SOCIAL INTEGRATION THROUGH ARCHITECTURAL INSTALLATIONS

SOCIAL INTEGRATION THROUGH ARCHITECTURAL INSTALLATIONS SEMINAR REPORT Submitted by Sidharth Benoi Bachelor of Architecture (B. Arch) Under the guidance of Ar. Shabna M

NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY CALICUT NIT CAMPUS PO, CALICUT

0

Table of Contents CERTIFICATION....................................................................................................5 DECLARATION.....................................................................................................6 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT.......................................................................................7 ABSTRACT.............................................................................................................8 CHAPTER 1.............................................................................................................9 1.1

INTRODUCTION................................................................................................9

1.2 AIM............................................................................................................................9 1.3

OBJECTIVE.........................................................................................................9

1.4

DELIMITATION................................................................................................10

1.5

SCOPE AND LIMITATOIONS.........................................................................10

1.5.1. SCOPE.............................................................................................................10 Helps in interactive design.............................................................................................10 Social-cultural fabric creation........................................................................................10 Helps in creating harmonious social capital..................................................................10 1.5.2. LIMITATIONS................................................................................................11 Subject of conflict..........................................................................................................11 Subject of debate........................................................................................................11 T.....................................................................................................................................11 Site-specified changes...............................................................................................11 1.6.

METHEDOLOGY..............................................................................................12

1.6.2. DETAILED ANALYSIS AND REVIEW OF DATA...................................13 1.6.3. LIVE EXPERIMENTS AND SURVEY.........................................................13 CHAPTER 2...........................................................................................................14 1

2.1.

DATA COLLECTION.......................................................................................14

2.1.1 INSTALLATION?...........................................................................................14 2.1.2 SPECIFICITY:.....................................................................................................14 2.1.3. ARCHITECTURAL TRANSFORMATION OF INSTALLTIONS...............15 CHAPTER 3...........................................................................................................16 1.3. LITERATURE REVIEW STUDIES......................................................................16 3.1.1. ROBERT KRONENBURG’S PORTABLE ARCHITECTURE....................16 3.1.2. INSTALLATIONS BY ARCHITECTS -EXPERIMENTATION IN BUILDING & DESIGN............................................................................................16 CHAPTER 4...........................................................................................................19 4.1.

CASE STUDIES.................................................................................................19

4.1.1 SKY GARDEN - SO ARCHITECTS, ISANBUL TURKEY..........................19 4.1.2. MICROINSTALLATION - NO STUFIO WROCLAW POLAND................20 4.1.3 TIOVIVO: WHIMSICAL SCULPTURES BY JAIME HAYON....................21 4.1.4 BE IN THE WEATHER - OLAFUR ELIASSON DENMARK......................23 4.1.5 FLOATING FOREST - STEFANO BOERI INTERIORS MILAN, ITALY. .24 4.1.6. PUBLIC SPACE MUMBAI, INDIA - Architects: MVRDV..........................26 4.1.7 JETTY GARDEN / DAMAN, INDIA - KTA + ARUR..................................28 4.2 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS................................................................................30 CHAPTER 5...........................................................................................................32 5.1 LIVE STUDY..........................................................................................................32 5.1.1 FREEDOM SQUARE DEEARTH KOZHIKODE, INDIA.............................32 5.2 OBSERVATION.....................................................................................................34 5.3 INFERENCE...........................................................................................................34 CHAPTER 6...........................................................................................................35 2

6.1. LIVE EXPERIMENT.............................................................................................35 6.1.1 INSTALLATION FROM ADIZYA.................................................................35 6.2 QUESTIONNAIRE.................................................................................................37 6.3 OBSERVATION.....................................................................................................37 6.4 INFERENCE...........................................................................................................38 6.5 CONCLUSION........................................................................................................38 CHAPTER 7...........................................................................................................39 7.1 QUESTIONNAIRE REVIEW.................................................................................39 7.1.2 QUESTIONS....................................................................................................40 6.2

ANALYSIS.........................................................................................................43

6.3

CONCLUSION...................................................................................................43

CHAPTER 8...........................................................................................................44 8.1 CONCLUSION STATEMENT...............................................................................44 REFRENCES.........................................................................................................45

3

Figure 1sky garden - source archdaily...............................................................................19 Figure 2 sky garden - source archdaily..............................................................................19 Figure 3 micro installtion source : web publication- design boom by michal majewski. 20 Figure 4 source : web publication- design boom by michal majewski..............................21 Figure 5source : web publication- deezan dan howarth....................................................21 figure 6 source : web publication- deezan dan howarth....................................................22 Figure 7 source : web publication- deezan dan howarth...................................................22 Figure 8 source : web publication- Olafur Eliasson web page........................................23 Figure 9 source : web publication- Olafur Eliasson web page........................................23 Figure 10 source : web publication- Olafur Eliasson web page.....................................24 Figure 11 source : source : web publication- floating forest arch daily...........................24 Figure 12 source : web publication- floating forest arch daily.........................................25 Figure 13 source : web publication- floating forest arch daily.........................................25 Figure 14 public space Mumbai views , source – archdaily..............................................26 Figure 15 public space Mumbai views , source – archdaily.............................................26 Figure 16 public space Mumbai views , source – archdaily..............................................27 Figure 17 public space Mumbai views , source – archdaily..............................................27 Figure 18 jetty garden views - source archdaily................................................................28 Figure 19 jetty garden views - source archdaily................................................................28 Figure 20 jetty garden views - source archdaily................................................................29 Figure 21 jetty garden views - source archdaily................................................................29 Figure 22 de earth architects web page..............................................................................32 Figure 23 de earth architects web page..............................................................................33 Figure 24 Adizya student photographs- dark room light installation................................35 Figure 25 Adizya student photographs- dark room shadow art.........................................36 Figure 26 Adizya student photographs- outside space art installation..............................36 Figure 27 Adizya student photographs- outside space art installation..............................37 Figure 28 figure showing the halted stage of installation in Kottayam source - the Hindu newspaper 2022 march 3...................................................................................................39 Figure 29 pie chart showing the response from various people........................................40 Figure 30 render image showing the finished image of installation..................................42 4

CERTIFICATION

This is to certify that the report entitled " social integration through architectural installations" submitted by Sidharth Benoi to National Institute of Technology Calicut in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the award of the degree of B.Arch. is a true and accurate record of the work he completed under my supervision and guidance. The seminar's material has not been submitted to any other Institute or University for the granting of any other degree or certificate, in whole or in part.

Place A.r. Shabna M Date:

(Guide & Mentor)

Signature of Head of Department

5

DECLARATION

I hereby declare that this submission is my own work and that, to the best of my knowledge and belief, it contains no material previously published or written by another person nor material which has been accepted for the award of any other degree or diploma of the university or the other institutions of higher learning, except where due acknowledgement has been made in the text.

Place: Calicut

Signature: Name: Sidharth Benoi

Date:

Registration No.: B180001AR

6

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I first and foremost give thanks to everyone for all the blessings. I owe a huge debt of gratitude to my mentor, Ar.Shabna M, for her prompt advice, unending encouragement, and patience in appreciating my work throughout the semester.

She gave me the motivation to finish the project to this level, and I will always be grateful for her guidance and support. I want to express my sincere gratitude to Dr. Anjana Bagyanathan for her insightful analysis of the project, which enabled me to improve the study with more comprehension.

Friends and family members, who are a never-ending source of inspiration and support and never fail to uplift my spirits with each passing day, have my undying gratitude.

7

ABSTRACT

looking into various forms of installation and focusing on social installations or public space installations and their effects on society. through experimentation and survey and study of past papers, publications, and research work. comparing them and analyzing the case studies with similar backgrounds the seminar report tries to brief upon the social integration caused by installations and their effects on society and their positive and negative effects on society.

8

CHAPTER 1

1.1 INTRODUCTION

Installation is a type of art or can be architectural 3d art that exhibits the character of temporariness or permanent form which can be changed or moved from site to site. They occupy a 3d space indoors or outdoors etc., each installation varies in many ways.

With diverse features which are mostly not comparable to each other. What changes do they make to the site or the surroundings or are they meant to be just admired as a form of art?

Installations interact with the space, surroundings, and people, do they bring significant changes to society, and are these changes always positive, or do they have a negative side? through various studies, the seminar looks into the matter.

1.2 AIM

• To study and analysis installations which acted as the catalyst in bringing difference in society and community.

1.3 OBJECTIVE

• To study Case-studies on various installations.

• To study effects of installations upon placing in a community.

• Live social experiment and analysis of the study.

9

1.4 DELIMITATION

This is to state that the following seminar work topic is limited to scopes of installations coming under the margin of social installations and their positive and negative effect on society,

1.5 SCOPE AND LIMITATOIONS 1.5.1. SCOPE

Helps in interactive design

The study helps in knowing more about interactive design, by analyzing the social aspect of installations we can access the data on designs that bring in positive changes in society and their limitations and negatives which helps in creating a more interactive design in other segments of architecture.

Social-cultural fabric creation

The interactions between people, groups, and community, brings in new ideologies and changes in the different groups that are having different perspective thus creating a new social fabric and opening up to new ideologies and ideas. the discussion between people helps in creating new dynamics in community and social life

Helps in creating harmonious social capital 10

A beneficial outcome of interpersonal connection is referred to as social capital. The desirable result could be tangible or intangible and could consist of favor, helpful knowledge, original concepts, and upcoming opportunities. The stir in social structure caused by the interaction through installations can act as a stepping stone for the same.

1.5.2. LIMITATIONS

Subject of conflict

Clashing of ideologies due to installation or a person’s perspective of looking into the subject can lead to conflict between

Subject of debate

The installations placed in a space may conflict with people’s interests thus leading to various debates on different topics.

Site-specified changes

The installation varies in the different physical setups which have to be adjusted according to the place of exhibition and needs to change in various aspects within and around the surroundings to attain the creator’s perspective.

11

1.6.

METHEDOLOGY

12

1.6.1 DATA COLLECTION

13

Collection of data (primary and secondary data) Primary data collected from survey, question answering and interviews are collected and studied on detail and analysis using comparative studies from secondary data. Tools used Internet, google sheets, google forms, NVIVO (data analysis software) Collection of secondary data from research papers, journals, books are done and reviewed then analyzed to be the background study for supporting and comparing with the primary data.

1.6.2. DETAILED ANALYSIS AND REVIEW OF DATA After collection of data from various sources the data is combined in chronological order and the data is analyzed using graphs, tables and the changes in data with respect to the topic is reviewed over the data periods.

A framework for the next stage, the recognition of the importance of installations in society and their effect on society is drawn from the data.

1.6.3. LIVE EXPERIMENTS AND SURVEY Doing a live installation in campus or on site for experimentation purpose and doing a questionnaire interview on the viewers and analyzing the answers for collecting data on installations effect on society.

14

CHAPTER 2

2.1.

DATA COLLECTION

2.1.1 INSTALLATION There are two categories of installations, both physical and virtual. While physical installation deals with the installation of actual goods like computer hard drives, cables, modems, etc., virtual installation refers to the installation of software. Multiple physical machine installations require specialized skills. Similar to how certain software installations must be carried out by experts, others are as simple and straightforward as the wizard-based installs that are frequently seen with consumer software and can be downloaded from websites. A few instances of various software installation types are Windows Installer installation, web-based software installation, and single exe application installation. an installation can be either: • mobile (or re-mountable); • permanent (or fixed); • ephemeral (or temporary)

2.1.2 SPECIFICITY:

Some installations are created specifically for (and in accordance with) a given exhibition venue. Interaction: In some instances, the installation or even the artist himself is made available for public interaction. The gap between the public and the work is mostly eliminated; in some situations, involvement occurs and the public encroaches on 15

the area designated for the work, creating new kinds of relationships between the creation, the creator, and the viewer. The scenography: Some pieces suggest a path or a series of stages or sensory experiences.

2.1.3. ARCHITECTURAL TRANSFORMATION OF INSTALLTIONS

One of Kurt Schwitter's first works, which is today categorized as an installation, dates from between 1919 and 1923 and up until the middle of the 1930s. It marked the beginning of the change of architectural space for the development of a spatial installation. Merzbau, a piece of art, is no longer in existence because it was destroyed in a British air raid in 1943. Over several years, "Merzbau" was built and spread over his home's many rooms. Inventing the name "Merz," Schwit-ter used it to describe all of his creations, including poetry, collage, paintings, and constructions. Merzbau was a perfect example of a piece that fit into this category.

Since it was always expanding and changing as Schwitter saw fit, the installation was never truly complete. Merzbau was a combination of all the collage, found art, montages, and assemblage techniques that Schwitter was known for using. Before engulfing eight rooms on different levels of his house, the effort started on the walls of his studio.

Merzbau covered areas in both the horizontal and vertical axes. It was put together using artefacts and found materials to create sculptures and columns that were all attached to the house’s architectural framework.

The installation was never completely finished since Schwitter constantly added to it and changed it as he saw fit. Merzbau included all of Schwitter’s well-known collage, foundobject, montages, and assemblage methods. The project began on the walls of his studio before spreading to eight rooms on various floors of his home. Merzbau spanned both the vertical and horizontal axes. It was constructed using artefacts and discarded items to make sculptures and columns that were all joined to the structural framework of the house. This started the installation in architectural spaces and line of architecture.

16

CHAPTER 3 1.3. LITERATURE REVIEW STUDIES

3.1.1. ROBERT KRONENBURG’S PORTABLE ARCHITECTURE

The nomadic lifestyle of civilizations served as the inspiration for the portable architecture movement, which is a global phenomenon that is rapidly growing. It also integrates modern technology. This book explores the portable structure trend via essays and projects by prominent practitioners, including examples from the residential, recreational, corporate, and industrial sectors.

3.1.2. INSTALLATIONS BY ARCHITECTS -EXPERIMENTATION IN BUILDING & DESIGN

This book is a collection of data on famous installations by various architects, artists, designers collected under 5 different topics.

1. Tectonics This part serves as a reminder that architecture extends beyond the facade by investigating novel methods of assembly and materials.

2. Body examines how the human body, spatial experience, and design are related.

3. Nature Might help shape a more responsible attitude towards nature.

17

4. Memory Engages with the collective memory and its relationship with space.

5. Public Space Offers citizens new ways to inhabit or relate to the city.

3.1.3. THE ARCHITECTURE OF SOCIAL INTERACTION – article

1. Programming for Social Intensity The programming of the structure, rather than the physical shape itself, is what has the most potential for architecture to unite people. In this situation, space serves as a container because of whatever purpose the group thinks is appropriate.

2. Challenging Spatial Expectations Taking in the example of The Ku.Be House of Culture in Movement the space is challenged to blend in special activities,

3. Designing the Common Ground Bringing in the social interaction into major and minor scale in residential planning and other spaces thus reducing the sense of loneliness Intergenerational living fosters learning and can make an essential contribution to bridging the gap between different social groups.

4. Re-imagine Civic Assets as Social Connectors Creating adaptive spaces and more multi-functional or changing architectural forms to create more opportunity for interaction between people and communities helping them to empower and to relate to each-other.

18

5. Allowing for Unplanned Activities Taking in the concept: architecture should also leave room for the unplanned, for spontaneous activities and encounters.

3.2 INFERENCE The architectural tools that the profession may use to help build a more cohesive society are as varied as the social world and its problems. Architects have a more active role in creating the environment for social discourse by creating the spatial linkages and programmatic layouts that foster accidental meetings, stimulate conversation, engagement, and community consolidation.

19

CHAPTER 4

4.1.

CASE STUDIES

4.1.1 SKY GARDEN - SO ARCHITECTS, ISANBUL TURKEY

Figure 1sky garden - source archdaily

Figure 2 sky garden - source archdaily

• sky garden is a 2016 installation done by so architects in Ortaköy Square • One of Istanbul’s busiest and most popular is Ortaköy squares.

20

• In such a crowded neighborhood, adding a garden to the ground would lower the square’s walking space and increase its density. Instead, it was suggested to hang the garden while yet allowing access to the ground. using the square’s existing slab as the foundation for the new garden, which will also act as a potted plant canopy on sunny days.

• The installation acts as a seating and relaxing spot for people • it helps people to relax and interact with a piece of nature.

4.1.2. MICROINSTALLATION - NO STUFIO WROCLAW POLAND

Figure 3 micro installtion source : web publication- design boom by michal majewski

• Consisting of half-chairs, and half-sunbeds, the objects transform the stairs into a seating area.

• As part of recovering and reimaging forgotten city spaces this project proposed various installations across the city.

21

Figure 4 source : web publication- design boom by michal majewski

• People come here to enjoy the view and relax.

• Natural shade provided by the trees around n the installations.

• People came and started to interact and relax at the spot.

4.1.3 TIOVIVO: WHIMSICAL SCULPTURES BY JAIME HAYON.

Figure 5source : web publication- deezan dan howarth

22

• This installation turns the area into an outdoor gallery, playground, and haven, fostering a convivial and leisurely mood.

• A creative multiyear programmed to include visitors in the arts and animate the piazza.

figure 6 source : web publication- deezan dan howarth

• Four wooden sculptures in the shapes of familiar animals or objects, such a pig or a bell, that evoke laughter and joy were constructed as a site-specific artwork.

• Each quirky building has a bright pattern—from polka dots to stripes—as well as a series of stairs and slides with kid-sized openings that invite visitors to engage with the sculptures.

Figure 7 source : web publication- deezan dan howarth

23

4.1.4 BE IN THE WEATHER - OLAFUR ELIASSON DENMARK

Figure 8 source : web publication- Olafur Eliasson web page

Be I the weather is a big vertical ring which is located along the Ordrupgaard Kunstpark’s north-south axis.

• The direction of the wind is determined by a particular weather vane that is positioned on the museum’s roof. A system of 36 jets that are evenly distributed around the ring’s perimeter release a gust of fog into the park whenever the wind changes directions.

Figure 9 source : web publication- Olafur Eliasson web page

24

Figure 10 source : web publication- Olafur Eliasson web page

• The weather is always a factor in the job, whether we realize it or not. The piece embraces this intangible component, making clear the wind, atmosphere, and air that surrounds us.

• The playground installation acting as a space for people to interact.

4.1.5 FLOATING FOREST - STEFANO BOERI INTERIORS MILAN, ITALY

Figure 11 source : source : web publication- floating forest arch daily

25

• a place for social interaction where the separation that a person creates from the natural world develops in new forms and dimensions.

• the place acts as a relaxing and eye-cleansing area from the city rush while also helping to promote the company’s ideologies.

Figure 12 source : web publication- floating forest arch daily

• created in Milan as a temporary installation.

• To mitigate the consequences of climate change and enhance the quality of life for inhabitants, urban greening is a crucial first step.

• the Floating Forest intends to provide a point of convergence and reconciliation between the natural world and people.

Figure 13 source : web publication- floating forest arch daily

26

4.1.6. PUBLIC SPACE MUMBAI, INDIA - Architects: MVRDV

Figure 14 public space Mumbai views , source – archdaily

• One Green Mile, a project by MVRDV and Studio POD that revitalized a number of unused areas beneath Mumbai’s Senavati Bapat Marg flyover, has reached its completion.

• The design transforms an obtrusive piece of concrete infrastructure into a community gathering place, adding much-needed facilities and plants, enhancing mobility, and giving the neighborhood a distinctive aesthetic identity.

• On a wider scale, the design sets up a new paradigm for underutilized public spaces in the dense Indian metropolis and presents a repeatable method for sustainable urban growth.

Figure 15 public space Mumbai views , source – archdaily

27

• The area is separated into a number of open-air “rooms” with various uses, including a lounge, gym, lounging area with shade, a performance space, and a reading room. The area is covered in vegetation. The design included greenery in retaining walls, planters, an archway at the entry, and a series of screens lining the space.

• The area is made more commodious and accessible by the design, which improves connectivity for bikes and pedestrians. Accessibility and safety are enhanced by paving, bicycle lanes, and vivid, large-scale zebra crossings. By including a continuous mobility network and a mobility hub to promote cycling, it enhances accessibility • Such a strategy is simple to replicate elsewhere in the city due to its focus on inclusive, shaded green spaces.

Figure 16 public space Mumbai views , source – archdaily

Figure 17 public space Mumbai views , source – archdaily

28

4.1.7 JETTY GARDEN / DAMAN, INDIA - KTA + ARUR

Figure 18 jetty garden views - source archdaily

• The site is peppered with about 20 fully mature trees. The park had become unusable and abandoned over time as a result of poorly planned spaces, gradual and unrelated landscape features, and sculptures.

• The goal was to recreate public spaces where the sea and the land.

Figure 19 jetty garden views - source archdaily

29

• A semi-open reading pavilion, an entry frame canopy, and public conveniences outline the entrance area. Larger landscaped areas, a children’s play area, and a senior citizens’ corner are all included in the design of the entrance spine’s side walls. These areas have mature trees already in them.

• All in all, the new garden plan seeks to improve the final urban park in the Nani Daman neighborhood while also creating a warm street presence, a wonderful public space, a connection with water and the sky along the promenade.

Figure 20 jetty garden views - source archdaily

Figure 21 jetty garden views - source archdaily

30

4.2 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS

Case study

Source

Type

Observation

Sky garden Istanbul

Archdaily

Public space

1. Space became more active 2. Attracts more tourists 3. Active participation of all age groups 4. Recreational space

Micro installation –

Web publication

Public space

1

Poland

design boom

restoration 2 3

Tiovivo: whimsical sculptures by Jaime Hayon,

Deezan Dan

Semipublic

Howarth

space art

be in the weather

- Oafur Eliasson Public space web page l

1 2 1 2 3

floating forest -

web publication- Public space

Stefano Boeri

floating forest

interiors Milan ,Italy

archdaily

1 2 3 4

Re- imaging of the space with more active use by locals and publics Restoration was done through installations Peoples came and spent time in space more frequently .

Children became more active in space Lived up the spaces for children in an adult space Much costlier and more maintenance.

Abandoned space became more usable and attractive.

Space converted to a public picnic and recreational space.

Interactive and healthy installation.

Green space gives people space to relax and breath.

Positive interaction.

Environmental quality increases with social interaction.

31

Case study

Source

Type

10-mile project

Archdaily

Public space

Jetty Garden

Archdaily

Public space

Observation

1

1 2 3

Unused space became more interactive and useful, 2 Accessible and usable for all age group.

Restoration of unused space.

Blends with nature and enhances the spaces quality.

Positive interactions

4.3 INFERENCE • People interact with the installation and placed after placing them.

• People tend to spend more time in space.

• Taking pictures and relaxing.

• Responsible and green or eco-friendly installations tend to attract people more.

• Overcrowding can cause problems.

• Littering in spaces is one problem caused by placing an installation in a space • Daily maintenance is required in some cases

32

CHAPTER 5

5.1 LIVE STUDY

5.1.1 FREEDOM SQUARE DEEARTH KOZHIKODE, INDIA

Figure 22 de earth architects web page

History The Old Beach Stage Hosted Many Historical Events and Figures in the Past Where Freedom Square Now Stands: The beach stage was the most well-known and substantial location for cultural events and political gatherings in the area. The stage, though, was only a throwback to the past, with its deteriorating and sinking construction.

Unfortunately, there were no manmade structures or landmarks along this length of land that would have suggested the area’s historical significance.

"Freedom Square" honors the valiant struggle and important national liberation movements that took place here.

33

34

Freedom square • Political events and big gatherings can be held on the spacious main stage, which faces south. The central walk emanating from the area is planned as a memory of Calicut’s history with a walking gallery, with historical narratives etched on selected plates. The North stage is for cultural events.

• Green rooms are helpful for the performance areas’ smooth operation. Abstract wall sculptures of the historic Salt Satyagraha evoke recollections of the past and draw attention to the unnoticed origins of our city.

• Political and cultural events of all sizes are welcome in the area. It serves as a gathering spot, attractive photo location, an urban gym, and more.

Figure 23 de earth architects web page

35

5.2 OBSERVATION • People tend to sit and enjoy food and other activates in the space • Taking photos and posting them in social media is a daily event in freedom square • 4-10 pm is the major active time • Couples and pedestrians mostly sit and enjoy evening sky at freedom square relaxing and recreational space for children.

• Littering and vandalism is a problem • Small stalls nearby attract more activity.

• Space brings in positive interaction.

5.3 INFERENCE

people tend to interact with each other during the time spent in freedom square. the space acts as a natural hotspot for relaxing, the major activates are taking photographs, eating food and sitting and relaxing. most active users are teenagers and children. freedom square brings in positive social interaction and make the space more socially active.

36

CHAPTER 6

6.1. LIVE EXPERIMENT

6.1.1 INSTALLATION FROM ADIZYA

Figure 24 Adizya student photographs- dark room light installation

Adizya installations

Adizya is a art and cultural fest being conducted alongside tathva in NIT Calicut. During this fest various installation where placed at the department of architecture and various data and inputs were collected from the viewers and visitors using interviews, questions and observation.

An analysis of this data and inference follows the experiments final results.

37

Figure 25 Adizya student photographs- dark room shadow art

Various installations using light, UV paint, UV light, light, and shadow art consisted of installation in a dark room.

Figure 26 Adizya student photographs- outside space art installation

Art installation using foam boards, shoe soles and cardboard waste where placed in open public spaces, the concept was fluidity for the installations.

Public space installation where accessible for everyone while the dark room installation was placed in a class room inside the department.

38

Figure 27 Adizya student photographs- outside space art installation

6.2 QUESTIONNAIRE 1 2 3 4 5

Have they seen both the set of installation?

Among them which was more engaging?

Did they enjoy the installations?

Do you recommend them to others?

Have the taken pictures videos etc. for sharing them?

6.3 OBSERVATION • People preferred to interact with the dark room installations more because of their nature • Among the installations placed outside people themed to interact with the major installation.

• Taking pictures as a group and individually along with installations.

• People talking mostly about the theme and aesthetics of installations.

• Few asked volunteers for the details of installations.

39

6.4 INFERENCE • people tend to interact with flashy or aesthetic aspects of installations more • taking photographs and admiring them are the main activity.\ • overcrowding in the dark room was seen on 2 and day of Adizya • damage caused by overcrowding • mostly the response was positive interactions of people.

• people felt comfortable talking about them and sharing experiences.

6.5 CONCLUSION People tend to interact and socialize bringing in positive changes due to installations. further, they help in providing life to spaces in a new light and help to reimage the spaces.

People from all age groups are actively taking part in these interactions. daily maintenance is needed for some installations. they tend to act more crowded so the littering in some spaces and damage caused to the surrounding area.

Some installations make the natural spaces lose their authenticity. More planning in placing installations needed to be done.

While concern of public safety also needs to be in mind.

40

CHAPTER 7

7.1 QUESTIONNAIRE REVIEW

An online survey among 109 people was conducted based on the failed installation placed at Kottayam, the following questions were circulated using google forms and an analysis of this data is used to conclude.

Figure 28 figure showing the halted stage of installation in Kottayam source - the Hindu newspaper 2022 march 3

41

7.1.2 QUESTIONS

1 Are you familiar with this installation in Kottayam?

Figure 29 pie chart showing the response from various people

The response shows that almost half of the people are familiar with the installation and have a basic knowledge about it.

2 Have you discussed the installation with friends, family, colleagues, and others?

42

The response shows that the installation has been a topic of discussion among people 3

Have you shared memes, posts, articles of this installation through various social platforms?

The response shows that the installation has brought a social integration through social media in good scale.

4

Do you think this was a good proposal?

Major portion of people are aware of the projects failure

43

5

Are you aware of its current status?

People unware of its current status – the installation is going to be demolished.

Figure 30 render image showing the finished image of installation

6. Do you think this installation made a positive effect?

Most people are aware of the negative effects and unsuccessful attempt of the government to finish this installation.

44

6.2

ANALYSIS 1 2 3 4

6.3

People are aware of the installation mostly through social media.

People tend to share various information about the installation through social platforms People have discussed about the social and non-social aspects of the installation among themselves and others.

Most people are not area of the installations current status.

CONCLUSION

The installation has brought in a significate amount of discussion among people and has been a topic of discussion and debate. People who have not seen the installation in real are also aware of the installation and its status due to social integration through various multimedia and social media.

45

CHAPTER 8

8.1 CONCLUSION STATEMENT

The study through various reviews and research has observed that the various public installations have made a significant change in their surroundings and among people.

People tend to interact and spend time among the installations and their surrounding space. The analysis of various experiments and studies also shows that the interaction can be both positive and negative which in most cases it was positive and a good outcome of social capital is formed due to the social interactions.

Studies show that the interactions can also bring damage to the installation, and it's surrounding. observations made in these studies show that unused public spaces can be reimaged using installations. installations bring in more crowd and thus more interaction among people.

Installations focused on reusable materials and spreading social awareness, raising environmental issues, and interacting with nature should be promoted and practiced.

The exchange of various opinions and ideologies bring in new ideas and changes among people. getting people to interact and mingle with each other during the post covid period is important for social growth.

46

REFRENCES

Ancel, Pascale. Une représentation sociale du temps: étude pour une sociologie de l’art.

Paris: Harmattan, 1996.

Bach, Penny Balkin. New Land Marks: Public Art, Community, and the Meaning of Place. Washington, D.C.: Editions Ariel, 2001. https://booksc.xyz/s/architectural%20installations https://www.archdaily.com/984486/le-kraken-installation-uv-lab? ad_source=search&ad_medium=projects_tab https://www.archdaily.com/968994/freedom-square-de-earth-architects? ad_source=search&ad_medium=projects_tab https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/kerala/hopes-of-skywalk-in-kottayam-fades/ article65187031.ece https://www.archdaily.com/search/projects/categories/public-architecture/country/india Installation Art (Claire Bishop) (z-lib.org) Installations By Architects Experiments in Building and Design (Sarah Bonnemaison, Ronit Eisenbach) (z-lib.org) (1) Portable Architecture, Third Edition ( etc.) (z-lib.org) Aycock, Alice. Alice Aycock: Projects 1979–1981. College of Fine Arts, University of Florida, 1981.

Azara, Pedro. Arquitectos a Escena, Architects on Stage: Stage and Exhibition Design in the ’90s. Barcelona: Editorial Gustavo Gilli, 1990. https://www.archdaily.com/983352/floating-forest-stefano-boeri-architetti 47

https://www.archdaily.com/985539/9-architect-designed-installations-products-andfurniture-pieces-at-the-2022-fuorisalone? ad_source=search&ad_medium=projects_tab&ad_source=search&ad_medium=search_re sult_all https://www.architecturaldigest.com/gallery/6-architectural-installations-that-reimagineoutdoor-spaces https://high.org/exhibition/tiovivo/ https://www.dezeen.com/2016/06/11/jaime-hayon-installs-tiovivo-animal-shaped-playequipment-atlanta-high-museum-of-art-design/#:~:text=Hay%C3%B3n's%20Tiovivo %3A%20Whimsical%20Sculptures%20have,area%20for%20children%20to%20play. https://www.inexhibit.com/marker/denmark-the-art-playground-of-the-ordrupgaardmuseum/ https://olafureliasson.net/archive/artwork/WEK109433/vaer-i-vejret

48

49