Tincuta Heinzel, NGM interview
interview host: Shih Wei Chieh
2022.11.08
Berlin, online
W: Can you tell us some considerations about the “Attempts, Failures, Trials and Errors” project?
T: The main aim of the “Attempts, Failures, Trials and Errors” project was to soften the debate around failures and to address in a critical way the discourses related to innovation. It was an invitation to see failures more like a way to evolve, as an opportunity to revise some things and to reflect on the practices before continuing. I started to think about it in the context of multiple startup competitions I was seeing around me at that time, the excessive focus on “success”, whatever these mean, and the multiplication of discourses on innovation when there aren’t massive changes in the society connected to them. The question was also how to speak about it. As a curator it would have been inappropriate to go and look for failed works and invite artists to exhibit them. But it would have been totally contrary to the aim of the project. I have quite some curatorial experience and, for me as a curator, it would have been strange to go to see the artists and tell them please give me that or that piece of work because I think it is a failure. Instead I thought it is better to launch a call for failed projects. Apart from the objects the artists and designers were invited to send in, they were also requested to send the story of the project and to explain in which way they felt or they think the project failed. And the story was as important as the object, and that's why also in the exhibition actually we have exhibited both the object and the story. Moreover, there have been a lot of learnings from the project which were reunited in a series of texts, one of them being presented in the context of the International Conference of the European Academy of Design back in 2019 in Dundee. It is a text that you also co-authored along with the artists and the designers involved.
It is interesting to notice the kind of pieces and failed stories the people in the field of electronics textiles sent for this exhibition. Sometimes it was about technical failures, other times it was about the number of attempts to make things work. Some other people were interested to speak about the context in which they have been working - the institutional support they might have got or not, or the funding they might have got or not. So somehow, it was a kind of invitation to reflect on their projects and to reflect on the conditions of their projects and how exactly they failed, what were the causes of failure, or to reflect on how they could do things differently next time. And I think from this point of view it was quite a nice project. So that was the aim of the project. It resulted in an exhibition. There were also a series of workshops, like the workshop you delivered in Bucharest on laser dyed textiles. Some other workshops took place in the context of a summer camp organized in Oradea in 2018. There was quite a diversity of workshops. For example, the RYBN group from France came and taught an introduction to programming, including a very nice presentation about the philosophy and history of programming, on the role of work in the process of programming, on how the work is conceptualized in any designed context. A group of architects from Bucharest offered an introduction to parametric design and we also had two interventions related to biodesign or the regulations related to the use of drones. The workshops also brought together different kinds of people.
So this is about “Attempts, Failures, Trials and Errors”. My understanding is also that you would like me to talk about my experience as a summer camp organizer. I've organized some other summer camps as well, as part of the projects I have run, but those were related to my teaching activity and the students were mainly involved. The format of those workshops aimed to accommodate the nature of those projects. I have here in mind the project ‘Utopian Cities, Program Societies’. The summer camp in the frame of the project that took place in the city of Victoria in Romania and I ran together with Dana Diminescu.
Victoria is a city built in the 1950s by the Soviets, next to a factory for armament built during the Second World War by the Germans. The city was built to accommodate the workers and the specialists brought there to work in the factory. The city was built from scratch in the mountains, and it was actually born from economic and war necessities. And because it was built from scratch, it followed the kind of ideals of that time - that of Socialist, brutalist kind of architecture, with mainly blocks - communal buildings, and following a certain type of architecture. It is also interesting to notice the kind of institutions which were supposed to support the social life of the city: the house of culture, the telephone and post buildings, the highschools, the sports infrastructures, the city hall. The story is that when the Soviets came and they saw the place and the factory, they also came with a “catalogue of cities” and the Romanian authorities had to pick a model. In this sense we can say that it is like a ‘town object”, or a “product” that you buy from a catalogue. And they implemented this town in Romania. Apparently, this “town model” (both in terms of architecture and urbanism) has been built similarly in Russia, in Georgia and in India. It would be interesting to see what happened in all these cities once inhabited, what is the afterlife of the Socialist design and architecture utopias.
The aim of “Utopian Cities, Programmed Societies'' project was to work with the students and to take this somehow exceptional case study as a starting point for a reflection on the role of utopia in design and architecture, to reflect on the implementation of design and architecture projects and the gaps between ideology, idealization phase, implementation, and the afterlife of these builded, made (please read this in conjunction with architecture, design and technique perspectives in general) surroundings and contexts. Victoria in Romania, as a town, is one of those exceptional cases studies where we can see how a built environment evolves over a period of time (in 2019 the town celebrated 70 years since its inception), where we can study the evolution of its social structure, the impact of the built environment on the landscape, the interconnections between ideology, political decisions, economic constraints, ecological derives and historical contexts. Precisely because it has been built from scratch, with a certain social model in mind, it is interesting to see how these utopian models are looking today, how they transformed themselves over the years. In the 1950s when the town was built, the propaganda was speaking of a town that will be forever young, as Socialism was the youngest political and social forms of organization at that time, and it was supposed to be eternal. The problem right now is that most of the inhabitants are those who have been there for years, while the younger generations are leaving, lacking perspectives. The idea to organize the summer camp was precisely to introduce the students to the history of the place and to present them today's situation, to encourage them to reflect on those aspects and maybe suggest solutions about how the future should look like. And it was important to bring the students to reflect on this, as utopian the exercise of a summer camp might look like. Unfortunately, during the second year of the project, when we were supposed to speak about the social dynamics and the idea of cybernetics as an utopian approach to social control, as well as the way in which the Socialist states have conceptualized it and tried to implement it, we were in lockdown.
W: Can you briefly contrast the function of camps with different organizational structures? like autonomous camps and camps organized with Universities. And what’s the difference between residency programs and camps?
T: For me, the camp is mostly like a format for a project, depending on what your objectives are. For some projects, as I said, I might take on the role of a curator, and depending on the topic and the context, I might opt for organizing an exhibition, or launching a call for works. Some other times, the summer camp is the most appropriate approach depending on who is involved and what are the aims of the project. The summer camp might be an extension of an educational process, as it might be something like artists colonies. In this latest case, the summer camp is the result of a common interest that might bring together artists, designers, and practitioners. It is the case of E-textiles summer camp, for example. Somehow at the intersection of the two was the I.N.S.E.C.T. summer camp we attended together this year in Denmark.
In any case, the camps are something exceptional, as they are taking place over the summer most often, are the opportunity to reflect and to apply the knowledge you supposedly learned during the academic year into a more practical activity or to learn something new. It was certainly the case of “Utopian Cities, Programmed Societies” project when the students spent some days in Victoria in Romania and applied something they might have learned during their studies, as well as something they have learned on the spot (there have been a series of lectures as well), and tried to apply that knowledge to a very concrete case study. Students' projects were not to be implemented, but to generate ideas about how the future of Victoria town might look like. What we did was to invite young people to come up with proposals about how this town should evolve. Probably because the camp I organized in Victoria was designed for the students, we can say that that summer camp had a pedagogical purpose. We had later on in August that same year an artists’ residency as well, but that was something different from the camp.
The so-called “autonomous” camps, as you call them, are mostly about a community of practitioners coming together and exchanging skills and knowledge, debating topics of common interest. From my perspective, they are more like the artists’ colonies, they are a form of gathering that allows people from different corners of the world, Europe, U.S., Australia, Taiwan, to meet and to get to know each other, to learn about their practices and exchange experiences and knowledge. Like in the case of E-textile Summer Camp, it is mostly about bringing together practitioners from different parts of the world who do not have time during the year to meet otherwise. It is in this sense an active, inspiring and generator of new ideas event, in a less formal context.
It depends also on the context of the summer camp. From what you are telling me about your summer camp in Croatia (Radiona), it's also about people having and sharing this common interest in certain topics of technology. Some of them are from academia, some not, so it's an exchange of ideas, it's a blur area where new things might happen. Our professional lives might tend to put us in bubbles. These kinds of summer camps might help us to go behind those walls.
For me, I think, to reflect upon the role of the summer camp, should also be about the place in which the summer camp is taking place, about how exactly the events connect to what's happening in that context? In which way, for example, it supports the local community as well. Or at least try to make a connection with that, so that will be another layer to add to the whole assembly beyond the topic of the project. It was what Tribe Against Machine project was trying to do as well. It is a way to engage with the local community, even though, nowadays, the differences between local and global are to be reconsidered. It's an exchange between the artists who are coming there, but it's also something related to the community there on the spot, about their needs and their hopes. This is also what the artists are hoping from these kinds of exchanges. And we have not to forget that the summer camps are events (in the most philosophical sense of the term). They are exceptional moments for both communities. The artists’ presence takes that community out of the normal path of things, of the routine. Their role is to allow the communities to regenerate, it's mostly like small events that allow a kind of regeneration for the community. It is a way to somehow bring new ideas to that community and to encourage new perspectives.
Also, I think it is important to recall that the summer camps are not specific to the art fields, even though the art summer camps tend to be more creative, tend to be more connected to the places through exhibitions, concerts, debates. There are also the “scientific summer camps”. I do recall I was tempted to go to a summer camp in Poland (it was a call in this sense) gathering students in physics to discuss the latest research on the concept of time in physics. In Romania there has been Telciu Summer School which was trying to address concepts such as “modernisation”, “urbanisation”, “ruralisation”, “Eastern Europe decolonisation”, by using the local history and its regimes as a starting point. A little bit like what “Utopian Cities, Programmed Societies” was doing for architecture and design, but focusing mostly on the social sciences approaches.
There are also the colloquies of Cerisy in France, for example, which are a kind of academic landmark, something more like a conference than a summer camp. Again, it's about individuals who work in different parts of the world and it's not about attending a conference, but it is also a way of gathering. The summer camps have more practical, hands-on approaches. All of them, summer caps, colloquies, are about presenting state-of-the-art research and starting some new projects, in a much more relaxed, less formal way. Because this is also one of the aims of the summer camps, to initiate new projects. The ways in which the summer camps are framed are important in this sense.
Speaking this time from the perspective of a participant in different summer camps, like E-textiles Summer Camp or Tribe Against Machine ones, the nature of partner institutions plays an important role as well in defining the nature of summer camps. In Paillard we were hosted by a contemporary art centre, and they have this spirit of art spaces, which invites a group of artists, designers, practitioners, and offers them all the freedom to do whatever they want, to experiment, etc. But it's very much related to the nature of that place. That's why you might feel that it's more like an exchange and you're much freer to do stuff because it's an art centre. In Taiwan with Yuma, and given the fact the summer camp was hosted by a weaving centre, there were the constraints related to the production to be taken into account. For me, at least, it was important to understand the local weaving traditions, the hosts’ needs to perpetuate them as a form of cultural identity, to connect to the village and the community around the weaving centre. So, the question was to understand Yuma and her team’s constraints. One of the big questions of the Tribe Against Machine summer camp was how to connect the “local cultural identity” and its tensions (and there were plenty, for as long as I could understand) with the present days and the future of the local and global community. And it is always a question if it is about one or several communities. The camp was an invitation to think about what unites us and not what brings us apart, even though those aspects are similarly important and do not need to be neglected. The relationship we are maintaining with each other might be the key here.
Finally, and probably here I am addressing one of your main concerns, that of funding and resources to implement these events. It is also a question of who the beneficiaries of these events are. This brings us to the role of artists into a community. It is an old debate intimately connected to the role of the arts in society. It goes hand in hand with what are the arts. In which ways are the arts different from techniques, for example. What is the relationship between arts, techniques, and sciences? The arts tend to be marginalised. Or more precisely, the experimental aspects of arts tend to be marginalised. It might have to do with the fear of the new, of an unknown future, as it might have to do with the recalls of a traumatic past. Being speculative and not immediately implementable, the arts offer that space to inquire the “what ifs”?
The question is how to create a structure that might also support yourself and cover the other needs as well. You try all the time to somehow be in a gain-gain situation. So, if several artists are coming together, it's like a gathering of resources. But that means that they have some extra resources somehow. Even in the case of a university, it's still a question of resources. I'm requested to examine the existing resources all the time I want to do something extracurricular. How much does it cost? Who's paying for this? Did we get the funding or not? are similarly important questions in both the academic and artistic contexts. It's precisely because summer camps are exceptional events, they are not part of the academic curriculum. But they are important for young people to evolve, to show them about how to concretely do research on the field, to show them something that you probably do not have the opportunity to do during the academic year. You try to give them more tools about how to do stuff. But I still had to apply for funding to get the accommodation, cover the travel, the food and all this. It's still an effort that I put in it, it's just that I try to involve the younger generation. Probably the difference between a summer camp as a form of bringing together people with a common interest and that of involving students is that of exchanges between colleagues, and the exchange with your future colleagues. This is also to say that I haven’t financially supported myself from the projects I have done. The honorariums I received have been always reinvested in the projects I have done. From this point of view, I could say I invested a lot in the future. I was probably in a privileged position or just idealist, naive.
To conclude, for me the formats of projects does matter as much as the aims of the project. I might opt for a summer camp, as I might opt for an exhibition, or I just might opt for organising a conference, depending on the context and the aim of the projects and how these would better fit together. What would be more relevant? What would really make my message pass through to a certain community? It is about in the end about which format would be more impactful. For me, the summer camp is just another form of intervention, but there are plenty of forms of interventions. It is about launching new topics, new debates, new ideas.
W: A last question. It is very interesting to make an analogy between Victoria town and the organisation of a global camp. I like the idea of a “catalogue of cities”. That inspires me that we might be able to find a way to make a dynamic camp model which can be applied for all those concerned with the redistribution of resources (probably we have to clarify the definitions for "resources" and "goals" here). Maybe the idea of camp is a type of "sensor" for investigating and absorbing the local curriculum format with global sense.
From an abstract point of view, yes, it is an interesting idea, even though I am afraid of ready-made ideas. Sounds like an industrial, ready-made dream. From a very concrete perspective, the Stalinist times weren’t the happiest ones. It was a totalitarian regime, and many people were traumatised, imprisoned, sent in forced workcamps. It was precisely the topic of the Victoria summer camp to discuss the positives and the negatives of the utopian nature of design and architecture, their historical contexts, and the gap between ideal, ideology, historic reality, and the afterlife and the future of such interventions. And I think these kinds of reflections should be part of all changes we would like to bring to our society and environments.
Links in the interview
;){kind=link}
;){kind=link}
;){kind=link}