Image credit:

Proceedings of the 3rd Biennial Research Through Design Conference

Bueno de Mesquita, N. & Hamers, D. 2017. ‘Mapping Invisibility’. In: Proceedings of the 3rd Biennial Research Through Design Conference, 22-24 March 2017, Edinburgh, UK, Article 27, pp. 423-437. DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.4747015.

Mapping InvisibilityNaomi Bueno de Mesquita and David Hamers

Naomi Bueno de Mesquita, Hanneke de Kort, and anonymised cartographer.

Abstract:InthedesignresearchworkshopMappingInvisibility,undocumentedimmigrantsandotherparticipantsundertookcollectivemappinginAmsterdam.Theaimwastoinvestigatethedaytodaypracticesofundocumentedimmigrantsandtolookforwaystomakepartsofthosepracticesvisibleandperceptibleforothers–preciselybecausemuchofthelifeoftheundocumentedisaboutinvisibility.Intheworkshop(atleast)twocartographers–anundocumentedimmigrant(guide)andaparticipant(guest)–walkedthecitytogether.ThewalkwastrackedviaawebapplicationonamobilephonewithGPSandvisualisedinrealtimeonadigitalmapthatcouldbeviewedby

othersonawebsite.Theundocumentedimmigrantguidedtheparticipanttoplaceswhichrepresentedacertainemotionorfeelingforthem.Onthemap,asitevolved,particularplaceswouldlightup,representingthefeelingassociatedwiththem.Alongtheway,theconversationbetweenguideandguestwasrecorded,andtheseaudiorecordingsstoredinalocation-basedarchivethatmakes‘unheard’storiesavailableto‘thepublic’.Atthedeparturepointoftheoriginalwalk,usingamobilephoneasanavigationaldevice,atanytime,invisiblestorylinescanbedownloadedasmp3s.Thestoryremainsaudibleaslongasthelistenerstaysonthesameroute.

NaomiBuenodeMesquita1,2,DavidHamers1

1DesignAcademyEindhoven,Eindhoven,theNetherlands; 2KULeuven,Leuven,BelgiumDominomi79@gmail.com,David.hamers@pbl.nl

Keywords:performativemapping;interactivenavigation;interfacing;publicrealm;embodiment

MappingInvisibility

424

BuenodeMesquita,Hamers|MappingInvisibility

BuenodeMesquita,Hamers|MappingInvisibility

425

IntroductionNavigatingthegreyareaIfinallyarriveatthepolicestation.IaligntheblueringwiththeredcircleuntilIgettheaudioplaying.AnAfricanaccentrecountsastory.Ilookatthesculptureprotrudingfromthebuilding,afewpolicevansandcarsparkedaroundthebuilding,andafloatingplatformforbikes.Themanhadbeenfeelinginsecureandhopeless–thisIlearnedlaterintheaudio.Hehadbeenlockinghisbikeonthisveryplatform.Themancontinueswithhisstory.Twopoliceofficersapproachhimandaskhimaboutthebike.“Doyouhavepapersforit,”theyaskhim.Thetwowomenwithwhomheshareshisstoryappeartobesurprisedandaskhim,“Doyouevenneedtohavepapersforabike?”(ArashGhajarjazi2016).Thisfragmentcomesfromthenotesofsomeonewhoparticipatedinamapping,morespecifically,someonewhore-enactedanaudiomapthathadbeencreatedbyanundocumentedimmigrantayearearlier.Whyandhowthismapwasmadewillbeexplainedlateraspartofanargumenttoconsiderperformativemappingasanactof‘inter-facing’betweenthephysicalandthevirtual,betweentheknownandtheyettobediscovered,andbetweendifferentpointsofview.First,wewillbrieflyintroducetheconceptofperformativecartography.Secondly,wewillpresentthedesignresearchcasestudy,MappingInvisibility.Inthiscasestudy,amappinginterfacewastestedinaworkshopinAmsterdamin2015.Theworkshopwasaimedatmakingvisiblesomeaspectsofthedaytodaypracticesofundocumentedimmigrants.

Thirdly,thisworkshopwillbeinterpretedasanelementofdesignresearchfocussingonhowperformativemappingfacilitatestheparticipationofavarietyofurbandwellersinacartographicpracticethatenablesthemtocollectivelyexploreanddiscusspublicspaceandaddresspublicissues.Finally,wewillarguethat,byusingthegenerativepowerofdigitaltechnologies,combinedwithexperiencinganddiscussinganumberofphysicalandsocialaspectsoftheurbanenvironment,someofwhatsooftenremainsinvisiblecanberevealedandreflectedupon.

PerformativeMappingandParticipationMapsareproductsofadesignprocess.Therearealotofdecisionstobemadeandeachdecisioninfluencesthefinaloutcomeintermsofwhatisrepresented.Inthispaperourinterestlieslessinthedecisionsthathavealreadybeenmade,thaninthosethatareyettocome–thephasewhenmapsarecollectivelyperformed;whentheycontinuetobepursued;andwhentheycanturninnewdirections.Wearguethattoperformamapisto‘inter-face’–betweendifferentpointsofview,thephysicalandthevirtual,thetacitandtheexplicit,theknownandtheyettobediscovered.Itisthis‘in-between’statewherechangecantakeplace,wherechangetakesitsplace.Inthisaccount,mapsarenotmerelyviewedastherepresentationsofacartographer,butaspracticesthatinvolvemultipleactors.

426

Furthermore,accordingtotheperformativeapproach,mapping,isviewednotonlyastakingplaceintimeandspace,butalsoascapableofconstitutingboth.WeconcurwithlandscapearchitectandtheoristJamesCorner(1998:p.213),whoarguesthatthe“agencyofmappingliesinneitherreproductionnorimpositionbutratherinuncoveringrealitiespreviouslyunseenorunimagined,evenacrossseeminglyexhaustedgrounds.Thus,mappingunfoldspotential;itre-makesterritoryoverandoveragain,eachtimewithnewanddiverseconsequences.”Theso-calledperformativeconditionincartographyis,toacertainextent,amplifiedbythedigitalisationofmapsandtheupsurgeofmobiledigitaltechnologies.Theclear-cutlinebetweenmapmakerandmapuserhasbecomebothblurredandcontestedduetosoftwareandapplicationsthatallowpeopleto(re)makemaps.Forexample,thedigitalisationandopensourcingofmappingtools–frompubliclyavailableGPSandthedevelopmentsinOpenStreetMapsandparticipatoryGeographicInformationSystems,totheopensourcingofmappingpracticesbyGoogle,includingthereleaseofitsprogramminglibrariesanddataformats(DeSouzaeSilva2014)–havecontributedtoaperformativeturninthecartographicpractice.Digitaltechnologiesnotonlyenablepeopletohaveasayinthechoiceofdatatobemapped,moreimportantly,theyalsogiveanincreasingnumberofpeopleagency,throughmapping,inthepracticeofmeaningmaking(makingsenseofdata).

Inordertodeterminehowagencycouldbeforegroundedinmappingpractices,theparticipatoryqualitiesofthesepracticesneedtobeexplored.Todothis,wefocusontheaspectof‘inter-facing’thatwasintroducedabove,inparticularonhowitplayedoutinthedesignresearchworkshopMappingInvisibilityinAmsterdam.Here,‘inter-facing’shouldbedistinguishedfromaninterfaceintheconventionalsenseofamerelydigitalmediator.FollowingtheleadsofGalloway(2012)andHookway(2014)weconsider‘inter-facing’tobeaprocessthatinvolvesnotonlytechnology,butalsothematerial,social,spatial,

andpolitical.

MappingInvisibility:AWorkshopaboutHidingStrategiesinthePublicSpacesofAmsterdamTheworkshopMappingInvisibilitytookplaceinAmsterdaminJanuary2015.TheworkshopformedpartoftheprogrammeOutofState,whichtookplaceattheFrascatitheatre.OutofStatebroughttogetherarangeofresearchers,artists,architects,andwriterstoengagewith,andreflectupon,theconditionofundocumentedimmigrantsresidinginAmsterdam.Itispredictedthat200millionpeoplemaybeforcedtofleetheirhomelandsbytheyear2050(O’Rourke2013),thusbeingstatelessmightbecomeafuturescenarioformany.

427

MappingInvisibilitywasorganisedanddesignedbyNaomiBuenodeMesquitaincollaborationwithPlatformScenographyandWereldhuisAmsterdam.Fortheworkshop,anumberofundocumentedimmigrantswereinvitedtotakepartinacollectivemappingtogetherwithotherparticipantsoftheprogramme.Theworkshopwasdesignedwithaclearquestioninmind:Whatarethehidingstrategiesofundocumentedimmigrantsinthepublicspacesofthecity?Theaimoftheworkshopwastoinvestigatethedaytodaypracticesofundocumentedimmigrantsandtolookforwaystomakepartofthosepracticesvisibleandperceptibleforothers,preciselybecausesomuchofthelivesoftheundocumentedisaboutinvisibility.Smallgroupswereformed,eachgroupconsistingofatleasttwocartographers–anundocumentedimmigrant(theguide)andaparticipant(theguest)–whowalkedthecitytogetherforthedurationoffourhours(Figure1).ThewalkitselfwastrackedviaawebapplicationonamobilephonewithGPS,andvisualisedinrealtimeonadigitalmapthatcouldbeviewedbyothersonawebsite.Thewalkwasstructuredbyalegendthatwasnotpre-determined,butwhichhadbeenco-constructedbytheparticipants.Departingfromthepremisethatthelegendisthekeytounlockingamap–adefiningelementinwhatamaprevealsandobscures,inotherwords,whatstorycanbetold–thelegendinthisworkshopwasco-createdbytheparticipantsaweekpriortothewalk.Traditionallythetaskofconstructingthelegendisreservedforcartographersalone,butinour

participatorymappingapproachweaimedtoopenupthiscrucialphaseofmapmaking.Inordertoenablethemtotrytoplacethemselvesintheshoesofanundocumentedimmigrant,participantsweresentanemailinwhichtheywereaskedwhatfeelingstheythoughtundocumentedimmigrantsexperiencewhilewalkingthroughthecity.Theyhadaweektorespondtothisquestion.Thewordswhichwerechosenmostoftenbecamethelegendthatwewouldworkwithonthedayofthewalk.Duetopracticalreasons–theworkshopwasonlyoneday,andthewalkswereplannedtolast‘only’fourhours–wedecidedtolimitthelegendtofourfeelings.Theideawasthat,duringthewalk,theparticipants’preconceivedideascouldbe‘puttothetest’–inthedialoguewiththeundocumentedimmigranttheparticipantswouldbeabletoprobetheco-constructedlegend.Onthedayoftheworkshop,theundocumentedimmigrant(s)guidedtheparticipant(s)toplacesinthecitywiththechosenfeelingsinmind.Atotaloffourfeelingschosenforthelegend–stressed,powerful,happyanddisconnected–weremapped,eachforonehour.Theswitchfromonefeelingtoanother,occurredatafixedtime,andwasmadebyallcartographerssimultaneously.Duringtheworkshopthedigitalmapevolved(Figure2).Wheneveranewfeelingwasbeingwalked,themapshowedthetrajectoryinadifferentcolour.Thelongerthecartographersstayedatacertainlocation,thethickerthelinedrawnonthemap,thiscommunicatedtheimportanceofaplaceinrelationtoafeeling,andvisualisedthedifferentresponsestothesamefeeling.Forexample,whenthefeeling‘disconnected’wasmapped,someofthe

428

undocumentedguideshadaspecificplaceinmindtogoto,whichresultedinathicklineatthislocationonthemap,whereasothersexperienceditasanongoingmoodandsokeptwalking,whichleftathinnertraceonthemap.

Figure1.Anundocumentedimmigrantguidesaparticipantthrough‘his’city.Photo:anonymisedcartographer.Duringtheworkshop,participantswereabletodiscoveranddiscussthediverseperceptionsandusesofpublicplacesbytheundocumentedguides.Forinstance,strategiesforhiding/camouflagewerediscovered,

suchaslingeringinthelibraryorpretendingtowaitforatrain.Also,itbecameclearthatcertainplaces/routeswereavoided,suchasstreetswithcamerasinstalled.Paradoxically,theseplacesbecame‘visible’becausetheydrewattentionbyremainingunmapped.

Figure2.Amap(screenshot)thatisupdatedinrealtime,visualisingthewalkedtracks(line)andcorrespondingintensityoffeelings(sizeofdot)experiencedbythecartographers.Photo:NaomiBuenodeMesquita.Furthermore,placesandthingsthattriggeredcertainmemoriesandfeelingsweremappedandphotographedbyusingawebappthatwasdesignedforthisworkshop(Figure3).Forexample,oneundocumentedimmigrantassociatedalandsurveyor’stoolseenonthestreet(Figure4)

429

withthefeelingofpowerlessness.Thesurveyor’sgaugingrodremindedthemanofhisdesiretowork,andthefactthatithadbeenleftunattendedmadehisfeelingsstronger.Asthemappingprogresseditbecameapparentthatparticularthingshadamorewidespreadeffectintriggeringacertainfeeling.Pedestriancrossings,forexample,werephotographedanduploadedbydifferentcartographerssuccessively(Figure5).Laterweunderstoodthatzebracrossingsraisedstresslevelsbecauseofahigherchanceofbeingcaughtthere.

Figure3(left).Interfaceofthewebappthatwasusedduringtheworkshop.Theappfollowsaserver/clientarchitecture.TheserversideisdevelopedinPHPusingtheLaravelframework.TheclientsideisawebappdevelopedinHTML5,CSS3andJavaScript.Ontheserverside,themainframeworkisLaravel,whichprovidesusermanagementanddatabaseaccessfunctionalities.OntheclientsideseveralJavaScriptlibrariesareused,mainlyLeafletformaprenderingandSoundJS(partofCreateJS)foraudio.ThewebappworksonanyphonewithanHTML5browser.Photo:MuftiAbabujey.Figure4(right).Oneoftheundocumentedcartographersassociatedthisinstrumentwithfeelingpowerless.Photo:anonymisedcartographer.

Navigate,Map,Engage,Enable,Probe,DiscussInthewalkthateachundocumentedguideandparticipantperformed,theundocumentedpersonwasthenavigator.AccordingtoNannaVerhoeff(2012),interactivenavigationisprocedural,experimentalandacreativeformofbothreadingandmakingspace.Inthiscasethenavigationalaspectliesinthedirectinteractionbetweentheguideandtheguest,whichshapedthewalk.Theundocumentedguidedirectedtheparticipantwheretogo/wheretojoinhim,whilsttheirroutewasbothmediatedbythemap’slegendandinfluencedbythedirectionthedialoguewastaking.Throughthisprocessaspaceofengagementwasconstructed.Aspacewheretakingthetimeandefforttoencountertheotherwasaprerequisitefortransferringknowledge–pointsofview,aswellasfeelings.Inthisspace,participantsnotonlyengagedwiththeconcretepracticesofhavingtohideinpublicspace,andwith(moreabstract)perspectivesonthesubjectofinvisibility,butalsowiththe(meta-)subjectofmapping;inparticularthecapacityofmappingtoenableonetoactandtospeak.Duringthewalk,throughthedialoguewiththeundocumentedguide,participantscouldevaluatetheirpreconceivedideasaboutthefeelingsthathadbeenchosenforinclusioninthemap’slegend.Theycould,forinstance,checktowhatextenttheselectedfeelingsmatchedthefeelingsexperiencedbytheguidesintheirdaily

430

life.Bydiscussingissuessuchasthese,participantscouldprobethemap’slegendduringthemappingand,asaresult,changesweresuggestedanddiscussedbythecartographers.Inthisway,themap’slegend,besidesbeingameetingpointbetweenparticipantsandtheundocumentedguides,actedasapointofdepartureforadebateaboutmapping,agency,andpower.

Figure5.Photosthatwereuploadedsimultaneouslybythedifferentcartographerswhenfeelingstressedwasmapped.Photos:anonymisedcartographers.

Additionally,alargeraudiencewasinvolvedinthisdebate–theresultofthecollectivecartographyperformedbytheguidesandtheirguestswasscreenedinrealtimeattheFrascatitheatre,themainvenuefortheOutofStateprogramme.There,themapservedasaconversationpieceforthepeoplepresent.Sucha‘public’debatecouldholdpotentialriskforundocumentedimmigrants.Generally,theyarenotabletotakepartinconversationssuchasthesewithoutjeopardisingtheirinvisibility.Inthisworkshop,however,themapenabledthemtohaveanactiveroleinthedebatewhilstcontinuingtosafeguardtheiranonymity.Apublicdebatewasabletoemergearoundtheevolvingmaponscreen,andtheundocumentedguideshadthepossibilityofsteeringthedirectionofthe

debate–literally,bywalking–withoutbeingseenonscreenthemselvesandtherebyjeopardisingtheirfragileposition.Bywatchingthecolouredlinesonthemapandtheincomingpicturestheaudiencecouldfollowthewalkanddiscussplaces,practices,feelings,perspectivesandmappingissues,butthedesignoftheapplicationandtheworkshopsetupguaranteedthattheidentityoftheundocumentedimmigrantswasnotrevealedtothepublic.

EffectandAffectThepresenceofonlyafewpeopleatthetheatreduringthescreeninglimitedthe‘public’effectoftheworkshop.However,theparticipantsoftheworkshopindicatedthattakingpartinthemappinghadquitea‘private’impact.Oneoftheparticipants,whoworkswithundocumentedimmigrantsonadailybasis,(welaterfoundoutthatheworkedfortheimmigrationandnaturalisationservice),saidthatthiswasthefirsttimethathehadactuallyabletoexperienceimportantaspectsofimmigrants’daytodaypracticesfromtheirperspective.Aftertheworkshophadfinishedheinvitedoneoftheundocumentedimmigrantstohishouse.Otherparticipantsthatwespoketoacoupleofmonthsaftertheworkshop,alsotoldusthattheworkshopwasetchedintheirmemories–someplacestheyregularlypassbyarenowpermeatedwiththeundocumentedimmigrants’stories.Inadditiontothemapping(performingthecitywalk)andthescreeningofthemap(theperformanceatFrascati),thereisalsoathirdwaythat

431

thisworkshophasinvolvedparticipants–duringthemapping,alongeachofthetracks,theconversationbetweentheparticipantandtheundocumentedimmigrantwasdigitallyrecorded.Theaudiorecordingswerestoredintheformofalocation-basedarchive,sothatafterthedayoftheworkshopthestories/testimonies/memoriesand/orimpressionsbecomeavailabletothepublic.Inthiscase,participantsarenotguidedbyanundocumentedimmigrantinperson,butbyanaudiotrack.One’smobilephonefunctionsasanavigationaldeviceinwhichtheaudioisdirectingyouwheretogo.Theinvisiblestorylinescanbepickedupatanytimebygoingtothedeparturepoint,aligningtheblueringwiththeredcircleonthewebapp’sinterface,anddownloadingtheaudiotrackasanmp3.Whenonestartstowalk,thetrackwillplayandthestoryisrevealed.Ifonewandersofftheoriginalroute,thesoundwillfadeoutandonewillhavetofindone’swaybackontrack.Itisonlybybeingphysicallypresentattheexactsamelocationandbyfollowingthesameroutethatthestoryunfolds.Inthisway,publicspacebecomesanarchiveofpersonalstoriesthatcanbeunlocked(performed)if,(carryingtherightequipmentofaphoneandapairofheadphones),onetriestoengagethroughaligningandsynchronisingone’sdirectionandwalkingspeed.InthislastphaseofMappingInvisibility,‘inter-facing’,bywayoftracingsomeone’ssteps(throughtheurbanfabric)andviawords(intheaudiostoryline),isasituated,embodiedand,literarily,groundedwayoftransferringknowledge.Again,asinpreviousphasesoftheworkshop,knowledgeinthiscaseexplicitlyincludesfeelings.Owingtothe

differenttimeframesatplay–i.e.themomentoflisteningtothestoryviatheaudiotrack,themomentthatthestorywastold,andthemomentthatthestoryistellingabout–differentfeelings(ofdifferentpeople)areinvolvedandcanbecomeblurredintheexperienceofthelisteneroftheaudiotrack.Thiscanbeunsettling.Tosomeextent,thisunsettlednesscanbecomepubliclyvisible.Asthelistenerisguidedbythestoryline,hisorherpossiblysomewhatpeculiarwayofwalkingbecomesvisibletoothersinthecity’spublicspace.Forinstance,someonestandingstillfortenminutesataspecificlocation,staringataconcretewall,listeningtoamantellingastoryabouthow,onthedaythatthestoryrefersto,heparkedhisbikeonthisexactlocation,when,inthe‘hereandnow’,thereisactuallynothingtobeseen–thiscouldarousethecuriosityofurbanpassers-by.Thetwoofficersdetaintheman,bringhimtothestationandverifythatthebikeisnotmissingorstolen.Heisabsolvedfromthisone,buthehasnopapersforhimself.Nextthingheknows,hetellsthetwowomen,heisinprisonforalmostsixmonths.Heissmiling,whichsurprisesthewomen,andisprobablylookingatthebuildingwithoutreallyintendingto.“Imaysmile,”heremarks,“butinside,insidemyhead,itaches.”Itrytostayalignedwiththereddotonthescreen.Itseemsthatitmovesaroundalittlebit(ArashGhajarjazi2016).

432

ConclusionandDiscussionThevalueofperformativemappingasadesignresearchapproach

ThecasestudyMappingInvisibility,weargue,demonstratesthevalueofperformativemappingasadesignresearchapproachforengagingmultipleactorsinbothaspatialexplorationofpublicspacesaswellasinadialogueaboutinclusion/exclusioninthepublicdomain.Wehavetriedtoshowthatbyusingthegenerativepowerofdigitaltechnologiescombinedwithactualexperienceof,anddiscussionabout,anumberofphysicalandsocialaspectsoftheurbanenvironment,someofwhatsooftenremainsinvisible,canberevealedandreflectedupon.Aswasshown,MappingInvisibilityinvolvesnavigatingandmapping.Weconsiderbothoftheseaswaysto‘inter-face’,atermwhich,inthiscase,wetaketoimplyaprocessofinteractionthatrevolvesaroundexploring‘in-betweenterritories’–betweendifferentpointsofview,thephysicalandthevirtual,thetacitandtheexplicit,theknownandtheyettobediscovered.InMappingInvisibility,navigationinvolvesinteractionbetweenaguide(anundocumentedimmigrant)andaguest(aworkshopparticipant)aswellasbetweenthisgroupofactorsandtheirsurroundings.FollowingNannaVerhoeff(2012),weconsiderinteractivenavigationtobeapracticebothofreading,andofmaking,space.Readingspaceinthiscasemeansreadingtheurbanlandscapethattheworkshop’sparticipantsnavigatefromanumberofpreselectedperspectives,i.e.thefourfeelingschosenbytheparticipants.These

perspectives/feelingsconstitutealegendthatenablestheparticipantstoco-createadigital,real-timemapwhilewalkingandtalking,bywalkingandtalking.Tounderstandhow,inthiscase,thereadingofspaceinvolvesmakingspace,theworkshop’snavigatingpracticehastobeconsideredasapracticeinvolvingmapping.Mappinginourviewisanact,itisperformed.ReferringbacktoJamesCorner’sview,mappingenablestheworkshopparticipantstounfoldpotential–“itre-makesterritoryoverandoveragain,eachtimewithnewanddiverseconsequences”(Corner1998:p.213).Insuchamappingpractice,readingspacecanbecomemakingspace–unfolding“newrealitiesoutofexistingconstraints”(ibid.:p.251).Thisspace,theserealities,notonlyrefertothephysicalspaceoftheurbanenvironmentthatisnavigated,mapped,readandre-made,theyalsorefertothespaceofengagementconstitutedbytheparticipantstakingthetimeandefforttoencounter‘theother’.InthecaseofMappingInvisibility,thisencountermaytakeplaceinvariousphases:duringtheworkshopinface-to-facedialoguesthroughoutthewalk;byengagingwiththemapscreenedatthetheatre;andaftertheworkshophasended,whensomeoneretracestheguideandguest’sstepsbyinstallingawebappontheirmobilephoneandretrievingoneofthestoriesfromtheworkshop’slocation-baseddigitalarchive–byfirst“navigatingthegreyarea”andthentryingto“alignthe

433

blueringwiththeredcircle”,onecanactivatetheaudiotrackandlistentothestoryunfold,again,anew.Amap,inthiscase,clearlyisnotconsideredsimplyanobjecttobeholdbutratherassomethingtobe(inter)actedwith.Themap’spotentialliesinitsabilitytoactivate.FollowingtheleadofJacquesRancière(2009),whodefiestheideaofviewingandactingasopposites,wearguethatitisintheactivityofboththeviewer(ofthecityandofthemap)andofthelistener(ofthestory)thatencounterscantakeplaceandterritoriescanbeexplored.Thisexplorationofthe‘previouslyunseenorunimagined’willnotnecessarilybeasmoothlyflowingtrajectory.Onthecontrary,bothduringtheworkshopandafterwards,walkingdoesnotimplykeepingasteadypace,rather,itinvolveshalting,forinstanceinplaceswheretheguiderecallssomeincidentandneedstoreflectonit.Hereandthere,walkingmayeveninvolvestumbling,dodging,andturningaround.Alongsimilarlines,talkingalsoincludesremainingquieteverynowandthen.Itmayinvolvehesitation,forinstancewhentheguideislookingforwordstosharewhathethinksandfeels,orwhenparticipantsengagewithwhatissharedwiththem.InMappingInvisibility,stumblingandhesitating,looking,andtakinganotherlook,listeningandlisteningagain,arepartofamethodthatdeliberatelyinterruptsorrekindlesdailyroutinesandfamiliarroutesthrough‘seeminglyexhaustedgrounds’.

TheMappingInvisibilityworkshopprovidesparticipantswithanopportunitytodiscoverwhatwashiddenfromviewandtorethinkwhathadbeenassumed.Theworkshoppresentsanunfamiliaryetoddlyrecognisablecity;itforces(orenables)participantstoengagewithwhatMicheldeCerteau(2002:p.96)hascalledthe“disquietingfamiliarityofthecity”.Togetherwiththeirguide,theparticipantsexploreandre-fashionaterritory,reflectingontheconsequencesthishas,bothineverydaylifeaswellasinprofessionalpracticesofengagingwithpublicspaceandpublicissues.Inthisway,theworkshophelpsparticipantsexplorewhatinteractionandparticipationhavetoofferinacontestedurbanenvironment–bynotjustconsideringabstractconcepts,butbyputtingthemtothetestinapracticeof‘inter-facing’.

Preparations,presuppositions,andresponsibilitiesindesignresearch

Thispracticeof‘inter-facing’involvesquiteafewcomplexitiesandchallenges.Notonlydoallkindsofpracticalitiesrequireattentionbut,becausethereisagroupof‘vulnerable’peopleinvolved,ethicalissuesalsoneedtobeaddressed.Thedesignresearchinthiscase–andinsimilarcasesthatinvolvevulnerablegroups–needstobethoroughlyreflectedonpriorto,during,andaftertheworkshop,asregardstheresearcher’spreparation,presuppositions,andresponsibilities.Althoughwecannotoffergeneralguidelinesoradviceonthebasisofoneworkshopalone,wedothinkitcanbevaluableforotherdesignresearchers,especiallythoseconcernedwithmattersrelatedto

434

participation,agency,andpower,ifweconcludethispaperbybrieflyreflectingonthreeissues.Firstly,howweretheundocumentedimmigrantsrecruited,andhowdidweengendertrustandbuildrelationships?Inthiscase,contextandspacewereveryimportant.Theworkshopwasco-organisedwithPlatformScenographyandwaspartofatwo-weekprogrammeaboutthepracticalconsequencesofinconsistentpoliciesregardingundocumented(‘illegal’)immigrants.TwocuratorsfromPlatformScenographyinvitedustocontributetothisprogramme,andtheyprovideduswiththelogisticsofwhereandhowtoreachtheundocumentedimmigrants.Then,twoweekspriortotheworkshopwewereinvitedtocometoWereldhuis,abuildinginAmsterdamwhereundocumentedimmigrantsgatherforvariousmeetingsandactivities.There,inthissafeandfamiliarenvironment,wepresentedtheideafortheworkshop.Thisintroductionwasimportantbecauseitallowedustopresenttheaffordancesofthewebappwithregardstoenablingundocumentedimmigrantsinparticipatinginthepublicrealmwhilstsafeguardingtheirfragileposition,i.e.stayinganonymous.Thisbringsustoasecondissue,oneofpreparationandtheunexpected.Ourcarefulpreparationstomitigateriskdidnotpreventusfrombeingcaughtunawaresduringtheexecutionoftheworkshop.Itprovedtobehardtopredicthowtheimmigrantswouldreacttothedifferentcombinationsofmediatechnologiesandphysicalspacesinvolvedinthisworkshop’sexplorationsof‘hiding’and‘makingpublic’.The

undocumentedimmigrantsthatwereinvitedhadtheopportunitytodecidewhethertoparticipateortowithdraw,upuntilthelastmoment,sowewerenotsurehowmanyofthemwouldactuallyshowupandiftherewouldbeasufficientnumberofguidesforthewalks.Tooursurprise,onthedayoftheworkshopthereweremoreundocumentedimmigrantsthanparticipants.Anothersurprisewasthatoneundocumentedimmigranttoldusthathewouldliketoappearinafilm.Hewasinterviewedandwascomfortablewiththeideaofpostingavideoofhimonline.Apparentlythewillingness(ofsome)tosharetheirstorieswasgreaterthanthefearofbeingcaught.OnthedayoftheopeningofOutofStateattheFrascatitheatre,however,therewerenoundocumentedimmigrantssittingintheaudience.Althoughonecanconsideratheatremoreasacollectivespaceratherthanapublicone,(onewhichforsomeevenprovidesanintimatesphere),forundocumentedimmigrantsthereappearedtobeabarriertoparticipationasamemberoftheaudience.Athirdissueconcernspreconceivedideas.Indesignresearchtheseplayaroleinallkindsofways,e.g.intheguiseofpreconceptions,hypotheses,conjectures,andprejudice.WewillgivethreeexamplesfromMappingInvisibility.Thefirstexampleconcernsprejudice–ourownprejudice.Intheworkshoptheparticipantsweretousetheirownmobilephonestomapthecitywalks.Wepreparedabriefinstructionfortheparticipants,andexpectedasmoothstart.However,quiteafewparticipantsappearedtohaveproblemswithoperatingtheirown

435

phone.Forinstance,somedidnotknowhowtoturnonlocationservices.Atsomepoint,acoupleofundocumentedimmigrantsthatwerealsopresenttookoverthephonestohelptheparticipantsbyexplainingtothemhowtooperatethem.Clearly,someofourpreconceivedideasaboutagencyinrelationtotechnologywerefalse.Thentherewasourconjecturethatasecondversionofthisworkshop,acoupleofmonthsafterthefirstworkshop,involvingonlyundocumentedwomenactingasguides,couldbeundertakenwithoutmuchtrouble.Thissuppositionprovedtobewrong.Attitudesandinterpersonalrelationsturnedouttobedifferentinthesecondworkshop,andthisresultedindifficultiesintheconversationsduringthewalks.Thewomenindicatedthattheyfeltuncomfortablebeinginthespotlightduringinterviewsbymaleparticipants.Themaleparticipants,inturn,feltuneasyaskingthewomenquestions.Althoughwehavenothadtheopportunitytoexploretheseissuesfurther,wethinktheproblemscouldbeexplainedbytheevenmorevulnerablepositionofwomeninpublicspace,andbyculturaldifferences.Afinalexampleconcernsaresearchhypothesis.Forthesecondworkshop(involvingthewomen)theappdesignwaschanged.Duringthewalk,participantswerenotaskedtosticktoasinglefeelingbutcoulddecidetodiscussavarietyoffeelings,chosenfromalist.Inaddition,theycouldcommunicatetheintensityofthefeelingthatwasexperienced,bypressingabuttonbuiltintothewebapp.Ourhypothesiswasthattheappwould,inthisway,facilitatemorenuanced

conversations.Thisturnedoutnottobethecase.Thedialoguessufferedfromthisaddedfunction,becauseitrequiredmoreactionsfromtheparticipantstobeperformedduringtheconversation.Furthermore,includingmorethanonefeelinginanhour’swalkresultedinshallowerconversations.Inthefirstworkshop,the(single)feelingshadbeendiscussedmoreindepth.Inthisrespect,inourview,thefirstversionofMappingInvisibilitywasmoresuccessfulin‘inter-facing’andexploring‘in-betweenterritories’.

AcknowledgementsMappingInvisibilitywasorganisedanddesignedbyNaomiBuenodeMesquitaincollaborationwithPlatformScenographyandWereldhuisAmsterdam.ThispaperwaswrittenaspartoftheTRADERSproject.TRADERSreceivesfundingfromtheEuropeanUnion’sSeventhFrameworkProgrammeforresearch,technologicaldevelopmentanddemonstration,undergrantagreementno.608299.Theapplication

MappingInvisibilitywasdevelopedbyIvánFuciñosCalle.

ReferencesBuenodeMesquita,N.(2014).MappingInvisibility.[Blog].PerformativeMapping.Availableat:

https://performativemapping.net/outofstate[Accessed29Jan.2017].

436

Corner,J.(1998).Theagencyofmapping:Speculation,critiqueandinvention.In:D.Cosgroveed.,Mappings.London:ReaktionBooks,pp.

213-252.

DeCerteau,M.(2002).Thepracticeofeverydaylife.Berkeley:University

ofCaliforniaPress.

DeSouzaeSilva,A.andFrith,J.(2012).Mobileinterfacesinpublicspaces:Locationalprivacy,controlandurbansociability.NewYork:

Routledge.

Galloway,A.(2012).Theinterfaceeffect.Cambridge:Polity.

Hookway,B.(2014).Interface.Cambridge:MITPress.

O’Rourke,K.(2013).Walkingandmapping:Artistsascartographers.

Cambridge:TheMITPress.

Rancière,J.(2009).Theemancipatedspectator.London:Verso.

Verhoeff,N.(2012).Mobilescreens:Thevisualregimeofnavigation.Amsterdam:AmsterdamUniversityPress.

437