Studio1 - Semester 1 2021 - Tess Quilliam

An Evolving Perception of Landscape.

An interconnected hierarchy of the importance of ideas or thoughts provoked by each piece of work or research task that led to change in my perception of landscape across different sites.

Tess Quilliam - s3842545 - DESIGN STUDIO 1

INITIATION: In the change in my ideas on landscape

Structured Structured thinking: thinking: Research Research

Fluid Fluid thinking: thinking: Experience Experience on on site site Convergent Convergent thinking: thinking: Founding Founding (outcome) (outcome)

28 (3.1.i) 23 (3.3.i)

MY PERCEPTION OF ‘LANDCSAPE’

Structured Structured thinking: thinking: base base drawings drawings

26 (2.1.i)

29 (3.2.i)

27 (2.4.i)

8 \ (1.2.f)

27 (2.3.i)

9 \ (1.4.f)

10 (2.1.f) 10 (2.2.f) 10 (2.3.f) 10 (2.4.f) 10 (2.5.f) 10 (2.6.f)

10 (2.7.f) 10 (2.9.f)

FOUNDATIONS: Base drawings, gathering information

10 (2.8.f)

10 (2.10.f)

25 (1.1.i) 25 (1.4.i)

23 (4.1.u)

30 (3.3.i)

Divergent Divergent thinking: thinking: experimentation experimentation

11 (2.11.f)

23 (4.3.u) 23 22 (4.2.u) (4.1.u)

15 (1.2.u)

‘reflective’ narrative

UNDERSTANDING: Of my initial perception of landscape. What changed this?

20 19 (3.5.u) 19 (3.4.u) (3.3.u) 19 (2.2.u) 19 (3.1.u)

Fluid Fluid thinking: thinking: Observation Observation

Start 1.

18 (2.3.u)

11 (2.12.f)

17 (2.1.u)

PAGE NUMBER

2

Start/Finish

10 (2.4.f)

12 (3.1.f)

(FIGURE NUMBER)

25 (1.2.i)

25 (1.3.i)

Convergent Convergent thinking: thinking: Idea Idea Curation Curation

Fluid Fluid thinking: thinking: creating creating with with no no clear clear intention intention yet yet

9 \ (1.3.f)

25 (1.2.i)

27 (2.5.i)

30 (3.3.i)

7 1.

(1.1.f)

27 (2.2.i)

15 (1.2.u)

27 (2.4.i)

3.

17 (2.2.u)

9 (1.3.f)

5.

23 (4.2.u)

16 (1.3.u)

2.

25 (1.1.i)

4.

19 (3.3.u)

‘thinking process’ narrative

Finish

(altered perception)

15 (1.1.u)

Nested conversations: {[(Self)Peers]Group}

Convergent Convergent thinking: thinking: Compilation Compilation of of thoughts thoughts or or ideas ideas

Structured Structured thinking: thinking: Compilation Compilation of of findings findings

3

Our thoughts, ideas and understanding of a concept or feeling is constantly evolving. It changes shape, depth and potency as differing ideas present themselves.

Whether forced or natural, my perception of the concept of ‘environment’ was challenged and expanded through the series of tasks and research conducted throughout Design Studio One. Eliasson’s (2016) understanding of how we shape our understanding through the continued question of “why?” enabled me to grasp how reflection and curation of my work enables me to better understand how I learn and produce my thoughts in a physical or intangible way.

I have always worked in a very structured and planned manner where I prefer to know exactly where I am going and what the outcome will potentially be. I stepped into this course challenging myself to open my mind to the uncertainty of design and adapt to a more free-flowing idea curation. Upon reflection, as the studio progressed, I developed a more relaxed and accepting nature to the way thoughts, ideas and understandings entered my mind and work (presented in this folio through the differnt ways of thinking; structured, fluid, divergent and convergent).

Design Statement.

Territories provided a more structured approach to tasks but still had an aspect of uncertainty, while Assemblages entailed more of a “surprise discovery” whereby there was no right or wrong solution (Christophe Girot, 1999). The melding of these units enabled me to challenge old working habits and develop an evolved way working; seeking structure through accepting uncertainty in order to produce a more natural progression of ideas.

Prior to commencing this studio, I rarely took the time to reflect upon my work in such a depth that allows me to get a better understanding of how I produced what I did.

Through the duration of the semester this has evolved, and I now have not only a greater apprehension for how I like to work, but an increased appreciation for reflecting.

5

Foundations (f)

Foundations category 1: STRUCTURED THINKING (base drawings)

base drawings, gathering information

Foundations includes all drawings that aided in further research, testing and exploration. More ‘structured thinking’ was evident through the base drawings which were used to conduct experimentation of ideas and can be looked back on for grounding. The ‘fluid thinking’ phase includes any drawings or collages created while my head is in a free-flowing state and there is no idea yet of what a resolution could be. Despite this, these drawings were used to conduct further research and aid in the overall understanding of a landscape.

Complied information could then be refined further during the ‘convergent thinking’ stage to make more sense of the gathered data and draw conclusions.

[how could you explore heirachy or a progression of ideas]

6

Figure. 1.1.f - Theoretical Frameworks Villa D’Este Base Plan

7

Figure 1.3.f marks the third checkpoint in the ‘thinking process’ narrative. After the initial altered perception of landscape and following reserach, the creating process stage began.

This base drawing explores the conditions on site in the particular spot where my prior ideas on how water interacts with a landscape was challenged. I would then use this base drawing throught the creating or experimenting process to reach a conclusion of why my perception was challenged. (move to figure 3.3.u [page 19]) Figure. 1.3.f - DS1 Territories Base Conditions Section #1

(what causes me to question my understanding of landscape on particular sites?)

Figure. 1.2.f - DS1 Territories Site Base Plan

8

9

Figure. 1.4.f - DS1 Territories Base Conditions Section #2

Foundations category 2: FLUID THINKING (creating with no clear intention yet) Figure 2.4.f marks one of the drawings utilised during the ‘reflective’ narrative process.

Once the final eidetic collage was created, I could then reflect back on this process model to get a greater understanding of how I iIutilised the ‘moment’ seen through the model in my program on site. Upon the completion of the unit, by refelcting back on this task I could see that I incorporated the action verb of my process model into my final design idea more than I initially realised. (move back to figure 3.3.i [page 30])

Figures. 2.1-10.f DS1 Assemblages Process Model Drawings

10

Figure. 2.11.f - DS1 Assemblages Eidetic Collage section

This task underpinned Eliasson’s idea of the importance of “risking vulnerability and practicing in the robust discomfort of uncertainty” in order to reach new thoughts, ideas or solutions. At this point, a great degree of uncertainty surrounded the task as there was no clear direction yet of where the task would lead.

(Eliasson 2016)

Figure. 2.12.f - DS1 Assemblages Eidetic Collage Plan

11

Foundations category 3: CONVERGENT THINKING (compilation of thoughts or ideas)

“Art...yields and gives in to an understanding of more than one persepctive, it offers sites of connectivity, where multiple stories and trajectories can co-exist” (Eliasson 2016).

The combined notational drawing melds all the senses experienced on the site into one overall perspective and experience.

Figure. 3.1.f DS1 Assemblages Notational drawings expanded compilation map

12

13

UNDERSTANDING (u)

Understanding category 1: STRUCTURED THINKING (compilation of findings)

What was my initial perception of landcsape? What challenged this?

Understanding explores the types of drawings that aided in my enquiry to a specific site or idea. They gave me a better understanding of why certain preconceived ideas were the way they were and helped to challenge them or certify them. The understanding process involved a great deal of creative thinking, creating and reflection. The work can be separated into four main sub-categories of thinking; structured, fluid, divergent, and convergent thinking. The ‘structured thinking’ group enabled me to meld previous drawings or bring together a group of ideas into one concise drawings or collage. From this, I was able to better understand what the meaning of all the work was or how it fits into a specific site. The ‘fluid thinking’ category involved thinking carefully about my experience within a landscape or understanding what I learned on a site and potentially challenging this or trying to understand it more.

The ‘divergent thinking’ stage entails drawings that show trials of ideas or diagrams trying to make sense of something. After experimenting, I was able to curate my ideas in the ‘convergent thinking’ phase into a final piece of work that summarised my thinking and understanding of how a site works or could potentially work better. These final drawings enabled me to move forward and make conclusions or repeat the experimenting process again until I found a better solution or idea that enabled me to further understand the landscape I was exploring.

[how could you change the title of your categories to be more easily understood]

14

Figure. 1.1.u DS1 Assemblages Notational drawings refined compilation map

Figure 1.2.u marks one of the drawings utilised during the ‘reflective’ narrative process. This refined plan collage of the site with the implemented program developed through the experimenting process, shows the continued development of my ideas. By reflecting back on this collage,I was able to gain a greater understanding of how I initially perceived my program to work on the site and then speculate about how I went about heightening the experiemce I was trying to achieve. (move back to figure 3.3.i [page 30])

Figure. 1.2.u DS1 Assemblages collage plan updated with program included

15

Understanding category 2: FLUID THINKING (observation)

Figure. 2.1.u Environments Wet, protected and shaded plant community drawing

Figure. 2.2.u Environments Dry, exposed and arid plant community drawing

16

Figure. 1.3.u DS1 Territories Collation map of water registers and permeability

17

Figure. 2.3.u DS 1 Assemblages refined eidetic collage after site visit

Understanding category 3: DIVERGENT THINKING (experimentation)

Figure. 3.2.u DS 1 Territories Effect of a maniupulated slope on water permeability

Figure. 3.3.u DS 1 Territories Path Alignment and water condition manipulation #2

Figure. 3.3.u DS 1 Territories Flatness and Permeability water experiment

Figure. 3.4.u DS 1 Territories Path Alignment and water condition manipulation #1

Figure 3.3.u marks the fourth checkpoint in the ‘thinking process’ narrative. These water experiments allowed me to grasp how water intereacts on the site more and enabled me to amke more sense of why my perception of landscape (specifically water within a landscape) was altered. (move

to

figure

4.2.u

[page

23])

19

Figure. 3.5.u Theoretical Frameworks Experimentation with embedding the Villa D’Este into Melbourne’s CBD

Gardens Elevation (contour lines) Buildings of wealth Infrastructure

20

Figure 4.2.u marks the fifth checkpoint in the ‘thinking process’ narrative. This is the final stage in the creating process that enabled me to better understanding how and why I had an altered change in perception of landscape. This drawing shows the proposed conditions to my site which highlights how I have grasped this newfound understanding of how water interacts with a landscape through manipulation of materials.

Understanding category 4: CONVERGENT THINKING (Idea curation) Figure 4.1.u marks one of the drawings utilised during the ‘reflective’ narrative process. By reflecting back on this conceptual collage of how my program works on site over time, I am able to better understand where my final idea stemmed from and how it evolved over the course of the tasks. It was interesting to reflect on this collage and compare it to the collage withthe process model verb included to see how I altered the site to gain a heightened experience. (move 3.3.i

back to [page

figure 30])

Figure. 4.2.u DS 1 Territories Proposed condition section #1

Figure. 4.1.u DS 1 Assemblages Section collage of implemented program on site (effect over time)

Proposed condition sections hightlight that the “sense of feeling foward is improvisation [of thinking]” and any progression towards a final result increases my understanding of a site (Ingold, 2012).

22

23

Figure. 4.3.u DS 1 Territories Proposed condition section #2

INITIATION (i)

Initiation category 1: STRUCTURED THINKING (Research)

Drawings that initiated change in my thought on landscape.

Figure 1.2.u marks one of the drawings utilised during the ‘reflective’ narrative process.

After the initial change in perception on landscape, doing research into precedent projects to understand how other designers have gone about implementing change to a landcsape to create an improved experience was beneficial. Reflecting on how this research was helful since completing the task was even more beneficicial in seeing how heightening an experience on a site has a lasting impact. (move 3.3.i

Initiation explores the work that sparked new ideas or introduced me to a new way of thinking which ultimately changed or built on my perception of landscape. My perception of landscape being the way we adapt, view and live within a landscape.

Work in this category falls under one of three sub-categories; structured, fluid, and convergent thinking. The research completed through ‘structured thinking’ entailed exploring projects related to the task I’m completing as well as enquiries into key or new ideas. My experiences had on site during the ‘fluid thinking’ phase directly altered my perception of landscape through being within the landscape and understanding how certain processes work, interconnect and impact one another. The ‘convergent thinking’ stage includes founding drawings or the final outcome that show how my ideas curated into a final form to show my understanding of a particular site.

{try to explore categories that don’t outline the production method}

24

back to [page

figure 30])

Figures. 1.2-3.i DS 1 Assemblages Precedent research for chosen program design

Figure 1.1.i marks the second checkpoint in the ‘thinking process’ narrative. The research process of learning how precedent projects utilised water in allowing nature to ‘take back’ was beneficial in understanding how water interacts with a landscape and how it can be maniupulated to induce a positive impact. I used this learnt information to build how I would propose change to my site. (move to figure 1.3.f [page 9]) Figure. 1.1.i DS 1 Territories Exploration into the concept of ‘urban nature’

Figure. 1.4.i DS 1 Territories Research into Duisburg Nord’s hydrology systems

Initiation category 2: FLUID THINKING (Experience on site)

WSUD - The Fern Gully

Figure 2.4.i marks the first checkpoint in the ‘thinking process’ narrative. During the sit spot exercise it occured to me that I’d never taken a close notice of how water interacts with every surface and the path it takes towards it’s final destination. This initiated a change in my understanding of the relationship between water and a landscape and sparked the start of the journey to gaining a better understanding of this relationship.

plants that tolerate damp and low light conditions or have adaptations to reach for sunlight grow in this area filtered water comes from the Raingarden

(move to figure 1.1.i [page 25])

plants extract any pollutants from the water and benefit from the humidity created by the flowing water and tropical conditions

Figure. 2.2.i - DS 1 Territories Water permeability trace layer Figure. 2.4.i DS 1 Territories Sit-spot exercise roots were evidently growing externally of the soil and taking water directly from the creek

rocks slow down the flow of water and also collect any pollutants

water heads towards the main Ornamental Lake of the Botancial Gardens

This section of the WSUD emphasises the human maniupulation of plants that have adapted to grow in a certain condition. This area is created as a beautiful place for people to walk through and experince a tropical landscape while still being in the heart of Melbourne. In addtion to this, it helps to maintain the quality of the water being passed through the gardens which ensures all the plants and gardens on show are looking lush and healthy for people to enjoy.

26

Figure. 2.1.i - Environments Diagram of WSUD at the Royal Botanical Gardens (Ferntree Gully)

Figure. 2.3.i - DS 1 Territories Water registers trace layer

27

Figure. 2.5.i DS 1 Territories Path trace of ‘moments’ on site

Initiation category 3: CONVERGENT THINKING (The Founding or Outcome)

Figure. 3.1.i - Theoretical Frameworks Final plan of the Villa D’Este inserted into Melbourne’s CBD

28

Figure. 3.2.i - DS 1 Assemblages Final section collage of implemented program with process model moment embedded

(what has my perception of landscape become?)

Figure 3.3.i is the collage that all the points of reflection fall upon in the ‘reflective’ narrative process. This final collage brings together all aspects of the design process to gain an overall understanding of my final program concept to heighten the experience on site. The reflection process is crucial for this collage as it is the “weigh station” and allows me to understand the thinking processes I went through to achieve the final product as well as a greater grasp on how I worked through each task (Ingold, 2012). It’s interesting to see how I interpreted my work to meld together to create a complete snapshot of my final proposed program on site to heighten the immersive, educational experience of the wetlands. In another sense, it is important to reflect on this final task as a way of exploring what information I may have missed that would have further aided in creating the snapshot of my ideas. (move from this figure to any of these figures; figure 1.2.i [page 25], 4.2.u [page 23], 1.2.u [page 15], or 2.4.f [page 10] in order to reflect on how this task was created in order to have a greater understanding of the landscape)

“An artefact is the materialisation of a thought.” “nothing is ever finished” (Ingold, 2012) The final eidetic collage proposes a starting point for continued specualtion about the site and how to heighten experiences.

Figure. 3.3.i - DS 1 Assemblages Final Eidetic collage

31

Glossary.

References.

Perception: my idea of a landscape created through my senses of sight, smell, touch and awareness. This is constantly changing.

Eliasson, O., Ellingsen, E., Werner, C., From the Past with Love, 135-137, in Pais, A. P., Strauss, C. F., Benkler, Y., & Blaisse, M. (Eds.). (2016). Slow reader: A resource for design thinking and practice. Valiz.

Understanding: my overall grasp on an idea/concept/thought/action/etc; my understanding of the interactions within a landscape and the impact of maniupulating a site.

Artefact:

Pohjoisen kulttuuri-instituutti – Institute for Northern Culture. (2012, January 11). Ingold—Thinking Through Making. <https://youtu.be/Ygne72-4zyo>.

Reflecting: a process of stepping back from the physical work and thinking about how I got to a specific point through deep consideration and analysation.

Urban nature: The melding of nature and urban establishments to form a relationship; growing with modernisation.

Raxworthy, J., Building a Wilderness with Louis Le Roy, 98-109, in Pais, A. P., Strauss, C. F., Benkler, Y., & Blaisse, M. (Eds.). (2016). Slow reader: A resource for design thinking and practice. Valiz.

Girot, C. (1999). The Four Trace Concepts in Landscape Architecture. In J. Corner, Recovering Landscape, Essays in Contemporary Landscape Architecture. Princeton Architectural Press.

Eidetic: conceptual curation of ideas or memories

32

33

Epilogue statement.

What’s next for me?

After the conclusion of this design studio, I have learnt so much about the way I like to learn and experienced my passion for designing within the natural world grow. I want to continue challenging myself to think more wholistically about tasks and be more accepting of the unknown going forward.

In order to achieve this, choosing design studios that sound intriguing but of which I know nothing about would be an exciting challenge. I hope that these studios quench my urge to design in a way that leaves a lasting positive impact on the landscape for the future and teaches me to find my own way of achieving this.

To further my studies and push myself, I challenge myself to think more outside the box and completely immerse myself in each task instead of completing it just to avoid a late submission and tick a check box.

I am going to approach future design studios with the knowledge of the required workload and standard and aim to put myself in a more relaxed position to complete each task so that I feel more naturally immersed in the experience rather than feeling stressed or overwhelmed.

34