Project 2 - Blog 1

Moving on from Project 1..

After presenting the ideas developed in project one its time to take the ideas a lot further in project 2 and synthesize them into a resolved architectural entity.

The idea of a third house remains potent and can be interpreted in a number of different ways. I am undecided at this stage whether to take the idea literally and retrofit a third house into the existing parliament house or whether to take the show on the road and explore a more mobile alternative.

The Issue Revisited

I have been thinking about Debate and Forum as the focus of project 2 and see debate as the issue and forum as an architectural facilitator of the debate. Looking at the status quo of Australian Parliament and Politics in general it is clear that there is an issue with communication between politicians and the public realm. One only has to look at the Carbon Tax debate as an example of how disjointed and unorganized political discussion is. Witnessing the debate myself as well as noting the opinions of academics condeming the way the debate has played out has led me to ask the question of how we can improve political debate/discourse?

Q and A

In exploring the question at hand I started thinking about examples of effective debate and discourse especially pertaining to political issues that affected Australia. One of the best forums I could think of was the ABC television show Q and A which is something I already watched on a regular basis. The show is a great example of how the debate of an issue can be structured, unbiased and engage a diverse range of people from public and private realms. To top things off Q and A also adopts a virtual strategy to enhance the debate by utilizing social media during the debate. This adds another layer to this discussion and changes the dynamic to something above traditional discourse. The simple notion of reading another persons twitter comment on the screen while listening to someone speak helps to reinforce or rethink what it is you are listening to. It also broadens the debate to involve the entire population who can interact with the debate proceedings from the comfort of their own home/cafe/work thorough their mobile phone.

What can I take away from Q and A?

Format / Scale / Technology

Q and A has given me an example of what a controlled public debate can look like and offers

a potential model for my architectural entity.

The format of Q and A is the critical success factor and is the reason that the debate is structured and kept flowing. The moderator plays a key role in this and acts as a centre of the debate. Without the moderator then the debate would lack structure and become disorganized.

The scale of the debate is also very important in order to maintain an efficient and controlled discourse. From a physical perspective it allows for face to face discussion between the panelists and the studio audience. If the audience is too large then this face to face visual/verbal interaction would be lost and the conversation would not feel as natural. At this stage I don't have research to back this up but will endeavor to find some.

The social technology used by Q and A enhances the dynamic of the debate through the inclusion

of public opinion and instant feedback on the ongoing debate. It also expands the debate beyond the physical constraints and allows to people to be part of the discussion through a virtual interface such as facebook or twitter.

The virtual strategy they adopt also has a lot of potential to be adapted and used to enhance my architectural outcome. After looking at the Q and A structure for ideas I am led to ask some further questions..

How else can I structure a debate in a way that will facilitate my architectural project?

What structure will enhance public political discourse?

and..

How can architecture enhance debate?

I've included this short video of the Q and A set assembly as it has led me to think about debate forums and their physical presence. Essentially the physical studio set is simple and relatively mobile. It does not take a great deal of resources to assemble meaning it could be constructed anywhere. This video has given me some ideas for a mobile debate studio/auditorium that allows one to 'take the debate to the public'.

Q and A set assembly