brief - workPROGRAMM_071220

this is the minute of the latest progress meeting 2007-12-14/16
discussed points are listed in order of discussion and a to do list will be put in the end.

>theBOOK - the question of how to order different topics within the book where discussed. how to provide order and orientation for the reader. ideas: numbering [1,2,3,4], size [s,m,l,xl], color, icon, a-z, ...
there need to be probably two sections of each topic. a text bit that is connected to examples. the problem of how to actually write the text among the three of us remained undecided. we discussed these options: all of us write bits to each topic, each one writes on his own topics and the others give feedback, we discuss the topics individualy and one of use writes edited text in the end.
the linking among the text bits could be established trough the examples. examples can refer to different texts, the overlay of different texts on to the same example establishes the link.




>theTITEL - options where discussed, no decision taken. agreed was that there is a titel and a subtitel. options for the titel are: >links, >cross links, >urban cross links, >playing links, >urban conversation. the subtitel options: >bogota, london, plymouth, >overlapping topics, >multi discipline research, >in theory and as examples, >urban research comparison, >talking urban subjects, >linking urban tools, >urban relations and their product.
the favorites are:
playing links - bogota, london, plymouth
urban conversation - bogota, london, plymouth
the intension is to bring a narrative into the project in order to enable the reader to experience the text in kind of a flow. this is not yet achieved, but the direction is towards conversation, exchange, comparison of different people [jlf] and different cities [blp]. during the discussion it became clear, that this combination work must be the focus rather than a troughly scientific dissertation on all the subjects.

>theTOPICS - the list of the topics was taken from the visions and all the blog posts. the intention was to talk trough all the topics and find relations. four major groups emerged from this process: process, system, forces, interaction. regarding the time and the recourses, the decision was taken, to focus on one and maybe on a second one if the progress is too good. it was agreed that the intention should be a deeper exploration in one field rather than a collection of outline. first choice is system and if there is time the plan is to look at the system in time which would be the topic porcess.
the relations of the topics are described in the following, listed in no particular order:
>adaptability - system and process - it is believed that this term is a description of what a system needs to be, adaptable, in order to deal with changing inputs and in general to stay alive. on the other hand it is related to process as the adaption takes place within time and describes a process as a kind of a measurable indicator.
>knowledge - force - it was discussed as a product of the system, that could be shared within or with other system as an exchange. it then mainly acts as a force to drive development.
>regeneration - process - this is just like the adaptability, kind of the process itself. a manifestation of the changing system in time, although it can concentrate on only parts of the system.
>chaos - system, force - it is an element of any system and the main force to drive adaptability. it enables structural changes keeps structures flexible.
>cycle - system, force, process - it is the description of the mobile elements of a system. as a generator it drives changes trough movement and at the same time describes changes in time.
>boundary - is an abstract description of the relations within the system. boundaries are constituted among the most important relations, but are highly dependent on the view point / measurement unit.
>culture - force, interaction - it is a driving force of the urban environment. on the other hand it emerges from the interaction of humans and describes their organization [more in terms of codes and general understanding, not system related]
>force - an energy that pushes towards a different stage. it is needed for any kind of activity.
>dynamics/change - process - contains the topics chaos, process but with a strong focus on the time aspect.
>interaction - especially focusing on humans in space, their actions and reactions and how they form and transform space.
>process - describes a system in time.
>emotions - interaction, force - a product of the interaction. it is also a driving force as it is an expression and full of energy as it is extroversive.
>feelings - interaction - a product of the interaction. it is introversive
>urban experience - interaction
>system - it describes a network of elements that are connected trough relations. the network is active and able to maintain itself and exchange informations with other system. the system approach it is a theoretical concept that emerged in the 60-ties. it was initially developed by bertanalfi a biologist, but quickly was translated to other scientific subjects as its potential was discovered. it is used in urban design but not currently not as a concept, more in the manner of a fact. am important theory around this topic is: a city is not a tree by christopher alexander {xxxx}
>memory - interaction, process - in terms of the relationship between humans and space the memory makes a huge bit of how we experience space and especially the urban surrounding. in terms of the time aspect memory provides a sense of continuity within a ever changing environment.
>scale and time - are general terms that apply to all topic. both can be interpreted as a technical unit or as concept.




>theTEXT - layout, keywords, structure, links, quotes,
the layout needs to be worked out in january. and will be revised in july when we have al the text bits.
as we are working on the Ggroup we will not need a special format wile working. what we do need is a specific structure in order to keep the final revising of the text elements as short as possible. this means mainly titling system, references, quotes and bibliography. we will also need keywords to indicate links between the topics.
titels - topic, C for comment or T for text, initial (jlf), date (yymmdd}, title of the text [example - adabtability_t_fan_071220_streetlevel
quotes are stated directly within the text, with name and year
references and keywords are listed in the end of the text and marked with numbers: 1.1keyword01, 1.2keyword02, ... and 2.1reference01, 2.2reference02, ...
the bibliography should be a document that we all share. probably a second edition of what we should read could be helpfull. maybe we even share the books and do not read all the same books. bibliography should be edited: author (date). title. place: publisher

>thePROGRAMM - the time frame is six month into the new year 2008. by the end of july the body of text has to be finished. during this time we put three public consultation [Pc]. this means we publish developed content on digital medias. the first one should take place in mid january and is an introduction to the project with an outline of the content. second one then is content work in march and the third one in may again with text content. we have to allow at least two weeks for people to respond and another two weeks for us to incorporate inputs. this results in a month of work that runs parallel to the normal content development following the Pc. of course it would be nice if exchange could continue after july, specially as a platform to comment on the final result. july and august are dedicated to layouting, proofreading and final mounting. the time to develop the text content is quite tight and the base has to be quite high, but if everyone writes two articles per month we should be able to bring together a good pile of work.

>theORGANIZATION - to publish the text in the end we should think about how to get a publisher to print it for us. the plan is to work on this just after we have the outline in mid january. a second round to approach publishers and potential founders should take place from june on. especially some founders should be found in the beginning. This should be possible, just like it has been done for the bartlett catalogue.
there is no decision on how much content we should work towards.

>theTOOLS - for now the decision was taken, that we are using google group [GoGr] as the development place for the text. google earth [GoEa] could be the tool to maintain example connection. the blog will be continued with material from the discussion. for public consultation we'll use the blog, facebook [Fb] and maybe we have to look for a myspace [mSp].
Ggroup it is seen as a better opportunity in terms of ease to follow ongoing parallel discussion. it should be used as follows: the discussion is for text development. each topic will get two headings, one for text and one for example. the problem with posting images in this section can be solved by posting text and comments via e-mail [we have to test this further]. the page section should be used only for common topics. this is something like bibliography and common definitions of terms and words [eg. quotes from dictionaries...] maybe text bits that are finalized [if so] and also for work/organization related topics.
GoEa could be introduced as a "new" tool. the intention would be to start a collection of marked places and maybe movement to be shared. with placemarks, path, overlays and so on we could share a vivid picture of the current city we are living in. [eg. example fan]
Fb, here we have to work on a way to use it to publish. would it be possible that L can do it? F: I am definitely not familiar enough to work it out




>toDO - jeff: draft of the outline for the book, cheque layout settings for the blog - fan: minutes of the meeting 071214-16, Ggroup setup, Gcalendar - L: testing option to publish content on facebook

by FAN 071220

workPROGRAMM_sketch

how can we structure our process.
you both mentioned concerns about the links to cities, as there is the possibility that we are moving to another place and the research could be discontinued. I think the cities we life in will be used as a reference and a place to observe our interests. it should be adaptable to other places, but we need to be careful that it doesn't become general and cheap. it should be specific for the one place.
about the text I am not sure how we can work one one piece of writing. you guys have done this at the bartlett once. how are your experiences?



I can imagine it to be some kind wikipedia or pattern language. say it to be some kind of open map like a graphical pattern language. we continue writing but interlink articles actively. each topic gets explored in an essay and this gets expanded among the keywords. references to our cities could become the links where the theoretical writings meet and interlink. say we write about adaptability and come up with examples of the real place but in the same drawing or image we might also find evidence of boundaries and this would then link to the essay about boundaries.
we need to develop a really good referencing system that then also allows us to bring the work into other forms, say a book.



let me know your inputs. the sketches are not meant to be a final proposal, just tried to visualize the discussion...


[1.0] K E Y W O R D S
.1 >

[2.0] R E F E R E N C E S
.1 >

[3.0] L A B E L S
.1 >work

U R vision F A N

urban design [UD] makes me nervous. not necessarily the outcome, built, although it usually gets me thinking, but more the aspect of planning as an act. the planning act is highly connected to the time it is undertaken. so to say we are dealing with fashion manifested as built form. with fashion I am not only talking about the color and style, but more the self-concept of the society as such.
even more than in architecture UD is representing the current society and its vision. architecture probably is closer involved with fashion and trends but is also able to cover it's ambitions with a style, color or material. UD on the other hand is kind of honest and lays bare the capacity of the society building it. one could argue, it therefore is a summary of the social and scientific background of the time. to follow, this idea would open the possibility to read something into any UD. say the barcelona masterplan with its octagon blocks and rigid grid reefers to the rationality of the scociety surrounding its development. it would be interesting to see how detailed such an interpretation could be developed. but in this case I would guess this.
past UD-visions were usually based in a wider such context. say related to architecture, art, science and society. see 1920's le corbusier's plans of rationality and separation. the intention was to clean up and install a plan that would be able to answer all the questions.

in terms of UDtoday there is now up to date theory covering these aspects. my vision for this project would be to outline such a concept of UD.
what I am talking about is the idea of something that lies beyond the obvious labels of UD. these labels size, high-with relation, connection, [space syntax], color, material, grain, usage, ownership, density... seem to me like materials to build something upon, but I d'rather be interested to talk about the tools to handle them.
something must be responsible for the setting of those elements. as stated above those settings can be seen as society rooted, and therefor a statement of the current state of the art. fashion and trends are probably not predictable, lots of theories around predicting this must exist. here I would say it could be more something as state of the art rather than visionary. if it would be possible to root UD in society that would already be a lot. in the end I do believe in something like a collective memory. UD as a massive form representing this. like the thought I mentioned once in one of my plymouth posts, UD as a body extension. is it possible that one can/does experience UD as a body extension. experiencing and shaping the urban environment at the same time? how far can a intellectual body extension be stretched?

I am thinking about some references just like you guys [J_L] did in your bartlett project, you had some interesting references into science. could be into physics, math [fractals, space syntax, systems, ...], neurotics, medicine, sociology, art, fashion, it, computing, communications, design, material, environment, ...

to refer this vision to my former topic "cycles" [C] I would interpret the aim of the investigation undertaken at the bartlett as a search for an element that drives movement within an urban setting. as a vision Cs could be an element of an urban driving system that contents objects, relations and Cs. this was my basic picture, but I was not able to built up enough evidence to proof anything. but there too was the aim to research on the driving forces behind urban live. also the AKA project could be read as an investigation in this direction, the search for the basic elements of UD. we talked long enough about floating and reconfiguration elements until the "city" dissolved. but again at this point we where not able to come up with the essentials nor the drivers beyond the elements we managed to supersede - so it is kind of time to try again : )

I read an article about the possible split of the new yorker OMA office from its sister office in rotterdam. it is probably down to a dispute between the master rem and the new head of the new york branch. the argument of the guys in new york is basically that they want to establish a new vision of architecture that moves away from the one genius idea in architecture [thats why they think they can not continue working with rem k. as he is an celebrity in architecture and widely recognized as a genius...]. they call it HYPER-RATIONAL [2.2]. sounds great and basically means bringing the intellectual architecture on an even more rationalized level [can't believe it]. explained is it as talking things down to essentials. in order to take decisions and setup directions on those simplified findings.
transferred this idea into this vision, it would be trying to brake UD down and reach trough the decoration of the above "materials" to access the simple links within the society - UD system.

I do see our locations [the different towns] as test and specially recourse areas, where different findings and outputs can be compared.
in order to find essentials this comparison could be the key point. trough comparing the same aspects we would be able to filter out data that refers to underling processes. I imagine it to be real fun to dismantle bogota, london and plymouth/basel. a reassemble in a different order/mixture could be even more fun, having good old ben in bogota high-street and drake-circus at the riviera basel.

to go about it: braking urban structures into fragments is a matter of systems/perspective. say we could brake along extended analysis lines, such as transport links with infrastructure - multistory parking. in terms of history, starting with a urban timeline, we could look at elements from the past that survived and up to now have a relevance within the city structure. ex: union street in plymouth, covent-garden in london.
this would suggest that we continue on the strategy but transfer investigations consequently across the different locations. we end up having a comparable catalog of topics revealed from three/four different scenes.

what do we need a UD theory for? is it useful to know how to do it, to act in different cases? what is the meaning of such a theory. it can't be a how to do manual. this goes too low. I do see a theory more as a state of the art description. a sketch of interrelations and a manifesto for the urban society and positioning UD in the light of a collective commitment rather than a collage of genius visions. this would give consideration to UD as a continuos and collective process and incorporate its fluidity referring to the society it is constituted out of. the word theory is probably not the right one, it claims to be too intellectual. it should be rather guerilla style - [plymouth under attack, bogota under attack, london under attack, basel under attack]

to conclude, I have no idea what I just wrote about and even less clue of how to go about it. it is basically a collection of feelings if not dreams, but maybe for a vision dreams are essential, specially with a personal favor for utopias.


-
fan_visionStatement_2007-11-25
-


maybe this is more of a statement rather than a vision....


[1.0] K E Y W O R D S
.1 >interpretation of designs
.2 >summary of state of the art
.3 >independent statement
.4 >new theory
.5 >underlying process
.6 >hyper-rational
.7 >city comparison
.8 >
.9 >...


[2.0] R E F E R E N C E S
.1 >barcelona masterplan
.2 >prinz-ramus/rem koolhaas OMA twist - businessweek.com, interview with Joshua Prince-Ramus, feb 23, 2006 - "We believe in a hyper-rational process where you accept the constraints, conditions, and challenges of a project, and you attempt to engage them by going back to first principles. You don't accept any convention. ... Our observation is that if you do this hyper-rational, almost dumb process of taking everything back to first principles, it's tiring as hell, but you start to construct something that has never been done before -- something that transcends convention."
>[http://www.businessweek.com/innovate/content/feb2006/id20060223_523277.htm?chan=innovation_architecture_architecture+lead]
>[http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/95/open_design-prince-ramus.html]
>[http://www.archinect.com/forum/threads.php?id=35551_0_42_0_C] what the web-community has to say


[3.0] L A B E L S
.1 >work
.2 >research

how to work [F]

I try to add a post today. I still haven't really understood how this bloog works. [J] did u delet the previous posts? or is this now a new blog?
anyway - my idea of working now could be the following. why not say each one of us has one week of work that has to be published here on line, that the other two can follow day by day. the next week someone else takes over and kind of continues his week in his city by picking up on the previous content. this way we could collect in the next, lets say six or nine weeks, topics and informations about each of the places. by the start of the new year we wold have an idea of where we are heading to...

by [F]