Merging our discourse with Freshlatino2´s decalogue
“Our work considers problematisation (1 dispute) and visibilisation of hidden relationships (2 un-blackboxing) crucial mechanisms to make steps forward in our search for new ways of practicing architecture. We understand that the issue is not to look for illuminated solutions from a practice detached from reality, but, on the contrary, to generate discussion, to collaborate with other disciplines, and to work in processes where conflict and consensus could coexist agonistically (3 laboritorise). Processes that (4) empower those who a priori do not have the disciplinary tools and make sure they manage to access those tools, and also processes that are capable of being moved to those spaces and arenas where multiple approaches could be taken into account.
Thinking on a critical practice forces us to study situated contexts. For us, the urban is a multiplicity of assemblages composed by multiple fluid and situated practices and networks of relations in constant evolution. The actors of these assemblages include not only individual humans, but also non-humans with agency (5 antropononcentrism) – such as infrastructures, institutions, waste, discourses, associations, contracts or documents. These actors constitute the city through the enactment of day-to-day specific situations, arrangements or conflicts (6 happenings, events).
The project presented in the frame of ‘Architectus Omnibus?’ problematises a way of making the city only based in economic growth. We propose to (7) reappropriate the right to infrastructure by those who use it, for it to be understood not from its exchange value but from its use value. A use value which manages to (8) redistribute the benefits through a collaborative management of the city building in turn more (9) resilient and (10) solidary neighbourhoods.”
(*) in italics the 10 concepts.
[Authors ExposeProposePolitise: Giulia Toscani, Miguel Martin and Jorge Martin]