Borders workshop, Bergün, Switzerland July 2005
64
description
The European Architecture Students Association summer workshop in 2005 took place in the village or Berguen, Switzerland. Arriving from all over Europe, the participants, tutors and organizers temporarily occupied two buildings in this serene village. Doubling the local population with their presence, they've created new spatial definitions, paths and uses for the local space. Their dominant presence formed and altered existing boundaries in the little village. Our workshop became a laboratory of tools, patterns and interventions and a microcosm of border production and change.
Transcript of Borders workshop, Bergün, Switzerland July 2005
The workshop was made possible thanks to the generous support of:
Verein Kampagne Olivenöl Postfach 8164 CH-8036 Zürich phone 01 462 20 03 Haus der Jüdischen Jugend AG Grütlistr. 68 CH-8002 Zürich phone +41 44 289 66 88
lectures
As a framework for discussion, we held a series of lectures concerning the unique complex case study of Jerusalem, showing the historical chronology of Jerusalem by both Israeli and Palestinian sides. Guest lecture: Sami Murrah, Shereen Al-Qadi
20:30, introducing the bar
Documenting
Documenting
Documenting
Tools
the obscure surface was achieved by placing logs of wood on four sides of the chosen area and light fabric was strained between them.
irregular pieces of wood, plastic and metal were placed underneath the fabric to make sound and create a surprising surface to step on.
crossing the unknown this intervention placed an representation of an unknown space on an important traffic route. we investigated how people behaved and what kind of strategies they pursued concern - ing investigating, crossing or circumvent - ing the space. apparent properties of the space where altered with a sign saying either “please be careful” or “do not step” or taking out the sign.
following our previous observations it was expected that people will not step on the installation before seeing step marks or being asked to
the site was surrounded with red line.
on the red line was hanged a note saying “please be careful” or “do not step”.
the object and line were placed so that the bridge could be entered without stepping on the object but inconve - niently.
site as seen from the point of view
of the unsuspecting victims of this
cruel experiment
without exception 173 participants
stopped to have a look and think
about what to do
the most of people chose to try to
get pas the object without touching
it
quite a few people changed their
minds and went to another entrance.
it seemed that the people not crossing
the transcape site might have been more
apt to this choice
this picture shows foot prints on the
object. later in the experiment at the
“do not step” phase the object was
considerably more harmed
some ten people chose to directly
jump over the object entertaining
our crew
experiment started with clean sheet and “please be careful”. in the beginning people interpreted this as not to step on the object or this amplified the uncertainty concerning what to do. after some twenty persons first person stepped on the installation. step marks on the installation altered the interpretion of the “please be care - ful” space into more active one as expected.
at the “do not step” phase some 20 % of the people still did step on the object at least partly because seeing prints or others do it.
observations
phase 2 - no sign
a
b
c
d a: 03%
b: 40%
c: 34%
d: 23%
n = 35
phase 3 - “do not step”
a b
c
d a: 04%
b: 22%
c: 62%
d: 12%
n = 83
b c
phase 1 - “please be careful”
a d a: 07%
b: 44%
c: 36%
d: 13%
n = 55
a: jumping over, b: steping on, c: walking around, d: using another entrance
easily passable fence
“please, be careful”
“do not step”
(no sign)
sheet of fabric obscuring the view to the surface
materials to be felt and to make sound when stepped on
Tools
the obscure surface was achieved by placing logs of wood on four sides of the chosen area and light fabric was strained between them.
irregular pieces of wood, plastic and metal were placed underneath the fabric to make sound and create a surprising surface to step on.
crossing the unknown this intervention placed an representation of an unknown space on an important traffic route. we investigated how people behaved and what kind of strategies they pursued concern - ing investigating, crossing or circumvent - ing the space. apparent properties of the space where altered with a sign saying either “please be careful” or “do not step” or taking out the sign.
following our previous observations it was expected that people will not step on the installation before seeing step marks or being asked to
the site was surrounded with red line.
on the red line was hanged a note saying “please be careful” or “do not step”.
the object and line were placed so that the bridge could be entered without stepping on the object but inconve - niently.
site as seen from the point of view
of the unsuspecting victims of this
cruel experiment
without exception 173 participants
stopped to have a look and think
about what to do
the most of people chose to try to
get pas the object without touching
it
quite a few people changed their
minds and went to another entrance.
it seemed that the people not crossing
the transcape site might have been more
apt to this choice
this picture shows foot prints on the
object. later in the experiment at the
“do not step” phase the object was
considerably more harmed
some ten people chose to directly
jump over the object entertaining
our crew
experiment started with clean sheet and “please be careful”. in the beginning people interpreted this as not to step on the object or this amplified the uncertainty concerning what to do. after some twenty persons first person stepped on the installation. step marks on the installation altered the interpretion of the “please be care - ful” space into more active one as expected.
at the “do not step” phase some 20 % of the people still did step on the object at least partly because seeing prints or others do it.
observations
phase 2 - no sign
a
b
c
d a: 03%
b: 40%
c: 34%
d: 23%
n = 35
phase 3 - “do not step”
a b
c
d a: 04%
b: 22%
c: 62%
d: 12%
n = 83
b c
phase 1 - “please be careful”
a d a: 07%
b: 44%
c: 36%
d: 13%
n = 55
a: jumping over, b: steping on, c: walking around, d: using another entrance
easily passable fence
“please, be careful”
“do not step”
(no sign)
sheet of fabric obscuring the view to the surface
materials to be felt and to make sound when stepped on
Tools
the obscure surface was achieved by placing logs of wood on four sides of the chosen area and light fabric was strained between them.
irregular pieces of wood, plastic and metal were placed underneath the fabric to make sound and create a surprising surface to step on.
crossing the unknown this intervention placed an representation of an unknown space on an important traffic route. we investigated how people behaved and what kind of strategies they pursued concern - ing investigating, crossing or circumvent - ing the space. apparent properties of the space where altered with a sign saying either “please be careful” or “do not step” or taking out the sign.
following our previous observations it was expected that people will not step on the installation before seeing step marks or being asked to
the site was surrounded with red line.
on the red line was hanged a note saying “please be careful” or “do not step”.
the object and line were placed so that the bridge could be entered without stepping on the object but inconve - niently.
site as seen from the point of view
of the unsuspecting victims of this
cruel experiment
without exception 173 participants
stopped to have a look and think
about what to do
the most of people chose to try to
get pas the object without touching
it
quite a few people changed their
minds and went to another entrance.
it seemed that the people not crossing
the transcape site might have been more
apt to this choice
this picture shows foot prints on the
object. later in the experiment at the
“do not step” phase the object was
considerably more harmed
some ten people chose to directly
jump over the object entertaining
our crew
experiment started with clean sheet and “please be careful”. in the beginning people interpreted this as not to step on the object or this amplified the uncertainty concerning what to do. after some twenty persons first person stepped on the installation. step marks on the installation altered the interpretion of the “please be care - ful” space into more active one as expected.
at the “do not step” phase some 20 % of the people still did step on the object at least partly because seeing prints or others do it.
observations
phase 2 - no sign
a
b
c
d a: 03%
b: 40%
c: 34%
d: 23%
n = 35
phase 3 - “do not step”
a b
c
d a: 04%
b: 22%
c: 62%
d: 12%
n = 83
b c
phase 1 - “please be careful”
a d a: 07%
b: 44%
c: 36%
d: 13%
n = 55
a: jumping over, b: steping on, c: walking around, d: using another entrance
easily passable fence
“please, be careful”
“do not step”
(no sign)
sheet of fabric obscuring the view to the surface
materials to be felt and to make sound when stepped on
Tools
the obscure surface was achieved by placing logs of wood on four sides of the chosen area and light fabric was strained between them.
irregular pieces of wood, plastic and metal were placed underneath the fabric to make sound and create a surprising surface to step on.
crossing the unknown this intervention placed an representation of an unknown space on an important traffic route. we investigated how people behaved and what kind of strategies they pursued concern - ing investigating, crossing or circumvent - ing the space. apparent properties of the space where altered with a sign saying either “please be careful” or “do not step” or taking out the sign.
following our previous observations it was expected that people will not step on the installation before seeing step marks or being asked to
the site was surrounded with red line.
on the red line was hanged a note saying “please be careful” or “do not step”.
the object and line were placed so that the bridge could be entered without stepping on the object but inconve - niently.
site as seen from the point of view
of the unsuspecting victims of this
cruel experiment
without exception 173 participants
stopped to have a look and think
about what to do
the most of people chose to try to
get pas the object without touching
it
quite a few people changed their
minds and went to another entrance.
it seemed that the people not crossing
the transcape site might have been more
apt to this choice
this picture shows foot prints on the
object. later in the experiment at the
“do not step” phase the object was
considerably more harmed
some ten people chose to directly
jump over the object entertaining
our crew
experiment started with clean sheet and “please be careful”. in the beginning people interpreted this as not to step on the object or this amplified the uncertainty concerning what to do. after some twenty persons first person stepped on the installation. step marks on the installation altered the interpretion of the “please be care - ful” space into more active one as expected.
at the “do not step” phase some 20 % of the people still did step on the object at least partly because seeing prints or others do it.
observations
phase 2 - no sign
a
b
c
d a: 03%
b: 40%
c: 34%
d: 23%
n = 35
phase 3 - “do not step”
a b
c
d a: 04%
b: 22%
c: 62%
d: 12%
n = 83
b c
phase 1 - “please be careful”
a d a: 07%
b: 44%
c: 36%
d: 13%
n = 55
a: jumping over, b: steping on, c: walking around, d: using another entrance
easily passable fence
“please, be careful”
“do not step”
(no sign)
sheet of fabric obscuring the view to the surface
materials to be felt and to make sound when stepped on
touching point
results 5:3 for EASA.
A joint beer…after all.
@contact Karen Lee Brachah | [email protected] Yehuda Greenfield | [email protected]
