[p2p-research] Vivarium

[Michel Bauwens]

Hi Eric,

will be published on the 18th, cfr.

http://blog.p2pfoundation.net/vivarium-a-proposal-for-a-modest-experiment-in-p2p-architecture/2009/03/18

On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 12:07 PM, Eric Hunting <erichunting at gmail.com>wrote:

> Vivarium - A Proposal for a Modest Experiment in P2P Architecture
>
> [soundtrack: Constructors - Zatoichi OST]
>
> The Drive To Build:
>
> There is an instinctive compulsion to architecture in the human being. Left
> to their own devices, as children more often were in the recent past, they
> build. Growing up in the suburbs of the NY metropolitan area at a time when
> American children were not quite yet relegated by their parents' paranoia to
> an existence as juvenile inmates, I was witness to an interesting phenomenon
> that emerged in response to the cultural squalor of the suburbs. Contrary to
> the common delusion that suburbs are designed for child raising, there has
> generally never been a place for children in that environment. Suburbs are
> made for cars, not kids. (as if the number of them run over by their own
> parents when backing vehicles out of the driveway hasn't made that fact
> obvious) The problem with suburbs, of course, is a distinct lack of spacial
> identity. There is no 'sense of place' anyplace, let alone places for kids.
> And so kids of the time were inclined to create this themselves in spaces
> adults overlooked or abandoned, most commonly the 'green belts' and other
> fractured bits of natural landscape in the surrounding areas. Thus
> throughout the wooded areas of the metropolitan fringes one was (and still)
> likely to find -aside from the piles of trash, abandoned cars and
> appliances, and mysterious masses of rusting unmarked chemical drums, a
> variety of makeshift encampments, tree-houses, shacks, 'forts', skate board
> ramps, and 'dirt bike' courses, all created by and for kids using whatever
> cast-off materials they could scrounge up from the trash around them. Adults
> (those who actually owned these forgotten bits of land especially), of
> course had no respect for such endeavors and these constructions were
> routinely declared Dens of Iniquity, raided, and razed whenever some less
> intelligent child managed to injure himself in a sufficiently dramatic
> manner or when the local generation of children reached That Certain Age,
> only to re-appear in some other location once the 'heat was off'.
>
> Clearly, invention and building represent essential human forms of play
> that are sadly unfulfilled in our contemporary culture, manifesting among
> children in activity adults seem to compulsively suppress as 'dangerous' and
> would rather redirect into the safer forms of 'hobbies' they can better
> control. The DIY and craft industries, the customization of cars, the
> fanatical adult fans of building toys like Lego, and the more recent Maker
> movement certainly seem to reflect this suppressed desire for making and
> building as play that isn't exclusive to the child or the specially
> talented. But often the social dimension is missing. What point creativity
> without an audience? What point invention without others for it to benefit?
> Thus in the communities that emerge around these hobbies a compulsion to
> gather exists, realized through conventions, expositions, and competitions.
>
> A Sandbox for Architectural Recreation:
>
> We don't normally think of architecture as a form of play. Assuming the
> task beyond us or simply too important for failure and thus beyond personal
> experimentation, we relegate the creation of our built habitat to
> professionals. To a certain extent this is quite practical. Without some
> degree of engineering knowledge employed to insure their integrity, large
> buildings would be quite dangerous. But for most of the history of human
> civilization, most construction was conducted without the benefit of such
> professionals and, since adopting the dependence upon them in modern times,
> our instinctive desire to express ourselves through our built habitat goes
> unfulfilled. What if we could better integrate this form of play and
> constructive/creative socialization into our built habitat? What if we could
> create an environment specifically for casual 'architectural recreation';
> for building as social play? Recently, the P2P cultural community has begun
> to explore the notion of P2P Architecture and Open Source Urbanism. But
> these are concepts hard to move beyond the level of theoretical discussion
> -particularly in a world where the structure of the built habitat is so
> often under the control of people incapable of comprehending much of this
> intellectual discussion. It would be extremely valuable to have a venue for
> physical experimentation with principles of P2P Architecture and the
> technologies of adaptive architecture and I think the key to that may rest
> in this notion of architectural recreation, in the idea of creation a place
> where one builds space for fun. Thus we arrive at a proposal I call the
> Vivarium.
>
> The Vivarium is a simple idea. It is a place whose functional purpose in
> fun and comfort, intended as a public meeting and lounge area -a social
> club- where people go to relax and amuse themselves in a casual social
> venue. Nothing unusual there except that in this place all the structures
> used for these purposes are created by the users of the space. Thus they get
> to collectively/interactively decide how the space is used and they create
> the structures they want for that. The participants decide what 'fun' and
> 'comfort' mean and it's up to them to implement that.
>
> The Vivarium would be based on appropriating some relatively large
> clear-span whether-sheltered 'purposeless' space -an empty industrial
> building for example- that is in a relatively convenient location for its
> community of users and which would support the creation of light
> free-standing structures inside it. The basic space supplies little itself;
> basic toilet facilities, electricity, basic heating and cooling, access to
> Internet and television. Everything else is up to the users to make. To
> facilitate the project, a companion workshop and storage facility may also
> be provided so as to eliminate the need to fabricate parts for structures
> within the Vivarium space, limiting work there to simple assembly and
> disassembly to keep it clean, comfortable, and relatively quiet. The ideal
> community would be a group of creative people, artists, and their friends
> with some inclination toward making things and perhaps some experience with
> some of the common adaptive building technologies currently available;
> Matrix/Box Beam/Grid Beam, T-slot profile framing, simple space frames. tent
> structures. creative cardboard construction, etc. The club would be
> invitation-based with building access limited to the membership in order to
> reduce the potential for theft and vandalism. However, regular open houses
> would be conducted to provide a public demonstration of the project.
>
> The key to the experiment represented by the project would be to impose as
> few rules as possible on how the space is used, leaving this up to the
> imaginations of the participants and their negotiations on use of space. But
> a few simple 'house rules' would be useful as a starting point.
>
> 1) Employ Common Sense. A pretty obvious rule. No open fires. No hazardous
> material. No blocking emergency exits. Use electricity safely. Etc.
>
> 2) No Nails. All the structures deployed in the space must be demountable,
> assembled without nails or glues except with the fabrication of
> subcomponents. Structures of two or more levels may be allowed given the
> ceiling height, but for safety without serious engineering approvals two or
> three storeys may be a practical limit.
>
> 3) Space is alloted on a first-come-first-serve basis moderated by
> consensus. Members propose an amount and use of space and the collective
> membership approves or rejects this proposal. Relatively small private
> personal structures can be built without approval as long as there's no
> dispute over the location. Larger structures will require more active
> negotiation with and consensus approval by the group -and most likely group
> participation to build them. Initially, space may be alloted to initial
> members as a percentage share of the overall volume and they can contribute
> all or portions of this to group-built structures.
>
> 4) All built structures have a 30 day 'lease'. At the end of 30 days, the
> members of the club vote on whether to give them another month or remove
> them to free up space. They can also vote to adapt rather than remove,
> giving the creators of a structure the option to adapt it to accommodate
> specific issues the group may have in order to gain another 30 days lease.
> And, of course, the creators of the structure can, for as long as the
> structure is allowed space by the group, adapt it or remove it as they see
> fit. This 30 day lease is intended to insure members maintain the structures
> they build and that underutilized space is continuously freed-up for other
> uses.
>
> 5) Habitation is limited to 48 contiguous hours in any week period. It may
> not be practical to let people actually live in this experimental project,
> though later this rule could be dropped if it seems like a functional
> cohabitation is possible. In later larger scale Vivarium experiments,
> continuous residence would be the key objective.
>
> These basic rules would be intended only as loose conventions. As the
> members of the Vivarium gain social experience, they may add or drop house
> rules as they see fit by consensus. Since all structures would be
> demountable and adaptable, free and dynamic negotiation on space would be no
> particular problem.
>
> To facilitate brainstorming at the start of the project by helping people
> easily visualize possible structures, an initial common building system may
> be proposed, with Grid Beam or similar post and beam systems a likely choice
> based on economy and recyclability of parts and materials. This would be
> helpful where the project is largely supported on grants. Structures with
> common building systems would have the advantage of structural integration,
> allowing participants to link up their structures and trade in components
> and their fabrication.
>
> Many of the issues associated with P2P architecture -social, logistical,
> and technical- on larger scales would potentially be represented in this
> simple experiment. Cultivating systems of negotiation over space use, public
> and personal property, management of noise, energy efficiency, and much more
> would need to be worked out, with this casual venue offering 'low stakes'
> environment to explore this. Technology and designs developed in this
> experiment would also have many applications elsewhere, particularly for
> relief architecture, public art projects, and exposition structures.
>
> The Vivarium has the potential to generate many imitations or spin-offs and
> produce progressively larger projects using more sophisticated building
> technology, eventually moving beyond the limits of repurposed pre-existing
> enclosures to the use of independently weather-tight structures in an open
> environment. Clearly, this idea of group architectural recreation -of
> building adaptive structures and evolving complex environments as art and
> play- has much potential and could become the impetus for many projects and
> experiments. Certainly, events such as Burning Man, increasingly focused on
> inventive temporary structures as artistic installations, hints at the
> potential a continuous venue for such creativity might afford. This seems an
> accessible project, well within the means of any sufficiently motivated and
> creative group in most location, though likely better suited to urban areas
> with a concentrated community of art and design enthusiasts able to casually
> access this space like a local social club.
>
> Eric Hunting
> erichunting at gmail.com
>
>


-- 
Working at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhurakij_Pundit_University -
http://www.dpu.ac.th/dpuic/info/Research.html -
http://www.asianforesightinstitute.org/index.php/eng/The-AFI

Volunteering at the P2P Foundation:
http://p2pfoundation.net  - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net -
http://p2pfoundation.ning.com

Monitor updates at http://del.icio.us/mbauwens

The work of the P2P Foundation is supported by SHIFTN,
http://www.shiftn.com/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/attachments/20090314/94737222/attachment.html>