2011-2012 Spring SemesterFaculty of Architecture ID 501 Advanced Project DevelopmentDepartment Of Industrial Design In Industrial Design Erasmus IP Project Partnership with TU/Eindhoven & Hogeschool Sint-Lukas Brussel: Cultural Differences in Practice Inst. Figen IŞIK, Part-Time Inst. Burcu DERER OMAY, Res. Asst. Yekta BAKIRLIOĞLU Hande IŞIK Selma KADİROĞLU Ceren KÖKTÜRK Hande ÖZTAŞ Zeliha UYURCA Nur YILDIRIM
CONTENTS• Creative Methods • Observation • Intervention to Space • Questionnaires• Design Ideas
Observation• 15-20 minutes rest• Waiting for someone else• Eating/Drinking/Smoking/ Making,answering a call…• Chatting with friends• Waiting for an unknown reason – Watching the people passing by, making comments about them, – killing time…
Loitering as an economic and social activity…– Free as you sit, hang around there– You create your “own space” • Bring along seeds to crack, drink tea, eat food, ………..– An easy way to vanish in the crowd • Hidden behind the mobile phones, cigarettes, eating/drinking– As a social control mechanism to monitorize individuals • Ottoman district control
Hopscotch cardboard• Created a new behavior of skirting over the cardboard at Kızılay.• Created no change in seniors at Tunalı – They ignored, walked over the cardboard. – Was only used by children at Tunalı.• But, then it turned into a loitering area for seniors.• At “Park Cad” loitering was not similar to what we observe at Kızılay and Tunalı. It was more in forms of leisure and social activities.
• Availiability of a person on the top of cardboard increases the attention of other people.• Children kept company with the cardboard easier than seniors.• Seniors exercised self control – Not to be seen as weird, childlike, crazy – Felt tired? Lazy? – Because it is not a senior game? – Refraining him/herself? – Do another one for only seniors!?
The Impressions of Ours• When we loitered, we felt nervous because we were unsafe.• Man are more active in responding to the intervention in the public space.• Shopkeepers – Some people responded aggressively to the intervention created by us. – When we told about the experiment to others, they were benevolent.• Municipal workers and the cardboard collector – They tried to understand why the cardboard was there. – They were cooperative.
• Appropriation increases the response of people who spend most of their time in the intervened space.• Exaggerated activities draw more attention• If the action is subject to the individuals’ shining out in the public, response decreases – Being part of the mass in public? Not to take attention as an individual?
SurveyTime: Morning, Afternoon, Evening, After midnightReasons: Boredom, Nothing to do; Waiting someone/something, Resting need,Motivation and funSpace: Infront of shops or shopping malls, Seaside, StreetsSpacious, clean, designed, attractive, convenient to pass time, wide, open,crowded, chaosObjects or urban equipments: Shop windowsPractices done while loitering: Talking with cellphone, Watching people, Listeningmusic, ReadingPersonal loitering- Group Loitering: Harmony with groupLoitering in Turkey&loitering in other countriesHighschoolers, people who have to kill time, environment, dirtiness