Towards an Architecture of Perspectives and Practices Visual Investigations for a future spatial agency (25/26)

“Investigate, Visualize, Install” are the words that best describe the essence of the research seminar, designed for contributing to the CA2RE Conference in Hannover. With “Trajectories” as the topic of the conference, the aim was to deepen an understanding of artistic and design-driven research and to explore possible future fields of the architectural discipline. Students examined a range of contemporary artistic and design-driven practices that challenge conventional understandings of architectural production, digging into their positioning and modes of working as well as their perspectives upon a paradigm change. One, that would shift the way we look at and work with spaces towards a more social, critically engaged and experimental field of knowledge creation. Instead of designing and creating new spaces, the seminar aimed to investigate architectural practice. Instead of creating visions and models as representations of a project, invisible processes of thinking and intervening in space were visualized. And, instead of presenting drawings and models of a finished, to-be-built architecture, an installation with Leporellos showing comparisons between different practices, made accessible the research steps undertaken.

This design-driven research seminar was set to explore how topics and concepts relevant for a future design in Architecture and Urbanism could be made graspable. In order to do so a framework for pursuing individual research topics in a same manner, but with distinct visual approaches was developed. This process resulted in a shared installation format, later presented at the conference (Fig. 1).

Trajectories: Collective Research – Individual Creation

Together with a group of five master students, we asked the following questions: What defines the practice and research in architecture and urban design today? Which perspectives and practices can be discussed as positive examples in relation to the current discourse? And what role do experimental approaches and methods of design play in exploring these contexts, opening them for discussion? With “perspectives and practices” the designers’ conviction was investigated – a positioning within the current discourse. While entering this field collectively – discussing ideas and possible research methods as well as looking at references and sharing intermediate results – individual works following own interests were created and brought together as an installation. It shows the individual research processes that even though being very different from each other, share a common conceptual ground.

In the following, the procedure and main steps of the seminar are introduced.

1. Getting Ideas: Connecting artistic positions to the architectural discourse

As a starting point, artistic positions tackling aspects of architecture and opening up perspectives upon space or spatial creation as social practice are looked at. The artistic positions selected, use various approaches to highlight what for them is relevant in the creation, transformation and dealing with space in one or another way. The artistic positions can be seen as experiences that make us think and open up broader reflections upon what we care about in our professional practice.

For example, 1. Kader Attia in “Traditional Repair. Immaterial Justice” works on the topic of Repair, collective memory and time, which stresses the value of the existing and visibility of transformation by showing scars. 2.) Jean and Claude Christo in “Over the river, a work in porgress”, develop a design for a public intervention with huge pieces of translucent fabric above a river bed. Already the drawings allow to experience the site in different ways – from underneath the fabrics – exploring the space inbetween the river and its novel layer; from the street, exploring the section through the landscape; or from above, exploring the added layers becoming part of the texture already there. 3. Franz Erhardt Walter in “Action Pieces” works with object performances that question space as a medium and art as social practice, while 4. Ute and Werner Mahler in “Kleinstadt” collect impressions from small cities across Germany which introduces an observation of vacancy, missing infrastructure and at Everydaylife and perspectives of young people outside the city. 5. Yukinori Yangai in „Wandering Position“, through the close observation of Ants in a fictive world, – a network of sugar flags through which they path their ways while eating opens reflections about crossing borders, transnational connections and scales. 6. John Smith with his film “blight” addresses gentrification and transformation at an urban level, introducing personal memories as left-overs from a large scale project of a new road map in London. And 7. Rimini Protokoll with “Staat 1-4” thematizes co-creation and knowledge ransfer between rules and rights of the city.

2. Formulating Interests: Practices and Perspectives

Departing from these references, we discussed a possible future of architectural practice, fields of engagement, ethics of designing and interdisciplinary collaboration as fundamental base. In order to shift architectural thinking and doing towards spatial agencies as a broader and rather self-organized engagement with space, we searched for ways of dealing with the built environment that could inspire the present. From this discussion, a framework of principles and relevant topics in the current discourse evolved. It allowed a comparability among the projects and defined a structure of five aspects to dig into throughout the research. These five aspects were defined by the students. Together they combine a personal approach and interest (questions) with the comparison of case studies (focus: agen), a closer look into their organization and relation among eachother (constellations), an investigation about the working methods and approaches (methodology) of the practicioners , as well as their communication and visibility (performativity).

Then, the individual investigations into the works of spatial agents with alternative backgrounds, projects and networks started. Central to the process of gathering information was the continuous search for an adequate visual representation – a transfer of information into graphical elaborations and visually experienceable contents. Throughout the research process, the steps and findings were continuously discussed and thought further collectively. External advice was given by guest critiques; Jackie Williams and Jörg Schröder, who contributed in two separate presentation rounds. The works developed, define five different topics, each of them looking at, comparing and visualizing two to three practices and perspectives of spatial agents. Here, three of the five investigative works were selected to share their processes and findings. In their own words, the participants of the seminar describe what they did.

“Performative Politics of Urban Space” by Paula Kruse

Agents: Guerrilla Architects / Rimini Protokoll

My interest in the performative politics of urban spaces arose from the intersection of theater, activism, and urban planning, as all three fields operate through publicly visible actions and actively shape space. I am particularly fascinated by the idea that the city is not merely planned, but politically produced through collective practices. In my work, I therefore examined the approaches of Guerilla Architects and Rimini Protokoll, both of which operate at the intersection of space, the public sphere, and participation. My primary focus was on how their methods can make power relations visible and influence spatial processes. The goal was to derive approaches for my own performative design process from this investigation.

The selection of the two collectives is based on their shared thematic intersections, but also on their differing approaches. Both understand urban space as a negotiable framework and work in a transdisciplinary and participatory manner. Nevertheless, clear differences emerge: Guerilla Architects operate in a more spontaneous, activist, and situational manner, while Rimini Protokoll works with structured formats and pre-defined roles. While Guerilla Architects’ interventions are open-ended and often conflict-ridden, participation at Rimini Protokoll is deliberately shaped and guided. This comparison allows for the analysis of different forms of control and openness in dealing with space and participation.

Methodologically, my work is based on a comparative analysis of the two practices and their translation into my own design approach. In doing so, I have examined in particular the process-oriented nature of the methods, which are structured into phases such as research, participation, action, and impact. It is striking that both approaches do not function linearly, but are iterative and open to change. This structure is also reflected in my own working process, which was characterized by detours, hurdles, and new impulses. On this basis, I have developed my own model (based on the two reference groups) that understands design as a dynamic, open process.

A central insight of my work is that performative practices do not merely comment on the city but can actively structure spatial processes. Through interventions, participatory formats, and the conscious handling of conflicts, power relations become visible and negotiable. Design is no longer understood as a finished object, but as a sequence of actions and situations. Particularly important is the integration of everyday knowledge, which is regarded as equal to professional knowledge. This results in an expanded understanding of architecture as a process-oriented and open system.

My visual approach also follows this logic of non-linear, process-oriented thinking. The Leporello format and the graphic representations create a narrative structure that resembles a spatial experience rather than a classic linear presentation. Diagrams, comics, and schematic sequences help to make complex relationships visible and to present processes in a comprehensible way. The presentation of the values and methodology was particularly challenging and has significantly shaped my visual language, as I attempted to convey complex information with as little text as possible. The graphic language of the comic has proven (even in retrospect) to be very suitable for this purpose, as content can be grasped intuitively without the need for extensive textual explanations. This makes the presentation more accessible and allows key messages to be understood quickly and immediately—similar to a performance by Rimini Protokoll or Guerilla Architects.

„Public Participation“ by Merle Suhr

Agents: Rurbane Ruralitäten / nonconform /Neue Auftraggeber

This investigation focuses on public participation as an indispensable tool for sustainable planning within rural and rurban contexts. My interest was specifically sparked by the unique challenges and opportunities found in non-metropolitan areas where social ties are particularly strong. The research proceeds from the belief that local knowledge only becomes truly accessible through direct contact with the people on-site. By exploring how residents engage with their environment, the study seeks to understand how they can identify with and take responsibility for their surroundings. Ultimately, the goal is to show how activating these social potentials can transform subjective life realities into tangible spatial opportunities.

Due to their intensive and innovative work with participation , I selected the offices Rurbane Realitäten, nonconform and Neue Auftraggeber. A major commonality is that all three prioritize the activation of local potential in rural or rurban territories. However, they differ significantly in their organizational scale, ranging from a small two-person team to a large collective of over 30 members. Despite these size differences, each office emphasizes the "potential of the many" and the fundamental importance of cooperation. This selection allows for a broad comparison of how various structures manage the complexities of citizen engagement across different project types.

The research methodology centers on an intensive analysis of self-published texts, interviews, videos, and photographic documentation . I structured the investigation around four key questions concerning the identity of actors, their roles, the spatial impact, and their specific work methods. I specifically sought out characteristic statements to understand the underlying mindset and "communication culture" of both planners and citizens. The focus was placed on human interaction and communicative processes, which are often described more vividly in photos and texts than in technical blueprints. This approach highlights that results are often snapshots of performances or ideas rather than physical building projects.

A central finding is that planners must act as mediators who listen, activate, and accompany citizens to make the "fantastic thinkable". In rural contexts, participation is more emotional and personal because residents belong to a "Schicksalsgemeinschaft" where they face each other daily. Unlike the anonymity of cities, village interactions have a higher inhibition threshold because actions are closely linked to one’s personal identity in the community. Success often depends on "thinking with your hands" and using adaptive processes that allow for perspective changes. This method ensures sustainability, as local users identify more deeply with solutions that respect their individual life realities.

The visual design of this work uses a continuous line to represent the interconnected influence and constant connection between all actors. This line symbolizes that every participant in the process impacts the others, creating a web of mutual influence. I chose to specifically highlight or strike through certain text segments to reflect the iterative and process-oriented nature of participation. This graphic strategy mirrors my own research process as I filtered through material to uncover core statements and potential. Ultimately, these visual elements represent the idea that the process of development and negotiation is just as significant as the final spatial result.

“More than Buildings” by Nico Krause

Agents: Constructlab / Assemble

My investigation focuses on architecture as a collective and process-oriented practice rather than the production of isolated objects. I am particularly interested in how spatial design emerges through negotiation between social, material, and institutional conditions, and how these relationships shape decision-making processes in architecture. In this context, I examined the working methods of ConstructLab and Assemble, whose practices challenge hierarchical structures through collaborative authorship and design-build approaches. Their projects demonstrate how participation, on-site construction, material reuse, and long-term engagement with local communities can become fundamental elements of spatial production rather than supplementary methods. Through this research, I aimed to develop an understanding of architecture as a platform for exchange, learning, and collective responsibility in shaping urban space.

The investigation into seselected practices examines how criteria, authorship, and decision-making processes shape collaborative architectural work, particularly in relation to collective design approaches. I am interested in how “selectivity” is not a neutral act, but a negotiated process influenced by social values, material constraints, and institutional frameworks. In comparing the working methods of ConstructLab and Assemble, both common aspects and fundamental differences in their approaches to participation and authorship become visible. While both practices emphasize collaboration and openness, they differ in how responsibilities are distributed and how decisions are structured within the design-build process. This analysis aims to understand selection as an active spatial and organizational mechanism that shapes not only outcomes, but also the conditions under which architecture is produced.

Approach and methodology in architecture can be understood as a way of generating knowledge through practice. I am particularly interested in methodologies that frame design as an iterative and situated process shaped by continuous feedback between people, materials, and context. In this framework, the working methods of ConstructLab and Assemble serve as key references, as both operate through experimental, site-specific and collaborative design-build processes. Their approaches reveal how architectural methodology can shift from fixed planning towards adaptive systems of making, testing, and adjusting in real time. This perspective understands methodology as an evolving structure that produces not only space, but also forms of collective learning and shared authorship.

Findings from this study highlight that architectural practice increasingly operates as a collective and process-driven activity, instead of a purely object-oriented discipline. It becomes clear that decision-making is distributed across multiple actors, where social, material, and institutional conditions constantly interact and influence outcomes. In the work of ConstructLab and Assemble, shared authorship and participatory design-build processes emerge as key strategies for negotiating these complex relationships. Their practices demonstrate that openness, collaboration, and on-site engagement can fundamentally reshape how architectural knowledge and space are produced. Overall, the findings suggest that architecture functions less as a final product and more as an ongoing, collective process of spatial negotiation and learning.

Reflection and Visual Approaches focuses on how architectural ideas can be critically understood and communicated through visual representation and iterative reflection. In my work as an architecture student, I use drawing, mapping, and diagrammatic studies not only as tools of representation, but also as instruments for thinking and analysing spatial relationships and processes. Looking at the practices of ConstructLab and Assemble, it becomes evident how visual strategies can document and reveal collective design processes, material decisions, and site-specific dynamics. Their work shows that visual output is not separate from making, but deeply embedded in the development of architectural projects. This reflection highlights how a visual approach can support a more process-oriented understanding of architecture, where representation, experimentation, and construction continuously inform one another.

3. Curate: “Trajectories” as Installation for CA2RE

While each of the participants in both – form and content, worked on their own interests, a group installation was developed in parallel. It was thought as a contribution to the CA2RE Conference. As a common format for the investigations the Leporello was chosen. This was based on the artistic work of Dayanita Singh, an Indian photographer who alongside her photographs explored ways of exhibiting them in small, easily transportable formats. Instead of putting the Leporellos on shelves, as she does with many works, we decided to use a hanging construction that allowed to show the works while at the same time defining the spatial setting. The theoretical explorations in this way framed the space of encounter at the conference and could be explored by walking through.

As a concluding remark, it has to be said, that the trajectories explored throughout the seminar were not only those of the selected practices. It were also the trajectories of the students engaging with these practices while developing a design-driven methodology and the trajectories of architecture itself. By tracing how different spatial agents think, collaborate, communicate and act, the seminar opened a space for reflecting on where the discipline might be heading—and how future architects may contribute not only through designing buildings, but through shaping processes, relationships and collective forms of spatial knowledge. The resulting installation thus functioned not only as a presentation format, but as a research instrument for reflecting on this changing role of architecture within contemporary society.

Works by: Catalina Andraczek, Nico Krause, Paula Marie Kruse, Milena Matul, Merle Suhr

Course led by: Riccarda Cappeller