Research Interest: a question

Photo Credit: Karen Eliot

I plan to study how counter-culture is defined in terms of its aesthetics. To do so, I plan to research and answer to following question: What is the aesthetic of counter-culture, specifically squats?

By narrowing "counter-culture" or "anti-consumerism culture" down to squats, it keeps me within our group question, but provides a specific definition of the space I will be looking at. Researching aesthetics is problematic in that "aesthetics" is difficult to define, and even more difficult to document and analyze. In "Aesthetic Understanding of Organizational Life" by Antonio Strati, the point is brought up regarding the relationship between the researcher and the reader. The aesthetic understanding of the researcher and that of the audience, and even that of the "subject(s)" being studied may vary. I plan to conduct my research through a combination of observation (which brings in my own aesthetic understanding) and conversation with those "natives" of the culture (ie the squatters) in an effort to better understand their aesthetic. At the same time, being on site will provide me with the opportunity to absorb their aesthetic attitudes, or at least, experience them. My interactions with these native persons comes with potential human subject issues, especially concerning privacy of those individuals, and the way I conduct my conversations with them.

kulture+kitchen: group synecdoche

After much discussion, we (Isaac, Cassie, and I) found that many of our various interests (i.e. food, squatting, graffiti) have a similar DIY-ethic base. From that, we decided upon our group research question: How is counter-consumerism a cultural movement?

Photo by: Cookiemouse

Our synecdoche: de Peper.

According to OT301, "de Peper is a collectively organised, non-profit project combining kulture with kitchen. Cultural happenings include poetry, cabaret, dj nights and exhibiting artists work. All ingredients and products used in the kitchen and bar are organic and vegan."

Online Manifestation

To figure out how youtube and blogs work, I'll start out with a couple videos that pretty much explain what squatting is and how it works.

This first one is by youtube user TashPhoto.



This second one is by journalist Julia Dimon.




This site lists various squat bars and restaurants.

[squat!net] is "an international internet magazine with main focus on squatted houses, car sites and other free spaces." It doesn't just focus on Amsterdam, but it seems up to date.

ASCII is an organization that uses squatted spaces for their HQ, located in Amsterdam, and for workshops they host.

Well-known squat restaurant: De Peper. I definitely want to eat here sometime. They also do other various events.

OT301 is a squat venue that hosts performances and film screenings, amongst other events. They happen to have their own youtube station here.


The more I read about squatting, the more attached to this topic I get. Research directions I might want to go in:
-How is a space transformed once it is squatted? I want to see if having squatters "tidies up" the space, or if having squatters results in the place getting trashed.

-How do squatted spaces become a center of culture? I would want to study how squat cafes/restaurant/venues breed a culture within itself, but also contributes to the large squat culture. Furthermore, shared squatted living spaces also seem to contribute to the larger squat culture, and it seems like an interesting intersection to study.

Research interest

This is a mobile upload test since i saw this while walking to my car with thoughts about amsterdam and potential research topics. I started out interested in street art and design. And i still am. But with the recent entry of the mainstream by local underground dining, i thought of squatters in Amsterdam. Funny how the mind works, right? Anyways, as far as i know, there's a pretty significant squat scene with cafes, restaurants, gallarys. And of course there's an anti-squat movement of some sort. I think it would be interesting to study the use of spaces squatted, how they become squatted, what the government stance is, and how the neighbors feel about all this.

Disorderly Recycling: Observations at Seattle Center

We (Emily and Fiona) decided to close read the South Fountain Lawn at Seattle Center, while Cassie visited the New Haven Green. Here are our initial observations regarding the South Fountain Lawn:

1. Cement Walls

-There were low cement walls that ostensibly doubled as hillside blockers (to keep dirt and grass in a mound) and as seats for the passerby. These were interesting because they were too low to be comfortable seating especially for adults. It seemed that to serve two function the architects had to make compromises against the other purpose. The only exception was in one case where the bench was built up with a back.

We also noticed the use of Skatestoppers (circled in red in both photos) indicating that the space was not intended for skateboarders.

2. Location of Ash Trays

-Another thing that we noted immediately was the spacing and location of the ash trays—while there were three lined up [in above photo] equally distant from a green space (and visible from every angle, perhaps there was an element of shame attached as a disincentive for people to smoke?) there was one pushed up against the cement wall [see photo below], presumably for people to sit down in the less visible corner and smoke.

It did not fit with the neatly organized layout of the rest of the park (where every object was pushed into a corner or logical space) and I wondered who had moved it (maintenance or someone trying to smoke inconspicuously) and whether it was more frequently used by smokers than the other ash trays.

3. Roped Off

-We also noted that part of the grass area was roped off (meaning people entering from the Key Arena side of the lawn via the stairs had to walk around the circle to get access). We wondered why this region would be roped off when there were activities on the grass, especially considering that the stairs were a logical entering point to the region. The photo below is the view from the stairs.

We did notice that the lawn closest to Fisher Pavilion was unroped, as shown in the photo below. We attributed this to the Seeds of Compassion workshops happening in Fisher Pavilion at the time.

Now for our research question... We focused on temporary plastic recycling bags scattered across the grassy public space. These immediately caught our attention because of their odd positioning—they were not located near the cement paths where the majority of people were walking but rather INSIDE the green space at odd angles and at different distances from the sidewalk. They were located far enough into the green that a person would need to walk at least ten feet off the path and over the grass to reach one.

The holes for cans were facing the inside of the grass (except for one bag, which broke the pattern and faced outwards). We wondered “Why are these recycling receptacles placed in this manner, and what purpose do they serve?” We could use any methodological approach to explain this phenomenon, but we chose a combination of close reading the space (a la Burstein) and looking at cities (Jacobs-style) and determined that a good approach would be to observe environmental behavior as a “secret outsider” or “marginal participant,” although we got a little overexcited and became “full participants” (Ziesel).

By close reading/looking at the space we could infer that maintenance (or whoever had placed these bags on the grass) had done so for a temporary event. This was obvious for several reasons: a) the receptacles were soft plastic and not weather-resistant (and were barely grounded, they were obviously not meant to last more than a day or so); b) the grass underneath them was healthy, suggesting they hadn’t been there long enough to block the sun or rain; and c) they were scattered haphazardly across the ground as compared to the highly “ordered” or organized park, which had everything in a corner or by a tree or equally spaced out (although possibly Fiona and I were unable to determine the order of whoever had placed these receptacles). These all suggested that the recycling bins were there for an unusual event, and therefore they had been placed to cater to whoever was going to act in the grassy space.

By first observing from a set of benches above the green space and watching which people used the recycling bins, what they looked like, and where they came from (“secret outsider”) and later walking around it like the people we had been stalking and visualizing how we would use those recycling bins (“marginal participant”) and finally becoming “full participants” by hula-hooping in the event on this grassy lawn, we understood the recycling phenomenon coming from the other direction. By talking to Dizzy Hips, the hula hoopist hosting the Seeds of Compassion event, we heard that there were supposed to be thousands of children and their families on this lawn, and we could therefore infer that the receptacles were set up on the grass facing inwards to cater to the potential customers (but while we were there, only about five kids showed up).

It was interesting to approach this subject from the two different directions, especially because it was unclear why the recycling bins ruined the park’s orderly consistency and “marred” the lawn (at least in my mind). By close reading/looking we could determine there was some sort of a temporary event that demanded it, but by observing environmental behavior and participating we were able to determine what the event was and work backwards.

Observations and thoughts of the similar New Haven Green, CT.

Submission. Islam. Submission. Islam.

The title “Submission” did not surprise me, but what did was that “Submission” is the English translation of “Islam.” An aptly named film, I soon realized.

With the stories all told by what I assume is the same actress, it took me a while to realize there are several different stories in there. Each was about the body; the women’s body to be exact. And the images shown were just as compelling as the tale being told.

Throughout the film, the body is shown painted with the verses from the Qur'an. In my opinion, it is a brilliant way of illustrating the forcing of the teachings from the Qur'an onto the beings of women. The nakedness and a sort of ‘unveiling of the body’ I found to be much more powerful, but also, more subdued and subtle. I found it mesmerizing and a beautiful form of (like I believe Jessica mentioned) art. The blend of the shadow and the burka, highlighted the bit of the face that was shown, reflects life of a Muslim women, but is also effective as part of the composition. In the story of a woman receiving 100 lashes for being guilty of adultery and fornicating, the body is shown, marked with lashes, and of course, painted with the words of the Koran. The story of the women physically abused by her husband shows images of a body, beaten and slumped. The visual imagery is definitely gripping. I wish I had watched it as a silent film first, and then learn the story of the women.

[On a side note, I just realized I started out using “Qur'an” but then switched to “Koran.” Which is correct? …proper/PC/more generally acceptable…does it matter?]

What shocked me more than the stories was my lack of extreme reaction to this film. None of these stories were “new” to me, and while I am still disgusted beyond words by such treatment of women, I don’t have much to say regarding the content itself. What in the past would have gotten disbelief and anger, I can only muster up a shrug of the shoulders and a “that doesn’t surprise me.” I guess I have just become accustomed and somewhat emotionally drained. The questions that this film sparked were mostly regarding the side that did not have a voice in the film, the men. While I recognize the power of creating shock and controversy, especially when bringing the issues of the suppressed into the light, I really just want to have a better understanding of the complex culture and ideology that spawned all this.

like reading a story, but not

As somebody who has somewhat read blogs before (generally reading through Google reader rather than the actual blog itself) I knew that the most recent blog entry is displayed first (at the top of the page.) However, when tackling this blog assignment, I started reading Irina’s blog like somebody reading a book or journal: from top to bottom. Or I suppose I could say I started reading like somebody who has kept up to date with her blog. Anyways, whoops, but this reverse chronological order definitely has its upside and downsides.

To aid in the laying out of chronological order, Irina has labeled some of her blog posts to reflect this passing of time. While not as consistent as a formal research report, it is sufficient for a blog. A reader can easily navigate though the use of blog entry titles such as “First interview results” and “Research day two.” Some, such as “Research Day... 3.. (I think)” are more reflective of what happens in the mind but clear enough nevertheless. Amongst these numerically indicating post titles, there are those that are less in the “timeline” of things, but happen anyways, such as “Brussels & Gay Pride Weekend.”

Taking a closer look at the posts itself, I notice the posts regarding days are chronologically describing her day. It starts in the morning, and ends in the evening, like in “Research Day Four...it only gets better!” which features the photo of the sunset near the end of the post. Often, it is wrapped up with a last thought or foreshadowing what is happening next.

What caught my attention was the photos, specifically, the location of the images. The images are always integrated with the text, never standing alone. The image always seems to be located amongst the text that describes it. For me, it was a question of how to order this. With the rest of the blog in a chorological order of some sort, it threw me off to have to decide if I should examine the image first, then read about it, or read first, and then look the image? Or read part, then look, and then continue reading? This seems like a place where Irina could have made a decision of which to present to her readers first. I’ll have to keep this in mind as I start to add images in my own posts.

(how) confusing(???): a close reading

This email was not a reply directly to me, but rather, to one of my fellow committee members. A question asking for clarification regarding our upcoming monthly meeting date was sent out via the group mailing list, which is how I ended up with a copy of the email sitting in my inbox. The responding email is the one I will attempt to close read.

The email starts off with no “dear _____” or “______,” or anything of that sort. Being a response to a previous email, the heading seems unnecessary; all of us receiving the copy of the email would have received a copy of the email posing the question. The lack of a direct addressee also implies the email is for all of us. The clarification did regard something that matters to me and all the others that received it. Furthermore, the informal nature of the email is something that is present throughout the rest of the email, as seen in the tone, the punctuation, and the word choice present. Notice the apostrophe s, rather than spelling out “meeting is” and the use of “5-7” rather than adding the “:00pm.” The familiarity between the email sender and receivers is apparent in the omission of such detail since the meaning was assumed to be understood.

The second line was the reason I choose to close read this email. The use of parenthesis creates another separate sentence within, and in this case, with a completely different meaning, than the one spelt out excluding the parenthesis. “See you April fools there!” and “See you fools here!” are significantly different. Would the reader, being reminded it’s April’s fool day, take it to mean the meeting isn’t actually happening today? Or would they read it as a cleverly inserted joke, but realize the sender was serious and that the meeting would be happening at the stated day and time?

The line following says basically, joke aside, the meeting is really happening. But it that truly clear to the reader? The line is set within parenthesis as well, just like the part of the April fool’s line, which associates this message with something less seriously and more as a joke. Even the word choice “but seriously” brings about skepticism.

To further understand the recipient’s understanding of this email, it is important to contextualize it. The steering meetings are regularly scheduled at 6pm. This very unusual time of 5pm would bring up doubts in those not aware of the reason why this one meeting would be held at 5pm rather than the typical 6pm.

The end result? Meeting attendance was significantly lower than usual levels. [Disclaimer: correlation, not causation. Many other unnamed factors also influence attendance levels.]