project #1: instruction sets for strangers (2021)

***

description

Instruction sets for strangers is a project that seeks to connect strangers through a shared task, interaction, or form of curiosity. We were prompted to choose a space that was close to our respective living spaces (but was not a part of the New School) and begin to understand it. In order to serve the space and its occupants best, it is necessary to understand the space's historical significance, its unique elements, and how it exists in the present.

I worked with Pepper Xiao (Parsons MFA DT '23) and Duo Xu (Parsons MFA DT '23) to create an interactive piece for strangers in Washington Square Park, which is located in Greenwich Village, NYC.

guiding questions

1. What kinds of patterns arise from your observations?
2. What kind of narrative does the space suggest?

***

research

During the week of Sep 30, 2021, we all separately visited Washington Square Park to make our own observations. Pepper and I also visited the site together on Labor Day (Sep 6, 2021). We used several design tools to begin understanding the space better: we completed (1) behavior mapping, (2) AEIOU charts, (3) photo journaling, and (4) brainstorming trees throughout our preliminary research stage.

There are several key characteristics of the park. The park is very close to several universities, so there are many students from the New School, New York University, Baruch College, among other institutions. It is also close to several major subway lines, including the NQR, 456 trains, and the L. Because of this, there are many young visitors to the park. The park is also frequently filled with people; it is a popular destination that is rarely empty. Because of the number of people, there are also many vendors throughout the park. These vendors sell different items, ranging from drinks, to artwork, to clothing, to drugs, to food.

Atmosphere, atmosphere, atmosphere. Washington Square Park is known for its aesthetic beauty, socializing, entertainment, and interaction. It has historically been the venue of protests, performances, art pieces, and community gathering (NYC Parks 2021). Overall, it's a proud, vibrant symbol of New York and New York life. How can we add to an already rich experience, while still respecting the history and core character of the park?

the aeiou chart

By tracking and observing the Activities, Environment, Interactions, Objects, and Users (AEIOU) of Washington Square Park, we were able to identify common trends and patterns. How is the space used? Who are the participants?

photo journaling

(Mesh 2021).

cottonwood trees

There is simple joy in the small, fleeting experiences of nature. While thinking about the bubble concept for our project, I was reminded of the magic of cottonwood trees. I spent the majority of the pandemic in the Midwest (near Detroit, Michigan), where Eastern Cottonwood Trees (Populus deltoides) are widespread. These plants shed cotton, which acts as an agent to carry cottonwood seeds with the wind (Missouri Department of Conversation 2021). The result is an enchanting atmosphere of floating objects, that make you look up, look around, and notice the natural world around you.

(Nederbrock 2016).

brainstorming

development + methods

concept sketches

After making initial observations, we came back together to collaborate on a concept for the project. Looking at the history of the park, as well as the joy we'd like to promote through this temporary interaction, we landed on an experience that is ethereal, but shared. The ethereal experience is converted into a shared memory, making the project a part of this park's lasting legacy.

Bubble machines... installed with ladders? Speaker, soothing music. The wind takes the bubbles through the park. If the bubble button is pressed at the same time, can we trigger music? To where?

Also includes ideas for a button taped to a bench (which might be more accessible) and a button hanging from the tree where the machines are located.

materials

There are several materials, techniques, and technologies that we looked into in order to carry out our project.

1. Ladder
2. Bubbles
   • Soapy water
   • Wire
   • Motor (?)
   • Button
3. Music
   • Speaker
   • Button / Remote
   • Wire

remaining questions:

1. What should the scale of these machines be? How do we turn it on and invite use?
2. How does childlike curiosity impact us? Is there a specific time and place for it?
3. What are the limitations of the tools we have? Is this design even possible? And if not, would it be possible to create manual bubble makers for people to interact with?
4. Whose space are we infringing upon? Can we still respect the boundaries (even if subtle) between public and private space?
5. What exactly will this concept call attention to (e.g., natural elements, trees, certain locations, etc.)? Are there any unintended consequences of this design?
6. How much does "going viral" or "creating for the photo op" influence our design? How much should it?

***

prototype 1

interaction interface

A shared canvas or making surface, where strangers and passerbys can contribute to a shared piece of art, while still maintaining a safe and comfortable distance.

This point of interaction should provide opportunities for person-to-person, person-to-group, and person-to-public. We hope that this installation will culminate in a lasting artifact, created by the collective curiosity and joy of park-goers.

initial proposal

1. interface
   • canvas / surface to make on
   • easel
   • various bubble makers
   • colored bubble solution
   • eventually, podiums to mount bubble makers in front of our making surface
2. wayfinding / indicators
   • colored indicators around the podiums ("personal bubbles," if you will)
   • perhaps, if clearer indication is necessary, additional colored symbols on the park grounds

further research & concept sketches

(Mesh 2021).

(Xiao 2021).

prototype 1: materials + methods

Prototype 1 was constructed and installed using:

• thrifted t-shirts, hand sewn together by me (Guinevere Mesh)
• a wire frame constructed by Pepper Xiao
• a bubble machine / solution that Duo Xu sourced, and
• a length of rope

prototype 1: in the wild

We tested our first prototype at the intersection of two walking paths on the east side of Washington Square Park. The prototype was hung up between a lamp post and a park tree.

test 1

For our first experiment, we set up our installation without the bubble machine. We observed how people reacted to the piece in our chosen location, and if the structure itself was effective in attracting attention.

(Mesh 2021).

As you can see in the video, we observed a lack of interest in the object, even though it was directly in the middle of the walking path. Several people walked directly into our piece. Duo mentioned that the sculpture looked somewhat like laundry hanging on a line to dry. After observing this, we iterated to see if we could garner more interest among passer-bys. We carried out one more experiment with Prototype 1, implementing the bubble machine within the piece.

test 2

(Mesh 2021).

The bubbles attracted more attention, but the installation still did not have a clear indication for what viewers should do with/to the object. The interaction time was quite short, and the bubbles enticed people to look at the sculpture, but not to stay and investigate.

People were also confused and put off by the form and location of this piece. It resembled laundry, had an amorphous shape, and was in the middle of a busy walking path. People felt obstructed by the object, rather than interested and curious.

From these findings, we identified several areas that needed improvement:

1. location
2. approachability
3. clear interaction instructions

***

prototype 2

prototype 1 → prototype 2: proposed improvements

Because of the lack of success in prototype 1, we iterated further. We took the failures we identified in order to create a piece that was more specific, clear, and approachable.

1. location → relocation
   • movement of installation to main square
   • close to the fountain, a popular tourist destination
   • near bands performing on the south side of the park
   • place in a populated area, but no longer obstructing hurried foot traffic
2. approachability → modifications to form
   • polished design
   • closer to eye-level
3. clear interaction instructions →
   • transition to paper materials rather than cloth (clearer connection as a writing surface)
   • circles as indicators of what to draw, and where
   • pens directly attached to the installation

(Mesh 2021).

prototype 2: materials + methods

Prototype 2 was constructed and installed using:

• foam core and paper
• colored pens with magnetic caps
• a camera tripod

prototype 2: in the wild

Prototype 2 instantly showed more promise. As soon as we installed the piece, people began engaging with it, and the instructions were clear. As you can see in the below images, the two young women and two young men immediately began drawing images on the sculpture. The intention of the piece came across much more clearly.

(Mesh 2021).

We observed several different interactions with the sculpture, and several interested populations.

1. young students (usually in groups of 2-5)
2. older, individual adults walking through the park
3. occasional individual passer-bys

(Mesh 2021).

Our improvements made a monumental impact on the effectiveness of our installation. The new location was both close to live music and no longer impeded folks getting from point A to point B. The interaction instructions were received well, and we saw a significantly increased amount of interactions with our piece.

Though we also saw improvements in approachability, the construction of Prototype 2 needed further development. Prototype 2 was installed on a tripod with wire, and the wire did not have a strong hold on the paper and foam core. Because of this, we often had to intervene to readjust the installation, and at one point, a man interacting with the installation broke it.

This brought us to →→→ EVEN! MORE!! ITERATION!!!!!!

***

final installation

prototype 2 → final installations: proposed improvements

In our final installation of the instruction sets for strangers, we had several improvements in mind. We wanted to maintain the aspects that were working well, and combine them with final tweaks.

It was important to maintain:

1. location
2. clear interaction instructions
   • pens attached to installation directly
   • circles included as a guide
   • a few circles filled in with figures / drawings

Only a few final tweaks! Final improvements to approachability:

• structural improvements
• cleaner materials (i.e., no exposed wire)
• flashier indicators to get people interested

Duo Xu working on the final prototype (2021).

final installation: in the wild

(Xu 2021).

The above video documents our final installation, Collective Artwork in Washington Square Park. It was taken over a 6-hour period. In it, you can see a large amount of interactions (we lost count - next time we'll bring a clicker to get an exact number!), groups gathering, folks lining up to leave their mark on the sculpture, and look at the drawings that had been left by previous visitors.

(Xu 2021).

Finished drawings on the final installation (Xu 2021).

Our final piece, Collective Artwork in Washington Square Park experienced a great deal of success. Similar to the last iteration, the installation immediately attracted attention, but we observed further improvements. At night, the addition of blinking lights attracted attention and made people excited to engage with the installation. It communicated fun. The length of interaction also increased, and people began to form more lasting, mutualistic relationships with the piece and with the strangers who chose to engage with it.

For example, a group of college-age students formed an attachment with the sculpture, returning to continue working on their drawings, and guiding newcomers through interaction instructions. Together, they built a collective knowledge and experience of the installation, without any intervention on the side of the creators (Duo, Pepper, and I). We also saw mutualistic relationships form between different strangers interacting with the piece. At one point, a stranger offered to hold a man's dog so that he could interact with the sculpture unencumbered.

In addition to the mutualistic behavior we observed, we also saw people self-organize around the installation. Folks lined up patiently, waiting their turn to draw on and engage with the piece. We were pleased to see the installation act as a unifying, positive presence in the park - people could have fought over ownership, but instead, they organized peacefully around the sculpture, all waiting to make their mark.

Overall, we found a great deal of success in our final installation of our instruction sets for strangers. It achieved several things: it brought strangers together, it instructed people to interact with the installation in a way that created a collective artwork, and it brought joy to (at least a subpopulation of) the park.

future directions

This installation left us with several questions that could be answered in future iterations. For example, could the teachings from these experiments extend to other populations within the park?

Though we found a great deal of success among groups of college students and individual adults, we did not reach every demographic within the park. Most notably left out of this installation were children (situated by the two playgrounds, the grassy fields, and walking through the park with caretakers) and the houseless population (situated on the northwest side of the park, on benches lining the walking paths). With more resources and time, we would like to explore the wants and needs of those populations in greater depth.

Necessary questions to ask prior to initiating further tests would be:

1. Could this concept be translated to alternative contexts? In what form?
2. Should this concept be translated? What are the implications of interrupting and intervening in space, and what are the different dynamics of power that operate within different spaces within the park?

credits

This project was organized and facilitated by Harpreet Sareen (https://harpreetsareen.com/) as part of the Major Studio 1 course at the Parsons School of Design.

references

1. “Cottonwood.” Missouri Department of Conservation. Sept 8, 2021. https://mdc.mo.gov/discover-nature/field-guide/cottonwood.
2. Nederbrock, Michael. "Cottonwood in the air!" YouTube video, 1:00. Jun 17, 2016. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nAXHywov0Bs.
3. "Washington Square Park." NYC Parks. Sept 8, 2021. https://www.nycgovparks.org/parks/washington-square-park/history."