vilken framtida stad vill vi se?

Some Thoughts on Dromology and Urban Techno Topology

- by Helena Björnesjö

We live in an increasingly mediated and automated technological high speed whirling world. Technology and its products are everywhere. Think of the vast spread and use of the internet. We socialize online. We retrieve information online. We shop, book our trips and do our banking errands online. Think also of the cars, buses or trains many of us take to and from school or work. Well on the bus or train we call a co-worker from our smartphone and check a text message from a friend. Then we send off an email from our tablet whilst uploading yesterday's images to some online cloud service. It has been suggested that this technologized world is driven by a logic of speed and a strive for efficiency. It has also been said that technology arranges, orders, and alters reality in certain ways. How do these suggested features affect urban space, and the people that live in it? And how do they affect the urban planning practice?

Michel Foucault used the term 'heterotopia' for referring to places and spaces of otherness, or of difference. A heterotopia is characterized by deviating from some normality. A greenhouse is a heterotopia if it houses plants that are other and rare, perhaps relative to the local flora. A hospital is another example of a heterotopia in that it houses ill people in contrast to well people (and wellness is taken to be the normal health state). Foucault treated a variety of heterotopias and he described a heterotopia of compensation as: ”[...] a space that is other, another real space, as perfect, as meticulous, as well arranged as ours is messy, ill constructed, and jumbled.”1  A heterotopia of compensation brings order to where there is otherwise some amount of disorder. It is a regulated, and perhaps idealized, manifestation of the world from which it secludes itself. We might then ask: Could the modern and present-day planned cities be conceived of as such manifestations of order?

Urbanist and academic Paul Virilio has long argued that modern society is dominated by a logic of speed that he terms 'dromology' (derived from the Greek word 'dromos', meaning race or race course). Dromology is largely associated with logistics and technology. Motor highways that cut through both cityscape and landscape, serving fast speeds and logistic efficiency, might come to mind. Consider also the nearly optic speeds at which information travels in between devices of technology.

In the computer and information age that we are in, we communicate messages to people across the globe in near to no time, using social media such as Instagram. The effective distance from here to there is overridden by the immediacy of the internet. Due to properties like these, in this age the individual becomes subject to repositioning, or redistributing. Performance artist Stelarc writes: ”Certainly what becomes important now is not merely the body's identity, but its connectivity [and interconnectivity] – not its mobility or location, but its interface.”2  Foucault similarly argued: ”We are at a moment, I believe, when our experience of the world is less that of a long life developing through time than that of a network that connects points and intersects with its own skein.”3

Virilio is critical of this development. He believes that technologies distort ”real” reality by substituting real time and space with virtual realities. German philosopher Martin Heidegger also considered modern technology to be a sort of distortion of reality that contributes to an incomplete, or even false understanding of reality and of our role in it. Technology, he believed, can make us forget that we are not merely technological beings in a technological realm.

Urban planning is not exempted from the digitalization of space or rapid increase in technological services. On the contrary, the city has often been a site for realizing new technologies. As such, the city is also subject to “dromofication”. It is a dromosphere. Earlier this year CITYMOVES, a conference about transportation policies for future cities, was held in Stockholm. One of the speakers at the conference was Noah Radford, advisor on futures, foresight, and innovation. Radford is part of a project in which a web-based survey on possible scenarios for future Stockholm has been conducted. Participants in the survey agreed on several trends that they believed will be important forces of change. Amongst these were: an increase in urban population and in usage of information and communication technologies (ICT). Trends were then correlated to possible future city scenarios, one of which was Techno City. In a techno city, or technopolis (from the Greek word 'polis', meaning city) technologies are integrated into most aspects of life. This scenario comes across as particularly interesting as there is widespread interest in future cities where technology plays a crucial role in shaping city space and city life alike.4 

In techno cities, ”smart cities” is yet another common phrasing, vast quantities of data and information become available. Data can be used in many different areas of urban planning, varying from geographic information systems (GIS) and traffic management, to policy making and action planning. Professor Rob Kitchin from the Programmable City research project talks of a translation-transduction cycle, such that data about events and activities in the city are collected, and then translated into software whereby data can be analyzed.5  Data can be employed in predicting and simulating future scenarios, similar to the work of Radford and team. But it can also be used to transduce city life by reshaping space, or affecting how and where we work and move, entertain ourselves and so on. Planner, forecaster, and author of Smart Cities; Anthony Townsend, raises some concerns about this type of approach:

”Smart cities need to be efficient but also preserve opportunities for spontaneity, serendipity, and sociability. If we program all of the randomness out, we’ll have turned them from rich, living organisms into dull mechanical automatons. They need to be secure, but not at the risk of becoming surveillance chambers. They need to be open and participatory, but provide enough support structure for those who lack the resources to self-organize.”6

Heidegger believed that the modern world is dominated by calculative and technological ways of thinking. However, models and simulations fail to give a full view of reality. They rely on methods of estimation, measurement, categorization and organization that leave out what cannot be so measured or easily categorized. Heidegger understood modern technology as revealing what is real in an ordering mode. If we return to Foucault for a moment, it seems the techno city does begin to resemble a heterotopia of compensation, a place of order. It represents what is perhaps an idealization of technology. But a heterotopia does not merely (wrongfully) represent. It also transduces – alters – reality in various ways, transforming city space into a large scale digital maze.

Techno cities are very complex structures and planning for, and handling them requires expertise. In discussing this expert role in her thesis Planned, All Too Planned (2010), Sara Westin turns to Freud's theories of the psychic apparatus. She likens the modern architect/planner coupling to that of a rational and oppressive superego, and the city to that of a control-mechanism at its service. And between superego and the untamed id (likened to the citizen, or flâneur), lies a conflict. This is a very vivid illustration of the organizing and controlling character of the planning practice, and of the complicated relationship between planner and citizen. Westin critically argues further that expertise is often accompanied by a certain amount of legitimacy. Could this put experts of (techno) cities in a position to make order and control, dromology and technology, into norms, seemingly normal?

This connects to another concern raised by Virilio about the rapid increase in technologies. Reducing distance in space and time is key in the dromosphere. One way of achieving such reduction is by minimizing friction, or resistance. However, Virilio claims that one type of friction is in fact a constitutive feature of dromology and an integral feature of technology: accident, or crash. Since the logic of speed is as present today as ever before, it is therefore not unreasonable to consider what types of risk (of accident) might emerge in the technological dromosphere. There is no space for discussing risk at any length or depth here, but some considerations might be in place. Risk is typically taken to be the product of the probability of an undesirable event and the effect of that event. This immediately raises the questions: What is a desirable event and what is an undesirable event? And furthermore, who decides what is and what is not so, and which risks we should attend to?

In considering risk assessment procedures in areas of technology, Franssen et al. suggest that some of the possible negative effects of technology, such as social or psychological effects, are given less attention than other much debated areas of impact; such as safety and health.7 Townsend writes, somewhat cynically, that: ”The technology industry is asking us to rebuild the world around its vision of efficient, safe, convenient living.”8 

But, if technology has great social and psychological impact; then the scope of undesirable events that we take into account when judging risks in planning may be too narrow if we leave these out. Recall the quotes from above by Stelarc and Foucault about individual connectivity. Recently there has been a surge in reports on how life online, beeping smartphones, and the multi-tasking that goes with it, might negatively affect our mental and bodily well-being. Present in this debate are propositions about increase in stress and distraction, a fear of missing out (FOMO), passivity, boredom and alienation. Effects on memory, learning, and other cognitive capacities, are other debated risks. Radford mentions a filter bubble, where we retreat into our own digital worlds. Ironically then, it seems we might be growing increasingly disconnected in a time when everything is about being connected. These reactions may not be the direct or typical concerns of architects and urban planners, but the mediated and technologized environments that they help realize, and the lifestyles these encourage, contribute to such effects.

Furthermore, Franssen et al. argue that there is a widespread technological fix: ”(...) the solution of a problem by a technical solution, that is, the delivery of an artifact or artifactual process, where it is questionable, to say the least, whether this solves the problem or whether it was the best way of handling the problem.”9 For instance, it seems doubtful that (merely) implementing technological, or otherwise artificial, strategies for dealing with the psychological effects of technology use described in the last section would be very helpful. What more, if we rely too heavily on technological practice, Townsend worries we might be (at risk of) ordering away plurality, friction, and flexibility from the city, making it an automaton. That being said, the benefits of technology are of course plentiful, and what is going too far in one's optimism (or skepticism) towards the virtues of technology is not always so clear.

What is clear is that planners and architects cannot allow themselves to be reduced to Freudian superegos that by suppressing what is not in order face away from other, non-standardized, non-regulated, wishes and needs. Yet planning is a way of practicing control. Balancing between exerting control and knowing when to let go becomes an important characteristic of the urban planning practice.

If dromological techno cities are made norm, should planners in fact be planning for a ”heterotopia” that is other to the logic and properties of these cities? What would such a counter heterotopia be like? Following Virilio, maybe a counter heterotopia ought to be one of resistance, where we begin to slow things down. The orthodox planning process is often criticized for being slow and inert. But maybe this is as it should be then, in a way. Or, should we continue to accelerate in order to free ourselves from technosocial bonds, as accelerationalists suggest? Perhaps the complexity of, or inherent accident in, techno cities will make them unstable and bring it about that they collapse in on themselves. Truly smart cities should cope with a variety of kinds of challenges and wicked problems. Perhaps no heterotopia can be fit for this task.

Common to both Heidegger's and Virilo's critical analyses of technology is large (industrial) scale, and a distortion of reality of some kind. The smart city is a technopolis is a dromosphere. Managing this ubiquitous superstructure in all its complexity is part of the planning challenge that lies ahead. Heidegger believed that by reflecting on technology and by reassembling our thinking beyond ordering reason, we can come to terms with, and possibly avoid the ordering crisis that he thought technological domination brings upon us. In "The Question Concerning Technology" (1977), he quotes German romantic poet Friedrich Hölderlin: ”where danger is, grows the saving power also”. Until then, citizens are likely to cry: These are evasive days in redundant space, where we seem to be doing everything at a pace. Life is but a race!

This text has been produced as a part of the research and idea development within Experiment Stockholm.

  1. ”Of Other Spaces: Utopias and Heterotopias (1986)
  2. http://stelarc.org/?catID=20242
  3. ”Of Other Spaces: Utopias and Heterotopias” (1986)
  4. You can watch video footage from the conference at CITYMOVES youtube channel. Radford's presentation is availiable here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r8F43axbM9g
  5. http://www.maynoothuniversity.ie/progcity/
  6. http://placesjournal.org/article/smart-cities/  
  7. http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2013/entries/technology/
  8. https://placesjournal.org/article/smart-cities/
  9. http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2013/entries/technology/ 



Politisk debatt

- om hur Stockholm utvecklas, planeras och byggs


Plats: Färgfabriken

Tid: 20 november kl 14-16, friare diskussioner och mingel kl 16-17.

Fri entré. Anmäl dig Den här e-postadressen skyddas mot spambots. Du måste tillåta JavaScript för att se den.

Under hösten har Experiment Stockholm varit inte bara en utställning, utan också en samlingsplats för ett rikt program av diskussioner, seminarier, möten och workshops där idéer om Stockholm och städers framtid har belysts ur olika perspektiv. Intressanta idéer och brännande frågor har vaskats fram. Publiken har också kunnat lämna idéer och frågor efter att ha besökt utställningen. Detta tar vi nu vidare för att debattera med regionens politiker.

Vi diskuterar med politiker i olika paneler i tre block:

  • En växande stad - en hållbar stad.
  • Planera för det oplanerade - behovet av nytänkande stadsutveckling.
  • Från vision till verklighet! Vem ska ta risken att göra saker på nytt sätt?

Medverkande politiker meddelas inom kort.

Välkomna att lyssna och diskutera!

Experiment Knivsta

– Hållbarhet från idé till verklighet.

experiment knivsta 800

Den 13 november kl 13-16 på Färgfabriken

Anmälan till Den här e-postadressen skyddas mot spambots. Du måste tillåta JavaScript för att se den. senast den 12 november.

I början av en byggprocess finns ofta en stor entusiasm för gröna lösningar, men de riskerar att försvinna i byggprocessens “svarta låda”. Knivsta ska bli en föregångskommun och en mötesplats för ett hållbart samhälle. Samtidigt ska man växa med omkring 10 000 personer fram 2025. Hur tar man den hållbara stadsdelen från idé till verklighet?

Knivsta kommun kommer presentera konceptet TrähusEtt som ska fungera både som ett exempel på tekniska hållbarhetslösningar och som ett socialt nav i den nya stadsdelen. Kan ett litet experimentellt trähus hjälpa till att förverkliga visionen?

Bland talarna finns även den belgiska arkitekten Julien de Smedt, KTH som berättar om sitt arbete med sociala mötesplatser


13.00 – 13.15 Experiment Stockholm och Experiment Knivsta. Jan Rydén, Färgfabriken

13.15- 13.30 Visionen. Ambitionerna med den nya hållbara stadsdelen Nydal, Tobias Arvidsson, samhällsbyggnadschef, Knivsta

13.30- 13.45 Livable cities och Experiment Knivsta, Tina Henning, Ramböll

13.45- 14.00 Träarkitektur i urban miljö, Ola Jonsson, CF Möller Berg

14.00 - 14.15 Paus

14.15- 14.30 Konceptet TrähusEtt: Livscykelanalyser, småskaliga energilösningar och en social mötesplats. Martin Wetterstedt, Energistrateg, Knivsta kommun

14.30-14.45 Social hubs, social interaction and public space, Julien de Smedt, JDS Architects, KTH

14.45 - 15.15 Paus

15.15-16.00 Paneldiskussion om hållbar stadsutveckling. Hur kan en kommun gå från vacker hållbar vision till förverkligande? Hur undviker man risken att det blir ”som vanligt”. Jan Rydén, Färgfabriken Tobias Arvidsson, Samhällsbyggnadschef, Knivsta kommun. Joanna Dickinson, Naturvårdsverket

Estetik, psykologi och andra värden inom stadsplanering

- seminarium 5 november kl 17-20


Diskussioner om städer och platsers utveckling handlar naturligtvis ofta om hus, gator, service och andra konkreta, påtagliga och mätbara funktioner och beståndsdelar. Vi vill lyfta fram fler aspekter av vad det gemensamma rummet är och betyder - både vad gäller det existentiella och kulturella.

Vilka parallella strategier kan man arbeta med? Vi söker det förbisedda och det som finns underförstått. Begrepp som skala, sociala relationer, intimitet, möten, närvaro och flöden kan betraktas utifrån filosofiska, estetiska och psykologiska perspektiv. I seminariet ryms reflektioner kring hur vi upplever våra omgivningar samt hur konst och konstnärliga strategier kan relateras till stadsrummet. Vad kan hända när man förskjuter perspektiv och kritiskt undersöker begrepp och hierarkier eller när man blandar kompetenser och kunskapshorisonter?

Preliminärt schema:
Bar och utställning kl 17, seminarieprogrammet börjar kl 18.
Färgfabrikens kafé håller öppet till kl 20 och serverar mat och dryck.

Ingår i entréavgiften
(konst- och arkitekturstuderande har fri entré).

Passa på att ta del av utställningen Experiment Stockholm, denna kväll utökad med tillfälliga installationer/performance/ljudverk från deltagare i kursen “Sound art: Listening, resonating, intervening“, Konstfack, kl 17-18.

18.00 -18.15 Introduktion, Joachim Granit, Färgfabriken
18.15-18.30 Ljudexperiment i staden som forskningsmetod. Monica Sand, konstnär och forskare, Arkitektur- och designcentrum.
18.30 -18.45 Demeter - om stadsplanering och alternativa metodologier. Jan Hietala, Konstnär med PhD i arkitektur, ansluten till Research in Architecture, KTH Sweden. Demeter är ett samarbete med Moneo Brock Studio Madrid
18.45-19.00 18.45-19.00 Jonas Mosskin, leg. psykolog. Människans plats i staden.
19.00-19.15 Paus
19.15 -19.30 Luis Berríos Negón, konstnär, talar om "Earthscore Specularium" som han just nu ställer ut i Experiment Stockholm på Färgfabriken.
19.30 - 19.45 Publikt rum eller rum för publiken? Håkan Nilsson, professor i konst, konstkritiker.
19.45-20.00 Avrundning, sammanfattning. Färgfabriken.


– Ersätt parkeringsnorm med en spårtrafiknorm och hållplats inom 4 minuters gångavstånd från bostaden.

damer tcentralen 800px

Kopplingen bil och ökat byggande är automatisk. Det finns byggregler för det. Spårtrafiken får snällt vänta på politiska beslut. Tänk om vi tänkte tvärtom? Att fastighetsägaren ansvarar för att ordna spårtrafik med hållplats inom 4 minuters gångavstånd från den nybyggda bostaden?

Det finns krav på att bygga viss bilparkering per bostad, även i flerbostadshus. Det kallas parkeringsnorm, eller p-norm. Kommunen bestämmer exakt hur mycket parkering som fastighetsägaren är skyldig att ordna. Kostnaden slås ut på alla nya bostäder i ett område, även på hushåll som inte har bil. Varför finns inte krav på skolor, dagis? Eller spårtrafik, som i vårt förslag! Bilparkering kunde vara en privatsak, som det är i Tokyo.

Styrkan i parkeringsnormen, och biltrafiken, är att den hela tiden drivs i varje enskilt byggprojekt.

Den får en helt annan dynamik och flexibilitet än kollektivtrafik. Kopplingen bil och ökat byggande är automatisk. Satsningar som Spårväg Syd och förlängningar av Tvärbanan får däremot vänta på långdragna politiska förhandlingar som tar många år. Att bygga en p­plats i garage kostar mellan 250 000 kr och 450 000 kr/st. Kostnaden slås ut på alla nya bostäder i ett område. Även de som inte äger en bil får subventionera p­platsen genom priset på bostaden och hyran/månadsavgiften, ungefär 2000kr­4000kr/månad. (Källa: Parkeringspolicy och parkeringsnorm för bil, mc och cykel, Malmö 2010)

Varför ska just bilparkeringar ordnas av fastighetsägaren? När alla inte ens har bil? Vore det inte bättre att ersätta parkeringsnormen med krav på tillgång allmänna transporter inom exempelvis några minuters gångavstånd? En spårtrafiknorm: S­norm per bostad istället för P-norm per bostad? För fastighetsägaren skulle kostnaden tas igen i ökat värde på hyresfastigheten/bostadsrätten. Mindre än 500 m till spårstationer ökar värdet för lägenheter med 3,5% medan tillgänglighet eller framkomlighet med bil inte påverkar priset på lägenheter. Spårtrafiken ligger där den ligger, och driver därmed fastighetsvärdet tydligare, medan t.ex en busslinje lättare kan flyttas. (Källa: Värdering av stadskvaliteter, 2011)

Subventionerad bostad skulle kunna definieras som bostad som inte behöver betala s­norm men ändå dra nytta av den: ungdomsbostad eller studentlägenhet kunde undantas från s-normen för att sänka tröskeln till bostadsmarknaden. Kommunerna i Stockholm kunde bestämma en S­norm för att påskynda byggprocesser och sedan ”leasa” ut spårtrafiken till Landstinget.

FÖRSLAG: Hållplats inom 4 minuters gångavstånd, 400 m, från bostaden. 


Hur många nya bostäder skulle ge 1 km spårväg? Jämförelse med kostnader för garage.
Om kostnaden för garageplats/bostad är 250 000 kr och byts mot bidrag till spårtrafik får vi ungefär denna uträkning.

Kostnad 1 km spårväg/kostnad per p‐plats garage= antal lägenheter 200 000 000 kr/ 250 000 kr = 800 hushåll. Så minst 800 hushåll skulle betala 1km spårväg.

Hur tätt måste man då bygga? En täthet på minst 100 hushåll per hektar räcker långt, det är lägre än i många nybyggda områden. Hammarby sjöstad har 133 lägenheter/hektar. Inom fyra minuters gångavstånd,(400x400 m = sexton hektar) skulle det rymmas hela 1600 hushåll .

I Stockholms stad har cirka 65% av hushållen bil, 35% äger ingen bil. De som bor i villor och radhus har flera bilar, de som bor i flerbostadshus har färre bilar.

En parkeringsnorm är en kommuns regelverk för hur bilparkering ska ordnas vid ny­ eller ombyggnation. Den anges vanligen som antal bilplatser per lägenhet, per anställd, eller per kvadratmeter byggnadsyta. Detta ger ett minsta antal parkeringsplatser som krävs för bygglov.


Svante Pettersson

– Visar en installtion om det som i alla tider lockat människor att flytta till städer.

Color trip 800

Ljusdesignern Svante Petterssons installation handlar om det som i alla tider lockat människor att flytta till städer. Friheten att få tänka, tala och vara som man vill. Att komma till en fristad. Att få välja att vara ifred, helt anonym, men ändå omsluten av folk – eller att söka sig till en ny, självvald gemenskap.

Svante Pettersson har skapat en passage som illustrerar denna typ av transformation. Passagen rör sig mellan de mer intellektuella fallstudierna i projektrummen och de konstnärliga verken i stora salen. Hans uttrycksmedel är det artificiella ljuset som är en så viktig del av stadsmiljön, inte minst under vinterhalvåret i Stockholm.

Den optimala visuella upplevelsen, och fotovyn, är vid angiven ’photo point’ 130 cm från golvet. Ladda upp bilderna på sociala medier med #colortrip.


Color Trip (2015)
spånskivor/particle boards; akryl-färg/acrylic paint; LED-ljusinstallation/LED light installation
9,9 m x 1,3 m x 2,45 m

Earthscore Specularium biografi

familjen web

Foto av Familjen Berríos-Negrón Larsen taget av Noshe.

Freia Pilar Berríos-Negrón Larsen (Denmark, 2014*) is having fun.

Maria Kamilla Larsen (Denmark, 1985*) has a bachelors degree in art history from the Arts and Cultural Studies Department of the University of Copenhagen and worked as assistant curator at Charlottenborg at the Royal Academy of Fine Art.

Luis Berríos-Negrón (Puerto Rico, 1971*) was commissioned artist at the 3rd Biennial of Art of Bahia in 2014. In 2013, he represented Germany in the São Paulo International Biennial of Architecture, was resident in the Size Matters Project at the ZHdK, and was Danish International Visiting Artist. In 2012, he exhibited with Paul Ryan in his Threeing project at Documenta, and in Ute Meta Bauer’s Future Archive at the Neuer Berliner Kunstverein. Luis has a bachelor of fine arts from Parsons, a master of architecture from M.I.T., and is doctoral candidate at Konstfack/KTH in 2015. He is currently exhibiting his installation Earthscore Specularium at Färgfabriken in Stockholm until November 29, 2015.

The Berríos-Negrón Larsen Family lives and works in Berlin and Stockholm.

Earthscore Specularium Schema

2-5th October - Jean Gardner, (urban ecologist, New York)
- Public talk, 4th October, 2pm.

12-14th October - David Fischer (photographer, Berlin)

16-18th October - Ulrich Schurr (biologist, Jülich)
- Public talk, 18th October, 11.30 am. Läs mer här.

19-20th October - Behzad Khosravi (artist, Tehran/Stockholm)
- Vernissage Tuesday 20th October, 5 to 7.30 pm.

Alexandra Hopf & Rick Buckley (artists, Berlin)

24-25th October – Jörg Koopmann (photographer/curator, München) & Lene Harbo (producer, Copenhagen)
- Lunch event, 25th October, 1pm with Katarina Bonnevier, Jörg Koopmann and Luis Berríos-Negrón (artist) at the Earthscore Specularium.

25-26th October - Katarina Bonnevier (architect, Stockholm)
- Lunch event, 25th October, 1pm with Katarina Bonnevier, Jörg Koopmann and Luis Berríos-Negrón (artist) at the Earthscore Specularium.

27-29th October - Julie Harboe (art historian, Zürich)
- Lunch session discussion 29th October, 12pm with Julie Harboe and Luis Berríos-Negrón (artist) at the Earthscore Specularium. Read more here.

31-1st November - Maria Lantz (artist/photographer, Stockholm)
- Oct 1st at 3 pm-4pm. Maria Lantz will screen her film Moon Bracelet, followed by a short discussion. Read more here.

2nd - 3rd November - Hanna Husberg (artist, Stockholm)
- Vernissage for The World Indoors 3rd November at 5 to 7 pm at the Earthscore Specularium

5-6th November - Håkan Nilson (art critic, Stockholm)

7-8th November - Hélène Frichot (architect/theorist, Stockholm)
- Public talk with Hélène Frichot and Jonathan Metzger 8th November, 2pm at the Earthscore Specularium

9-11th November - Florian Dombois (artist, Zürich/Bern)
- Public talk Luis Berríos-Negrón and Florian Dombois in conversation 10th November, 5:30pm at the Earthscore Specularium

11-12th November - Gehard Eckel (artist, Vienna/Stockholm)

13-15th November - Michael Obert (author/journalist/director, Berlin) & Daniela Grittner (actor, Berlin) 
Song from the Forest film screening premiere and Q&A, 13th November, 7pm

16-17th November - Maja Frögård (designer/artist, Stockholm)
- Vernissage with Maja Frögård 17th November at 5 to 7 pm at the Earthscore Specularium

17-19th November - Andreas Gehrke, aka Noshe (photographer, Berlin)

20-22nd November - Eva Wilson (curator, Berlin) & Adam Gibbons (artist, London) 
- Public presentation, Sunday 22nd November 2pm at the Earthscore Specularium

Adam Gibbons is an artist based in London and Eva Wilson is a curator and writer based in Berlin. During their time as guests at Earthscore Specularium during the weekend of November 21st and 22nd they will collect and discuss the world of hyper: (including but not limited to) hypercubes, hypercolor, hyperspace, and hyperstition.

24-26th November - Michael Marten (urbanist, Berlin) & Camila Preve (architect, Florianópolis)

27-29th November - Adam Bergholm & Coco with Rita (artists, Berlin/Stockholm)

Earthscore Specularium gäster

Invited Guests (in order of appearance): Bill Arning (curator, Houston), Rick Herron (curator, New York), Jean Gardner (urban ecologist, New York), Jan Hietala (to be rescheduled, artist, Stockholm), David Fischer (photographer, Berlin) & Jessica Valin (producer, Stockholm) with Frances Ali, Ulrich Schurr (biologist, Jülich), Behzad Khosravi (artists, Tehran/Stockholm), Lene Harbo (producer, Copenhagen) & Jörg Koopmann (photographer/curator, München), Katarina Bonnevier (architect, Stockholm), Julie Harboe (art historian, Zürich), Alexandra Hopf & Rick Buckley (artists, Berlin), Håkan Nilsson (art critic, Stockholm), Hélène Frichot (architect/theorist, Stockholm), Michael Marten (urbanist, Berlin) & Camila Preve (architect, Florianópolis), Jonathan Metzger (urbanist, Stockholm), Maja Frögård (designer/artist, Stockholm), Florian Dombois (artist, Zürich/Bern), Gerhard Eckel (artist, Vienna/Stockholm), Michael Obert (author/journalist/director, Berlin) & Daniela Grittner (actor, Berlin), Eva Wilson (curator, Berlin) & Adam Gibbons (artist, Berlin), Andreas Gehrke, aka Noshe (photographer, Berlin), Adam Bergholm & Coco with Rita (artists, Berlin/Stockholm), Maria Lantz (artist, Stockholm), Hanna Husberg (artist, Stockholm).

01-11 27-29 ES-BergholmShowing the film "End of the Line" produced and installed by Adam Bergholm and family.

01-11 24-25 ES-MartenThe silk Threeing drawing by urbanist Michael Marten and architect Camila Preve.

01-11 20-23 ES-WilsonCurator Eva Wilson and artist Adam Gibbons at the farm after their Hyper talk.

01-11 17-19 ES-Noshe
Photographer Noshe in Threeing practice at the mess.

02-11 13-15 ES-Obert-1Laying out the ink for the silk after the premiere of his film “Song from the Forest” with journalist Michael Obert.

03-11 16-17 ES-MajaAfter dinner with designer Maja Frögård in the Mess.

04-11 09-11 ES-FlorianD-1Looking for house shoes with Florian Dombois.

05-11 7-8 ES-Helene-1Morning coffee with architect and theoretician Hélène Frichot with her boys Felix and Florian, with Freia and Maria in the farm.

06-11 7-8 ES-Helene-JonathanFika session num.8 with architect and theoretician Hélène Frichot and urban theorist Jonathan Metzger.

15-10-31 ES-LantzArtist, photographer, and guest Maria Lantz presenting her film “Moonbracelet” at the Specularium.

15-11-05 ES-NilssonArt historian and guest Håkan Nilsson discussing the farm activities with Freia over coffee.

15-11-03 ES-HusbergArtist and guest Hanna Husberg at the farm planning her installation “The world inside” as part of the Specularium’s program.

15-10-29 ES-StudentsKonstfack-0Konstfack master students of fine arts as guests of the Specularium while attending Luis’ course “Instance, Notation, Sensation”.

15-10-29 ES-StudentsKonstfack-1Kamen Zlatev and Alexander Höglund, with course respondent Elof Hellström of Cyklopen.

15-10-29 ES-StudentsKonstfack-2Tomas Sinkevicius and Richard Krantz, with Elof Hellström about to engage the groups final presentation, the relational pizza.

15-10 ES-Bonnevier
Katarina Bonnevier with family (Joakim, Tyra, Magdalena, Marie, and Adam) at the farm.

15-10 ES-Buckley
Rick Buckley at the farm.

15-10 ES-Harboe
Julie Harboe and friend at the farm.

15-10 ES-Schurr
Uli and Petra Schurr Threeing in the mess.

15-10 ES-Behdzad-Buckley
Behzad Khosravi Noori's film "Black Eyes of Bruce Lee" being watched by Rick Buckley.

ES guests Fischer 2With David Fischer, Jessica Valin, Frances Ali, and Friends at the farm and the mess.

ES guests Fischer 1With David Fischer, Jessica Valin, Frances Ali, and Friends at the farm and the mess.

ES guests J Gardner
In the Specularium’s farm Jean Gardner with Luis and Maria.

ESFF-DavidFischer-05 In the Specularium’s farm with Bill Arning, Rick Herron, Mark and Tad Beck with Luis. Photo by David Fischer

Earthscore Specularium fakta & siffror

15 ES-exb-text-base15 LBN-FGT-CW-NSXV-s-i15 LBN-NSXV-Statement-Ltr

Sida 1 av 3

Byggdagbok Lövholmen