Accepted Paper
Short Abstract
The paper presents an impersonation game, the Talking Buildings, used for community engagement in participatory processes related to heritage buildings. Illustrating a Zurich case study, the discussion extends to the role of informal self-reflective accounts in the negotiations of heritage value.
Abstract
The paper introduces a playful citizen science framework, the Talking Buildings <talkingbuildings.net>, inspired by Bruno Latour’s actor-network-theory (ANT) and based on NetHood’s participatory design methodologies.
This impersonation game invites people to observe and connect with a heritage building or with its parts of their particular interest and attachment, to tell stories from the building’s perspective and create their own building accounts. Some initial experiments show that Talking Buildings, being lively and stimulating, increases the chances of participation, but also introduces a new research question in citizen science: to what extent does the impersonation of nonhuman elements enhance the quality of participatory processes?
An illustrating case study may be discussed as ambivalent heritage. The largest cooperative housing (ABZ) in Zurich is facing a crucial challenge generated by demanding urban development: to demolish one of its historic settlements (Seebahnhöfe), and replace it with modern and more efficient buildings, a process involving residents’ displacement and the dismantling of a long-term formed community. As the cooperative is an association of members including the settlement’s current residents, what is the meaning of heritage and to whom belongs the decision about its value in this case? The Talking Buildings focuses on the experiences of long-term residents, visitors and more recent inhabitants of the buildings declared for temporary use, in a self-reflective way allowing participants to be more than contributors of data and personal impressions. An interesting discussion provides the transition from such an informal to a more formal citizen science process.
Studying ambivalent heritage through Citizen Science?