Bang / Conflict Zones

INDA Berlin 2011

INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 EAST BERLIN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

PART 1 — MAPPING KREUZBERG p. 10 p. 11 p. 12 p. 13

Group 1 Group 2 Group 3, 4 Group 5, 6

p. 14 p. 15 p. 16 p. 17

Group 7, 8 Group 9, 10 Group 11 Group 12

PART 2 — LIMINAL POSITIONS p. 22 Representation and Reinterpretation of Boundaries p. 24 Cultivating Boundary p. 26 Beanbags p. 28 Blur

p. 30 Memorial Within a Memorial p. 32 Invisible Boundaries p. 36 Pronouncing the Forgotten p. 38 Visible Connection/ Physical Separation

WEST BERLIN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .40

PART 3 — BANG p. 46 p. 48 p. 50 p. 52

Thai Park/Market Territorial Experimentation Within the Circle Cultural Exploration

p. 54 p. 56 p. 58 p. 60

On the Verge of Levels Assisted Box Do Not Sit Cohabit

CREDITS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64

INTRODUCTION 24 May — 27 June 2011 Berlin is a city that is rife with conflicts from the scars on the surfaces of its museums and monuments to the voids it bears in the heart of its urban landscape.

Historically, Berlin has been witness and host to some of the most significant socio-political conflicts in the modern world. The architectures of the social and political movements are continually questioned as new regimes emerge. For example, a Palladian planned Nazi bunker has been transformed from a space that shelters citizens from attacks, to a storehouse for fresh fruits, a space for hosting raves, and currently a private collection of contemporary art.

Today, contemporary Berlin is actively rebuilding and reframing its identity, both through economic policy, architectonic revisions, and cultural initiatives. Despite the seemingly surfeiting development in the city, Berlin is bankrupt and supported by its neighboring states. In this case the proposed resolution of (economic) conflicts has shifted away from tactical warfare and towards stimulating artistic initiative and creative capital. Art and architecture, as media often used to pronounce conflicts, become the principle venues for promoting tension: regulating society by challenging accepted fundamentals and equilibria.

In the summer of 2011, twenty four students from Chulalongkorn University’s International Program in Design and Architecture travelled to Berlin to participate in a

4

Design Build course focusing on investigating the varying manifestations of conflict in Berlin. Initiated and organized jointly with PROGRAM e.V., the course provided a platform for the students to research into the existing conditions of the city, to formulate a personal hypothesis toward the current condition of conflict, and to propose and construct a physical test of their thesis. Our course was divided into two halves — where we literally conducted our studio in two different locations — the first two and a half weeks in the former East Berlin, and the second half in the West. The students began with a mapping project in Kreuzberg. We then moved to a site along the former Berlin Wall, in Park am Nordbahnhof where they were asked to design an interface that expands the definition of a boundary.

For the final project, we moved to Preußen Park, known as “Thai Park,” in West Berlin where students designed and built pieces of outdoor furniture that both displayed and ameliorated the conflicts at work on the site. Park users — food vendors, diners, sunbathers, dog walkers, and tourists — all participated in the pop-up installation. The event, Bang, was a great success, receiving several hundreds of guests as well as positive reviews by both German and Thai journals and newspapers.

The word “Bang” ( ) in Thai translates to divide but also means to share, and was selected by the students as the title of their project.

This publication documents and celebrates the process and outcomes of the student work.

5

EAST

LEAP — Lab for Electronic Arts and Performance — located on the first floor of Berlin Carré, overlooks a park by the Alexanderplatz TV Tower, in former East Berlin.

This is where we held the first half of the studio.

6

BERLIN

PART 1 — MAPPING KREUZBERG

8

There is no grand narrative for a city. Every city is made from combined experiences of its inhabitants over time.

Nowhere is this truer than in Berlin, whose history is a combination of imperial, national-social, socialist, and Western democratic ideologies. The inhabitants of Berlin are carriers of these ideologies, actively constructing narratives as they move through the city.

As visitors of the city, students were empowered with a unique way of seeing. In the eyes of a visitor, the everyday is examined for potential: the overlooked becomes salient, and the muted becomes pronounced. In their first encounter with Berlin, Fotini Lazaridou-Hatzigoga led the students through Kreuzberg starting at Kotbusser Tor station and ending at Henrich-Heine-StraĂ&#x;e station.

Students were challenged to produce a map of the walk based on their observations, with explicit focus on conflicts. The short exercise resulted in a diverse set of works that investigated spatial, sensorial, and temporal relationships. Some students investigated differences in experiences through multiple visits to the site, guided tours as maps through overlapping and sometime misalignment between audio-tour and visual experience, evolutions between historical images and contemporary use, and even attempts at simulated haptic experiences of space.

9

GROUP 1 SUTHATA JIRANUNTARAT, TACHAPOL TANABOONCHAI

e raß

bst

He in

rich

-He

ine

Str aße

o Jak

An

ne

nst

raß

e

tr.

rS

ne

de

es Dr

Wa ld

em

Ora

nie

ars

traß

nst

raß e

stra ber t Ad al

Trial 3

ße

Trial 1 Trial 2

e

Trial 4

Various paths taken by a student based on the description of the narrator.

The grey line underneath shows the path taken by a narrator describing key landmarks located along the route through the site.

10

GROUP 2 NATREEYA KRAICHITTI, WACHIRA LEANGTANOM

Maps of visual attention that reveal key elements. Drawn independently by two students while walking.

11

GROUP 3 BENJAWAN IAMSA-ARD, PREE THIRAKUL

Maps showing building operations during different periods within a day.

GROUP 4 YANISA DECHWATTANATAM, PANUWAT PANPATTANASIL

Unfolded elevations of building faรงades along the route.

12

GROUP 5 PITCHAPA JULAR, PRATAN TINGSOMCHAISIN

An exercise in re-mapping based on the journey of two people, where the spatial qualities of the studio itself are used to reconstruct the experiential qualities of the site. A turning point in the route becomes a corner of the studio and photographs during the walk are mounted in the studio according to their relative vantage point in the site. A viewer is led through the re-mapped space by an audio guide where the left-channel is the voice of one person as they walked through the site, and the right another voice, synched in time.

GROUP 6 NUTHAPONG JIRATITICHAROEN, NOLE SUWANPARIN

Video documenting obstacles along the route. Orange tinted frames indicate moments of obstruction.

13

GROUP 7 PAWIKA CHAROENKUL, SIRAPAT TECHARUVICHIT

Historic Residential

Contemporary Residential

Park

Commercial

Buildings with graffiti in four programmatic locations along the route.

Mapping graffiti along a route through the site.

GROUP 8 VARIS NIWATSAKUL, PIMCHANOK WANGVEERAMIT

Initial route taken by group members based on Google Maps directions.

Routes taken based on Berliner’s verbal directions.

14

GROUP 9 THUNPORN MONTRISRISAK, CHANYA SIRIPHANNON

Formal variations in pedestrian space along a route through the site.

GROUP 10 WICHAPOL HIRUNSATHITPORN, PASIT ROJRADTANASIRI 1

1

2

2

3

3

4

4

5

5

RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL

Mapping pedestrian obstructions and how these obstructions, whether plants or other pedestrians, perform to divide a group.

15

GROUP 11 YANISA CHUMPOLPHAISAL, NICHAPATARA SWANGDECHARUX

Haptic model based on various densities located on the route through the site.

16

GROUP 12 CHAYAPAT CHAIYANUN, NATTHAPAT THANAPOONYANAN

The students created an augmented reality using a series of framing devices coupled with a fictional narrative. Objects and architectural elements along the route are primed with new meanings and stitched together to create an alternative reading of the urban fabric.

PART 2 — LIMINAL POSITIONS

REPRESENTATION AND REINTERPRETATION OF BOUNDARIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 CULTIVATING BOUNDARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 BEANBAGS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 BLUR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 MEMORIAL WITHIN A MEMORIAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 INVISIBLE BOUNDARIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 PRONOUNCING THE FORGOTTEN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 VISIBLE CONNECTION/PHYSICAL SEPARATION . . . . . . . 38

18

The Berlin Wall was erected overnight on August 13, 1961.

The next morning, Berliners awoke physically and psychologically divided. The wall evolved from checkpoints and fences into a thick zone that ran through the heart of Berlin. For more than twenty years, walls stood as an insurmountable boundary, often separated by a strip of barren land morbidly called the “death strip.” In 1989 protests in the East escalated, the wall fell, and the reunification process began.

Today the boundary exists as a memory. In a few places, preserved fragments remain intact as reminders of the past. In most places in the city, the boundary exists as a sober stone line in the ground. The work of memorialization is, in many ways, complete. Visitor centers, installations, reconstructions, interactive maps, observation decks, and signs all point clearly toward a boundary.

While these signs inform the visitor of the past, they do little to leave an impression of the spatial experience of boundaries. This project sought to expand the notion of boundaries through an architectural intervention. Rather than looking toward the past, this project engaged the boundary through spatial performances that offered an alternative, or possible future, for understanding boundaries.

The site was located along a line in the ground in Park am Nordbahnhof. The line marked the former location of the Berlin Wall. Students situated their projects in relation to this line. Each group designed an interface that challenged the definition of a boundary and revealed relationships between physical limits and subjects within the space.

19

LIMINAL POSITIONS — SITE PLAN

4 2

7 1

20

5

8

6

3

p. 20

p. 21

SUTHATA JIRANUNTARAT, NATREEYA KRAICHITTI, PIMCHANOK WANGVEERAMIT

no.1 REPRESENTATION AND REINTERPRETATION OF BOUNDARIES

22

Before

After

Initially left as an overgrown island of paved area in a vegetated field, the project reconfigured the circulation of the existing site and resuscitated a previously abandoned, bounded island, converting it into a shortcut for park users to cross from one side of the park to the other. The students worked solely with found elements on site. Through mowing and rearrangements of stones, boundaries were erased and new spaces were created.

23

CHAYAPAT CHAIYANUN, PAWIKA CHAROENKUL, VARIS NIWATSAKUL

no.2 CULTIVATING BOUNDARY

24

Before

After

The students used fertilizer to draw a simple pair of white parallel lines across an open field. The lines created a marked pathway connecting one side of the field to the other. People began to use this new defined ‘path’ as a shortcut. In the beginning, this white line of fertilizer radically altered the existing ecosystem and actually killed all of the weeds and volunteer

flora within its path. It hardened in the rain. Over time the fertilizer dissolved into the earth, and for a brief period of time nothing grew. Soon thereafter, vegetation on this fertilized soil would return and grow faster than its neighbors and its height will define a new boundary in the open field.

25

THUNPORN MONTRISRISAK, NOLE SUWANPARIN, SIRAPAT TECHARUVICHIT

no.3 BEANBAGS

26

Check Point Circulation Boundary

Mapping the potential locations of beanbags based on existing circulation in the memorial site.

Variation in starting positions of beanbags to test visitor participation and response.

What is an appropriate behavior at a “memorial site”? Initial observations of activity at the “official” Berlin Wall memorial site noted many visitors during the day who would take photos and read information. However, during the evening, younger people would arrive to use the site as a meeting place, to share food, and drinks. During particularly sunny summer days, one could observe this large open space being used for sunbathing and leisure while others simultaneously were reflecting on the past that the memorial strived to represent.

This project questioned the use of the public space, by introducing large yellow square beanbags to the site. Students arranged the soft yellow forms on the site, and documented their use during the day. Immediately visitors to the memorial began to use them. Not only were there no places to sit within the large memorial site, but also as we learnt through the intervention this form of activity (even if already occurring and not explicitly forbidden) was considered an “inappropriate use” by the memorial director. This installation respectfully pronounced the invisible codes of conduct underlying the act of memorialization.

27

WICHAPOL HIRUNSATHITPORN, NICHAPATARA SWANGDECHARUX, NATTHAPAT THANAPOONYANAN

no.4 BLUR

28

Time-lapse of users traversing the site

Before

After

Through the use of sod, the project attempted to blur the physical boundary between the footpath, typically used as a circulation space and the adjacent vegetated area, typically left uninhabited.

The implementation of a new material onto the concrete footpath directly affected the movements of the passers by — some zigzagged around the square pieces of sod, avoided stepping on them while some others began to trespass the initial confines of the footpath into the adjacent grass area.

29

YANISA CHUMPOLPHAISAL, PITCHAPA JULAR, PRATAN THINSOMCHAISIN

no.5 MEMORIAL WITHIN A MEMORIAL

30

Highlighted burial site juxtaposed against existing Berlin Wall memorial

Old Cemetary Layers Berlin Wall overlaid on top of a cemetary

Contemporary Layer

Historical Layer

Remaining trace of the old cemetary

Example of memorial “occupation”

Palimpsest of multiple memorials

This project questioned the singular narrative of the Berlin Wall memorial and the notion of historical bounds by reintroducing traces of the past use of the site onto the present. The students reintroduced the boundaries of the cemetery plots that once existed in the “dead zone” between the two walls back onto the green, manicured, clover filled lawn of the official Berlin Wall

memorial site. The project used wooden stakes and string to demarcate the position of the historical plots, which referenced archeological methods — challenging an existing method of the official memorial site.

31

BENJAWAN IAMSA-ARD, PASIT ROJRADTANASIRI, TACHAPOL TANABOONCHAI

no.6 INVISIBLE BOUNDARIES

32

Variations of “invisible boundaries” and the resulting circulation of visitors within the Berlin Wall memorial site.

“People as temporal architecture” marked the initial concept of this project. Students investigated how personal spaces could be created through various activities, for example, a space between two people having a conversation, a space between a photographer and his subject. Through choreographing a series of events within the Berlin Wall memorial site, the students successfully created “invisible boundaries” which directly affected the ways people moved through the site.

Image left: Students following scripts describing locations and activities for performing “invisible boundaries.”

33

YANISA DECHWATTANATAM, WACHIRA LEANGTANOM, PANUWAT PANPATTANASIL

no.7 PRONOUNCING THE FORGOTTEN

36

Lasers were visible from the Berlin Wall Memorial site.

A series of line-lasers were set up within a dense forest pathway mounted to trees and existing park infrastructure. The lines of the lasers, typically used in the construction industry to ensure level construction, were displaced into a now seemingly natural setting. The red lines were diffracted by leaves, weeds, and scraps of material left on the site marking the former boundary of the Berlin Wall.

The red line fragmented that can only be seen after dusk, called to attention the construction of “nature” on top of what was once a central train station and later the location part of the Berlin Wall. Sited in a park that was literally adjacent to an official Berlin Wall memorial park, this project could be read as a critique of institutionalized memorial. Asking the question of what gets pronounced and what is forgotten or camouflaged as “nature”?

37

NUTHAPONG JIRATITICHAROEN, CHANYA SIRIPHANNON, PREE THIRAKUL

no.8 VISIBLE CONNECTION/ PHYSICAL SEPARATION

38

fig. 3

fig. 1

fig. 4

fig. 2

fig. 1 The orange highlight shows the location of the mirror. fig. 2 Visitors see the reflection of the path, but not of themselves.

fig. 5

figs. 3–5 Visual continuation through the wall is accomplished by placing a mirror on the pathway.

Throughout Berlin, there are different ways of reminding one of the presence of the Berlin Wall. Even within the “official” Berlin Wall memorial site adjacent to Nordbahnhof, there are many different strategies of remembering the presence of the wall: through printed images at the scale of buildings, existing fragments of the wall, corten steel rods marking the scale and position of the wall, to literal physical simulations of the wall bounded by corten steel plates that can only be fully experienced from the distance and height of an observation tower.

This project was located at the intersection of these imposed corten markers or boundaries.

This project introduced an alternative narrative to the existing memorialization of the Berlin Wall and reinterpretation of the role of the boundary within this context. This was accomplished through the introduction of carefully positioned mirrored surfaces. One mirror was situated at a corten steel wall that isolated a reconstructed fragment of the wall and simulated a path extending onwards to infinity. The second mirrored surface reflected the exterior of the wall back to the interior of the site.

39

WEST

BERLIN

PART 3 — BANG

THAI PARK/MARKET . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 TERRITORIAL EXPERIMENTATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 CULTURAL EXPLORATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 WITHIN THE CIRCLE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 ON THE VERGE OF LEVELS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 ASSISTED BOX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 DO NOT SIT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 COHABIT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60

42

Preußen Park, known in Berlin as Thai Park plays host to the city’s Thai diaspora every Sunday each summer.

Despite local ordinances, food is prepared, umbrellas are put up, and even massage services are all on offer at the park. Located in a city that already operates under a split identity, Thai Park can be seen as both variant and microcosm to the city’s East/West divide. Clear separation of users, cultures and activities coexist every Sunday, and on occasion, these differing aspects collide. Sunbathing, dining, cooking, resting, gambling, massaging take place meters away from people playing sports, fetching with dogs, sunbathing in bikinis, and listening to music. Unlike many other Berlin public spaces where citizens from the former West and East intermix, cultural differences are displayed here to full effect. At first glance it appears that many of the Thais at the park, particularly those selling food, have imported an entire visual culture of clothing, cooking utensils and packaging techniques.

Working in groups of three, students were asked to design and build a piece of outdoor furniture that both displays and ameliorates the conflicts at work each Sunday. Strategically placed in the park, student interventions invited user participation while concurrently sparking reflection on the socio-spatial conditions of their context.

At the beginning of the project, the entire studio visited the park for a Sunday picnic. Students formed relationships with the Thais who used the park as well as the other users and conducted rigorous interviews on how the space was used.

43

BANG — SITE PLAN 7

Overall plan of Preußen park

6

3

Sections through the area of intervention in Preußen park

5

1

4

8

2

SUTHATA JIRANUNTARAT, PASIT ROJRADTANASIRI, PREE THIRAKUL

no.1 THAI PARK/MARKET

46

Initial conditions in the park

Result of intensifying the market

Thais dining in the shade Berliners sunbathing Thai Market

This project attempted to emphasize on the split dynamic of the park users as well as to ameliorate the notion of conflicts. The group developed a design that considered the existing condition on one side of the park, a Thai “market,” and to intensify its essence to make the conflict between the two sides — “market” and “park” — more obvious.

At first glance, the low tables/benches almost disappeared or were so immediately integrated into the existing activities of the park. The low horizontal planes and umbrellas served both as functional spaces for dining but also as cultural signs of inhabitation, transforming the park into a “Thai” market.

As a side note, the Thai community that uses the park requested to keep the low tables and umbrellas. Perhaps they are still in use today.

47

YANISA CHUMPOLPHAISAL, WACHIRA LEANGTANOM, NICHAPATARA SWANGDECHARUX

no.2 TERRITORIAL EXPERIMENTATION

48

Assembly of the chair/lounge

Chair/lounge configured by different user groups

“Social” configuration

“Anti-social” configuration

A series of carefully crafted cardboard objects that had a dual function: both as a chair and a lounge that were bound together by a single loop of rope. Initially, the objects were set up in a perfect circle facing in the chair position. Over the course of a single day, the objects were moved and occupied forming a constellation of different use patterns across the park.

Thais the grass was used for sitting in the shade. The project encouraged park users into a personal negotiation of space, which in many cases was that of participation. Watching the constellation of objects moved across the park during the period of a day allowed one to observe how space was controlled, divided, and shared.

The dual forms of chair/lounge evolved from observations on two different ways in which the park was used — for Germans the open grass space was used for sunbathing, while for the

49

BENJAWAN IAMSA-ARD, VARIS NIWATSAKUL, SIRAPAT TECHARUVICHIT

no.3 WITHIN THE CIRCLE

50

An invisible boundary ran down the middle of the central open space of the park. It divided the park activities into two halves — one side with Thai food vendors and the other with German clients/sunbathers. The project proposed a double ring of benches made from modular units. The benches were placed right at the center of the open space and centralized the site that was previously polarized. The geometries of the benches also promoted collective awareness as well as interaction between various users.

51

PAWIKA CHAROENKUL, CHANYA SIRIPHANNON, PRATAN THINSOMCHAISIN

no.4 CULTURAL EXPLORATION

52

View towards the sunbathing Berliners

View towards the Thais

A small cubicle was placed in the middle of the open space in the park. The cubicle could accommodate only one person at a time. Inside there were two pairs of headphones on opposing sides of the cubicle and a small stool. Once the door was closed, it was completely dark except for two small peepholes (like one would find on a typical apartment door) above each pair of headphones.

and could observe Europeans sunbathing. On the other side, one could hear German country music and observe the Thai community preparing Som-Tum.

Looking through the peephole on one side, and putting on the corresponding headphones, one heard Thai country music

The intention for this project was to emphasize the existing polarization of the shared space, where music reflected the atmosphere of the “other” in juxtaposition to an isolated — peephole — image of cultural activity. The cubicle allowed one space to reflect upon these imposed juxtapositions and perhaps to find humor in this isolation.

53

YANISA DECHWATTANATAM, WICHAPOL HIRUNSATHITPORN, PITCHAPA JULAR

no.5 ON THE VERGE OF LEVELS

54

This project sought to question how users of different cultural backgrounds react to a piece of furniture. Built as an ambiguous structure that looked like both an oversized chair and a bar counter, the construct allowed the park users to interact with it in multiple ways: the user could sit on the lower bench and used the higher one as a table top. One could stand on the other side of the horizontal top and used it as a counter.

The user could also sit on the ground, and lean on its sideboard. Engaging the structure at different ‘levels’ elevationally reflected different dining customs between cultures.

55

CHAYAPAT CHAIYANUN, TACHAPOL TANABOONCHAI, NOLE SUWANPARIN

no.6 ASSISTED BOX

56

Elevations

Sections

This project attempted to communicate the idea that both German and Thai people share the same space and that the shared use is of mutual benefit. The project was a functional water dispenser that could only be operated by two people.

In order to dispense water, two people must cooperate. On one side, a person pushed the box to reveal the spout of the water tank, and on the other side a person waited to fill a cup with water. After filling one’s cup with water, the tank sprang back into the middle of the box, awaiting another pair of participants.

57

NUTHAPONG JIRATITICHAROEN, NATTHAPAT THANAPOONYANAN, PIMCHANOK WANGVEERAMIT

no.7 DO NOT SIT

58

An existing set of park benches, the installation of two “decoy” benches, and their eventual use.

“Decoy” benches in an alternative configuration, challenging social engagement and prompting questions of use.

This project questioned the role of language, rules, use, and authenticity in a public space through the design of a bench that mimicked the existing public park bench infrastructure.

The project acted as a critique of the site and institutionalized use structures, as signs existed at the entrances of the site, written in both German and Thai language, explicitly forbidding people from cooking, playing music, or selling within the confines of the park. These rules of use were clearly and openly broken in the daily use of the park.

The decoy bench had the exact form and dimensions of the existing park bench, however on the bench was painted with a sign in both German and Thai language that said, “Do Not Sit.” The bench was situated next to an existing bench on the site. This project brought the question of permitted and approved use to the foreground through physical installation of a bench that self-proclaimed its dysfunction.

59

NATREEYA KRAICHITTI, THUNPORN MONTRISRISAK, PANUWAT PANPATTANASIL

no.8 COHABIT

60

The slot in the separation between the two sides allowed for unexpected intervention.

An adjoining dining set and recliner separated by a solid screen but with a hole that allowed for a glimpse to the other side.

This project questioned the nature of two collective groups that were sharing the park and the differing implications of doing things “at the same time,” “alongside,” or “together.”

The hybrid form was constructed using interlocking pieces of wood composite, such that each half depended on the center division for structural stability. Perhaps one could read the structural reinforcement of the division as a critical act.

61

Amerika Haus, by architect Bruno Grimmek, was built next to the Zoo Station in 1957. It housed the post-war mission to familiarize Germans with American culture. This building housed the second half of the studio.

BIOGRAPHIES Yarinda Bunnag is an architect, actor, and musician. Bunnag currently works as the Year Four Coordinator and the Abroad Program Coordinator at Chulalongkorn University, International Program in Design and Architecture (INDA) in Bangkok. She received a Master in Architecture from Harvard University, Graduate School of Design and a Bachelor of Architecture from Cornell University. During her studies, Bunnag received several awards including the American Institute of Architects school medal and certificate of merit for excellence in the study of architecture, the Baccalaureate Award for excellence in scholarship, and the James Templeton Kelley Prize for the best final design project submitted by an MArch degree candidate at Harvard Graduate School of Design in 2012. Prior to teaching, Bunnag was working at Duangrit Bunnag Architect Limited where she engaged in a wide range of projects including design competitions, private residences, as well as hotels and high rises. In most projects, she was involved from the initial design stage to the completion of building. In conjunction with architectural works, Bunnag has released three full-length albums and two EPs to date. She has garnered multiple awards including “Female Artist of the Year” from Seeson Awards for her album “Schools” in 2009. She has portrayed the leading character in two movies — both of which have been shown in theaters throughout Thailand and several other Asian countries. Bunnag has also interviewed a broad range of contemporary practitioners, including Rirkrit Tiravanija, Apichatpong Weerasethakul, Wisut Ponnimit, and Prapakorn Watanyakul for the interview show “Is, Am, Are” on Thai PBS.

William Patera is (an)architect currently working as the Year One Coordinator and adjunct professor of architecture at Chulalongkorn University, International Program in Design and Architecture (INDA) in Bangkok. He received a Master of Science in Architecture Studies from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Design and Computation Group and a Bachelor of Architecture from Cornell University.

He is currently working in collaboration with Moritz Kassner on Pupil — an open source eye tracking platform — an extension of their joint thesis research conducted at MIT. In the summer of 2010 he founded “INDA Berlin” in collaboration with Yarinda Bunnag and Carson Chan, the project culminated in a temporary “restaurant” in Berlin Mitte, designed, constructed, and operated by students. In the summer of 2011, Patera, Bunnag, and Chan continued their collaboration and brought another twenty four architecture students to Berlin for five weeks to research the concept of “Conflict Zones,” documented in this publication.

Carson Chan is an architecture writer and curator. Chan studied design, history and theory of architecture at both Cornell and Harvard University, where he received a Master’s in the History and Theory of Architecture. After working at Barkow Leibinger Architects and the Neue Nationalgalerie’s architecture exhibitions department in Berlin, with Fotini LazaridouHatzigoga, he founded PROGRAM in 2006, a non-commercial initiative for art and architecture collaborations. He has variously curated and overseen more than 30 international exhibitions of contemporary art and architecture.

His writing on art, architecture and contemporary culture appears in books and periodicals worldwide, including Kaleidoscope, where he is a contributing editor, and 032c (Berlin), where he is editor-at-large. Chan has interviewed a broad range of contemporary practitioners, including Thomas Demand, Udo Kittelmann, and David Simon. He has recently lectured at the Schaulager (Basel), GAMeC (Bergamo), 12th Venice Architecture Biennial/ Nordic Pavilion, Bund Deutsche Architekten (Berlin), and 0047 (Oslo). Chan is an active advisor to several cultural institutions including DLD (Munich), Europan, and the Premio Furla — a biennial prize given to the most promising emerging artists in Italy. In 2008 he organized an evening of panel discussions at the Neue Nationalgalerie (Berlin) to commemorate the 40th anniversary of the Mies van der Rohe building. With Nadim Samman, Chan curated the 4th Marrakech Biennale 2012 at five locations throughout the city.

Chan is currently an architecture curator at the Biennial of the Americas 2013, in Denver, Colorado.

64

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Without the participation of twenty four curious and motivated Chulalongkorn students and the support of INDA from Ajarn Preechaya Sittipunt and advice and assistance of Ajarn Pornprom Mannontarat, this project would not have been possible. Our deepest thanks to the continued collaboration and support from Program e.V., both from Carson Chan as a continuing collaborator of the project and Fotini LazaridouHatzigoga for her support and time spent leading the students through Berlin. All of the guests who participated in showing us their work as inspiration, and for their time spent giving feedback to the students: Patricia Reed, Alex Schweder, and Luis Berríos-Negrón. John Casey for dedicating your time once again and leading us through Hansa Viertel. Markus U. Wahl for helping us coordinate everything in Berlin, driving vans, giving students advice, and for picking up exactly from the point where Sabine Gottfried left. It is always a pleasure and luxury to work at Bildhauerwerkstatt in the stages of final production and at Leap Studio and Amerikahaus during stages of design and development. And finally, but not least, thanks to Sara Hartman and John McCusker for all the hard work and patience in making this publication not only tangible but much more.

65

BANG CONFLICT ZONES Berlin, 24 May — 27 June 2011

EDITORS Yarinda Bunnag, Carson Chan, William Patera TEXTS Yarinda Bunnag, William Patera

DESIGN Sara Hartman, John McCusker

STUDENT EDITOR Nichapatara Swangdecharux

Published as part of the INDA Berlin Program 2011

by International Program in Design and Architecture, Faculty of Architecture, Chulalongkorn University

PARTICIPATING STUDENTS Chayapat Chaiyanun Pawika Charoenkul Yanisa Chumpolphaisal Yanisa Dechwattanatam Wichapol Hirunsathitporn Benjawan Iamsa-ard Suthata Jiranuntarat Nuthapong Jiratiticharoen Pitchapa Jular Natreeya Kraichitti Wachira Leangtanom Thunporn Montrisrisak Varis Niwatsakul Panuwat Panpattanasil Pasit Rojradtanasiri Chanya Siriphannon Nole Suwanparin Nichapatara Swangdecharux Tachapol Tanaboonchai Sirapat Techaruvichit Natthapat Thanapoonyanan Pratan Thinsomchaisin Pree Thirakul Pimchanok Wangveeramit

INDA International Program in Design and Architecture Room 409, Faculty of Architecture Chulalongkorn University Phyathai Road Bangkok 10330 Thailand

www.cuinda.com www.programonline.de

ISBN 978-0-9837481-1-3

© 2013 PROGRAM e.V. © 2013 Chulalongkorn University Printed and bound in Germany Edition of 250

USER STATISTICS: AGE RANGE

Children

Young Adults

Adults

Elders

ISBN 978-0-9837481-1-3