writing and layout. In this workshop we also had a group discussion about the importance of comprehensively understanding what a manifesto is by constructing curiosity driven field research. As part of this field research, it is important to find good precedents, analyse their work, learn from them and then apply what I learn’t within my own manifesto document. It is important that I create iterations by utilising various forms of making through playing around with different tones and layouts of manifestos.
Today we also received some formative feedback for Part Two of our design brief. Overall my feedback was really positive however it expressed how there is an opportunity to refine particular aspects of my documentation artefacts further. To do this I need to have more intentional consideration of images and materiality as well as refine the layout of my document. It is important that I give my ideas and images space to speak, as both my maps incorporate a lot of information, especially descriptive and explanatory writing paragraphs. In order to tweak, develop and refine my documentation artefacts I need to improve and alter these particular components by simplifying the layouts and making sure each piece of information featured on my artefacts is well considered and purposeful.
As part of refining my designed documentation artefacts, I wanted to conduct further research into other design precedents to help generate new design layout ideas along with the various approaches I could take. Featured below are some design precedents work that I was particularly drawn too, as they all utilise this ‘map’ composition document in such differing ways.
![Brian Yale. 1971. [no title]](https://spatialdesign904921432.files.wordpress.com/2020/10/screen-shot-2020-10-10-at-10.05.28-pm.png?w=857)
Brian Yale. 1971. [no title] 
Dennis Oppenheim. 1966. Directed Harvest
I was drawn to all these design precedents work because of their creative approaches to generating a ‘map’ document. They all incorporate a detailed, intricate and specific map highlighting key details relevant to the place they are representing. Each also utilises strong colour and materiality which is something I wish to continue highlighting and making use of within my own documentation artefact map. All the artists have included both a mixture of text and photography along with their map diagram, however they have all done so in very different ways. The map diagrams are the hero within each work, with the imagery and explanative writing there as supporting elements. The overall composition and layout of each work is unique to the qualities it is expressing. One is in a collage format where the images overlap each other onto the map, whereas the others are arranged in a more structured grid like format. For the new kind of artefact I am trying to create, and as I am wanting to refine and simply my layout I wish to employ this more clear and structured approach as it will allow my ideas to present best and have room to speak on the page.
Once I had found some new design precedents to help inform the kinds of approaches I could take to creating my iterated designed artefact, I began drafting out my various ideas of how this document could present. Firstly I wrote down some key reflection notes based from comments within my formative feedback. Then I proceeded to draw out and plan my new documentation artefacts, maintaining the features from my previous artefacts, just refining the layout, presentation and information density of the document. Featured below is my planning page sketching out my new ideas.
For my designed artefact maps, after reflecting through my feedback comments I have a strong idea about how I wanted these new documents to look and present. I wanted to still maintain the concept of a map, however this time developing it further into a topographic map format. In this format I would still establish one map document relative to humans and one to dogs. By changing to this type of layout, it will allow me to refine and clarify my insights, images, text and diagrams that I wish to include, reducing my information so that whats there is purposeful and has room to speak. For these maps I also knew that I wanted its aesthetic and visual look to be a combination between a refined, digital presentation and an organic, handcrafted appearance with some hand written elements. In terms of the paper stock I chose to utilise a more organic, natural appearing paper, one with a little more texture and grain as this suited and connected to the ‘natural qualities’ present within my social space. Featured below are my new developed, designed artefact maps of my intervention at Monte Cecilia Park.
While establishing an archive of manifestos as a way of developing my own manifesto document, I decided to research into the concept of Manifestos and ‘What makes a Good Manifesto’. There are ten traits of effective public declarations which are all important to consider when generating a manifesto document. This includes: Manifestos usually include a list of numbered tenets as it conveys a ‘sense of urgency and straight talk’, Manifestos exist to challenge and provoke, Manifestos are advertisements, Manifestos come in many forms expanding into every corner of the arts (and crafts) as well as academia, Manifestos are better very short than very long as the longer the manifesto the exponentially crazier and duller it seems to get, Manifestos are theatrical where performance is part of the manifestos materiality, Manifestos are fiction dressed as fact, Manifestos embrace paradox they are unstable texts in the extreme, Manifestos are always on the bleeding edge ‘make it new’, and finally Manifestos are magic (almost). As all these traits help to create a strong, influential and meaningful manifesto, it is important I take most if not all of them into account when creating my own manifesto document for my chosen social space.
This research was retrieved from Hanna, J. (June, 2014). Manifestos: A Manifesto. Retrieved from https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2014/06/manifestos-a-manifesto-the-10-things-all-manifestos-need/372135/
As part of my manifesto research, I decided to gather a selection of manifesto documents and design precedents to help inform my work and develop my overall understanding of how to purposefully compose and layout a manifesto document. It is important that the composition and layout of my manifesto document is meaningful and relevant towards what I am saying in the document/written text. Featured below are my sketch pages analysing an array of various manifesto documents that I was drawn too in some way.
Once I had gathered a collective archive of manifesto documents to help me in my own development, as well as overall understanding of a ‘manifesto’, I started to write some manifesto iterations using my insights made from my chosen social space Monte Cecilia Park.
This particular manifesto I created by drawing on my insights gathered from observational studies and analysis. I was thinking about what dogs bring and provide to a social space and how they are considered to be such an influential component. How dogs are influences in determining our association and/or experience in a space. In this manifesto I chose to highlight three key features of dogs behavioural actions: Dogs provoke interaction. Dogs initiate movement. Dogs generate joy. I wanted to express these insightful observations through a direct, structured and straight to the point tone with some questionative and narrative based aspects.
This particular manifesto I created with a ‘diary entry’ format and narrative based tone, exploring what we can learn from dogs in regards to and drawing from my own personal observations. Looking into human and animal simarlities and differences in a social space, and how this all stems from their natural, intrinsic behaviours. Asking questions of imagine what its like to observe something that isn’t you? Something thats not human? How does it drive or influence the way you see the world?
This particular manifesto I created by making a direct comparison between a dogs behaviour in a social space and a humans behaviour in a social space, all with regards to my observational reflections on Monte Cecilia Park. Recognising the propensity of both dogs and humans and how it inherently determines how they choose to behave, approach, occupy, influence and experience a socially driven space.
Design Workshop 18
06. 10. 20
During todays design workshop we were able to freely work on our manifesto documents, as well as discuss our work with the tutors and others. In this lesson my table group had a collaborative discussion with one of the tutors about our manifestos and the best way to manage our workloads. This chat was really helpful as we talked about some of the various approaches we can take when writing and developing our manifesto. I continued my progression towards constructing more manifestos by creating multiple iterations experimenting with different tones and text structure. I also wanted to test various ways of expressing my insights into my chosen social space and what elements of it I wish to highlight in my manifesto. What exactly do I wish to say in my manifesto? And how could it be applied to other social spaces? Using my research and analysed archive of manifestos I began to create more iterations of manifestos, playing around with tone, text structure and length. Featured below are the various manifestos I developed.
This particular manifesto I created by generating two lists of descriptive words, one relative to humans and the other relative to dogs. These words all reflect my insightful observations made at Monte Cecilia Park where I observed both dog and human behaviours.
All these manifestos I created again through drawing on my reflections and observations of my chosen social space. Where I was thinking about how to observe and learn from something thats not human, how we can learn from dogs and their approach to social spaces as well as how these insights can be applied to other social spaces in general. In all these manifestos approaches I wanted the tone of voice to be clear and direct, where the text itself is short, simple and minimal – the best way I felt to get across my statement within my manifesto.
Before beginning to play around with the design layouts and aesthetic details of my written manifestos, it is important that I take into consideration my font choices as they will have a deliberate impact on my entire manifesto documentation. The type of font I choose, the size and density of the font, as well as the placement of the text are all extremely important components to think about when creating my document. Some key pointers to keep in mind when making these decisions are if you want a ‘handwriting’ look or feel utilise your real handwriting as computer generated fonts do a generic and bland version of this style, use fancy or decorative display fonts accordingly as they are less comfortable to read over long pieces of writing, and fonts have a character so its important to be aware of this character and match it (or contradict it) with your text.
Through referring back to my previous manifesto research and archive collection, I started playing around with the compositional layout of each of my written manifestos, using my research as further guidance for the different kinds of ways I could do this. My archive of manifestos all employ a variety of approaches to creating a ‘Manifesto Document’ and how it can be arranged through paper stock, orientation, font choice, size, density, placement, imagery and a combination of hand drawn or written elements against digital ones. Featured below are an array of my diverse design layouts and iterations for each of my written manifestos.
As I started to reflect over all of my written manifestos, it was important that I considered the statement and message that I wished for my manifesto to portray, as this would essentially determine which of my manifesto iterations to proceed forward with. As all my insights stem from my detailed and intricate observations of dogs and humans, I wanted my manifesto to express how we can learn from these fascinating animals. How can we as humans learn from their approach to social spaces, with the ways they choose to function, occupy, encounter, interact and experience these kinds of environments. What have I noticed and learn’t from all my observational insights and intervention that humans can begin to consider within their own approaches. Based on these reflections, I decided to proceed forward with my sixth manifesto iteration titled ‘The Dog Approach’, as I felt that the direct and concise points discussed were relevant, impactful and held purpose to my overall understanding and reflection on dog/human behaviours and interactions, both with others and the space itself.
Once I had chosen the written text and title for my manifesto document, I began to play with iterative design layouts, referring back to my archive of manifestos, previous iterations and further research of various ways to lay out and arrange my page. As well as the layout of my manifesto it is important that I consider the font type, text size, its placement and line weight as these elements all contribute that how the manifesto will present and read. I also reflected through all my previous design iterations, selecting my favourite layouts and font choices to further experiment with. Featured below are my further iterations playing around with all these visual components.
Based on my manifesto research and initial design layouts, I knew I wanted the title ‘The Dog Approach’ to be a very prominent feature on my manifesto document, where it is the first thing you notice, drawing your eye into what it potentially implies or could mean. The written text itself I decided to place in the top left hand side of the document, where each statement is placed directly underneath each other in a list format. This made it really clear and easy to read, where each statement has room to speak and hold its place on the page. For the written text I selected a clear font with breathing space in between each letter. The calligraphy and visual appearance of my final font choice I felt was the perfect combination between structured and organic where there is some curve to the font but it still is extremely easy and comprehensible to read. For the positioning of the title I decided to arrange it along the side of the page, facing in towards the listed statements, in order to reinforce their presence as well as draw a connection between the two elements. However for the word ‘approach’ I wanted it to sit seperate down the bottom of the page. I played around with its positioning, yet for my final iteration I decided to flip its orientation, again facing towards those statement points. My font choice for the title I made multiple iterations experimenting with the comparison between a striking bold, heavy line weight font or a more lighter line weight font. For my final manifesto document I eventually decided on the lighter line weight font as it visually connected with the written text better, it wasn’t as juxtaposing or jarring, yet was still able to pop off the page and be attention grabbing. The size of the font title also allowed for this element to be striking on its own without having a thicker line weight. Featured below is my final design layout for my manifesto document.
In terms of my paper stock choice for my final printed manifesto document, I experimented with a couple choices, a natural looking, recycled paper and a higher quality, glossy finished paper. However once I printed the two options I chose to utilise the more organic, natural appearing paper, having a little more texture and grain from its recyclable materials. Overall this paper stock was much better suited overall to my social space, connecting to its array of natural qualities.
As preparation for presenting all my work generated in Part’s One, Two and Three, I went back through all my Part One documents to ensure they were all organised, coherent and presentation ready. For the final hand in I developed a carefully thought out, curated collection of my Part One documents, choosing the best, most relative and purposeful pieces to captivate my overall design concept and thought process. It was important that each document I chose to include within my final presentation was considered, where I selectively refined down to the most meaningful documents to articulate my ideas in both a visual and written format. As well as preparing for my presentation I decided to reflect back over my iterative design statement, developing and refining it to summarise and captivate the entirety of my design project, inclusive to all the progressive stages and aspects of my project. Shown below is my final written statement about my overall design project and ideas.
Design Workshop 19
27. 10. 20
For our final studio session this year we all presented our work relative to our individually chosen social spaces. We laid out and arranged a carefully curated selection of some of our Part One observation documents of our chosen social space, along with our Part Two designed artefacts, our Part Three manifesto document and written statement. Getting to see everyones final presentations was so incredible as there was such a diverse range of projects and social spaces. Everyone approached this design brief so uniquely and so personally to them and their own choices, ideas and interests as an establishing designer. It was especially interesting to see how everyones initial ideas had developed and evolved into their final design outcomes, getting an insight into their iterative, thought process throughout the entire semester. After we arranged our work we had some guest visitors come through and look over all of our design work. We had a collaborative class discussion, where the guest visitors gave us collective feedback comments and statements in response to what they saw, noticed and observed amongst all of our work. It was really engaging to hear what they had to say about our work, as their knowledge and insights into different aspects of our work and the design brief were incredibly interesting. Their general feedback comments to everyone were super uplifting and positive, as they really enjoyed the diverse range of projects and how differently we each approached this design brief through our chosen social spaces. They also noted how they way we curate and present our work is incredibly important, because as designers we want our work to be captivating and engaging visually yet also be distilled where we can clearly communicate our ideas in a refined way to only highlight the most important elements of our iterative work. These comments and feedback will be super important for me to learn from and continue thinking about in my future design work.
Featured below is my final presentation layout of all my explorative design work generated throughout the semester, all as a response to our overall design brief ‘Everybody in the Place’.
As a reflection on this entire iterative design process, I found this project incredibly interesting and compelling to engage with. This design brief ‘Everybody in the Place’ concentrated around exploring a social space through its actions and interactions, focused on understanding how spaces are created, altered, modulated, and interfered with when something happens. The concept that spaces are centred on relations and relationships, not only with other people but with the spaces themselves. This brief really broadened and developed my design thought process and perception towards spaces, as naturally I tend to be drawn towards aesthetics and the visual qualities in which a space possesses, however this brief allowed me to challenge and extend my conceptual design thoughts. Where I am now much more observant towards the actions, movements, behaviours and interactions that occur within social spaces. The ways in which space can create, develop or even alter social relationships and how as designers we are able to influence these actions or interactions within the ways we choose to construct, define, intervene or establish a spatial environment. Overall I thoroughly enjoyed this kind of iterative, ‘document’ focused design process, as well as the observations, developments, explorations and insights I generated in relation to my chosen social space Monte Cecilia Park. This new way of thinking and approach to social spaces will allow my future design work to be much more meaningful, and connective towards what actually occurs within a space, the relationships it upholds and how as a designer I am influencing it in some way.
Spatial Design 