TOGETHER WE THINK, DESIGN, BUILD (UP) AND RUN A TV STATION.
Together, we will research on and discuss architecture in relation to different modes of property. Using *television as our tool, the goal will be not just to communicate existing knowledge, but rather to design architecture, argue for and against it and redefine the possible roles architects could play in the future.
THE PROPERTY SHOW
Who owns the ground? And why?
Property and land have been at the core of social disputes ever since the two institutions were invented. From the Bible to the Enlightenment, property has played and still plays a crucial role in our understanding of what modern society is.
While architecture is being built, distributed and demolished as a property, it seems as if architects still know nothing about it. Private ownership is taken for granted — land is rendered invisible. Property escapes the scope of architectural expertise and the problem is passed onto others.
However, this wasn’t always the case. During 1960s, a number of architects and planners tried to tackle this issue. On the one hand, Yona Friedman, Renee Gailhoustet, Frei Otto, Superstudio, Vjenceslav Richter, to name just a few, experimented with the questions of property and land distribution in their (mostly utopian) designs. On the other hand, politicians such as Hans-Jochen Vogel, famous Social Democrat and former Mayor of Munich & Berlin, worked with laws. His proposal for an equitable land policy recognized land as a limited resource — like air and water — aiming for its exclusion from the market.
From 1960s until today, many things have changed — an almost complete dissolution of the welfare state, a neoliberal shift, the compression of space and acceleration of time. Big ruptures such as the 2008 crisis confirm once again, that real estate speculations play a decisive role in any debate on equity, far beyond the limits of a nation. Global circulation of people, capital and commodities call for new ways of seeing and understanding of property and land. What does that mean for architects? Which new roles and positions could we take? If sixties were about techno-utopias and the rise of global organizations, what is today about? What are the new tools and technologies at our disposal to access the question of property?
Montage + Storytelling (Christopher Roth)
The series will provide insights in film- and television theory by both watching historical examples and actively using the medium for content production.
Tools + Function (Severin Bärenbold & Dominique Frey)
The design studio will be complemented by a technical course, which gives insights in recording, video editing and broadcasting techniques. The course will be blocked during the first four Wednesdays.
INTEGRATED SEMINAR WEEK
As part of the studio we will travel to Berlin to actively produce (film and edit) scenes and episodes of our TV series, related to the semester topic. The seminar week will take place from March 19th-23rd — following the technical course (Tools + Function). The costs of the integrated seminar week won’t exceed 750 CHF.
LEGISLATING ARCHITECTURE – THE PROPERTY SHOW
The Property Show is embedded in an architectural mindset and research that was accompanied by the film Legislating Architecture and the ARCH+ Issue of the same title, published two years ago. Both have been presented at the Venice Architecture Biennale 2016 where they gained a lot of attention.
Leading to the second film The Property Drama premiered at the Chicago Architecture Biennale in 2017, which will result in the following ARCH+ Issue (forthcoming in March 2018) and a travelling exhibition in collaboration with several institutions, among others the V-A-I, Austria.
The student works of the Spring Semester 2018 will be embedded into the exhibition Legislating Architecture — The Property Show, planned for November 2018.
*TELEVISION AND ARCHITECTURE
Architecture is always thought and communicated through models and drawings. Still, it is more than an object. It is defined by content and context, both time-based elements. Starting from this point, the question becomes — how can time-based media, such as video and television, bring both spatial and temporal dimension of architecture into a discussion? Storytelling allows for an argument to be made, and for an architect(ure) to occupy a political position.
Therefore, *television as a technology de-centers the view from the object, and challenges our usual way of thinking of architecture. Could we use *television as our tool to communicate and design architecture?