maybe this has taken me a long time, but i'm starting to feel more confident about finding my own voice in research. for people that know me, the idea that i haven't been confident or said what i thought in the past might seem a bit strange. i am confident and i do say what i think, but not always as fully as i would like to, and sometimes its just scary.
i think now i'm just getting angry and realising that i have to say exactly what i want to say, in my own words. i seem to have been spending a lot of time in the last few weeks telling people that i don't mean what they think i mean. but to me that's really positive, like it helps to clarify what i think if i know for certain what i don't think/mean/say.
confusing? i don't think so.
Sunday 4 January 2009
Thursday 13 November 2008
From gala to grassroots - arts funding Salon at Media Centre, Huddersfield
Last Tuesday I went along to the Salon (trendy name for debate) about arts funding, and whether gala performances or grass roots community arts should be given priority for funding. The speakers were Franco Bianchini, cultural planning expert from Leeds Met, and Andrew McGill head of arts and events at Leeds City Council.
Franco talked about the opportunities presented by the 'triple crunch' that might favour a swing towards grass roots, in that the collapse of commerce in our city centre might make spaces available to alternative activities, that public funding might increase (in the UK) as a government tactic to deal with the crisis, that the focus may shift to production and skills rather than consumption and cash, that the property crash might make real cultural quarters viable as artists will be able to afford to live there.
Andrew presented 7 reasons why gala performances are good. these were: sustainability (economic, not environmental), enabling/outreach - they do community work as part of their conditions for funding (and not because they are well placed to do it!!), adventurousness and being creatively challenging, surveillance and accountability (yes he really used the word surveillance), joint gala and community performance (eg community choirs in the town hall, football on millenium square, light night), it brings money in, and it supports home grown talent. he said that LCC is an 'arms length' organisation, that they let people who know get on with it whilst they deal with the paperwork. He listed the gala organisations in leeds - opera north, WYP, northern ballet, leeds museum etc., and the grassroots included red ladder, east street arts, patrick studios etc.
two things struck me - one was that McGills description of 'grass roots' only included very well established regularly funded organisations, and seemed to miss an enormous sector of what i would call real grass roots organisations and individuals that would fall below that benchmark. Also, it seemed to be that grass roots and gala performances were being put at either end of an artificial spectrum. Should the two be in competition for funds at all? Whilst undoubtedly connected, it was clear from the debate that neither would exist without the other, yet both require different skills and resources. In Leeds I have been familiar with the sense that for years the gala venues such as the playhouse, grand theatre and so on have been prioritised for public moneys and that other art forms miss out. It seems that Kirklees has the opposite problem. Why aren't the two areas recognised as separate and worthy disciplines, rather than community arts being cast as the gala arts poor relation?
McGill mentioned the DIY scene in Leeds, and that it might be a response to the credit crunch. I know that the DIY scene has been growing for years, nothing to do with the current climate, but probably to do with a different policy focus in Leeds. I have to say that if the DIY scene is the result of a conflict between gala and grassroots, then it doesn't seem like a bad thing. Loads of great stuff is coming out of Leeds because of the DIY scene and the lack of alternatives for up and coming artists/musicians/performers etc.
How does this relate to what i'm doing? i see the boundaries between art, design and craft as being blurry, and becoming increasingly so in the kind of public sector work that is emerging. some of the projects that i came across at the salon are what i would call emerging design projects. in essence the debate about gala vs grassroots is the same debate as appointing an ego architect or going to a participatory approach. do we have creative 'experts' showing us how its done, or do we get people involved in doing it for themselves?
Franco talked about the opportunities presented by the 'triple crunch' that might favour a swing towards grass roots, in that the collapse of commerce in our city centre might make spaces available to alternative activities, that public funding might increase (in the UK) as a government tactic to deal with the crisis, that the focus may shift to production and skills rather than consumption and cash, that the property crash might make real cultural quarters viable as artists will be able to afford to live there.
Andrew presented 7 reasons why gala performances are good. these were: sustainability (economic, not environmental), enabling/outreach - they do community work as part of their conditions for funding (and not because they are well placed to do it!!), adventurousness and being creatively challenging, surveillance and accountability (yes he really used the word surveillance), joint gala and community performance (eg community choirs in the town hall, football on millenium square, light night), it brings money in, and it supports home grown talent. he said that LCC is an 'arms length' organisation, that they let people who know get on with it whilst they deal with the paperwork. He listed the gala organisations in leeds - opera north, WYP, northern ballet, leeds museum etc., and the grassroots included red ladder, east street arts, patrick studios etc.
two things struck me - one was that McGills description of 'grass roots' only included very well established regularly funded organisations, and seemed to miss an enormous sector of what i would call real grass roots organisations and individuals that would fall below that benchmark. Also, it seemed to be that grass roots and gala performances were being put at either end of an artificial spectrum. Should the two be in competition for funds at all? Whilst undoubtedly connected, it was clear from the debate that neither would exist without the other, yet both require different skills and resources. In Leeds I have been familiar with the sense that for years the gala venues such as the playhouse, grand theatre and so on have been prioritised for public moneys and that other art forms miss out. It seems that Kirklees has the opposite problem. Why aren't the two areas recognised as separate and worthy disciplines, rather than community arts being cast as the gala arts poor relation?
McGill mentioned the DIY scene in Leeds, and that it might be a response to the credit crunch. I know that the DIY scene has been growing for years, nothing to do with the current climate, but probably to do with a different policy focus in Leeds. I have to say that if the DIY scene is the result of a conflict between gala and grassroots, then it doesn't seem like a bad thing. Loads of great stuff is coming out of Leeds because of the DIY scene and the lack of alternatives for up and coming artists/musicians/performers etc.
How does this relate to what i'm doing? i see the boundaries between art, design and craft as being blurry, and becoming increasingly so in the kind of public sector work that is emerging. some of the projects that i came across at the salon are what i would call emerging design projects. in essence the debate about gala vs grassroots is the same debate as appointing an ego architect or going to a participatory approach. do we have creative 'experts' showing us how its done, or do we get people involved in doing it for themselves?
Friday 31 October 2008
Writers Block
I'm experiencing the most prolonged writers block imaginable (to me at least). What is this all about? I've cleared my diary so that I have time, I'm going to bed early and eating well so I'm not super tired or unhealthy, I know what I've got to write because I've made a start on it and got some very useful feedback. But still, I just can't write.
The irony is that a significant proportion of my teaching has been about writing, particularly about helping students who find it difficult to write to write. And I did a whole teaching portfolio about it. So in theory I know all the tricks. So it must be something deeper than that. I'm starting to look into the psychology of writers block. When I find some things to read about it I will report back.
First observation though, why are there books about doing academic writing that don't talk about writers block?
The irony is that a significant proportion of my teaching has been about writing, particularly about helping students who find it difficult to write to write. And I did a whole teaching portfolio about it. So in theory I know all the tricks. So it must be something deeper than that. I'm starting to look into the psychology of writers block. When I find some things to read about it I will report back.
First observation though, why are there books about doing academic writing that don't talk about writers block?
Sunday 31 August 2008
Arse kicking
it's quite difficult to kick one's own arse without falling over, but i kind of feel like i should. this blog reminds me of the diaries i used to sparodically keep when i was a teenager. i actually still have most of the diaries. i was never very good at keeping it going, and usually wrote in them when i felt really bad about something. consequently they're not great reading, and generally just remind me of a whole load of angst. so, this blog reminding me of that is probably not great, but on the other hand doing a phd is by most accounts a tough time, and one that has many highs and lows. so if this is a place to vent ab0ut the lows then i guess it will serve a worthy purpose.
so, i'm back in the saddle after having a really long summer break. it was a working holiday type break - conference in turin (which thinking about it i should really write a review of because it was really influential), performing at latitude festival, and trying out some appropriate technology in indonesia. i do feel like i had a proper break, a complete mental rest if not a physical one. i was able to put all thoughts of phd to one side and focus on some very delightful experiences. i am now drafting my revised proposal for the participatory design conference, and realising that actually i do kind of know what i'm doing, and certainly what i need to do, which is reassuring.
i'm also quite tempted by the design history or research society conference on experiential knowledge next june. one of the brick walls that i keep banging my head against is the division between research and practice, and the way that i seem to keep getting involved in my potential research material as a practitioner. i reckon it has a lot to do with my personality, i just get involved with things, like for example the PRADSA network that i have been going along to as a participant, i have somehow ended up volunteering to take on some of the organisational tasks for the next workshop, and working for erskine, and the love it share it project.
anyway. its late so i need to focus on some other things, like sleeping and cups of herbal tea. but i must must must get this blog going. consider your butt kicked katie jane. write the damn blog.
so, i'm back in the saddle after having a really long summer break. it was a working holiday type break - conference in turin (which thinking about it i should really write a review of because it was really influential), performing at latitude festival, and trying out some appropriate technology in indonesia. i do feel like i had a proper break, a complete mental rest if not a physical one. i was able to put all thoughts of phd to one side and focus on some very delightful experiences. i am now drafting my revised proposal for the participatory design conference, and realising that actually i do kind of know what i'm doing, and certainly what i need to do, which is reassuring.
i'm also quite tempted by the design history or research society conference on experiential knowledge next june. one of the brick walls that i keep banging my head against is the division between research and practice, and the way that i seem to keep getting involved in my potential research material as a practitioner. i reckon it has a lot to do with my personality, i just get involved with things, like for example the PRADSA network that i have been going along to as a participant, i have somehow ended up volunteering to take on some of the organisational tasks for the next workshop, and working for erskine, and the love it share it project.
anyway. its late so i need to focus on some other things, like sleeping and cups of herbal tea. but i must must must get this blog going. consider your butt kicked katie jane. write the damn blog.
Tuesday 6 May 2008
falling in to place
i went to a meeting on friday of the Love It Share It project, with a view to finding a potential case study. I had one of those days when everything falls into place and suddenly it all becomes clear! i find that i have these moments of clarity where i suddenly see all the connections between all the things that i want to do, and it all seems really straight forward, then after a few hours it gets misty again and i know the connections are there, i just can't really articulate them. but then i guess that's probably part of the phd process.
anyway, i'm thinking at the moment that the LISI project will be the main case study around which i can build my phd project, and within it and linked to it will be several potential design projects.
so now all i've got to do is go back to that moment of clarity and remember what it was all about.
maybe i should try hypnosis!
anyway, i'm thinking at the moment that the LISI project will be the main case study around which i can build my phd project, and within it and linked to it will be several potential design projects.
so now all i've got to do is go back to that moment of clarity and remember what it was all about.
maybe i should try hypnosis!
Wednesday 23 April 2008
Abstract
This is a recently produced summary of my research proposal.
ABSTRACT
This proposal outlines research that seeks to investigate and model emerging participatory design practices in design for urban regeneration of post-industrial cities and towns, and community development as led by local government in the UK. The research questions challenge the location of consultation exclusively in the domains of planning and visioning and evaluate the role of design practice therein.
It is my hypothesis that existing models of design and participation are too simplistic and idealistic, showing simple two way decontextualised power exchanges, and linear design processes. My professional experiences of participatory design lead me to think that a more appropriate model of participatory design would be a matrix of different drivers and limiting factors and this is what I plan to explore through my research.
Keywords
Design, participation, co-design, regeneration, community
INTRODUCTION
Urban regeneration has been a hugely influential movement in the UK that has seen major government spending targeted at the development of post-industrial towns and cities towards more sustainable communities and economic re-invigoration, addressing poverty, unemployment, and other social issues through redevelopment. Design and culture have played a major role in regeneration, and likewise regeneration has had a significant impact on the work of designers and architects over recent years.
Consultation and participation are increasingly being included as a statutory part of urban regeneration, including urban design, architecture, landscape architecture, graphic and systems design. This is being pushed forward by both political and economic drivers that make participation a requirement for developers and authorities investing in the design of new communities.
Consultation is an established practice within architecture and urban design. With roots outside of design, key models and methodologies for consultation (such as Arnstein’s Ladder [1] and Planning for Real [4]) come from the discipline of planning. Traditionally designers have been at the end-point of the consultation processes, recipients of edited interpretations of user needs (reports created by consultants and developers). By not having direct contact with those that they are designing for, designers have been excluded from the qualities of process not evident in results alone. When designers do become involved as participants in a project, notions of power and expertise shift and challenge the traditional role and status of the designer as a professional.
This research examines the need for re-framing the role of designers as participants, as, for example, recognised by Leadbeater, Cottam [2] and Thackara [5] on co-creation, and looks at case studies of a participatory design approach applied in UK urban regeneration and community development projects.
RESEARCH QUESTION
The research questions challenge the location of consultation exclusively in the domains of planning and visioning and evaluate the role of design practice therein. They look to establish the impact of the current participation agenda in the UK on design practice.
The research explores the potential models for this re-framing of participation. It evaluates current examples that exhibit elements of these models and works towards definitions of participation within design practice.
The questions are contextualised by design for urban regeneration and community development (predominantly design in the public sector and public realm), particularly in relation to current design opportunities in health, education, urban design and housing. It will also draw upon the established bodies of knowledge within related disciplines of HCI, Web 2.0, design for social action, community architecture, participatory health promotion, community art, and criticisms of participation in development studies.
METHOD
Design history
The foundations of the research project map through desk research and interviews the political, social and economic landscape within which these practices are occurring. Design with a distinctly social purpose has traditionally been a marginal practice, with predominantly commercial practice occupying the mainstream. As well as establishing what is happening in these practices, I also seek to determine to what extent participatory design can be seen as a mainstream or marginal practice.
Anthropology
A set of case studies will be observed and I will present the case studies at the consortium. I hope to be able to discuss some of the issues arising from the initial findings within the case study set. The case studies will be chosen to represent a profile of different types of emerging participatory practices. Criteria for selection will be developed from the findings of the design history part of the project. The themes of power and expertise will provide a framework within which the role of design and the designer will be analysed. I am currently investigating a phenomenological approach to the case study analysis.
Design management
Existing models of design practice and participation are being used to compare the observations of practice to existing notions of what constitutes design practice and participation. It is my hypothesis that existing models are too simplistic and idealistic, showing simple two way decontextualised power exchanges, and linear design processes.
My professional experiences of participatory design lead me to think that a more appropriate model of participatory design would be more like a matrix of different drivers and limiting factors, and it is the interaction of the different factors that shape participatory design that I want to explore and conceptualise through my research.
REFERENCES
1. Arnstein, S. R. A Ladder of Citizen Participation Journal of the American planning Association, 35, 4, (July 1969) 216-224
2. Cottam, H., and Leadbeater, C. RED PAPER 01 HEALTH: Co-creating Services. Design Council, 2004
3. Mayfield, W. and Hill, K. Interdisciplinary and Participatory Design in the Context of Healthy Schools: Interdisciplinary working in participation: a case study. Design Principles and Practices: an International Journal 1, 3 (2007), 7-11.
4. Neighborhood Initiatives Foundation, A Practical Handbook for ‘Planning for Real’ Consultation Exercise Neighborhood Initiatives Foundation, 1995
5. Thackara, J. In the bubble: designing in a complex world. The MIT Press, 2005
ABSTRACT
This proposal outlines research that seeks to investigate and model emerging participatory design practices in design for urban regeneration of post-industrial cities and towns, and community development as led by local government in the UK. The research questions challenge the location of consultation exclusively in the domains of planning and visioning and evaluate the role of design practice therein.
It is my hypothesis that existing models of design and participation are too simplistic and idealistic, showing simple two way decontextualised power exchanges, and linear design processes. My professional experiences of participatory design lead me to think that a more appropriate model of participatory design would be a matrix of different drivers and limiting factors and this is what I plan to explore through my research.
Keywords
Design, participation, co-design, regeneration, community
INTRODUCTION
Urban regeneration has been a hugely influential movement in the UK that has seen major government spending targeted at the development of post-industrial towns and cities towards more sustainable communities and economic re-invigoration, addressing poverty, unemployment, and other social issues through redevelopment. Design and culture have played a major role in regeneration, and likewise regeneration has had a significant impact on the work of designers and architects over recent years.
Consultation and participation are increasingly being included as a statutory part of urban regeneration, including urban design, architecture, landscape architecture, graphic and systems design. This is being pushed forward by both political and economic drivers that make participation a requirement for developers and authorities investing in the design of new communities.
Consultation is an established practice within architecture and urban design. With roots outside of design, key models and methodologies for consultation (such as Arnstein’s Ladder [1] and Planning for Real [4]) come from the discipline of planning. Traditionally designers have been at the end-point of the consultation processes, recipients of edited interpretations of user needs (reports created by consultants and developers). By not having direct contact with those that they are designing for, designers have been excluded from the qualities of process not evident in results alone. When designers do become involved as participants in a project, notions of power and expertise shift and challenge the traditional role and status of the designer as a professional.
This research examines the need for re-framing the role of designers as participants, as, for example, recognised by Leadbeater, Cottam [2] and Thackara [5] on co-creation, and looks at case studies of a participatory design approach applied in UK urban regeneration and community development projects.
RESEARCH QUESTION
The research questions challenge the location of consultation exclusively in the domains of planning and visioning and evaluate the role of design practice therein. They look to establish the impact of the current participation agenda in the UK on design practice.
The research explores the potential models for this re-framing of participation. It evaluates current examples that exhibit elements of these models and works towards definitions of participation within design practice.
The questions are contextualised by design for urban regeneration and community development (predominantly design in the public sector and public realm), particularly in relation to current design opportunities in health, education, urban design and housing. It will also draw upon the established bodies of knowledge within related disciplines of HCI, Web 2.0, design for social action, community architecture, participatory health promotion, community art, and criticisms of participation in development studies.
METHOD
Design history
The foundations of the research project map through desk research and interviews the political, social and economic landscape within which these practices are occurring. Design with a distinctly social purpose has traditionally been a marginal practice, with predominantly commercial practice occupying the mainstream. As well as establishing what is happening in these practices, I also seek to determine to what extent participatory design can be seen as a mainstream or marginal practice.
Anthropology
A set of case studies will be observed and I will present the case studies at the consortium. I hope to be able to discuss some of the issues arising from the initial findings within the case study set. The case studies will be chosen to represent a profile of different types of emerging participatory practices. Criteria for selection will be developed from the findings of the design history part of the project. The themes of power and expertise will provide a framework within which the role of design and the designer will be analysed. I am currently investigating a phenomenological approach to the case study analysis.
Design management
Existing models of design practice and participation are being used to compare the observations of practice to existing notions of what constitutes design practice and participation. It is my hypothesis that existing models are too simplistic and idealistic, showing simple two way decontextualised power exchanges, and linear design processes.
My professional experiences of participatory design lead me to think that a more appropriate model of participatory design would be more like a matrix of different drivers and limiting factors, and it is the interaction of the different factors that shape participatory design that I want to explore and conceptualise through my research.
REFERENCES
1. Arnstein, S. R. A Ladder of Citizen Participation Journal of the American planning Association, 35, 4, (July 1969) 216-224
2. Cottam, H., and Leadbeater, C. RED PAPER 01 HEALTH: Co-creating Services. Design Council, 2004
3. Mayfield, W. and Hill, K. Interdisciplinary and Participatory Design in the Context of Healthy Schools: Interdisciplinary working in participation: a case study. Design Principles and Practices: an International Journal 1, 3 (2007), 7-11.
4. Neighborhood Initiatives Foundation, A Practical Handbook for ‘Planning for Real’ Consultation Exercise Neighborhood Initiatives Foundation, 1995
5. Thackara, J. In the bubble: designing in a complex world. The MIT Press, 2005
Tuesday 22 April 2008
getting started
i should be well beyond getting started by now, but i'm not, so here goes!
So here I am in my phd office on the 3rd floor, looking at a building site, and i've been back at uni doing my PhD for about 6 weeks now. To be honest, progress is slow so far, and i have been constructively procrastinating with a selection of worthy tasks such as teaching, helping colleagues with funding bids, sorting out the admin for my office (nightmare!) and new email accounts etc., and writing conference abstracts. i've also drunk lots of tea, had lots of chats, nipped to the shops a few times, and caught up on various email accounts.
my plan is that if i have a blog, and start to publicly record my progress, i will somehow shame myself into doing some work. i'll also be able to break the seal on writing and get going every day!. it's a bit ambitious but it may work.
what i need is a good plan. so right now i'm going to get on and do one and i'm not going to leave the office until i've made some progress.
eeeep.
So here I am in my phd office on the 3rd floor, looking at a building site, and i've been back at uni doing my PhD for about 6 weeks now. To be honest, progress is slow so far, and i have been constructively procrastinating with a selection of worthy tasks such as teaching, helping colleagues with funding bids, sorting out the admin for my office (nightmare!) and new email accounts etc., and writing conference abstracts. i've also drunk lots of tea, had lots of chats, nipped to the shops a few times, and caught up on various email accounts.
my plan is that if i have a blog, and start to publicly record my progress, i will somehow shame myself into doing some work. i'll also be able to break the seal on writing and get going every day!. it's a bit ambitious but it may work.
what i need is a good plan. so right now i'm going to get on and do one and i'm not going to leave the office until i've made some progress.
eeeep.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
