Walking as Do-It-Yourself Urbansim

This article develops a series of theoretical notions arising in the context of an urban art project that took place in London in the summer of 2004 under the title “Where do you breathe?”1 As a participatory urban intervention, the project challenged the notion of authorship in public space by casting the act of walking as a transformation of urban space, and examined the potentials for a practice of photography based on interaction rather than passive representation

WHERE DO YOU BREATHE?

The project wheredoyoubreathe.net consists of three elements: a photographic essay, an urban intervention, and a website. The photographic essay forms an investigation of the city through the act of walking. As opposed to the image of the city as a dense world and a conglomerate of vibrant urban spaces full of things, the photographic essay tries to portray it as a tranquilised terrain open to contemplation, a post-industrial and uprooted, yet surprisingly bucolic landscape where one can roam and linger. By walking the landscape, open yet personal spaces get revealed alongside the city’s designated living, working or sociable spaces. They function as possible chill-out spaces for the city walker, and could be called ‘breathing spaces’. The photographic essay is as much a search for this specific urban space as it is an evocation of London as a fluid landscape of possibility

Governing through nature: camps and youth movements in interwar Germany and the United States

Focusing on youth camp development in Germany and the United States during the interwar period, this article argues not only that such camps played a crucial role in the ways in which national societies dealt with their youth, but also that their history forces us to rethink relations between place-making, nationhood, and modern governing. First, the article addresses the historiography of youth movements in relation to current debates about spatiality, nationalism, and governmentality. The main part of the article examines organized camps, in particular by the German Bünde, the Hitlerjugend (Hitler Youth), and the American Boy Scouts, focusing on their transition from relatively spontaneous activities of particular social movements, to objects of professional design, national-scale planning and intricate management in the interwar period. This development demonstrates how in the seemingly trivial activity of camping, nationalism is interwoven with the project of conducting youth through contact with nature. Despite divergent contexts and political ideologies, youth camp development in this period constituted a set of practices in which the natural environment was deployed to improve the nation's youth, and to eventually reproduce them as governable subjects

Agency in Architecture: Reframing Criticality in Theory and Practice

Whether critiquing the architect’s societal position and the role of the user, conceptualising the performative dimension of the architectural object, or considering the effects of theory for architecture at large, current debates in architecture intersect in the notion of agency. As fundamental as it is often taken for granted, this notion forms the keystone of this issue, inviting contributors to rethink architecture’s specificity, its performance, and its social and political relevance. Agency in architecture inevitably entails questioning the relation between theory and practice, and what it might mean to be critical – both inside and outside architecture – today. The main proposal is to rethink contemporary criticality in architecture, by explicating the notion of agency in three major directions: first, ‘the agency of what?’ or the question of multiplicity and relationality; second, ‘how does it work?’, a question referring to location, mode and vehicle; and third, ‘to what effect?’, bringing up the notion of intentionality

Agency in Architecture: Reframing Criticality in Theory and Practice

Whether critiquing the architect’s societal position and the role of the user, conceptualising the performative dimension of the architectural object, or considering the effects of theory for architecture at large, current debates in architecture intersect in the notion of agency. As fundamental as it is often taken for granted, this notion forms the keystone of this issue, inviting contributors to rethink architecture’s specificity, its performance, and its social and political relevance. Agency in architecture inevitably entails questioning the relation between theory and practice, and what it might mean to be critical – both inside and outside architecture – today. The main proposal is to rethink contemporary criticality in architecture, by explicating the notion of agency in three major directions: first, ‘the agency of what?’ or the question of multiplicity and relationality; second, ‘how does it work?’, a question referring to location, mode and vehicle; and third, ‘to what effect?’, bringing up the notion of intentionality