InBetween: material encounters in human/non-human interactions€¦ · mathematical “things” to all sorts of different things (Knorr-Cetina 2001), which “produce knowledge that

ZIEGLER&FRITZ

©2017TheAuthors.PublishedbyLoughboroughUniversity.ThisisanopenaccessarticleundertheCCBY-NClicense(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/).

1

InBetween:materialencountersinhuman/non-humaninteractions

V.Ziegler1andO.Fritz2

1. V.Ziegler,ResearchAssociate,ZurichUniversityoftheArts,PhDstudent,LinzUniversityoftheArts/Zurich University of the Arts, in cooperation with Constance University of AppliedSciences,Dipl.EngineerArchitecture,MATextileDesign,MADesign.

2. Prof. O. Fritz, Chair, Department of DigitalMedia and Architectural Presentation, ConstanceUniversity of Applied Sciences, Initiator and Leader of the Constance Open Innovation Lab,Dipl.EngineerArchitecture,(Prof.FritzisservingasV.Ziegler'sPhDsupervisor).

This itemwas submitted to the proceedings of the LoughboroughUniversity Textile Design ResearchGroupINTERSECTIONSConference2017byVerenaZieglerandProf.OliverFritz.Citation:Ziegler,V.&Fritz,O.(2017)InBetween:materialencountersinhuman/non-humaninteractions.InProceedingsofIntersections:CollaborationsinTextileDesignResearchConference,13September2017,LoughboroughUniversityLondon,U.K.Availablefromwww.lboro.ac.uk/textile-research/intersections.AdditionalInformation:Publisher:LoughboroughUniversity(©TheAuthors)Rights:ThisworkismadeavailableaccordingtotheconditionsoftheCreativeCommonsAttribution4.0International (CC BY-NC 4.0) licence. Full details of this licence are available at:https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/PLEASECITETHEPUBLISHEDVERSION.

ZIEGLER&FRITZ


2

InBetween is a collaborative interdisciplinary PhD research project situated at the intersection ofarchitecture,textiledesign,andinteractiondesign.Theprojectexploressustainableformsoffuturelifeand seeks to identify bionic principles so as to create alternative lightweight building structures usingtextilesanddigital fabricationtechniques.Thispaperadoptsa“designerly”(Cross1982)approachandcollaborates with various experts in three different settings at the Open Innovation Lab (OIL). Itconstitutes a piece of hybrid research in that it combines an alchemical “Wunderkammer” (curiositycabinet) (Leibniz1600;Munster2006), i.e.,“theoldscienceofstrugglingwithmaterials,andnotquiteunderstandingwhatishappening”(Elkins2000,p.17),withmodernformsofcollaborativeinvestigationand with tool-making from science laboratories. This paper addresses the potential for holisticexperimentation in interdisciplinary collaborations based on embodied experiences and ideas. Thesecomeintoexistencethrough–ratherthanareexcludedfrom–anaestheticengagementwithemergingmaterial technologies and with materials research for designerly application. Such serendipity ininterdisciplinary collaborations opens up a space beyond disciplinary framings,where researchers canstep back from purely disciplinary methods and perspectives and engage in a collaborative space offuturepossibilities.Keywords: emerging material technologies; interdisciplinary collaborations; embodied engagement;epistemicaction;serendipitousdiscoveries1.0 IntroductionInBetween is a research venture at the intersection of architecture, textile design, and interactiondesign. It speculates on sustainable forms of future life in critical future scenarios and experimentalprototypes.Theprojectinvestigatestheculturalandsociallocationsofnovelmaterialsandtechnologiesinaninterdisciplinary,collaborativesetting.Itisinformedbyradicalcasestudies(1960s–1980s)onsoftarchitectureslikeArchigram,BuckminsterFuller,CedricPrice,orYonaFriedman.Italsodrawsoncriticaltheory on newmaterialism, (Haraway 1997, Barad 1998, Bennett 2007), and on thework of varioussociologists, philosophers (Latour 2005,Deleuze&Guattari 1987), and phenomenologists (Malafouris2005,Rancière2004,Massumi2002,Bourriaud2002,Merleau-Ponty1963).Theintersectionoftextiles,“smart” materials, digital fabrication techniques, crafting techniques, and bionic principles for self-bearingpropertiesseekstoinvestigatealternativebuildingstructures.Whilethesearedesignedtohaveminimal weight, for instance, by using light materials, they shift the focus from performance anddurability, categories typical of an engineering approach, to aesthetic qualities and to interactionsbetween those novel materials in relation to the body. The research presented here recognizes theincreasing need to explore new material possibilities and new technologies for their relational,interactive,andculturalpotentialsforembodyingthedesignoffuturelivingenvironments.Ontheonehand, InBetweenaimstofoster innovative,newlinkagesandtorecombinetechniques,materials,andprocesses to foster the potential co-emergence of new materials, new design processes, and newmethods. It does so using practices of making based on experiments involving “smart” (prosthetic),performativematerials,digitalfabrication,andanaloguecraftingtechniques.Theprototypesaretestedwithexpertcommunities,students,andprojectparticipants.Ontheotherhand,thisresearchattemptsto advance critical and artistic approaches that conceptualize materiality more actively and moreperformatively. The developed prototypes and probes prospectively seek to offer an experimentalplatformsituatedat the intersectionofart, theeconomy,andurbanplanning.Theultimategoal is toopenupapracticalandtangiblespaceforthinkingaboutsustainableformsoffutureliving.

InBetween focuses on the embodied engagement with “smart” materials in a more tacit, prostheticapproach. It also concentrates on the epistemic potential of such materials for interdisciplinarycollaborations in unpredictable, serendipitous research. Three interdisciplinary case studies were

ZIEGLER&FRITZ


3

conductedwithcontributorsfromvariouscreativefields,industry,andscience.Thisapproachhighlightsthe nature of tacit working practices in relation to their potential for holistic experimentation, asdiscussed by Ingold (2010). InBetween reveals the dose of serendipity needed for emergingmaterialtechnologies and research. The project combines the alchemical “Wunderkammer” (Leibniz 1600;Munster2006)withmodern formsofcollaborative investigationand the tool-makingcharacteristicofscience laboratories. This methodological hybrid reveals the element of wit and the unprejudicedexposuretoworkingwithdifferentexpertsthatbothtypifytheresearchundertakenat theConstanceOpenInnovationLab(OIL).

Thenaturalsciencesandengineeringshowhownewmaterialpossibilitiesandtechnologiescontributeto increasingefficiency andproductivity. But these fields areoften inaccessibleandhighly specialized(Hecht2014).Itgoeswithoutsayingthattheaccessibilityof“smart”materialswillgreatlyinfluencetheiruptake and creative exploitation. Such materials boost the demand for new design explorations,techniques, knowledge, and applications.Materials that change in response to external stimuli, thathave programmable properties, or that adapt to environmental conditions differ radically fromconventional designmaterials. And yet these substances require hands-on experience to grasp theirphenomenologicalandtechnologicalcomplexity.Inthisrespect,itisbothamatterofaskingquestionsabout the materials emerging from the technology sector, and of instigating the invention of newmaterialsandfabricationtechniquesfromdesignandfromthecreativesector ingeneral.Thepresentresearchspeaksofprostheticmaterialstodescribeanew,moreembodied,andtacitapproachtothesematerials,whichresemblethosefoundincraftpractices(Coelhoetal.2007).Theproposedmediatory,reciprocal capacity of prosthetic relations, which is also known as “agential capacity” (Barad 1998),“assemblage” (Latour 2005), “rhizomic structure” (Deleuze & Guattari 1987), or “relational agency”(Bennett 2007), seeks to enact the intentionality distributed between human and non-human actors,wherethehumanisconsideredtobeapartofalargersystemthatinteractsinequalmeasurewiththenon-human,cultural,andsociallygroundedworld.Prostheticmaterialsfordesignerlyapplicationrequireembodiedunderstandingandcreative intuition.Thisapproach shifts the focus fromperformanceanddurability, characteristic of an engineering approach, to aesthetic qualities. The Inbetween researchapproachesprostheticsasabodily, incorporatedsubsetofapparatuses(Coté2010)thathighlightstherelational possibilities between technology and embodiment in the essence of action. The epistemic,integrative, and mediatory capacity to approach prosthetic materials as an entirely embodiedexperiencesuggestswaysofperceivingandunderstandingourrelationshipswithotherbeingsandwithour environment. InBetween investigates the dynamic capacity of prostheticmaterials as ameans ofenacting, revealing, and encountering our bodily, environmental, and cultural reality as an array ofdynamicrelationshipsbetweenthehumanandnon-human,organismandmachine.Inanareafocusedsostronglyontechnicalsolutionsandondifferentformsofevidence-baseddesign,theoriginalityofthisresearch lies first in connecting architecture, textile design, and interaction design and second inexploringthepossibilitiesofprostheticmaterialsforexpressingadaptiveandresponsiveformsoffutureliving.2.0 Epistemicpotentialofembodiment

Ingenious materials research and emerging material technologies often spring from interdisciplinarycommitment and experience — and from an element of serendipity. In 2015, the Global ResearchCouncil(GRC)announceditsintentiontoprovide“researcherswiththeflexibilityandintellectualspaceneededforserendipity”(GRC2015:2).Itcalledonglobalresearchleaderstopromoteinterdisciplinaryorcross-disciplinaryexchanges,soastostimulatethedesiredserendipity,andto“encouragerisk-takingand tolerate failure in research activities” (GRC 2015, p. 2). Peter Strohschneider, president of theGermanResearchFoundationinBonn,said“Realinnovationsarethosethatcomeaboutunexpectedly,and this means we cannot actually plan for and organize them. In our strategies, we have toinstitutionalize something we cannot actually institutionalize” (sciencemag, accessed 22.05.2017).

ZIEGLER&FRITZ


4

Serendipity in interdisciplinary collaborationsopensupa spacebeyonddisciplinary confines. It allowsresearchers to step back from purely disciplinary methods and perspectives and to engage in acollaborative spaceof futurepossibilities. To illustrate thepotential of serendipity inmaterials-drivenresearch, three key concepts of interdisciplinary, collaborative research are presented below: 1)“epistemic things” (Rheinberger, 1992/97) from the history of biology and philosophy of science; 2)“epistemic actions” (Kirsh & Maglio, 1994) from the cognitive sciences; 3) the “enactive approach”(Varela,Thompson&Rosch1991)fromneurophenomenology.

2.1 “Epistemicthings”The concept of “epistemic things” was first introduced by Rheinberger (1992/97). It was furtherexploredas“epistemicobjects”byKnorr-Cetina(1999)inbiologicalandsociologicalcontextstodescribethe immediate, unfolding qualities of material realizations. These can range from figurative,mathematical “things” to all sorts of different things (Knorr-Cetina 2001),which “produce knowledgethatwedonotyethave”(Rheinberger,1997,p.28).Rheinbergerdescribessuchthingsas“Phenomenonandinstrument,objectandexperience,conceptandmethod[that]areallengagedinarunningprocessofmutual instruction” (2010,p. xiii). The interactive, reciprocalactivityofobjects (e.g, test tubesandmicroscopes)withmatter,organismwithmachinesotospeak,isunderstoodhereasboundtogetherinmutualspecificationandselection,whicharebothinitiatedandshapedbytheenvironment.2.2“Epistemicactions”Goingone step further, KirschandMagliodistinguished “pragmatic action” (i.e., actual andpure taskperformance)from“epistemicaction.”Theycharacterizedthelatteras“actionsperformedtouncoverinformationthatishiddenorhardtocomputementally”(1994,p.513).Thereforean“epistemicaction”isanactivebodilyengagementinacognitiveproblem-solvingtask,wheretangibleobjectsandphysicalarrangementsareusedtoperformthismentaltask.Thesenotionsofembodied,corporealengagementand“epistemicaction”questionKantian(i.e.,Western)aesthetics,whichprivilegemindoverbody(andbyimplicationoverbodilyengagements).Debatesincontemporarydesignresearchonthecredibilityofpractice-basedversuspractice-ledresearchmightfallintothesamecategory.InsteadoffallingbackintotheCartesianmind/bodydualismbetweencognition,performance,andcomputation,itmightbemoretheoreticallyusefultoheedtheideathatwearefundamentallyintheworld,embeddedandembodied,and equipped with a perceptual and cognitive repertoire that makes no hard and fast distinctionsbetween the inner and outer realms. Debilitating dualisms might exclude characteristic associationsunintelligibletooneanother(Brandom1994)andmighttendto“fallwithinthedomainbelongingtothesubject,mindandculture”(Bryant,2011,p.15).2.3 “Enactiveapproach”The“enactiveapproach”(Varela,Thompson&Rosch1991)formulatesanewmodeofepistemicaccess.Itdoessonotasamodethatrepresentsaworld,butasactive,embodiedengagementwiththeworld.Itthussuggestshowwecanunderstandourrelationshipswithotherbeings,andwiththeenvironment,inabroadersense.Theembodied-mindhypothesisreferstothe“enactiveapproach”astheemergenceofcognition, perception, and action as combinedwithin thematerial, relational system,which includesbodyandworld.Gallese(2000,p.34)arguedthatthecapacityforunderstandingothersasintentionalagents is deeply grounded “in the relational nature of action,” and also in the interaction with thematerialworld,soastodevelopintentionsandtoconstructbeliefs.Empathywithothers,andthusthecapacitytorecognizeknowledgeandmemoryassocialandrelationalinnature,reliesonunderstandingmovementasintentionalaction(Küchler2012).Dourish(2004,pp.125–126)claimedthat“Wefindtheworld meaningful primarily with respect to the ways in which we act within it [in ...] the creation,manipulation, and sharing of meaning through engaged interaction with artifacts.” Consequently,embodiedandactiveengagementenablesusnotonly toactivate social responses in interdisciplinarycollaborations beyond disciplinary confines, but also to interact empathically and in a sociallymeaningfulwayintheworld.Thechallengesforfutureresearchinthisarea—especiallyregardingthe

ZIEGLER&FRITZ


5

responsibilityforthecomplexity,interrelatedness,andrelationalityinvolved—areeithertocontributeortoincreasethesensitivitytoandthesensibilityfornewengagementswiththeworld.Thiswillmakeresearchersbetterabletodealwithsocial interaction(Peres2011)andtoextendcommunicationandknowledge production to visual, tangible, and performative experiences between cognition andperception.Newengagementswithdigitalmachinesandprostheticmaterialstakeintoaccountcrucialfactors (body, sensation, movement, and place), and thereby subvert the classical emphasis onprecision,order,andclarityofform.2.4Aestheticsand“form-giving”experiments “Form-giving”(Klee1964)focusesonembodiedexperiencesandideasthatcomeintoexistencethrough– rather thanareexcluded from–anaestheticengagementwithemergingmaterial technologiesandresearch. This process builds on the experimental, emergent, designerly, and revelatory capacity ofmaterialexperimentalprocesses.Thisnovelframeworkshiftsthefocusfromperformanceanddurability(typical of an engineering approach) to an emphasis on aesthetic qualities such as vividness orephemerality.

Anaestheticperspectiveonprostheticmaterialsmeanstoapproachsuchmaterialsnotjustforthesakeoftheirpotentialtechnologicalefficiencyandproductivity,butwheretechnologiescometopass,asfeltinmaterial,aestheticexperience.Inthemid-1990s,FelixGuattariarguedthattechnologycouldnotbeunderstoodwithoutlocatingitwithintheensembleofitssocialrelations(1995,p.36).Thecurrent(andongoing) redefinition and repositioningof aesthetics,understoodas the activeensembleof cognitionand perception in an “enactive” engagement, was also framed by Rancière’s (2004) concept of thedistributionofthesensibleasan“aestheticpolitics”ofexperience,whichBourriaud(2002)definedas“relationalaesthetics.”Exploringthematerial,sensual,andphenomenaldimensionsofhumanandnon-human interactions, the InBetween project examines certain boundaries and new perspectives onrelational agency. It does so to propose that human interactions with prosthetic materials revealempathy and enact socio-cultural relations and sustainable actions in theworld. In such an account,cognitionandperceptionaredistributedwithinthe“form-giving”processofmovement,whichcausesthebodytoactwithintheworld.

Together,“form-giving”(Klee1964),the“elementaryanalysisofcreativity,”andIngold'sresearch(2010)capturetheshiftinfocusfromanyfinalobjectednesstoform-giving—withaviewtoinitiatingmotionand movement. Embodiment as form-giving is seen as a perpetual becoming and as a constantinteractionwiththeenvironment.AlsotakingtheircuefromKlee,philosophersGillesDeleuzeandFélixGuattariarguedthattheessentialrelationshipinthelife-worldisneitherthatbetweenmatterandform,northatbetweensubstanceandattributes,butthatbetweenmaterialsandforces(Deleuze&Guattari2004,p.377).Pallasmaa(2009,p.143)describedhow“Inanycreativefieldtheprocessofunlearningisjust as important as learning, forgetting as important as remembering, uncertainty as important ascertainty.” This uncertainty,which is experienced as an existential,menacing process of shaping andreachingacrossboundaries,isnecessarytoextendandsuspendthresholdsandtosituatetransitzonesof material force-relations and spaces of affective engagement (Deleuze 1988). This hybrid researchtherefore involves a grappling with materials, an alchemical uncertainty about outcomes, and thescientific rigour of the modern material laboratory as an ideal setting for embodied learning,experimentation, and experiential developments in the field of emerging materials research andtechnologies.3.0InBetweencollaborations:the“Wunderkammer”approach

Imagining“theworldasahugekitchen,well stockedwith ingredientsofall sorts” (Ingold2010,p.8),creative, intuitive InBetween research blended these ingredients and combined them in processes oftransformation. Seeing the world full of substances and phenomena, the project entered a hybrid

ZIEGLER&FRITZ


6

researchspacesituatedbetweenanalchemical“Wunderkammer”(Leibniz1600;Munster2006)andthescientific rigour ofmodern forms of collaborative investigations and the tool-making characteristic ofstate-of-the-artsciencelaboratories.Thishybridconstitutesthedesigntoolproposedhere.

Figure1.CopperengravingofaWunderkammer,MuseumWormianum,1655.Source:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cabinet_of_curiosities

The sixteenth-century alchemist's “Wunderkammer” (curiosity cabinet or wonder cabinet) was anencyclopedicassemblyofobjectswhosecategoricalborderlinesstillneededtobedefined.Atthetime,objects carried economic, religious, magical, historical, aesthetic, or personal connotations, andknowledgewas contained in theassociative representationof things.AnnaMunster (2006)describedthebaroqueWunderkammer as a “relationof spacesofmatter, knowledge,memory and technics toeachother”(2006,p.6).Shealsounderstood itastheaffectiveengagementwiththenaturalandtheartificial,andwiththeirdifferentialrelations,whicharesituatedbetweenembodimentand(alchemical)techniques as pulsating force fields. This differential logic places body and machine, sensation andconcept,natureandartificeinongoingrelationsofdiscordanceandconcordance.

Such an approach enables researchers to develop an embodied understanding of materials and tocreatenewformsofsensingandactingsubstances.Thediscoveryofnewexperientiallevelsofinvisibleprocessesmayallowforsocialinteractionsthatmakenewmaterialvaluesaccessible.ThreeInbetweencollaborations are discussed below. Each took place in a different expert setting and involved variedtime frames. The paper concludes by considering theWunderkammer approach as a design tool forinterdisciplinarycollaborations.

3.1InBetweencollaborationI Thefirst InBetweencollaborationwas“WunderkammerforArisingMatter:Practice-ledLaboratoryforCuriousMaterials”(17–19November2016).Thisventurewasrunasaworkshop-cum-micro-symposium

ZIEGLER&FRITZ


7

at the Department of Interaction Design, Zurich University of the Arts (the project received internalfunding; its organisers and facilitators were L. Franzke, C. Winkler and V. Ziegler). Guest speakers,participants, and workshop contributors (from the creative disciplines, industry, and science) wereinvitedtothehybrideventbasedontheirextensiveexperiencewithnovelmaterials.Workfocusedon“softmaterials”and“bionicprinciples”throughapplyingdiverseinstrumentsfromsciencelaboratories,self-developed tools, and a host of materials readily available in the experimental space. The firstworkshop served to evaluate the usefulness and the importance of the proposed “Wunderkammer”formataswellasitscreativeoutcomes.

Figure1.WunderkammerforArisingMatterSource:C.Winkler

Duringthethree-day“Wunderkammer”event,expertparticipantsexploredmultipleperspectivesontheirexperienceswithmaterialityanddifferingpractices.Resultsweredisplayedinapublic“Wunderkammer”-styleexhibitionofmaterialbody-and-spaceexperiments.

ZIEGLER&FRITZ


8

Figure2.WunderkammerLaboratorySource:V.Ziegler

Figure3.LaboratoryworkingatmosphereSource:V.Ziegler

Withoutparticipatory,real-worldexperimentation,novelmaterialpropertiesandtechnologiestendnottomoveoutoftheresearch laboratories inwhichtheyaredeveloped.The InBetweenpilotdemonstratedthe relevance and benefit of havingmaterials readily to hand, both as constructingmaterials and astools forembodied learningprocessesand inspiration.Applyingprostheticmaterials inenactive, form-giving experiments opened up new possibilities for producing responsive environments and forconceptualizing materiality more actively and more performatively. The research presented hereintendedtodeepenunderstandingofsuchpossibilities,tomakeexplicitandtofindthetoolsneededtodevelop new methods for experimental practice-based design research. Various experiments wereconducted: with silicone and electroluminescent fluids (EL) and electroactive polymers (EAP); withsilicone in combination with rigid materials like plywood, stones, and inflated air; with silicone,integratedthreads,andinflatedair;andwithsiliconeandnaturalgranulates,thermo-chromiccolors,orshape-changingpolymers.Ouroverallaimwastoengageinandpromotenovelmaterialexploration.

ZIEGLER&FRITZ


9

Figure4.FirconegrowthprincipleSource:V.Ziegler,A.Piñeyro

Figure5.SkinmembranedehydrationSource:V.Ziegler,C.Winkler

Thedifferentoutcomes(Figures3–6)illustrateconceptualmaterializationsofbionicprinciplesandsoftmaterialproperties.Figure3displaystheinterrogationofstretchablefabric,andsiliconecombinedwithplywood, in the search for self-bearing properties. Figure 4 shows the growth principle of a fir conemadeofpaper.Figure5illustratesskinmembranedehydration,whichwasconductedwithstretchablefabric, silicone, and a heat gun. Figure 6 presents the surface property of a passion fruit, executedthroughfabricandironedPolypropylenestripes.Initsthought-provoking,physicalexplorations,thefirstInBetweenworkshopofferedpracticalexamplesof the new thinking about matter and about the materialization processes evident in contemporarytheoreticaldebates,whereresearchersventureintothehypotheticalandtheunexploredascreatorsorcatalyserscontinuouslyaimingforevolutionin—andthrough—interaction.Moregenerally,includingsocio-culturalprocessesinnewmaterialsresearch,technologies,anddigitalfabricationprocessesaimsto produce a series of various prototypes for critical/speculative future living scenarios. These couldresult both in novel material exploration or indeed in the application of spatial wall elements or ofcourseinartisticproductdevelopment.

ZIEGLER&FRITZ


10

Figure6.PassionfruitsurfacepropertySource:VerenaZiegler,AnaPiñeyro

3.2InBetweencollaborationII ThesecondcasestudywasconductedattheOpenInnovationLab(OIL).BasedatConstanceUniversityofAppliedSciencesforTechnologyandEconomics(Germany),OILisaninterdisciplinarylaboratoryfordigitalfabricationmethodsandahubforvariousfaculties(ComputerScience,ElectricalandInformationEngineering,ArchitectureandDesign,Mechanical Engineering,Civil Engineering, Economics and Law).Ontheonehand,thelaboratoryembracesvariouskeyconcepts("Makerspaces,""Fablabs,"andpubliclyaccessible “Do-It-Yourself workshops,” where digital tools can be creatively developed, tested, andproduced).On the other hand, it serves as an “innovation space” for collaborationswith companies,where new ideas are invented, developed, and quickly brought to market maturity through rapidprototyping methods. Interdisciplinary cooperation among students, teaching staff, and researchersfrom all disciplines is key to the OIL. The main InBetween research was conducted within the OILenvironmentthankstoaBrigitte-Schlieben-LangeResearchGrantforExcellentJuniorFemaleScientistsandArtistswithChildren.

ZIEGLER&FRITZ


11

Figure7.MicroscopicpictureofbonestructureSource:www.evolo.us/architecture/kmutt-learning-center-is-a-study-on-biomimicry/

The project call for this interdisciplinary collaborationwas facilitated through theOIL environment andannouncedtomechanicalengineersasafinalundergraduateprojecttowardearningaBachelor'sdegree.Thetaskwastodevelopanewlightweightconstructionmaterialoutof3Dfilamentdisposals,analogouslyto the principles of bone growth and their highly mechanical load capacity (Fig. 7). Important aspectsincluded the stated project goal, but also the capacity to accept failure (i.e., knowing neitherwhatwillhappen during hands-on experimentation norwhichmaterial results to expect). The sustainability (i.e.,reusability)of the filamentdisposalsofdigital fabrication techniqueswasa furtheraspectandasecondstatedprojectgoal.Thesecondcasestudyrestedonseveralmainpremises:tolettheinterplaybetweenmaterial forces takes its course; toavoidpredicting the formof thematerial itself,but instead toallowform-giving processes to let unprejudiced material performance happen; to allow combinations withtracing,whichattimesconstrainedthehands-ontechniquesandembodiedengagement.

ZIEGLER&FRITZ


12

Figure8.FirstprototypeexperimentingwiththegrowthprincipleofbonestructuresSource:J.Dihrik,V.Ziegler

The resulting collaborationwith JulienDihrik, amechanical engineering student, is anongoing researchprojectthatisbasedonprototypingiterationstodevelopafilament-flossmachinetocreate“bone”fabric.If successful, this fabric couldbeused for lightweight structures in the construction sectoror in artisticproductdevelopment,e.g.,tocreateaseriesofmarketablelampclouds.Involvingactivebodilyengagement,initialhands-onexperimentationwithperforatedcans,meltedsugar,andadrill(Fig.8)soughttodiscoverhowmeltedsugarontheflycoagulatestoformacompoundsystem.Sugar has a similar melting behaviour to the filaments used for 3D printing, e.g., PLA (Polyclactide)filament,whichisbasedonbiodegradablecornstarch,sugarcane,tapiocaroots,andpotatostarchon.Thefirstexperimentsrevealedthataconsistentdrillingmechanismandusingatightperforatedcontainertoretainandreleasethesugararekeytoflyingandcompoundingbehaviour.

ZIEGLER&FRITZ


13

Figure9.Seconditeration–3DprintedventilatorstocirculatecandyflossformationSource:J.Dihrik,V.Ziegler

Thesecondprototypingiterationrefinedthepreliminaryfindings.3Dprintedparts(e.g.,aspinnerhead,fanstocirculatethemeltedfilament,andlaser-cutfixedaxesforthedrillingmachine)wereconstructedandtestedwithintheOILlaboratory(Fig.9).Furtherexperimentsandprototypingiterationswillincludetests with various filaments and their combinations, to detect if the flight characteristics and formassemblieswillchangeduringtheirmaterialassemblages.Guidedbycreativeintuition,researcherscanmix thesematerial characteristics as ingredients and combine them in transformation processes. Theresultof these two iterations is still unsatisfactory,but theadopted interdisciplinaryworkingpracticeseeks toexemplify themodeof thoughtandactionneeded to situate transit zonesofmaterial force-relationsandspaceswithinserendipitousresearchinvestigations.3.3InBetweencollaborationIII Theinterestinmathematicalminimalsurfacestructuresarosefromtheinterestinbiomimicryprinciplesand in bionic principles found in nature. Key to minimal surface structures are their statically self-bearingproperties.Theseusetheminimumamountofmaterialwiththemaximumamountofsurfacestructure. Based on soap bubble experiments, minimal surface structures were tested to envisionminimal surface principals (notabene without a professional mathematical background). The soapbubbles created, helped envision, but also served as material realizations of thought processes for

ZIEGLER&FRITZ


14

facilitating communication between different scientists and diverse visions of modular buildingstructures.These soapbubble testswere translated intomathematicalminimal surface formulasand,aidedbyaspecialmathematicalprogramme(“Mathematica”),theywere3Ddigitalizedandintegratedinto Rhino, a 3D design drawing programme, and subsequently translated into 3D printed minimalsurfacestructures.

Figure10.MathematicalminimalsurfaceISource:V.Ziegler,S.Gerlach

Figure11.MathematicalminimalsurfaceIISource:V.Ziegler,S.Gerlach

The third interdisciplinary investigation is an ongoing collaborationwith Stefan Gerlach, a lecturer intheoretical physics at the University of Constance. Further research will explore minimal surfacestructures, with a view to printing the lines forming the minimal surface onto stretched fabric.Collaboration is mainly via verbal communication, combined with images of bionic structures or 3Dprintedprototypes.Thesearesubsequentlytranslatedintominimalsurfaceformulaswithmathematicalprinciples of Delauny triangulations, in order to construct the lines out of the surface topology. ThistriangulatedlinetopologyistranslatedintoRhinoontoatwo-dimensionalsurfaceoutline,whichisthen3Dprintedonstretchedfabric.Afterprinting,thestretchedfabricisreleasedandthecreatedcompoundsystem springs back into theminimal surface form. Shape-changing experiments with various elasticfabricsincombinationwith3DprintedPLAfilamentshavebeendesignedtotestthedynamicwithstandvalue,whichmightincreasewithprintedfilamentrigidityand,ifso,createatextilefilamentcompound

ZIEGLER&FRITZ


15

system.The idea istocreatestatically load-bearing lightweightstructuresbyscalingdigital fabricationtechniquestoaspatialformat.Conclusion

In aworld focusedon facts, statistics, andevidence-based technologies, intact communal, social, andculturalrelationships–andassumingresponsibilityforthemanypressingissuesatlarge—seemtobedisappearing increasingly.Thispaperhasarguedthattheenactive“Wunderkammer–Lab” isadesigntoolsuitedtoreconcilingseveralpersistentdualities:‘subject/object,’‘art/science,’‘making/observing,’‘mind/body,’ ‘aesthetic/rational.’ This tool has the potential to shed light on problematic, yet deeplyingrained issues. As society moves progressively from discipline-based and siloed knowledgemanagementtowardnon-linearmodels,ourthinkingneedstoadvancewithouractions. Notonlydowe to interrelate and convey knowledgebetweendifferent fields evenmore thanatpresent, butwealso need to free our minds through unpredictable, serendipitous collaborative research striving toreachbeyonddisciplinaryconfines.Suchiterative,dynamicapproachesreframeproblematicsituationsand preferred states and bring into play both theoretical and practical approaches. The resulting,designedartifactcanbeseenasamethodforopeningupnewspacefordesignandotherdisciplines,wheretheartifactisrecognizedasacreativemeansofinvestigatingwhatapotentialfuturemightlooklike. Fully recognizing the complex and entangled interdependencies within a globalized world, theInBetween project aims to foster linkages, knowledge exchange, and different perspectives throughcreatingnewmaterialsandvirtualalliances.Materialscarryinformationintothesocialsphere,inwhichthematerial's inherent spatial quality helps to access, encounter, or grasp information in a tangible,bodilywaybyinterrelatingseverallayersofreality.Insummary,thisresearch:

• Promotesout-of-the-boxperceptionthroughintersubjectiveapproaches

• Fostersemotionalawarenessandalliancestounderstandmaterialforcerelations

• Embodiesknowledgeratherthandissectsknowledge

• Graspsinterconnectedlayersandunveilsdifferentrealitiesandstreamsofbeing

• Isawareoftheimpactandtheconsequencesofhumanactionsandinvolvementinsocialandcollectivevalues

• Understandsmaterialinterfacesasperformativemedia,whichactivelyenactcorrespondencesbetweentheworld'smicro-andmacro-levels

References

Barad,K.:“AgentialRealism:FeministInterventionsinUnderstandingScientificPractices.”,TheScienceStudiesReader,ed.MarioBiagioli,1–11.NewYork:Routledge,1998.

—: "Posthumanist Performativity: TowardanUnderstandingofHowMatterComes toMatter". Signs:JournalofWomenandSociety28.3,2003.

—:“Meeting theUniverseHalfway:QuantumPhysicsandtheEntanglementofMatterandMeaning”.Durham,N.C.:DukeUniversityPress,2007.

Bennett,J.:“Ediblematter”.NewLeftReview45:133,2007.

ZIEGLER&FRITZ


16

Brandom, R.: “Making It Explicit: Reasoning, Representing, and Discursive Commitment”, HarvardUniversityPress,Cambridge,1994.

Bourriaud,N.:“RelationalAesthetics”,Dijon:Pressesdureel,2002.

Bryant,L.R.:“TheDemocracyofObjects”.OpenHumanitiesPress,2011.

Coelho,M.andMaes,P.:“ResponsiveMaterialsintheDesignofAdaptiveObjectsandSpaces”,2007.

Coté,M.:“Technicsandthehumansensorium:Rethinkingmediatheorythroughthebody”.Theory&Event,13(4),2010.

Cross,N.:"DesignerlyWaysOfKnowing".DesignStudies3.4,221-227,1982.

Deleuze,G.andGuattariF.:“AThousandPlateaus.CapitalismandSchizophrenia”.trans.byMassumi,B.,Minneapolis:TheUniversityofMinnesotaPress,1987.

DeleuzeG.andGuattari,F.:“Athousandplateaus”,trans.B.Massumi.London:Continuum,2004.

Dourish,P.:“WheretheActionIs”,Firstpaperbackedn,MITPress,Cambridge,Massachusetts,2004.

Elkins,J.:“WhatPaintingIs:HowtoThinkAboutPainting,UsingtheLanguageofAlchemy”.Routledge,London,2000.

Gallese, V.: “The inner sense of action: agency andmotor representations”. J. Consc. Stud. 7, 23–40,2000.

GlobalResearchCouncil(GCR)https://www.jsps.go.jp/english/e-grc/data/statement_principles.pdf.

Guattari,F.:“Chaosmosis:AnEthicoAestheticParadigm”IndianaUP,135pgs,1995.

Haraway, D., J.: “Modest Witness@Second_Millenium.FemaleMan(C)_Meets_On coMouseTM:FeminismandTechnoscience”,287pp.NewYorkandLondon:Routledge,ISBN0-41590386-6(hbk),0-415-90387-4,1997.

Hecht,S.in:“MaterialsExperience:FundamentalsofMaterialsandDesign”.KaranaElvin,OwainPedgleyandValentinaRagnoli.Publisher:Elsevier,Editors:ElvinKarana,OwainPedgley,ValentinaRognoli,2014.

IngoldT.:“BringingThingstoLife:CreativeEntanglementsinaWorldofMaterials”,2010.

Klee,P.:“NotebooksVol.1:TheThinkingEye”.London,LundHumphriesPublishers,1964.

Knorr-Cetina, K.: “Epistemic Cultures: How the Siences Make Knowledge. Havard University Press,Cambridge,Massachusetts,London,England,1999.

—:“Cultureinglobalknowledgesocieties:knowledgeculturesandepistemiccultures”.InterdisciplinaryScienceReviews,2007,Vol.32,No.4,2007.

Küchler,S.:“Socialmemoryintheageofknowledge”,BlackwellPublishingLtd.USA,2012.

Latour, B.: “Reassembling the Social – An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory”, Oxford UniversityPress,2005.

Latour,B.:“ReassemblingTheSocial”.1sted.Oxford:Clarendon,2005.

Malafouris,L.:"BeforeAndBeyondRepresentation:TowardsAnEnactiveConceptionOfThePalaeolithicImage".1sted.2017.

Malafouris,L.:“AtthePotter'sWheel:AnArgumentforMaterialAgency”,2007.

Massumi,B.: “Parables for theVirtual:Movement,Affect,Sensation”,DukeUniversityPress,Durham,2002.

MerleauPonty,M.:“TheStructureofBehavior”,1963.

ZIEGLER&FRITZ


17

Merleau-Ponty,M.:“TheStructureOfBehaviour”.Pittsburg:DuquesneUniversityPress,2006.

Munster, A.: “Materializing NewMedia: Embodiment in Information Aesthetics”. Dartmouth CollegePress|UniversityPressofNewEngland,2006.

Pallasmaa, J.: “The thinking hand: Existential and embodiedwisdom in architecture. Chichester: JohnWileyandSons,2009.

Peres, C.: “Sinnliche Erkenntnis-Experiment-Induktion: Zur Doppelfunktion der Ästhetik alsKunstphilosophie und ‚Logik der Erfahrung‘ bei Alexander Gottlieb Baumgarten, VIII“. Kongreß derDeutschenGesellschaftfürÄsthetik.http://www.dgae.de/downloads/Peres_SinnlicheErkenntnis.pdf

Rancière,J.:“ThePoliticsofAesthetics:TheDistributionoftheSensible”,translatedbyGabrielRockhill,London:Continuum,2004.

Rheinberger, H.-J.: “Toward a history ofepistemic things: Synthesizing proteins in the test tube”.Stanford,California:StanfordUniv.Press,1997.

—: “An Epistemology of the Concrete, Twentieth-Century Histories of Life”. Duke University Press,Durham&London,2010.

Sciencemag http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2015/05/global-research-chiefs-seek-ways-foster-serendipity(accessed22.05.2017).

Varela,F.J.,Thompson,E.,&Rosch,E.“Theembodiedmind”.Cambridge,Mass:MITPress.1991.

V.ZieglerVerenaZieglertrainedasanarchitect(Dipl.Ing.ArchitectureTH).SheholdsanMAinTextileDesignanMAinDesign.Sheiscurrentlyundertakingherpractice-basedPhD.VerenaisaResearchAssociateattheFaculty of Design, Department of Interaction Design, Zurich University of the Arts (Switzerland). Shereceiveda two-yearBrigitte-Schlieben-LangeResearchGrant forExcellent JuniorFemaleScientistsandArtists with Children to undertake her PhD research at the Open Innovation Lab (OIL), ConstanceUniversityofAppliedSciences forTechnologyandEconomics (HTWG,Germany). TheOIL specializes ininterdisciplinarydigitalfabricationmethods.HerPhDfocusesondevelopingbionicprinciplesforcreatingalternative lightweight building structures using textiles and digital fabrication techniques in aninterdisciplinaryframeworkbetweenarchitecture,textiledesign,andinteractiondesign.Prof.O.FritzOliverFritziscurrentlyChairoftheDepartmentofDigitalMediaandArchitecturalPresentationatHTWGConstance.HeistheInitiatorandLeaderoftheOpenInnovationLab,foundedin2016.HehasservedasProfessor of DigitalMedia andArchitectural Presentation in Constance since 2012.Hewas previouslyProfessorofCADandDigitalMediainCologne(2008–2012)andAssociateProfessorofDigitalMediainLiechtenstein (2004–2008). He was shareholder of Fritz und Braach ”Adaptive Architektur,“ a Zurich-based architectural agency from 2005–2012. Since 2013, he has been the co-founder of the “User-Generated-Design”network. Since2001,hehasbeena foundingmemberof the ”Kaisersrot“ researchnetworkforarchitecture,urbandevelopmentandcomputertechnology(Kaiserslautern/Rotterdam/Zurich).

Documents

InBetween: material encounters in human/non-human interactions€¦ · mathematical “things” to all sorts of different things (Knorr-Cetina 2001), which “produce knowledge that