Exploring DIP5 will focus on publicness, porosity and place as starting points

for architectural projects that respond to burning issues of public

Openness
interest, in order to generate site-specific impact. The projects
will be based on research into diverse notions of publicness in
the respective physical, historical and environmental contexts of
through places chosen by each individual student.

Boundaries Public space is essential for democratic society. It does not

imply ‘limitless’ space; rather, boundaries outline public space.
Simultaneously, porosity is defined by the characteristics of
boundaries, between a site and a built object, between the exterior
Diploma Unit 5 and interior and also within the built structure itself. DIP5 will
explore how porosity relates to the politics of architecture,
Design Brief
considering how we might create porous interventions and
2021-2022 what spatial effects these might generate in relation to social
and environmental questions. We will ask: How can we draw
boundaries that are inclusive rather than exclusive? How can we
create well-tempered environments with porous boundaries
without damaging the Earth’s climate? How might we redesign
the built environment to stimulate the senses and broaden our
generosity and imagination?
DIP5 interrogates connections between spatial and socio-political
categories, drawing from the hypothesis that porosity is a link
and a method to establish and contest different boundaries. By
drawing, modelling, referencing and prototyping, the unit will test
Gabu Heindl the agency of architecture as a means of increasing democratic
š
Bostjan Vuga participation, contributing to climate justice and promoting
inclusivity in public spaces such as culture, landscape, housing and
infrastructure. We will demonstrate how architects can engage
with activism in order to materialise the claim for public space
within a specific place, to generate architectural projects that are:
Public Porous Placed!

Zhi Bin Cheah, De-Fenced Vertical Habitat,

AA DIP5 2020/21

01
Public!
Public!
Porous!
Porous! PUBLICNESS
BURNING
BURNING
Public space ISSUES
ISSUES
is where democratic societies happen, where
democratic processes can take place. It comprises of sites of
DIP5 is
DIP5 is about
about architecture
architecture interacting
interacting with with burning
burning issues of of a
conflict, for conflict and its non-suppression and it is itselfissuescontesteda
larger
larger public interest and which relate clearly to spatial questions.
to the publicdegreeinterest
just as and which relate
democracy is. Inclearly to spatial
the design questions.
of publicness,
Challenging the
Challenging the position
position of of architects
architects and and with
with reference
reference to to the
the
architecture plays an important part. As the public – in the sense
political
political theory
theory of radical democracy,
of radicaloccurrences
democracy,and DIP5
DIP5 will encourage
will encourage the
the
of enabling
BURNING non-routine
ISSUES encounters – is being
students to
students to choose
choose a site
a site with
with an an urgency,
urgency, whichwhich may may also also bebe the
the
jeopardized, we start out to radicalise publicness: to design public
site
DIP5 of local
of isand
about protests or
or popular
architecture agency
responding of citizen groups regarding
site
space local toprotests
broaden popular
its meaning agency andto burning
ofscope
citizen issues
ofgroups
publicnessof a larger
regarding
even
publicness.
public
more. interest which have spatial impacts. What is such a burning
publicness.
issue?
What What
is and whose claims areand
at stake with housing at injustice,
What
This is aa not
does
burning
burning
imply
issue?
issue? What
What
‘limitless’ and whose
spaces; whose
rather,
claims
claims are are at stake?
stake?
environmental
Spaces of isolationthreats,
or closed borders,
quarantine? Unjust enclosures
distribution of commons,
of space?
Spaces
acknowledgesof isolation that or quarantine?
public spacelack Unjust
also distribution ofinspace?
surveilled
Environmental and controlled
threats? space,
Closed ofneeds
borders, urban boundaries
infrastructure?
enclosures of commons?
order
Environmental threats? Closed borders,
to be defined and differentiated from private space, and even to enclosures of commons?
Surveilled
DIP 5 isopen and
interested controlled
in howspace, these non-accessibile
issuesin are public in space?
Surveilled
remain and andcontrolled
universally space, the contested
non-accessibile
accessible public
first place. actual
space?
Your site
places.sitePlaces
Your could
couldwhich be a public space,
are characterized
be a public such as a
space, such asbya public public park,
a lack park, museum,
of publicness,
museum,
Boundaries
university,
e.g. gated are
school, generators
communities, infrastructure,for
business
university, school, infrastructure, riverbanks, etc. publicness.
riverbanks,
improvement etc.
districts or publicly
owned
Publicness private
is not space,
just unfinished
a characteristic constructions
of open public sites, unused
DIP5
DIP5 is is interested
interested in
in architectural
architectural agency:
agency: how
how can can we spaces,
we as
as architectssuch
architects
derelict
as areas,
city squares environmentally
or parks. intimidating public space, obsolete
become
become active
active creators
creators of Publicness
of change,
change, how how can canalso
can we betap
we taprelated
into
into the to full
the an
full
infrastructural
architectural
potentials spaces,
structure. to Itmention
does notsome.
depend on its size nor on its
potentials of of architecture,
architecture, while while understanding
understanding architectures
architectures own own
temporary
Political andvssocial
boundaries?
boundaries? permanent
burningcharacter.
issues become It canspecific
be characteristic
as they reflect of ina
small
spatial temporal pavilion
and architectural or of a large megastructure.
sequences of actual places. Challenging
Our
Our enquiry
enquiry will will embed
embed an an in-depth-understanding
in-depth-understanding of of connections
connections
the
The
betweenposition
physical ofcontext
spatial architectsdoeswith
and political
political not reference to the
play a decisive
categories of the chosen
political
role theory
in publicness,
sites. DIP5of
between spatial and categories of the chosen sites. DIP5
radical
which democracy,
can occur eitherDIP5 will encourage each student to choose
will
will operate
operate with
with theindiversity
the a high dense
diversity andurban
and area orof
specificity
specificity in athe
of remote
the spot
globally
globally
adistributed
of place
the withsites
countryside.an as urgency
Publicness
well their regarding
is
their common also publicness.
not necessarily
common denominators.
denominators. It may
a also
consequencebe the
distributed sites as well
site of local protests or popular agency
of the main program of a building. Architectural design can of citizen groups. The
DIP5
DIP5 leaps off
leaps
spatialization offof from
from
the the porous
the porous as aaissue
as stand-in
stand-in forbeopenings
for openings and
and
foresee publicness forgeneral
a private burning
commercial should
development, identifiedas wellin
closures,
closures,
the specific for
for gaps
gaps
place. and
and thresholds,
thresholds, for
for incompleteness
incompleteness and
and non-
non-
as for very public institutions such as libraries, museums and sports
identity. We
identity. We will
will putput toto the
the test
test the
the spatial,
spatial, social
social andand environmental
environmental
halls.
porosity,
porosity, and confront the specific sites with the urgent
and confront the specific sites with the urgent issues issues
Publicness
of publicness
of encourages
publicness through through mapping the increased
mapping and use
and prototyping of an
prototyping porosity architectural
porosity as an
as an
structure
‘architectural by various
tool -individuals
be it to and
increasesocial
‘architectural tool - be it to increase democratic participation, groups
democratic year around
participation, and
throughout
to engage
to the day. Unused
engage architecturally
architecturally buildingissues,
in climate
in climate space,accessibility
issues, such as abandoned
accessibility to public
to public
and
space, derelict
to structures,
culture, landscapes empty or offices
housing
space, to culture, landscapes or housing and infra-structures. and
and commercial
infra-structures. centres -
unfinished construction sites become sustainable when imbued
with publicness.

1 Don‘t Let Belgrade Drown, Protest Against

Speculative Project for River Front, Serbia
2 GABU at
1 Protest Heindl Architektur,
Sha Tin New TownFestival
Plaza Centre
Hong Vienna
Kong,
1
1
3 Jan Bockholt,
Jan Yeung
Bockholt,
Sadar+Vuga, Ronja
RonjaNg,
Central Engelhardt,
Engelhardt,
Part Sports
Sports Park
Park
Chun
Stožice, Michelle
Possible Futures, AAofDIP5
Urban
the National
2020/21
Farming
Gallery,
Stožice,
2 Don´t Possible
Ljubljana,
letphoto:Futures,
Hisao
Belgrade Urban
Suzuki
D(r)own! Farming
Protest against 02
2
2 Donaukanal
Donaukanal für alle!,
fürPrivat BürgerInneninitiative
alle!, Partnership
BürgerInneninitiative
large scale Public
Donaukanal, Vienna, 2015 river-front
Donaukanal, Vienna, 2015
development,
3
3 Open
Open Border
Belgrade
Border Protest, 2020, photo:
photo:inGabu Heindl 04
04
Donaucanale fürProtest, 2020, Sit-In
alle!, Citizen Gabu Heindl
defense of
public space, Vienna, 2015
3 Open Border Protest, 2020, photo: Gabu Heindl
02
 PUBLIC AND BOUNDARIES
Public space is where democratic societies happen, where
democratic processes can take place. It comprises sites of conflict
and it is itself contested, just as democracy is. In the design of
publicness, architecture plays an important part. As the public –
in the sense of enabling nonroutine occurrences and encounters
– is being jeopardized, DIP 5 starts out to radicalize publicness:
to design public space and to broaden its meaning and scope of
publicness even more.
Public space does not imply ‘limitless’ spaces; rather, it needs
boundaries in order to be defined and differentiated from private
space. Boundaries are generators for publicness. Publicness is a
characteristic of open public spaces, such as city squares or parks
and it can be related to an architectural structure. It does not
depend on its size nor on its temporary vs. permanent character.
Publicness can be characteristic of a small temporal pavilion or of
a large megastructure, it can occur either in a high dense urban
area or in a remote spot of the countryside.
Architectural design can provide for publicness independent of
the main program of a building, as part of a private commercial
development as well as for very public institutions such as libraries,
museums and sports halls. Publicness encourages the increased
use of an architectural structure by various individuals and social
groups year around and throughout the day. Unused building
space, such as abandoned and derelict structures, empty offices
and commercial centers - unfinished construction sites become
sustainable when imbued with publicness.
Public space is a paradoxical space: it only starts to exist if there
are people who are actively present. Publicness is not a generic,
ubiquitous phenomenon but depends on the particularity of a
place. Hence, to map publicness means relating to the physical,
mental, cultural and historical context, to distinguish between
the public, the civic, the common and the everyday. Publicness
is a spatial phenomenon which depends on its multi-layered
boundaries. There is not one public – it depends on its actors,
spectators and users.

1, 2 Jame el Fna square, Marakesh, day view, night

view, photos: B Vuga
03
Porous! POROSITY
Porosity is a measure of the void spaces in the physical matter. It
is a fraction of the volume of voids over the total volume. Porous
means capable of being penetrated.
Architectural porosity is defined by a character of boundaries in
an architectural object — the boundaries between the object and
the site where it is situated, the boundaries between the exterior
and interior, and the boundaries within itself. It is a physical
characteristic of a built structure that generates ambiguity and
POROUS AND BOUNDARIES
freedom of perception, of movement and of use.
DIP5 leaps off from the
Based on effects of architectural porousporosity,
as a stand-in for openings
our tendency and
to explore,
closures,
to unveil andfordiscover
gaps and spatialthresholds,
sequences are for stimulated
incompleteness
– and soandare
nonidentity. The unit will put spatial, social and
active participation and engagement with the built environment. environmental
porosity to the test, as the specific places should be confronted
DIP5
throughwillmapping
researchtheir on what porosityand
boundaries does in architecture,
porosity how one
as an architectural
creates porous architectural interventions and what
prototyping tool. Porous places are defined by various boundaries effects they
generate. DIP5characters
with different proposes porosity as a spatialoutline
which physically methodatoparticular
generate
publicness in all its diversity.
place and provide its accessibility and openness.
Porosity becomes
Porous places may agenerate,
tool for support
dissolvingand orenhance physical
creatingpublicness.
boundaries at different scales – from the micro-scale
Their physical structure has the potential to produce different to the macro
urban
possiblescale. DIP5 will shift
arrangements from theofsite-specific
of relations their users.toPorous
the abstract,
places
from almost forensic mapping assessment of the
enable a plurality of individual experiences. The spatial setting specificity of
chosen
of poroussites to the
places development
cannot be related of toporous
a singlespatial models,
and fixed from
ordering
understanding the public interests of the sites to
system, it is ‘unclean’ or messy and as such it remains open and creating design
projects.
inclusive. As such it stimulates publicness. Porous places are never
entirely completed or finished. They are characterized by anti-
permanence of their physical condition, as well as social relations
which may occur there.
Porous places are publicly inclusive, spatially multilayered with a
sensual atmosphere. Porous means capable of being accessible.
Porosity is a measure of the void spaces in the physical matter.
Architectural porosity is defined by the character of boundaries
between the site and the built, between the exterior and
interior and also within the built structure itself. It is a physical
characteristic of a built structure that generates ambiguity and
freedom of perception, of movement and of use. Based on the
effects of architectural porosity, our tendency to explore, to unveil
and discover spatial sequences are stimulated – and so are active
participation and engagement with the built environment.

1 Sample of Porous Stone

2 Candilis, Josic, Woods, Scheidhelm, The Free
University of Berlin, Mat Building: Architecture of
Multiple Accessibility, 1963
3 Sven Karlsson, Johan Talje, Placeholder, 03
Administration Pavilion

1 Sample of Porous Stone

2 Sadar+Vuga, Buthcer’s Bridge, Ljubljana, model
2008, photo: Hisao Suzuki
3 Map of Diocletian Palace in Split
04
 PLACED AND BOUNDARIES
Place is formed by people’s relationship with physical settings,
with its boundaries, by individual and group activities in a
built environment, by meaning, which is attached to a site – as
distinguished from the abstract notions of space.
A site becomes a place when its physical setting interacts with its
use so that its particular meaning or sense is generated. A place
can be of different sizes, it can be open or enclosed, isolated. The
physicality of the place is defined by its boundaries. The chosen
place could be a public park, museum, shopping mall, university,
school, infrastructure, riverbank, etc.
The unit enquiry will embed an in-depth-understanding of
connections between spatial/physical and social/political
categories of the chosen places. DIP5 will operate with the
diversity and specificity of particular places as well as their
common denominators. The notion of place implies a sensitivity
for intersectional experiences and power relations of class,
race, gender and ableism; with regards to the particular spatial
arrangements, and after all, its inclusiveness.
In short, DIP5 is interested in architectural agency: how can we as
architects become active creators of change, how can we tap into the
full potentials of architecture, while understanding architecture’s
own boundaries? Be it to increase democratic participation, to
engage architecturally in climate issues, accessibility to public
space, to culture, landscapes or housing and infra-structures

1 GABU Heindl Architektur, High School extension,

Wr. Neustadt, 2011
2 GABU Heindl Architektur, Out in Prison, 2013
3 Sadar+Vuga, Faculty of Social Works, Hogent,
Gent, 2020
05
 CURRICULUM
Chapter 1: IDENTIFYING BURNING ISSUE AND
SELECTION OF A PLACE
You are free to choose a site of your interest – which is marked
by a conflict over spatial non-porosity. You can decide either on a
site with a potential to become a place or on a place with a lack
of openness and inclusivity. You are encouraged to find a place of
your research and design intervention either in your home-city or
close to the location where you are studying. It could be a place
which you have always been interested in or a place where you
argue your design intervention will be needed.
Your focus should be on the lack of, and conflicts over, publicness,
Current Park
No 2
1923 Establishment of Republic of Turkey

Henry Prost’s Park 1936 French architect-urbanists, Henri Prost was

No 2 invited to supervise the planning of Istanbul as a

related to environmental or social issues, on the scale of a pavilion

consultant to the Municipality’s Directory of Urban
Buildings Development from 1936 to 1951.

1920
Total Loss of Green 63% 1940 Park No 2 was established as wide green strip at the

or a landscape, of a closed-off public space or building, a situation

9. Space which began at the Taksim Promenade and extended to
Maçka.
1940
Total Loss of Green
1950
1950 74%

of an undemocratic distribution of space, of infrastructure or

Public Space

1960 1. 1955 Hilton Hotel. First invasion the boundary of the park.

1980
2. 1956 Divan Hotel.

environmental effects.
580,000 m2 Henry Prost’s Park No 2
2000 220,000 m2 Cultural Programs
1960
2020 150,000 m2 Used Public Space

Think about abandoned areas, inaccessible urban areas,

60,000 m2 Small Green Space
1970
250,000 m2 Invaded Area
120,000 m2 Infrastructure (Roads)
1.
redundant office spaces, hibernating tourist resorts, riverspace,
3. 1975 Sheraton Hotel Taksim.

7. highways which run through cities, protected monuments, etc.

1980

Let´s see the potential of developing a public space where no one

8. 1987 Construction of Süzer Plaza. (Ritz Carlton)
1990
4. 1991 Swiss Hotel.

2.
10.
even imagines that. Choosing the place and engaging with its
5.
1994
1995
1. Protest to Süzer Plaza. (Ritz Carlton)
Hyatt Regency Hotel.

boundaries is the first step of your design project.

5.
6. 1999 Süzer Plaza. (Ritz Carlton)
4.
2000
2001 2. Protests to Süzer Plaza. (Ritz Carlton)
6.
2003 G-Mall and Concert Area. First time invasion to the

Chapter 2: MAPPING POROSITY OF THE PLACE

7.
3. established public boundary of the park.

8. 2006 Taksim Residence

9. 2009 Istanbul Congress Centre

In Chapter Two, you will map the existing architectural spatial

2010
2013 Taksim Gezi Protest

and environmental qualities of your chosen place. You will present

10. 2017
2018
Dolmabahçe-Levazım Tunnel
Protests to the Tunnel Project

the place through different parameters which outline the place’s

2020

specificity from it’s use and users, regulation to accessibility and

movement, materiality and structure to name just a few of them.
You will develop 2D and 3D drawings as well as physical
models of the boundaries, defining the place’s porosity by the
character of boundaries between the site and the built, between
the exterior and the interior and also within the built structure
itself. The place will be presented with its proper dimensions.
You will draw everything which belongs to the place and creates
its specificity, from invasive nature, to garbage bins, temporal
furniture, provisional partitions, etc.
1 Carlo Alberto Campolo, Revive the Ground!
Defining Social Spaces in Rome’s Olympic Village,
AA DIP5 2020/21
2 Defne Cengic, What`s Left from Park Nr. 2: Vertical
Expansion of Public Green Spaces, Istanbul, AA
DIP5 2020/213
3 Zhi Bin Cheah, De-Fenced Vertical Habitat, AA
DIP5 2020/21
06
 Chapter 3: MOOD BOARDS / DENKBILD / PROJECT
BRIEF
This chapter is about assessing the potential of the place and
relating the mapping of the boundaries with the burning issue,
with historic precedents and references of particular characters.
You will produce mood boards or collages which communicate
your design intention, open for interpretation: of anticipated
atmospheres, publicness of the place. The mood boards or collages
will be a projective design tool: addressing a specificity of the
place, such as materials, textures, lighting condition, colors, use
and linking to spatial/atmospheric qualities you want to develop
in your design project. You will conclude with the design intention
summed up in a first draft of your project brief.
Chapter 4 : POROSITY MODELS
You will develop research on different types of porosity and
develop a series of spatial prototypes with their specific spatial
formula. You will use a design tool of prototyping in order to
explore porous spatial sequences. Prototyping is a moment in
the design process when the constraints of the place are being
abstracted. Designing a set of testing models will form a tool for
developing spatial concepts, which will be fed back into the place.
The process will help the development of spatial sequences as
opposed to preconceptions from first glance. The sequence of
prototyping will move from 2D images into 3D spatial iterations.
In this phase, the set of models will help to explore the notion of
boundaries: indoor boundaries, indoor/outdoor boundaries and
object/place boundaries.
Through different design actions – subtracting, adding, assembling,
dissolving, collaging, piercing, cutting, pasting, sealing – you will
reflect at the level of materiality, the spatial sequences and the
boundaries of the place. Concluding this phase, the prototyping
models will be plugged back into the research on potentials of the
place.

1 Kamal El Kharrat, AA DIP5 2020/21

2 Maria Nefeli Stamatari, AA DIP5 2020/21
3 Stephanie Cheung, AA DIP5 2020/21
3 Zhi Bin Cheah, AA DIP5 2020/21
07
 Chapter 5: DESIGN DEVELOPMENT AND ITS PLACING
Moodboards and porosity models will be a base of your design
project. They will serve as a production and communication
tool of a spatial setting, type of boundaries, atmosphere, use and
publicness developed in the chosen place.
As future architects you will need to demonstrate how your
knowledge on and skills in dealing with the ‘burning issues’ of
public interest are embodied in an architectural design project.
Understanding that a design is a key product of DIP5, with which
you demonstrate your ability to actively shape and engage with the
world, you will develop a design project with a porous character,
which is a response to the burning issue and placed in your chosen
place, relating to new alliances you may have built. By its spatiality
and type of boundaries your design project should trigger and
stimulate public use and be an active part of the publicness of the
chosen place.

Chapter 6: REFLECTING AND COMMUNICATING

PUBLICNESS
Now, as you have your design project developed, you can reflect,
speculate, describe and communicate what is the nature of its
porous boundaries and what architectural effects it will generate.
You shall communicate the publicness of your design project, and
what spatial, social and environmental changes it could generate
in the specific place, as well as what is its impact to the larger
context of the burning issue.

TECHNICAL STUDIES
ETS 5 will be provide a great opportunity to test the material
and environmental characteristics of the porous materials and
porous formations embedded in your design project and develop
it further. DIP5 plans to join the later ETS schedule.

1 Rin Seo, Public National Theatre of Korea, Seoul,

AA DIP5 2020/21
2 HoSung Joo, Public! Porous! Speculation on
Flyovers, AA DIP5 2020/21
3 Polina Aleshkina, Materialising the Caim for New
Public Condition, Science Square, Chelyabinsk, AA
DIP5 2020/21
4-5 Chun Yeung Michelle Ng, Un-shopping the
Shopping Mall with a Deep Public Porous Threshold,
Hong Kong, AA DIP5 2020/21
08
 -
-

1.
Assembling the Boundary -
Legend -

Elevated Piazza
UNIT AGENDA AND OUTCOME
Due to the establishment of a drop-off lane for the transportation of waste material, the intervention preservers the public realm

• In-depth site reading and mapping skills: confronting the

in set location.

2. Marketing Suite
A space for the local residents to envision the future development, portraying visual images of its spatial conditions and market
the residential or commercial aspects of it.

3. Parasite
An observation Platform to attach itself to the railway.

4. Stairway to Heaven
An element of circulation and an observation tower, that allows residents to move across the various components of the interven
-tion.

5. Gallery

physical characteristics and the socio-political and economic

A space for artistic exhibitions, with a staircase leading up to the marketing suite.

1.

dynamics of the site, e.g. orientation, accessibility, spatially and

2.

3.

structurally, including parameters such as planning conditions,

- Matrix -

Primary Elements of Intervention

Elements that assemble to form the expanded boundary, each ‘component’ addresses issues pertaining the various stages of demolition and preservation of the
public realm.
land ownership rights, democratic development policies, public/
1.
4.
private agreements, identifying the obstacles and openings for
architectural agency within the democratic public field.
5.

3.
5.

4.
2.

• Skills and virtuosity in architectural design, ability to design an

architectural or planning project of highest quality and good skills
in visual presentation.
• Employing the architectural tool of porosity to reflect critically
and generate different qualities of boundaries and their impact to
publicness.
• Knowledge and understanding of the distinct features and the
history of concepts of the public, the private, and the commons.
• Critical reflection on architectural agency, popular agency, and
that of public institutions.
• Ability to formulate and sustain an independent argument of
critical nature throughout the length of the project.
• Drafting of a complete and well-crafted set of representations
that touch on all the relevant scales of a project.
• Ability to speculate on what a design project could generate.

Reaching Out:
WORKSHOPS - COLLABORATION - GUESTS
An important feature of DIP5 is reaching out to experts and
activists with regard to the burning issues of the chosen sites. We
will invite guests with special regard to your topics and projects
and organize special unit workshops throughout the semester.
DIP5 will be in an interdisciplinary exchange with experts
from critical economy, urban sociology, political studies, with
internationally practicing architects and urban planners, critics
and philosophers.

1 Edoardo Albertini Petroni, ‘PARA’-site. Intervening

on Existing and Future Boundaries to Preserve the
Public Realm, AA DIP5 2020/21
2-3 Zhi Bin Cheah, De-Fenced Vertical Habitat, AA
DIP5 2020/21
4 Evangelia Avramidou, Performative Preservation, A
dialogue between the old and the new city of Athens,
AA DIP5 2020/21
9

1 Evangelia Avramidou, Performative Preservation, A
dialogue between the old and the new city of Athens,
AA DIP5 2020/21
2 HoSung Joo, Public! Porous! Speculation on
Flyovers, AA DIP5 2020/21
3 Kamal El Kharrat, Reclamation of territories in the
dense city of Beirut, AA DIP5 2020/21
4 Maria Nefeli Stamatari, Inhabiting Edges of
Separation: Borders, Barriers and the UN Buffer
Zone, AA DIP5 2020/21
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Arendt, Hannah. 2013 [1958]. The Human Condition. University
of Chicago Press.
Benjamin, Walter, Asja Lacis. 1980 [1925]. Neapel. In Walter
Benjamin, Gesammelte Schriften. Frankfurt.
Bloch, Ernst. 1925. Italien und die Porosität. Die Weltbühne.
Christophers, Brett. 2018. The New Enclosure: The Appropriation
of Public Land in Neoliberal Britain. London.
De Carlo, Giancarlo. 2005. “Architecture’s Public.“ In: Peter
Blundell-Jones, Doina Petrescu, Jeremy Till (ed.), Architecture
and Participation, p. 3-18. New York.
Federici, Silvia. 2004. Caliban and the Witch: Women, the Body
and Primitive Accumulation. New York.
Fitz, Angelika, Elke Krasny (eds.). Critical Care: Architecture and
Urbanism for a Broken Planet. Cambridge (Mass.).
Heindl, Gabu. 2020. Stadtkonflikte. Radikale Demokratie in
Architektur und Stadtplanung. Vienna.
Heindl, Gabu, Michael Klein, Christina Linortner (ed.). 2019.
Building Critique: Architecture and its Discontent. Leipzig.
Hoidn, Barbara (ed.). 2016. DEMO:POLIS – The Right to Public
Space. Zürich.
Rancière, Jacques. 2010. Dissensus: On Politics and Aesthetics.
London.
Smithson, Alison. 1974. „How to recognize and read MAT-
BUILDING. Mainstream architecture as it developed towards the
mat-building.“ In: Architectural Design, 9/1974.
Stavrides, Stavros. 2007. Heterotopias and the experience of
porous urban space. In: Franck, Karen, Quentin Stevens (eds.),
Loose Space: Possibility and Diversity in Urban Life. London,
New York.
Teyssot, Georges. 2013. A topology of everyday constellations.
Cambridge (Mass.).
Vigano, Paola. 2009. The Metropolis of the Twenty-First Century.
The Project of a Porous City. On Territories, OASE, (80).
Vuga, Bostjan: Planting Publicness, 2018.
Wolfrum, Sophie (ed.). 2018. Porous City. From Metaphor to
Urban Agenda. Basel.
10
 TUTORS
Exploring Gabu Heindl, PhD, is an architect, researcher, educator and
Openness activist. Her Vienna-based practice GABU Heindl Architektur
focuses on public space, collective housing, urban planning and

through cultural and educational buildings. She completed her PhD on

radical democracy in architecture at the Academy of Fine Arts in

Boundaries
Vienna and Postgraduate Master of architecture and urbanism at
Princeton University.

Diploma Unit 5 Prior teaching at the AA she has taught at TU Delft, TU Graz and
the Academy of Fine Arts Vienna. Gabu is Professor of Urban
Design Brief
Design at the Nuremberg Institute of Technology. She is the
2021-2022 co-editor of Building Critique: Architecture and its Discontent,
Leipzig (2019) and author of Stadtkonflikte. Radikale Demokratie
in Architektur und Stadtplanung, Vienna (2020).

Boštjan Vuga, is an architectural practitioner, researcher and

educator. He studied at the Faculty of Architecture in Ljubljana
and at the AA. In 1996 he founded SADAR+VUGA architectural
office along with Jurij Sadar, which focuses on open, integrated
and innovative architectural design and urban planning. He is an
associate professor for architecture at the Faculty of Architecture
in Ljubljana.

He has taught at the Berlage Institute Rotterdam, the IAAC

Barcelona, the Faculty of Architecture Ljubljana, TU Berlin,
MSA Münster, Confluence School of Architecture Lyon, TU
Gabu Heindl Graz and Politecnico di Milano before returning to the AA.
gabu.heindl@aaschool.ac.uk
Gabu and Bostjan share interest in the pro-active role of a
Boštjan Vuga practising and educating architect to critically engage with and
bostjan.vuga@aaschool.ac.uk design for the contemporary society.

Gabu Heindl and Bostjan Vuga preparing the unit

brief in summer 2021.
Photo & Design: Eva Tisnikar 11
Zhi Bin Cheah, De-Fenced Vertical Habitat,
AA DIP5 2020/21