Das Unheimliche or the Uncanny- An inclusive research into creation and mortality, representation and education, time and

affection (22/04/10)
Abstract. Fear has become an ever expanding part of life in the West in the 21st century. The architectural 'Uncanny' is to be related with a specific kind of fear, i.e. an existential anguish without object (as opposed to fear out of danger which is always is connected to something or somebody). Research into the 'Uncanny' addresses a slightly disquieting, invisible and often forgotten component located between architectural praxis and theory, revealing a creative device in architectural design. Onheimelijk or Uncanny serves as a positive counterweight to traditional values in architecture (light, sight, visibility and so on): it functions as a creative engine to generate meaning in architectural representation and architectural education. The current culture of fear calls for a better understanding and confrontation with imminent treats: this culture does not intimidate but stimulates growth of human creativity through architecture. Uncanny facilitates an intentional attitude exploring grotesque possibilities in architecture and it highlights the affective side tof architecture. This transdisciplinary study examines how the 'Uncanny' becomes a vital element in the creation of a specific educational model and contributes to experiments in architectural representation of diverse types (written, drawn ). By doing so, we implicitly take architecture away from certain conventions regarding (re)presentation. Introduction to article. Wandering and looking back at the accomplishments of the Uncanny throughout the centuries, one is struck by the omnipresence of the Uncanny in time and space. The Uncanny is embedded in the philosophical horizon of Sein zum Tode (Heidegger, 1927) as professed in his writings. The sudden realization of mortality condemns us to creativity: fear of nothingness makes man decide -almost naturally- to produce artefacts. With this article, we are hoping to make a small but significant contribution to an expanding theory of the Uncanny. The article is an attempt to shed a little light on the discrete relation between two issues: in the first part we take a more theoretical inside view into the general cultural workings of the Uncanny, with its creative, representational, narrative and critical qualities. In the second part we have developed a specific pedagogical model which is particularly useful for architectural education and more specifically interior architecture. This pedagogical model shows how the Uncanny becomes pivotal in a series of design studios spanning several years. Here, we will see also some practical results of the research by design/research by education concerning the Uncanny. Keywords Uncanny/onheimelijkheid, fear, interior architecture, architectural representation, research by design, education Arguably, the origin of the aspect of fear in architecture or the architectural Uncanny can be found in the often belligerent interplay between the architectural interior (material space) and imagined interior (mental space). Both are close within reach and therefore probably most appropriate for a quest into the Uncanny. In my opinion, the imagined interior itself does not per se have to be materialized into a concrete architectural artefact in order to be considered Uncanny. The graphical Carceri series by Piranesi (Ficcaci, Piranesi, 1749) are exemplary in this respect. It is the childlike wonder that triggers the 'Sublime' and combines architectural interior and interiority in an Uncanny union: it is a moment in which man touches upon precognitive and pre-reflective issues. Wonder instigates a qualitative and intentional view of reality in which the viewer is open to curiosity and learning. The moment of wonder submerges man into existence itself, into mans own facticity: das Dasein (Heidegger, 1927) or being-thrown-in-the world, a pre-reflective state of being. Closely related to wonder and curiosity is the uncertainty and doubt. This mental attribute is partly responsible for many great works of art and it makes their emergence possible: writers, poets, visual artists and scientists shaped and transformed their doubt into art or science. Their artistic expression provokes but also provides intellectual and emotional solace for both artist and audience. The architectural Uncanny can be shaped through written means (for instance by authors and reading audience), drawn means (for instance by interior architect and user of architectural artefact), musical means (for instance by musician and his audience), or verbal means. The works of art portray often ambiguous situations or persons leaving a feeling of awe or 'Unheimlichkeit'. For instance, Certain types of graphical representation, historically instilled by the likes of Francisco Goya (Los Caprichos, 1797), Masereel (Mon Livre dHeures, 1919), Henry Fseli (The Nightmare, 1781), Caspar Friedrich

(Wanderer Above The Sea Of Fog, 1818,) Giorgi Di Chirico and Carr with their pittura metafysica, make the relation between fear and art apparent. Literary representations or narratives such as Das Schloss (1926) by Kafka and stories by Edgard Allen Poe such as The rise and Fall of the House Usher (1839), Jean Rays Malpertuis (1943) are fine examples of the written and imaginary negotiation between architectural interiors and fearful spaces. Musical representations such as Joy Division with the album Closer (1980) sound 'Unheimlich'. A mix of spleen filled lyrics, the choice of instruments, the specific structure of songs, the particular rhythm section, special artwork of the albums stir the audience's imagination and make listening to their music into a disquieting event. Another example we find in the music of Camille Saint-Sans' 'Danse Macabre (1875). All these types of representation illustrate the workings of the Uncanny: torment is made into art, and art is made into torment. The research concerning the architectural 'Uncanny' as a creative device for education and representation is framed by the science of philosophy, more specifically, the theory of phenomenology developed by Heidegger in his remarkable book 'Sein und Zeit' (Heidegger, 1927). His theory provides strong shoulders to support our research into the 'Uncanny', as it professes a fundamentally inclusive approach towards reality. It opposes the stubborn Cartesian duality in (scientific) thinking. This duality arguably led to a positivist conception of reality, misanthropy and absence of wonder. The phenomenological approach however is subject-based: it emphasizes a vital ability to 'return' to the phenomena as such. Central in phenomenology is notion of the motherly 'care' for things and beings that safeguards specificity and qualities, against positivist tendencies. We believe phenomenology offers an opportunity to take interior architecture away from representational conventions. It also offers a more solid foundation in research to the notion of interiority, instigated by the imagination. One can argue that interiors and interiority are fundamentally dealing with mental and physical inside of things, venturing beyond the obvious categories of numbers and data. This article focuses on the issue that the 'Uncanny' is able to establish and recreate qualities related with interior space through the imagination of both audience and author. The leading inquiry of our research is to find out how 'Uncanny' becomes vital in the creation of a specific educational model and contributes to a wide range of experiments in architectural representation (written, drawn ). To do this we have chosen seven key figures with diverse backgrounds (Burke, Freud, Husserl, Heidegger, Norberg-Schulz, Bollnow, and Vidler). All of them are or were -consciously or unconsciously- involved in the activating potentialities of the phenomena of 'Unheimlichkeit' in their respective disciplines. We have chosen these figures as they represent different schools of thoughts, eras of thinking and diversity in method building. The philosophical character of their work is a common ground. What is exactly the historical and philosophical background of the concept of the Uncanny? In order to understand this aspect, we should start by looking at some key historical figures and moments. The Uncanny is undoubtedly rooted in the tradition of Romanticism. The division between 'Sublime' and 'Beautiful' goes back to the writings of Edmund Burke's (1729-1797) 'A Philosophical Enquiry into the Origin of Our Ideas of the Sublime and the Beautiful', (Burke, 1757) Objects of art or forces in nature, for instance the depth of an abyss, the roaring sound of thunder and the endless misty landscapes, make us wonder about a deeper reality that transcends us. Through these sensations we reach out to the Sublime and the Beautiful. While the Beautiful is principally linked to simple pleasures and joys, the Sublime is connected to a strong sensation of pain and terror. The Sublime thus becomes a source of fear and threat. But it is necessary to keep distance from these primordial fears. By detaching ourselves from them, we can experience something like delight. The Sublime covers many disciplines. Our research by design is not aiming for an esthetical response to Romanticism, nor are we making a historical study on contemporary phenomena related to Romanticism. Rather, it is more about gaining an understanding of where the concept of the 'Uncanny' comes from and how it can meaningfully contribute to the field of architecture today. The term the Uncanny was introduced to science by psychoanalyst Sigmund Freud (1856-1939): his writing on the phenomenon of the Uncanny contributed to development of the psychoanalysis as a discipline. By means of empathy, metaphors, stories and dialogues, he discovered that the human psyche contains fundamentally unconscious layers of information. These layers are repressed out of fear, frustration, and anger. It can be argued that his findings installed an uncertainty and a fundamental distrust of the lucid judgment of the human rationale. In this respect, the Uncanny is just one of many discoveries. In his book Das Unheimliche (Freud, 1919) Freud sets out to fathom the etymological meaning of the word Uncanny in many different languages. In German language, the noun Heimlichkeit, (homeliness) bears a double meaning. On the one hand, it means not only something familiar/homely/recognisable, but it also means something concealed. The opposite, Unheimlichkeit ('Uncanny') also bears a double meaning: something that at first sight is not at home, something that is unfamiliar and unrecognisable. But the second meaning (to disclose, to unveil something) makes the understanding of the Un-heimlichkeit suddenly complex and intriguing. Conclusively, the Unheimlichkeit is an instance that is unfamiliar though immediately afterwards it is revealed as something strangely and disquietingly

familiar. Therefore somebody encountering an Uncanny experience is left feeling somewhat bewildered, perplexed and uncomfortably strange. One could argue that the architectural Uncanny is to be found in the philosophical works of Martin Heidegger (1889-1979) and his teacher Edmund Husserl (1859-1938). Husserl first founded the theory of phenomenology and intentionality (Husserl, 1907). His pupil, Heidegger elaborated his work further and developed the intentional notion of Sein zum Tode (Heidegger, 1927): being-towards-death: our existence has a meaning and direction because of the realization of mortality. This notion of being-towards-death is complementary to our being in the world, in which one is continuously being thrown in a world of possibilities (Heidegger, 1927). Both notions, being-towards-death and being-in-the-world hold a key to understanding the very essence of architectural creativity and our natural care (die Sorge) for reality and things. Creativity is limited and guided by the mortality of things and passing of time. In other words, a creative act is intrinsically connected to our awareness of mortality, a fact which links architecture and fear in a paradoxical and complex union. The architectural theoretician, Christian Norberg-Schulz (1926-2000), is clearly influenced by the phenomenology of Heidegger and Husserl. In his Presence, Language and Place (Norberg-Schulz, 2000) he tells us that our 'being-in-the-world', or das Dasein always encompasses 4 essential elements: the sky, earth, the presence of mortals and Gods. These 4 elements, the so-called quadrature or fourfold of 'things', are tied together and surface always simultaneously. In other words, every architectonic creation invariably is united and fulfilled by the synchronous presence of these 4 elements. This 'quadrature' refers to a spatial component of his phenomenology. Norberg-Schulz also developed a phenomenology related with time, consistent with the theory of intentionality and phenomenology of Husserl and Heidegger. According to this time-based phenomenology, there are basically three kinds of perception related to time. First, there's our perception of the past: all the things we knew previously (memory). Secondly, our perception of the present: we tend to consider somebody or something as somebody/something (identification). Finally, our perception of future: what we do (not) expect (orientation/anticipation). Our perception of reality is always synchronically guided by three perceptions of time in a single act of experience: we are wilfully and simultaneously memorizing (past), orientating (future) and identifying (present). (fig 1). I'll come back to this threefold notion of time later in the article as it is important to understand the objectives of the Uncanny.

Threefold phenomenology of time developed by Christian Norberg-Schulz (based on Husserl and Heidegger). Any act of thinking is the simultaneous assembly of past (memory), present (identification), and future (orientation). (Fig 1)

By studying the Uncanny in interiors, one also relates inevitably to the study Mensch und Raum (Bollnow, 1964) made by O. Bollnow (1903-1991), philosopher and educator. For example, Bollnow describes the igniting imagination of a child facing darkness in which the sensible perception of space ceases to exist. As seen from of a childs perspective, the world of materials and forms seems to be ever-changing, magnified, stretched and magical. A child that is left in the dark almost instantly designs a new and ever-changing universe out of the sublime mixture of wonder and fear, regardless of any conventions. Natural and subliminal landscapes with dense forests, thick mists and snow are analyzed as if they were domestic interiors. In doing so, interior architecture is brought in a strange alliance with the experience of uncanny natural environments. The Uncanny aims at understanding the primary forces (the 'Sublime' in relation to terror, and wonder related to uncertainty) as extremely creative design features. The Architectural historian and theoretician, Anthony Vidler, relates the 'Uncanny' with architectural issues in his influential book, The Architectural Uncanny (Vidler, 1992). It is written from an historical point of view. On the basis of a number of cases, it describes the 'Uncanny' as a discomforting cultural phenomenon or tendency which manifests itself in many ways: in the arts, literature, architecture, psychology and phobias, and archaeology (where he cites the terrific example of Herculean petrified corpses being buried alive an example whereby man is able to see and anticipate at his own inevitable death. This example triggered 18th century authors to write similar horror stories). Reading Vidlers book one becomes acquainted with how the Uncanny surfaces as a broad cultural theme throughout centuries. In our research, the architectural Uncanny acts as a sort of an umbrella term for many issues related to architecture and the 'Uncanny'.
Architectural understanding of the Uncanny When we accept that the Uncanny is related to pre-reflective and phenomenological issues that are partially instigated by the above mentioned influential figures, we can then try to develop an architectural understanding on that basis. We have found throughout our research several creative characteristics emerging from the architectural Uncanny: the understanding of the architectural 'Uncanny' is both inclusive, transdisciplinary, sinister and indulges in risks. Firstly, the Uncanny is by nature inclusive (Van Berkel, 2001): it unveils and veils/ orders and disorders/un-familiarizes and familiarizes. The Uncanny bears in itself two opposites (it alienates but reveals at the same time). This contradiction within one term can be considered as something inclusive. The Uncanny doesnt tend to exclude complexity nor does it exclusively tend to simplify: it includes both in the single concept. It stimulates joy and decay at the same time. Order and disorder are also part of the same constellation. The Uncanny doesnt impel one to the choosing of sides but tends to precede every imaginable division and acts within a pre-reflective setting of things. The Uncanny also encompasses time and space in a single gesture: it follows the logic of Heideggers phenomenology with its subject driven, inclusive and time-based perception of reality. Any act of thinking is assembled simultaneously in past, present and future. The Uncanny also tends to cross the borders of the different scientific disciplines. In the course of our research, we gradually came to realize that it is not only the physical building or space is a primal source of fear, but that our personal background with specific education, memory, etc must also be taken into consideration: the psychological component of the Uncanny matters just as much because it relates to unconscious and tacit issues. The latent and repressed nature of our unconsciousness continuously seeks compensation by resurfacing unexpectedly and erratically. On a philosophical level, the aforementioned key figures such as Heidegger and Husserl tell us that man is always confronted with (the passing of) time. In addition, we have a natural care for things and the other. In many different forms of media outside the architectural field the Uncanny represents itself: global media companies cover contemporary stories of horror and crisis situations as if they were daily bread. The Uncanny can be considered as sinister and imaginative: The Uncanny reveals sinister and hidden qualities behind the superficial curtain called architecture. These subtle qualities are equivalent to the traditional and perhaps obvious spatial values like light/sight/air. They make us aware of the important role of architecture as a discipline that is able to reveal and hide at the same time. The architectural Uncanny is about unravelling a multitude of layers into which the architecture is hidden. Many values related to the architectural experience depend on immaterial, invisible, intangible and often 'erratic' thus unpredictable aspects. Another sinister aspect is the mortality of all things and beings: architecture is probably not immortal but needs the horizon of mortality in order to exist. This is very important in order to understand the Uncanny in architecture: the architectural artefact may outlive several generations, but finally we are all are limited to our own ending.

Uncanny provokes by causing people to indulge in crisis situations/calamities. This provocative feature of Uncanny returns on many levels. In an architectural practice, a deadline is an artificial and self induced moment of crisis that finally nourishes an eagerness to come up with a sharp design. Uncanny is also an intentional attitude towards risks. To put it polemically: to avoid a design problem, is to avoid the possibility of generating architecture. The Uncanny is about intentionally searching risks and crisis danger/ pain/fear. The architectural design of the Uncanny flourishes in the context of catastrophe and imminent danger. For instance, the issue of climatic change provides this years background theme in the Design Studio dedicated to the workings of the Uncanny, but well come back to that in the second part of the article. The Uncanny can also be considered as an operational design issue: one can argue that a design is richer when, in addition to spatial issues, it also embraces movement and time. This intentional and deliberate search for complexity is essential for understanding the architectural Uncanny. Manifestations of the Uncanny We have seen some of the background and characteristics, but what are the real objectives of the Uncanny? The Uncanny affects our notion of time as it emerges before, during and after a specific architectural experience. The Uncanny can be experienced by physically moving through a building, space or situation. We are hereby guided by our imagination by synchronically incorporating three kinds of perception related to time. First our perception of the past: all the things we knew previously (memory). Secondly, our perception of the present: we tend to consider something as something (identification). Finally, our perception of future: what we expect (or do not expect) (orientation/anticipation). Thanks to the theory of the intentionality (Husserl, 1907) and the further elaboration by Norberg-Schulz (Norberg-Schulz,2000) we know that our perception of reality is always guided by three elements: we are intentionally and simultaneously memorizing (past), orientating (future), and identifying (present) and thus we are intentionally inciting the imagination while experiencing the Uncanny. Uncanny also tends to increase empathy, participation, affective and emotional aspects in architecture. It is therefore exercises its effects on a wider, non-specialized audience. As stated above, through a specific representation of the architectural Uncanny, we can experience and obtain an increased understanding of affective and emotional aspects in architecture. This dimension makes us more involved and affectively connected to the work of art/artefact. In this respect, we can refer to the 'Stendhal syndrome', whereby one enters in an emotional turmoil after having been exposed to a multitude of beautiful artworks. Most paradoxically, we are also becoming empathetically implied with something or somebody who is potentially threatening us! This phenomenon is somewhat reminiscent to the so called Stockholm syndrome: a paradoxical psychological phenomenon whereby empathy -and even sympathy- is induced in the hostages for and with the hostage takers and their cause. Uncanny also facilitates understanding of the psychological aspects related to fear and space. The Uncanny attributes a meaning to space that goes beyond the familiar and immediately recognisable: we are simultaneously alienated and drawn to its workings. This contradictory process is predictable in itself, but at the same time disquieting as the outcome is always uncertain. This continuous process of taking distance and drawing near (and back again) makes us -as an audience- (whether visiting or reading) more involved and affectively connected to the space or object of art. For instance, imagine yourself free at will walking along a cliff. As a free being, one can be suddenly confronted by thoughts of losing control. There's genuine anguish that emerges if one knows he or she has the freedom to throw oneself down to an imminent death. One could say that our confidence to confront space is continuously under siege through an inbuilt and existential uncertainty. The Onheimelijk has much to do with adopting an authentic and intentional attitude and accepting ever-changing realities. Even if they are disturbing ones. Finally, the Uncanny manifests itself through a specific architectural representation. The works of an artist by like Piranesi serve as good examples understanding the Uncanny in architectural representation: his study of the Carceri (Ficcaci, Piranesi, 1749) was in a sense a prediction of troubled times to come. The findings of Bernard Tschumi in his Manhattan Transcripts (Tschumi, 1981) are truly exceptional in this respect. This work is, so to speak, an unfinished symphony into the representation of the architectural Uncanny. Its importance lies in the implementation of collage and film techniques combined with traditional architectural techniques (diagram, plan and isometric). The book Manhattan Transcripts experiments with architectural representation as it combines movement, action and time. It gives us a clue as to on how this sublime mixture of space and time could be represented. The writings and images of Tschumi venture into radical experiments in architectural representation and seek the establishment of new meaning in architecture. Unfortunately, the book has not been implemented more broadly into the architectural practice or education.

Merging of time and space in comics and architecture By combining all the effects of the Uncanny- the synchronic threefold notion of time, the increased empathy with non-specialized audiences and a better understanding of psychological effects of fear and space- we can then understand that the architectural Uncanny has something to do with representation inducing fear and sympathy simultaneously in the field of architecture. This usually happens when time and space starts merging into a sublime and inclusive union. We need therefore to understand better the aspect of passing of time from an Uncanny point of view, (maybe even more than we need to understand aspect of space). Time is preferential to all spatial issues as our notion of time is intertwined our own realisation of mortality. Without the notion of time, there would neither be architectural experience nor representation: everything would be frozen. In conventional architectural representation, there are already a lot of techniques related to merging of time and space: a cross-section of an interior is also an artificial and mental construct combining time and space. The movement (time) of different users on different floor levels can thus be simultaneously verified optically in one drawing by the audience. This possibility of simultaneously viewing separate interior spaces does not exist in reality: it only exists in the drawing! An interesting figure who started challenging the impossibility of simultaneously viewing separate interiors is the artist Gordon Matta-Clark (1943-1978). His radical cutting techniques and adaptations of existing interiors relate in a strong way to the Uncanny, opening up inclusive possibilities. The potential audience can be omnipresent in many places at the same time, opening up a panoptical device encompassing past, present and future. Arguably, sequential graphic art such as comics is a great way to discover the architectural experience with its merging of time and space. The narrative techniques of comics are an excellent way to discover representation of the Uncanny. It can be very helpful to read work of the comic author Scot McCloud (McCloud, 1994) on this subject. He states that the separate panels of which comics are composed in fact offer an irregular sequence of unconnected moments fracturing both time and space. However, because the panels are sequentially connected from left to right something interesting occurs. Through the notion of closure, (Fig 2) the reader is invited to intentionally and mentally connect the gap between the panels in a continuous and unified reality. The arrangement of a comics page or even a single panel is, in fact, a condensed form of time and space put in a narrative sequence: it is a temporal map. The images and the language are combined in such a way that the plot encompasses movement, time and space in a single panel, in a single page, in a single comic.

Closure: The reader is invited to wilfully and mentally connect the gap between panels in a continuous and unified reality (Fig. 2)

In architectural experience, we encounter also a similar phenomenon: closure occurs when the audience or visitor passes through -intentionally designed- contrasting spaces. This type of intentional disorientation facilitates the growth of imagination, possibly causing dread to emerge to any kind of audience. Id like to start by giving a famous example: the Opera by Tony Garnier in Paris (Fig 3). The architectural movement through the building is intentionally guided by a staccato rhythm of perspective transformations. Garniers opera building seems not to lead to a single absolute plot or narrative climax: rather, the architectural experience can be read as a succession of many subplots. The author (the architect) is leading his audience into a seemingly endless cloud of architectural wonder. What the (narrative) plot of the building ultimately deals with is much less straightforward. One could argue that the architectural experience of sequential spaces in this opera building is fluid but not per se linear: the architect does not necessarily design his plot in a linear fashion. From a visitors point of view, an architectural experience of space probably is of a non-linear kind as the sequence of spaces can be easily read in reverse from the end to beginning or even in between the end and the beginning. Still, one can argue that the plot (and subplots) or the narrative has been pre-programmed: it has been preset and instilled by its author, the architect. This brings us to an interesting issue: the tension between a preset narrative in architecture and the will to escape from this narrative by the author and/or the audience.

Garniers opera building seems not to lead to one absolute plot: the architectural experience can be read as a succession of many subplots. (Fig. 3) How does the architectural Uncanny relate to the problem of a preset narrative or plot? Should we lose the plot or not? (Zimm, 2005) Should an architectural narrative be preset or not? One option is to lose the plot in architecture. We can choose to do this for a particular and critical reason. Since Modernity, it has generally been regarded that plots can intentionally or not intentionally act as agents of power. A plot clouds our imagination in a negative way as it paralyses our critical ability. So logically, we would choose to lose the plot, because of a natural interest in maintaining our critical abilities at all times. Alternatively, one can also consider a plot to be a narrative method intended to induce a pleasant and uninterrupted whole leading up to a singular climax. So, theres a sort of duality -or dilemma if you want in choosing sides between having a plot or not. We argue that the Uncanny with its intentional qualities is most likely able to absorb the duality between having a plot or not: the Uncanny can contain both at the same time since within the context of the Uncanny, there is in principle no difference between the two. The Uncanny does serve as a critical antidote against fragmentation. It criticizes the mental slavery and addiction to plots but paradoxically it does not exclude the possibility that it is precisely the plots that will provide the answers. The power of the Uncanny in architecture resides in its inclusive working: the appropriation of space and time by an intentional audience/intentional user constantly transforms bits and pieces into comprehensible wholes. Logically, architectural Uncanny is an ally in the resistance against losing consciousness of the invisible and intangible aspects 'behind reality'. It thereby enables a firm resistance against tendencies to fragment reality and destroy magic and wonder: this is a legitimate act of self defence as Uncanny originates in magic and wonder.

Research by education: educational Uncanny We have seen that the Uncanny is able to critically unveil obstinate misunderstandings or preconceptions in architecture regarding preset narratives, the merging of time and space, etc. Parallel to this theoretical and general discourse, we have also conducted educational research incorporating the Uncanny as a theme into a series of Design Studios. This has been a long and often arduous process: It was already during my architectural studies that I kept reflecting on matters like repulsion, decay. One could only stare in disbelief when virtually all architectural discourses in our institution were evaluated through and measured up to Le Corbusiers famous motto The erudite, correct and magnificent game of volumes assembled in light (Le jeu savant, correct et magnifique des volumes assembls dans la lumire). To advance this motto was certainly intellectually understandable but somehow incomplete: what about all the things architecture supposedly is not? What about grotesque issues like deliberate darkness, the lack of space, doubt, decay...? When reading, listening, and watching contemporary artistic manifestations (films, fiction, music), we found the architectural 'Uncanny' to be relevant. Oddly enough one can say that architecture was thought about, discussed and evaluated from an optimistic, harmonious and therefore perhaps one-sided point of view. It is obvious that the politically correct thinking at the architecture school was not promoting insight into the Uncanny, but the manifest absence of the concept of the Uncanny from many discourses certainly did stimulate some curiosity about this issue! By deliberately organizing a Design Studio on the subject of the Uncanny, we have found from practical experience the past two years that the architectural Uncanny acts as a sort of missing link in educational practice. Through the concept of the Uncanny, we have been able to develop a specific educational model encompassing the cooperative and individual student competence that has informed and stimulated our research. The Uncanny is the common umbrella tying this series of design studios together: the design studios provide the necessary space and time to see the emergence of the Uncanny in education. After two year of experience in organising these design studios, one can argue that the design studio itself is both subject and method (i.e. a specific approach) in order gain insight in the workings of the Uncanny in education of interior architecture. We have found out that students were very enthusiastic to tackle this unusual topic and approach. Development of a specific pedagogical model for 'Onheimelijk' Design Studio (edition 2008) The diagram (Fig 4) shows the structure and growth of competence in the Design Studio running over a period of 13 weeks. The red arrow indicates an individual student trajectory with several traditional design phases (for instance: introductory session in week 1, analysis in week 2, synthesis in week 3 and so on). The green arrow indicates a collective trajectory (for instance: in week 2 preparation of exposition/book/excursion/log). The parallel development of collective and individual trajectories leads to a synergetic and inclusive design process.

Creation of a pedagogical model: this time diagram indicating the individual and collective competence growth during the Uncanny Design Studio covering a period of 13 weeks (Fig. 4)

Individual trajectory over 9 weeks (Fig. 5)

Collective trajectory over all weeks (Fig. 6)

The individual trajectory (see fig 5: red arrow) involves individual student projects. These works were developed through a process of reflection: after possibilities are analysed and sorted out the individual design is gradually reduced to its essence. The radial grey arrows indicate bi-weekly presentation moments in the architectural design process: these moments act as deadlines. The collective trajectory (see fig 6: green arrow) does not have a tendency to converge like the individual track does. In fact, it does quite the opposite: through time it gradually expands and grows in importance. As an aggregate of knowledge, the collective trajectory contains synthetic qualities. This diagram is consistent with the proposed structure of the authors progress on his own doctoral thesis. On one hand there's the individual track with a sharp timeline and regular moments of submitting portions of the work for feedback and criticism. On the other hand, the collective track is the result of daily work and interaction with students on design issues related to the Design Studio theme of the 'Uncanny' and the consequent reflection on practical results of this dialogue. Our research into the Uncanny balances continually in a sort of pendulum movement between the buildup of individual and of cooperative competence growth among students and the teacher/researcher. The methods used within my individual research follow a similar pattern: there is no real hierarchy or premeditated order in which the methods are applied. Every method is checked continuously in every stage of the process and adapted if necessary. Students act both as informants and researchers: working cooperatively, they stimulate the growth of knowledge and common experiences. Simultaneously, the student focuses on increasing on his or her own individual competence during the Design Studio. The movement between the individual and the collective makes the two attitudes equal in terms of their approach and thus complementary. The individual body of work starts informing the collective body and vice versa and back and forth. Additional method building Next to this pedagogical model, we designed a specific strategy using a number of methodical tools applied in the research of the architectural Uncanny. As already mentioned, we reflect through student projects in order to conduct research: students as researchers/informants of a research (Bai, 2008). This method stimulates and motivates students especially of the awareness to be implemented in a larger scheme of research. Furthermore we undertake experiments of representation in design studio by/with students: they start inquiries and experiments on the representational nature of Uncanny images. The experiments extend from working in ultra short and sketchy design sessions in max. 60 seconds to the implementation of movement and time in architectural representation. By means of survey/interviews among students, were trying to find out how students perceive the link between Uncanny and architecture. Every design studio starts and ends with a written questionnaire. Furthermore, the scrupulous and rigorous application of rules of academia ensures clarity in communication: academic writing skills are inevitable tools in the production of research. Students are

encouraged to indicate references according to academic principles. We are also conducting experiments with nomadic and adaptive research method: theres no predetermined outcome or method application (Nilsson, 2004) . Every method is checked, evaluated, adapted and updated if necessary throughout the whole research period. What we ultimately seek to obtain is a tailor made and specific method applied locally and temporary, i.e. 'nomadic'. Finally, we are currently building through Participatory Action Research collective and individual competence: one group of students is responsible for publishing and editing a book, another group is responsible for organising and designing exhibition etc. The interaction between collective and individual competence building is ensuring a dynamic and accumulative build up of knowledge. We will now try to briefly describe some practical results of Design Studios Uncanny I: Oct-Dec 2008, Uncanny II Oct-Nov 2009. In order to get started and to obtain a body of work to reflect upon, we have organised and are currently still organising- teacher and students together- on a yearly basis a design studio dedicated to the subject of Onheimelijk. Every edition is accompanied by a publication and an exposition. This way a larger audience can participate and possibly reflect on the 'Uncanny'. The first years edition Onheimelijk I (Oct-Dec 2008) was a sort of pilot edition broadcasting the general workings of the Uncanny. The second edition, Onheimelijk II (Oct-Dec 2009) focused on a single theme that had emerged during the previous year: The Uncanny in crisis situations, or how does the uncertainty of climate change make architectural interiors agents of change? Unfortunately, it was not possible to show results as the workshop had not ended at the time the article was due. Our aim consequently is to build on last years accomplishments and acquired competence. In so doing, we envisage a gradual accumulation of knowledge competence. The publication of the book Onheimelijkheid (Deckers, 2009) is in a way an experiment in architectural representation. The book which was published at the end of the Design Studio, in January 2009, encompasses the projects carried out by twelve students. Made in thirteen weeks, the book also reports on the structure and results of the workshop, a study trip to Berlin and a public exhibition of the workshop. The booklet shows the different communication levels with an overview of the individual and cooperative accomplishments of the students, chronologically and thematically ordered. Naturally, a lot of attention was given to editing and arranging the text and images into a single, logical and coherent whole as with any architectural representation.

Example of an experiment in architectural representation and Participatory Action Research: the making of the book Onheimelijkheid which presents the structure and results of the Design Studio and final exhibition (Fig. 7) The exhibition Onheimelijkheid (Ghent, 15/16-12-08) was organized with the active participation of all students. More in particular, a group of students is accounted responsible for this task. They have chosen on a voluntarily basis to do this. By doing so, they are emotionally involved in this exhibition in order to make it a success. The

logistical part in organising an exhibition of this kind is like an exercise in handling crisis situations and deadlines. It is 'Uncanny' to see that each year the opening of the exhibition is established just a few seconds before! The public showing of individual student works is quite successful in terms of number of visitors: the exhibition attracted over two hundred visitors during one day and one evening. The total organisation (finding sponsors, location, insurance, publicity, exhibition design and so on) of this exhibition was accomplished in 13 weeks time. The guestbook, as copied in the back of the book is a written account of how visitors specifically perceived and experienced the theme of Uncanny: the guestbook is suitable to retrieve information from visitors.

Photo of the exhibition onheimelijkheid, December 2008: the organisation of the exhibition is an uncanny exercise in handling crisis situations. (Fig. 8) Communication of the studio working is exemplary for a care of things. Visual and written media are publicly addressed by the students in order to publish results that are obtained during the whole process of the design studio. Sponsors are spoken to in order to financially support the design studio: this demand creates a moral and ethical appeal to society as a whole. Inside the architecture school, the population of students, teachers and personnel are addressed by posters and sponsoring days. Within the design studio, a weekly monitoring ensures the internal communication and involvement through written reports, surveys and interviews. These reports are published on a common weblog/website accessible to all concerned. The website serves as a virtual server to exchange information. The website provides also a good opportunity to meet up outside school hours. Events as a way to build up individual and cooperative competence One can argue that through the educational workings of the Uncanny, we are starting to build up individual and cooperative competence through the organisation of set of fixed events: exhibition, school trip and publication.

These events are in a way the backbone in which the Uncanny is allowed to expand freely and rigorously. An event conditions the mind and attention of all involved towards one point in time. Its outcome is not predictable but provides a common ground for enthusiasm to grow.

Conclusion: The Uncanny as a creative device for architectural representation and education The second part of the article covers the practical results of the research by education. In turn, this educational research /research by design nourishes and questions the architectural theory of the Uncanny. The symbiotic but critical relationship between research by education and architectural theory building is the very essence of our research. The educational outcome of the Uncanny starts informing the theory of the Uncanny, and back again. Through research conducted by students and teacher and through post factum research, we achieve insight what the architectural Uncanny could be about. The design studio becomes an experimental place on a 1/1 scale where the 'Uncanny' starts to take shape. This way it's already a form of representation of 'Uncanny' as such! Finally, the process works loop wise: the theory of the architectural Uncanny informs and also guides the educational research and back again. It is essentially a cyclical and accumulative process consistent with the proposed pedagogical model (Fig. 4). One can consider the first part of the article (theory of the architectural Uncanny) as an individual track developed by the author whilst second part (the research by education) is developed collectively by the author and students. The Uncanny is the common and inclusive quest for growth in collective and individual competence, both in pedagogical and architectural research. The architectural 'Uncanny' intends to simultaneously bridge the gap between theory and practice, imagination and representation, time and space. In other words, as a theory and a practice, the architectural 'Uncanny' has the capacity and inherent duty to become a creative device for both architectural representation and education.

References

Bolnow, Otto F. Mensch und Raum ( Stuttgart: Kolhammer, 1963) Burke, E. A Philosophical Enquiry into the Origin of Our Ideas of the Sublime and the Beautiful, The Harvard Classics (New York P.F. Collier & Son company, 190914) Deckers, K. Onheimelijkheid (Gent, 2009) Ficacci, L. Piranesi, the etchings, (Rome: Benedikt Taschen, 2000) Freud, S. the Uncanny, (London: Penguin books, 2006 (1919)) Heidegger, M. Sein und Zeit (Leuven: Kritak, 1927). Husserl, E. Thing and space: lectures of 1907( Leuven: kritak, 1997) McCloud, S. Understanding Comics, an invisible art (New York: Harper, 1994) Norberg-Schulz, C. Architecture: presence, language, place, (Milan: Skira, 2000) Norberg-Schulz, C. Meaning in western architecture (New York : Praeger, 1975) Tschumi, B. The Manhattan Transcripts (London: Academy Editions, 1994 (1979)) Van Berkel, B. move (Goose Press, Rotterdam: Goose Press, 1998) Verbeke, J.; Belderbos, M; Nilsson, F. The Unthinkable doctorate, (Brussels : Press Point, 2006) Vidler, A. The Architectural Uncanny. Essays in the Modern Unhomely. (Cambridge, MA: MIT, 1992) Zimm, M. Losing the Plot (Stockholm: Axl Books, 2005)

Figures Figure 1 : Threefold phenomenology of time developed by Christian Norberg-Schulz (based on Husser and Heidegger ): Any act of thinking is the simultaneous assemblage of past (memory), present (identification) and future (orientation). Figure 2 : Closure: The reader is invited to wilfully and mentally connect the gap between panels in a continuous and unified reality. Figure 3 : the architectural experience can be read as a succession of many subplots. Figure 4 : Creation of a pedagogical model : this time diagram indicates individual and collective competence growth during the Uncanny design studio covering 13 weeks. Figure 5 : diagram of individual trajectory Figure 6 : diagram of collective trajectory Figure 7 : example of experiment of representation and Participatory Action Research : the making of onheimelijk exhibiting the results of design studio

Figure 8 : Example of experiment of architectural representation and Participatory Action Research : the making of the book onheimelijkheidshowing the structure and results of design studio and final exhibition.
Biography of the author: Karel Deckers (1975) The author of this article is currently working as an architect in Brussels, Belgium in his own practice and regularly contributes written articles for the Giornale dellarchitettura. He teaches at St. Lucas, interior architecture in Ghent and Brussels, Belgium. Hes currently a PhD student at the Chalmers University of Technology in Gothenburg, Sweden.