ArchiCulture Cafe number SIX

The lecture given by Carroll Go-Sam of the Aboriginal Environments Research Centre outlined the kinds of concepts, issues and difficulties involved with designing and realising a Cultural Centre in Musgrave Park.
It was eye opening to me to realise the complexity of the difficulties which can arise when dealing with a particular cultural group. Of course there are obstacles to tackle when working with any design brief but the issues and problems that were detailed by Carroll seemed a bit nightmarish to me. Having said this, I would have relished working on such a rich and complex design challenge. Collaboration with the Indigenous people as well as having to consult with the other cultural groups on the site would be a very interesting process and would provide an amount of frustration. However, I tend to think that solving the causes of this frustration would result in a rewarding outcome. The fact that you would have to solve the causes before the building could be built is being put aside for this reflection.
Also dealing with a committee of Indigenous people who are not the traditional owners of the site would mean that the set of boundaries, requirements and things to consider would be completely different to if you were dealing with the traditional owners. It strikes me as odd that the committee wouldn't have any traditional owners and if this was the case, then would that mean that the traditional owners would be opposed to anything built on the site?
This complexly woven fabric of difficulties and issues makes me consider the question of the interdependent relationship between architecture and culture. The amount of boundaries and concepts to adhere to with regard to this site and design brief seems ostensibly to feed only one side of the relationship - the cultural group has already been defined by centuries of existence and is now defining this architectural outcome, without informing further the definition of the cultural group. However, as a result of digging deeper in my brain, the thought arose that the Indigenous peoples rely on gathering and family groups as a main defining concept and that the site would help to redefine the way these gatherings and family groups come together in contemporary times.
Which leads me on to a concept presented in the reading Contested Sites of Identity and the Cult of the New by Kylie Message. The "juggling of tradition and modernity" makes me think of this idea of bringing traditional practices to a contemporary setting. In addition to this similarity, I noticed that the Centre Culturel Tjibaou draws on cultural aspects to inform its materials and conceptual framework. This makes me think of the question if the architectural result has been designed by persons outside the cultural group, can it really be considered architecture from that particular cultural group?
The other aspect of the reading I found of note was the description of Jean-Marie Tjibaou's cultural philosophy. His ideas that the Kanak people should not become "black Frenchmen" but instead define themselves seperately from the French - holding a 'self-confident identity rooted in culture and history'. To me it seems that these ideas have a parallel nature to the Australian Indigenous peoples and therefore the architecture which arises from this particular cultural group (and any person of European descent who wishes to design for the Indigenous people) would form part of the continuous redefinition of contemporary Indigenous peoples.

Archi Culture Cafe NUMBER FIVE

Week Four was skipped due to Exhibition Day Holiday :)

This week we were given a lecture by Anoma Kumarasuriyar on the Japanese art of Tea and Tea Houses. I found it endlessly interesting and was captivated by how such practical aspects of the cultural architecture contributed to the elements of the Tea House.

From listening to this I took away a few key points that hit me square in the chest:

• Something happens, then something else happens and in between them you experience the space. If nothing happens, then there is a void.

• The concept of impermanent, imperfect, incomplete
• The reduction of the movements of the body to only the essential

For the tutorial exercises our group had to create two mind maps: one capturing the Tea House and its aspects and one capturing our proposed assignment topic and its aspects.

This first mind map is describing the Tea House - breaking it down into elements of its design that stem from cultural values and functions.

This mind map outlines the aspects of our proposed assignment topic (the Public Housing Projects in New York City).

The mind maps were a really useful tool for visualising a topic. They set out the concept for analytical consideration. They are also good as conceptual platforms from which to grab other elements of the topic which you perhaps wouldn't have thought of without being able to see the links between existing elements of the concept.

From the mind map that my group created for the assignment topic, we were able to extract a more concise way of describing our topic - which will help in our research along the way.
It was

The Public Housing Projects in New York City as an illustration of the relationship between violence and architecture.

Archi Culture Cafe NUMBER THREE

The lecture this week was about professional values and I'd like to share with you the useful notes I took throughout.

• Design theory and Design understanding and the crossing of cultures of architects / designers / users and clients
• The designer must "maintain a commitment to openness and difference" and make an effort towards "understanding a country's culture and practices"
• Professional values are defined by the education and values of the field
• Clients and users assume that their values will be accommodated in the end result. Sometimes these don't match with the designer's values. This may lead to the viewing of a client as "uneducated" in the design language
• A design project could be rated according to its reviews by other designers, as opposed to the level of client satisfaction, both now and in the long term. -> Design inconsistencies or client satisfaction!?
• ALIGNING VALUES: a complex web of human dynamics are fundamental to design decision making
  -> social aspects of design
• MASLOWS HEIRARCHY OF NEEDS is a good thing to consider in relation to this
• The values that you hold as a designer in practice will contribute to the selection process of clients and users when selecting designers to hire - a particular set of values that draw a client to you as a designer
• Use participatory methods of designing and have a sensitivity to the cultural as the soul of design.

The activity in the tutorial this week was to think of a few objects or concepts that could be presented as metaphors for culture. Our group came up with three and here are some notes about each that were recorded during the discussion. The recorded notes are in green and my thoughts follow.

Culture is a CAVE

• Some elements are visible immediately and from the outside.
• The deeper you delve the more information you will receive.
• There are many different aspects - this shows how culture, although it seems like it from the outside, isn't one element or phenomenon but rather a collection of ideas, actions, morals, etc, that collaboratively contribute to culture. To understand a culture, its 'avenues' have to be understood.
• To explore a cave a light is needed. In terms of culture, the light is like the knowledge gained from your explorations into the various aspects of a particular culture.
  
  Whether by immersion or research, delving into a culture would inevitably teach you more about a culture. The thing about the cave is that you have to be brave enough to walk in, taking the risk that something hairy might jump out at you. Not that something hairy will jump out at you from a culture or its aspects, but I think this risk taking is kind of like being willing to understand a way of thinking or living that is different to what you are used to.

Culture is a HUMAN BODY

• Sums of the parts contribute to the running of the whole
• The organs each have their own value, but the body can not function without all of them working and functioning simultaneously
• Some parts may seem more prominent than others but still could not function as individual units
  
  This metaphor is interesting because of the way I understand the aspects of culture to work with each other. Like I mentioned in a previous post, the relationship between architecture and culture is cyclical - one aspect bears a reason for existing because another aspect came into being due to yet another. Then marking this up against the human body metaphor, for example the veins don't have a reason for existing without blood - which translates to one aspect/function of culture not existing without another.

Culture is a TREE

• The roots are like cultures historical beginnings and precedents
• Age rings are layers upon layers of growth and added richness
• The trunk is like the culture as a whole - what everything stands upon
• The branches are the breaking up of the trunk/culture into smaller parts, this is where they are understood
• The tree continues to grow and change - both from internal and external influences
  
  I like this metaphor because it makes reference to the history of a culture. Similar to the human body metaphor, a culture couldn't exist without an origin or a history. Also I like the tree because it refers to evolution and the constant alive-ness of a culture - how it moves and grows with the ages and gathers aspects along the way (layers in its trunk).

In this tutorial we had to hand in a personality survey that we were given in the last session, which focused on our personalities with regard to roles in a team. My results told me that as my primary role I am the Implementer and my secondary role is the Plant. The implementer is someone who mediates and provides direction for research and avenues to take in sticky sitches. The plant is someone who is often off with the fairies and unreliable but who comes up with awesome plans and ideas. I think I vary between both, probably if I'm being truthful I tend to be the unreliable plant more, but I am glad that mostly I can be seen as the Implementer and I will try my hardest to make this the whole case in the future.
The make up of my group consisted of (I think) three Implementers, one Finisher and one Coordinator. Pretty sweet.