How to make a community as well as the space for it

To transform temporary available and under-used spaces

A renewed approach to architecture and urban planning cannot be initiated solely by centralised structures and governmental bodies. Doina Petrescu highlights the importance of ‘other spaces’, the temporary appropriation and use of leftover spaces and urban interstices, spaces of relative freedom, where rules and codes can still be redefined.

continue>www.re-public.gr

Important events

Things happening soon in Helsinki worth checking out:

1) This year´s Megapolis 2023 on date 27.9.2008 at Vanha Ylioppilastalo in Helsinki

2) Carrotmob is coming to Finland: Saturday 27.9 (at 18.30) in Ravintola Juttutupa in Hakaniemi.

Concept idea presented by the founder Brent Schulkin on youtube:

3) Thursday 2.10.2008 (at 17.00)

HUM:ARC (Architecture for Humanity) exhibition opening at A-Guild´s Gallery “Mom, whats´s architecture?” Neitsytpolku 8 in Helsinki

www.new.facebook.com/EVENT

www.new.facebook.com/GROUP

Risky play and treehouses

As architects we often get frustrated by building codes. Finnish building codes are strict, and cut in stone, there are no excuses made. A step higher than 40-50 cm; has to have a safety rail of 90 cm high. Apple trees in apartment building gardens; forbidden, raw apples can be toxic if consumed in huge quantities (and I mean HUGE). A staircase cannot be too narrow or too steep - ever. Etc, etc. By all these rules we think we make the world safer. But is safety first right? We are actually by eliminating risk, also eliminating part of life, and the process of learning. Learning gives you joy and confidence. And arent small risks so much more fun than someone telling you “play NOW!”.//aito

www.baumraum.de

Kids need the adventure of ‘risky’ play

A major study says parents harm their children’s development if they ban tree-climbing

A major study by Play England, part of the National Children’s Bureau, found that half of all children have been stopped from playing; climbing trees, playing conkers or taking part in games of tag or chase. Some parents are going to such extreme lengths to protect their children from danger that they have even said no to hide-and-seek.

‘Children are not being allowed many of the freedoms that were taken for granted when we were children,’ said Adrian Voce, director of Play England. ‘They are not enjoying the opportunities to play outside that most people would have thought of as normal when they were growing up.’

Voce argued that it was becoming a ’social norm’ for younger children to be allowed out only when accompanied by an adult. ‘Logistically that is very difficult for parents to manage because of the time pressures on normal family life,’ he said. ‘If you don’t want your children to play out alone and you have not got the time to take them out then they will spend more time on the computer.’

Voce pointed out how irrational some of these decisions were. Last year, almost three times as many children were admitted to hospital after falling out of bed as those who had fallen from a tree.

The tendency to wrap children in cotton wool has transformed how they experience childhood. According to the research, 70 per cent of adults had their biggest childhood adventures in outdoor spaces among trees, rivers and woods, compared with only 29 per cent of children today. The majority of young people questioned said that their biggest adventures took place in playgrounds.

Voce said Play England was determined to spread the message that children ought to be taking risks and that it is ‘not the end of the world if a child has an accident’. The latest study will be launched on Wednesday to coincide with Play Day, when hundreds of events will take place across the country to celebrate children’s right to play. It will show that play providers also feel the opportunities for children to ‘test and challenge themselves in play involving a level of risk’ have reduced over the past decade. They blame overcautious health and safety officers and the fear of litigation if children have accidents.

link> The Guardian

The city of voice - Wikicity

Wikicity

Vaarallisia ajatuksia - Dangerous Thoughts - that is something the guys at Demos like. Imagine year 2050 they say: most of the worlds population will live in “slums”; self-built cities. `This is our salvation!´ the men state. Wait a moment?

Wikicity is the city of voice. It’s the place of opportunity superior to the gold paved streets of another utopia, it is where opportunity is something you create together. It’s the place where man (hopefully woman, too…) can create his own surroundings. It is organised anarchy - extremely alluring. Dangerous? Risky? Naive? Optimist? Innovative? Hopeful? Progressive? Unpredictable? Brilliant? YES!

Look at what we have as an option: people more and more disengaged in decisions on their own lives, more and more distrustful of neighbours, more and more alone, embedded into a blanket of that everything in life is -so well organized-.

Roope Mokka of Demos Helsinki wrote an article on “Thinking Cities” for the Monocle alongside Alain de Botton, Richard Florida, Jonathan Raban, Ricky Burdett and Richard Alston. //aito

The idea of self-built cities is the greatest promise for urban development. The idea is that we open up the creation of cities in the same way we have opened the compiling of encyclopedias and online-media to allow anyone to contribute. It’s the same principle that many industries are using to open up their R&D, design and marketing processes to their customers and which also inspires “open source” software development. Co-creating cities is one of the few positive developments in a problem-ridden tidal wave of urbanisation in the 21st century. And it’s one that could make us happier.

The core issue is that cities no longer enable us to live out our dreams. We have changed, but the cities haven’t. They remain the final bastions of modernistic design where users are seen as the masses and individuals are an obstacle. Even suburbia (on the surface a tasteless, mundane, hypermarket-bound high-carbon lifestyle) offers more potential for self-expression. That is why we fleeing cities. To lure us back we need cities that give us a voice. We need to take democracy to the next level, where it recognises our individual needs and dreams.

Demos NOW, an urban think tank, has created the concept of City 2.0 (PDF) - an urban ecosystem of social innovation, governance and social risk funding. We want to turn the Helsinki Metropolitan Area into a self-built city; a hi-tech low-carbon “slum” with an unforeseen and unpredictable quality of life. A Wikicity.

yhteiskunta 2.0

A whole new mind

The future architect

On the more conceptual side, this is FIRE! // aito

“The future belongs to a different kind of person,” Pink says. “Designers, inventors, teachers, storytellers — creative and empathetic right-brain thinkers whose abilities mark the fault line between who gets ahead and who doesn’t.” Pink claims we’re living in a different era, a different age. An age in which those who “Think different” may be valued even more than ever.

“…an age animated by a different form of thinking and a new approach to life — one that prizes aptitudes that I call ‘high concept’ and ‘high touch.’ High concept involves the capacity to detect patterns and opportunities, to create artistic and emotional beauty, to craft a satisfying narrative….High touch involves the ability to empathize with others, to understand the subtleties of human interaction…”

— Dan Pink, A Whole New Mind

www.presentationzen.com

The Walkability map

City Walkability map

WalkScore is developing colour coded walkability maps for cities. This is a great tool when buying an apartment, for tourists choosing hotels and for city and traffic planning. The basic score for Helsinki centre walkability is 74 out of maximum score 100 (Helsinki walkability). Hopefully we will soon have a full colour coded walkability map of Helsinki, too! //aito

http://www.walkscore.com (Seattle)

What makes a neighborhood walkable?

Walkable communities tend to have the following characteristics:

• A center: Walkable neighborhoods have a discernable center, whether it’s a shopping district, a main street, or a public space.
• Density: The neighborhood is dense enough for local businesses to flourish and for public transportation to be cost effective.
• Mixed income, mixed use: Housing is provided for everyone who works in the neighborhood: young and old, singles and families, rich and poor. Businesses and residences are located near each other.
• Parks and public space: There are plenty of public places to gather and play.
• Accessibility: The neighborhood is accessible to everyone and has wheelchair access, plenty of benches with shade, sidewalks on all streets, etc.
• Well connected, speed controlled streets: Streets form a connected grid that improves traffic by providing many routes to any destination. Streets are narrow to control speed, and shaded by trees to protect pedestrians.
• Pedestrian-centric design: Buildings are placed close to the street to cater to foot traffic, with parking lots relegated to the back.
• Close schools and workplaces: Schools and workplaces are close enough that most residents can walk from their homes.

Your Walk Score is a number between 0 and 100. Here are general guidelines for interpreting your score:

• 90 - 100 = Walkers’ Paradise: Most errands can be accomplished on foot and many people get by without owning a car.
• 70 - 90 = Very Walkable: It’s possible to get by without owning a car.
• 50 - 70 = Some Walkable Locations: Some stores and amenities are within walking distance, but many everyday trips still require a bike, public transportation, or car.
• 25 - 50 = Not Walkable: Only a few destinations are within easy walking range. For most errands, driving or public transportation is a must.
• 0 - 25 = Driving Only: Virtually no neighborhood destinations within walking range. You can walk from your house to your car!

The Bankside Urban Forest

Questioning common design on “safe” neighbourhoods

The regeneration of London’s Bankside quarter, most famous for the Tate Modern, is being accompanied by a public space strategy with an ecological approach.The Bankside Urban Forest is a proposal for a wholly new concept of urban green space networks and linkages.

This scheme for the London Bankside urban renewal has grown out of a strong sense that local residents perceive the area described in the scheme as being “calm”,“safe”, and enjoying a strong sense of local identity already. It is not the case, however, that labyrinthine means dangerous, as local residents confirm. Conventional public space strategies are often informed by safety concerns which suggest that large open spaces and long straight vistas must invariably feel safer. Yet many people find large, hard-surfaced landscapes threatening by their sheer lack of incident and anonymity. Local residents around Bankside find no contradiction between describing the area as feeling safe, along with praising the irregular network of streets and back doubles. What they do fear, however, is the “Manhattanisation” of Bankside north of Southwark Street, and the forest concept is one which it is intended will weave human scale and engaging pathways and networks linking old and new Bankside together. Local residents interviewed for this study have confirmed the importance to them of the distinctive irregular street patterns of the area, together with the many courtyards, railway arches, viaducts, bridges and alleyways. Thus, there were great strengths in respecting the existing labyrinthine set of streets and settlements, which inspired the idea of the Bankside forest.

Bankside is a densely populated and historic quarter on the southern bank of the River Thames in London.The area is being regenerated, with about 50 projects currently under consideration. Several illustrative projects (dark green) have been proposed to help bind the public space network together.

This proposal imagines the Bankside public realm strategy as an urban forest rather than a park. There is an important difference. The term park originates with the Latin parricus or French parc, both meaning enclosure. The early English deer-parks were royal hunting grounds and strictly policed, for instance, whereas the forest has always been regarded as a place of liberty and without distinct boundaries.
Over time, “forest space” has acquired a set of architectural and topographical associations with a sense of open-endedness and permeability, a place that can be entered or exited at any point at its edges, and which visually changes and re-configures itself as the traveller moves through it. Because of their organic origins, forests offer a multiplicity of paths, routes, changes of direction, as well as clearings, copses, streams, rides and allées. “A person should be able to walk through a forest on the way from home to work,” the architect Alvar Aalto once said.

“If forests appear in our religions as places of profanity, they also appear as sacred. If they have typically been considered places of lawlessness, they have also provided havens for those who took up the cause of justice and fought the law’s corruption. If they evoke associations of danger and abandon in our minds, they also evoke scenes of enchantment. In other words, in the religions,mythologies an literatures of the West, the forest appears as a place where the logic of distinction goes astray.”

Thus, there were great strengths in respecting the existing labyrinthine set of streets and settlements, which inspired the idea of the Bankside forest.

Though the forest idea introduces elements now associated with “greening the city”, and largely determined by ecological imperatives – to counter CO2 emissions, to lower ambient temperatures, to increase surface water retention and avoid flooding – there are equally important social and economic imperatives in the forest strategy too.

The intensification of existing public spaces allows for a hybrid of new urban forms. In Flat Iron Square, the existing café could be turned into a woodland hut built around the trunks of the mature plane trees.

In addition to strengthening the historical jigsaw of spaces and places, the forest concept also introduces a slowing down of time, based on the experience of irregular pathways and frequent and engaging visual incident. Urbanists have for some time now been drawing attention to the “overscripting”of public space in many urban regeneration schemes, so that all conflicts and loose ends are designed out, and the public are organised into patterns of use and timetables decided elsewhere. This disallows for that sense of wandering and of discovering a neighbourhood by serendipity. The very qualities for which we admire historic European towns and cities.

BANKSIDE URBAN FOREST, SOUTHWARK, LONDON, UK
Client: local stakeholders led by Better Bankside BID Company, including the
London Borough of Southwark,Tate Modern,Transport for London, Cross River
Partnership, Land Securities, GC Bankside LLP, the Architecture Foundation
Architects: Witherford Watson Mann, London, with Ken Worpole
Area: 1.7 square kilometres
Witherford Watson Mann were one of eleven competitors in an invited
competition.The framework was completed in March 2007, and launched
in September 2007.

London Bankside Urban Forest (pdf)

(link) bd on Bankside Urban Park by Witherford Watson Mann

Guerilla gardening

Urban gardening

Regardless of whether you are an urban, suburban, or rural dweller, there is inevitably a patch of neglected turf in your neighborhood that might need a bit of TLC and greening. If you see hidden gardening potential between sidewalk cracks when others see decay and abandon, well then, you might be a budding guerrilla gardener and not even know it! The guerrila gardening phenomenon is currently sweeping the globe as folks are finding innovative ways to come together for the optimization of neglected land and paved surface area. It’s a turf war for some, or a poetic gesture for others, but either way, citizens are rolling up there sleeves to create gardens in the most unlikely spaces and places.

The term ‘guerrilla gardening‘ might scare off some, but the practice has a long history of both radical and community-building tactics. Liz Christy and the Green Guerrillas transformed an abandoned lot in NYC’s Bowery during the 1970’s and as the BBC recently reported, guerrilla gardeners are ’sowing the seeds of resistance’ in South London. Many ‘resistance gardeners’ consider themselves to be vandals of sorts but with plants or seeds as weapons, often operating covertly at night in empty lots or on public property that otherwise remains unkept or barren.

The Guerilla Gardening website has a friendly though subversive sort of tone, as it has gone from tracking the activities of “illicit cultivation around London” to being a “growing arsenal for anyone who is interested in waging war against the neglect of public space.” It’s troop digs are warm and inviting and ultimately about reclamation, beautification, and even growing food in public spaces (a political act in and of itself as we re-educate ourselves about viable land use). The lighter side of the guerilla gardening campaign would probably be community gardens or grassroots gardening, which also brings folks together (during daylight hours) for neighborhood improvement and local food security. Whether as collective green graffiti or as an attempt to reclaim the neighborhood and make improvements for all, guerrilla gardening is a form of eco-activism that is catching on despite its controversial methods.

+ Guerilla Gardening
+ Green Guerillas

When the World is not Enough

Megafonin Helsingin toimituksen poliittinen dokumentti talonvaltauksista ja kaupunkitilaa koskevista konflikteista

Megafoni-Helsinki

Helsingin poliisilaitoksen mukaan talonvaltaukset ovat tämän kesän kuumin trendi. Mistä tässä trendissä on kyse? Talonvaltaukset ovat ilmaus sellaisten antagonististen subjektiivisuuksien syntymisestä, jotka ovat kehittyneet kaupungissa ja joille kaupunkitilan täytyy olla ilmaista, koska se on “ilmaa jota hengitämme”.

Vallatussa Telakkakatu 6:ssa oli valtava hallitila

Kaupungin edustajat ja moraaliset julkiset kommentaattorit ovat läpi kesän korostaneet, että talonvaltaajien vaatimukset ovat “kohtuuttomia”. He haluavat keskustasta niin suuren tilan, että siellä voi järjestää ilmaiseksi esimerkiksi teatteria ja keikkoja. Kaikki nämä ymmärtäväiset ihmiset ovat valmiita antamaan “nuorille” oman tilan, kunhan se ei ole liian kallis. Kuitenkaan he eivät tahdo ymmärtää, miksi mikään tarjottu tila ei valtaajille riitä.

He eivät ymmärrä, että kyse ei ole uuden “vähemmän byrokraattisen” nuorisotalon tarpeesta. Talonvaltaajat eivät halua uutta omaehtoista nuorisotaloa, vaan he haluavat asettaa kyseenalaiseksi kaupunkitilan kapitalistisen haltuunoton. Kyse on perustavasta poliittisesta ristiriidasta, johon ymmärtäväiset virkamiehet eivät pysty vastaamaan. Pieni syrjäinen tila ei riitä, koska kaikkein olennaisinta valtauksissa on juuri niiden ilmaisemien tarpeiden liiallisuus suhteessa kapitalistiseen logiikkaan. Edes maailma ei riitä niin kauan kuin kyse on pääoman maailmasta…

Sen rinnalle ja sisälle rakentuu toinen maailma, tai lukuisia toisenlaisia maailmoja.

Valtaajien tarpeet eivät ole liiallisia siksi, että ne olisivat määrällisesti liian suuria vaan siksi, että ne ovat laadullisesti erilaisia kuin kaikki tarpeet, joita kapitalistisen logiikan ohjaamat päättäjät pystyvät ymmärtämään. Valtaajat haluavat ottaa kaupunkitilaa yhteiseen käyttöön maksamatta siitä, koska tilaa ei ajatella kustannus-hyöty -logiikan mukaisesti. Tilasta ei makseta, koska sillä ei pyritä tekemään voittoa. Tila otetaan haltuun vapaata yhteistoimintaa ja rahalla mittaamatonta tuotantoa varten. Vapaa yhteistoiminta lisää kyllä sivuvaikutuksenaan pääoman arvoa, mutta sen logiikka on täysin toisenlainen kuin pääoman arvonlisäyksen.

Tämä tuotanto perustuu siihen, että ihmiset ovat valmiita tuottamaan asioita yhdessä saamatta siitä mitään yksityistä etua. Sen logiikka on pikemminkin lahjan logiikkaa kuin rationaalisen, taloudellista etuaan maksimoivan yksilön laskelmointia.

Nykyisin tämän yhteistoiminnan paikka on ennen kaikkea kaupunkitila, metropolin tila. Myös esimerkiksi autonomiset sosiaalikeskukset lisäävät kaupunkitilan arvoa, koska ne houkuttelevat ihmisiä. Italiassa tärkeimmät niistä ovat päässeet myös matkaoppaisiin, koska mielenkiintoisimmat keikat järjestetään usein niissä.

Kaupunkitilan yksityistämisen tarkoituksena on tämän kaikkialle hajautuneen arvon kasaaminen. Kiinteistöjen omistajat ja keinottelijat voivat odottaa omistamiensa tilojen arvon nousevan, koska ihmiset haluavat yhä kiihkeämmin elää kaupungeissa, joiden vetovoimaa he tuottavat elämällä, olemalla ja asumalla.

Tuotanto ja antagonismi

Urbaani yhteistoiminta siis sekä kasvattaa pääoman voittoja että menee sen logiikan tuolle puolen. Se on kollektiivista luovuutta, joka haistattaa paskat “luoville luokille” ja heidän konsulttihorinoilleen.

Nykyisin pääomalle kaikkein suurimpia voittoja tuottavat ihmisten välisten suhteiden järjestämiseen ja yhteisen älyn käyttöön perustuvat talouden sektorit. Siksi ihmisten välisen kanssakäymisen paikat, eli suurkaupunkien keskustojen tilat, ovat kalleinta mitä kapitalistit omistavat. Kahvilat ja ravintolat menestyvät keskustoissa, koska ihmiset käyvät siellä. Muotisuunnittelijoiden ja mainostoimistojen täytyy perustaa konttorinsa keskustaan, koska heidän hyödyntämäänsä raaka-ainetta ovat ihmisten pukeutuminen, eleet, slangit ja käyttäytymistavat. Globaalit suuryritykset haluavat perustaa pääkonttorinsa juuri globaalien metropolien keskustoihin, missä on tarjolla niiden tarvitsemaa työvoimaa ja äärimmilleen erikoistuneita palveluita.

Kaupungin keskustoissa tapahtuva kanssakäyminen tuottaa suunnattoman rikkauden juuri siksi, että ne ovat paikkoja, joihin väki kerääntyy, joissa metropolin heterogeeniset elementit jatkuvasti osuvat yhteen kaupunkitilassa ajelehtiessaan, joissa hengailevat kaikki metropolissa elävät erilaiset ihmiset: liikemiehet, skeittarinuoret ja pissikset, siirtolaiset ja joutilaat eläkeläiset. Vain erot voivat tuottaa rikkautta.

Itse asiassa pääoma tekee kaupunkitilasta yksityisen voiton lähteen juuri sen vuoksi, että ihmiset haluavat käyttää sitä yhteisesti. Kuitenkin ihmiset tekevät kaupungin, eikä pääoma voi riistää siihen kohdistuvaa kollektiivista “tekijänoikeutta” herättämättä alati kiihtyvää vastarintaa.

Sabotaasi ja yhteisö

Metropolin sosiaalisissa verkostoissa tapahtuvaa tuotantoa voidaan ottaa haltuun vain yhdellä keinolla: tekemällä metropolissa elämisestä rahan alaista. Raha taas on suhde, jonka kautta pääoma komentaa yhteiskuntaa. Ihmisiä pakotetaan kanavoimaan tuotantoaan palkkatyön eli pääoman komennossa tehtävän ja sen arvoa lisäävän työn sisään tekemällä kaikista kaupunkitilassa elämisen edellytyksistä vain markkinoiden kautta hankittavia. Ja markkinoilla tarvittavaa rahaa taas saa vain tekemällä palkkatyötä.

Tässä tilanteessa kaupunkitilan haltuunottamisesta, sen kollektiivisesta palauttamisesta yhteiseen käyttöön, tulee keskeinen yhteiskunnallisen lakon muoto.

Tämän kesän valtausten kokemukset ovat luoneet /ihmisille/ uskoa omiin toiminnan mahdollisuuksiin, kykyyn rakentaa ja ylläpitää tiloja itse yhdessä toisten kanssa. Sekä kykyyn ja mahdollisuuteen saattaa yhteen erilaisia ihmisiä. Erityisesti Katajanokalla onnistuttiin hyvin poikkeuksellisella tavalla luomaan suhteita naapureihin ja jakamaan heidän kanssaan kaupunkitilan käyttöön liittyviä kokemuksia.

Tämä ihmisten välisten suhteiden monimuotoisuushan on myös metropolin tuotannollisen merkityksen perusta. Kapitalismin tarvitsemat kulttuuriset ja tiedolliset innovaatiot syntyvät aina ihmisten omaehtoisessa kanssakäymisessä, urbaaneissa alakulttuureissa ja “ruohonjuuritason” verkostoissa. Pääoma ei voi riistää metropolin verkostoja ilman että se antaa niiden kehittää jotain ennalta arvaamatonta. Siis jotain vallankumouksellista, pieniä arkipäivän vallankumouksia, toiseksi-tulemisia, kohtaamisia, jotka antavat mahdollisuuden toimia totutusta poikkeavalla tavalla ja muodostaa uudenlaisia tapoja havainnoida maailmaa, uudenlaisia suhteita itseen ja toisiin ihmisiin. Siis uudenlaisia, vallankumouksellisia subjektiivisuuksia.

“Kansa löytää perustuslain kaduilta”

Varmuuden vuoksi vielä kerran: talonvaltauksissa ei siis ole kyse uuden nuorisotalon tarpeesta, vaan kaupunkitilan yksityisomistuksen lakkauttamisesta. Jälleen kerran kollektiivinen laittomuus muuttuu uudeksi laillisuudeksi, uuden perustuslain luomiseksi ja kahden laillisuuskäsityksen väliseksi konfliktiksi. Siis lupa tappaa vanha järjestys.

Sen vuoksi vanhoja puolueita ja niiden toimintaa vanhan laillisuuden sisällä ei välttämättä tarvita, sillä tilat otetaan joka tapauksessa. Kehotus laillistaa valtaukset ei ole pyyntö puolueille, vaan vihje siltä varalta, että ne haluavat säilyä hengissä uudessa globaalissa ja metropolitaanisessa kontekstissa. Metropolin tilassa taisteleva autonominen subjekti voi toki vain elää ja antaa toisten kuolla. Se on uudenlainen Bond-tyttö, jota eivät kiinnosta sen enempää martineja litkivien lipevien uhkapelureiden liehittelyt kuin kierosilmäisten roistojen runsaskätisimmätkään tarjoukset. Se on itse yhtä aikaa suunnattoman älykäs kollektiivinen rikollinen ja uutta järjestystä rakentava ja suojeleva salainen agentti.

(link to complete article) Megafoni Helsinki “When the World is not enough…”

The Squatted Office

The idea of `The Squatted Office´ touches me because of several issues; first, it continues my theme of Forbidden Places. It also comes close as to the personal experience I have on being offered (the now almost a rule) part-time work and work contracts of 3-6 months, and the problem of expensive housing costs in relation to wages. But the idea and the fact of working only part-time also describes the feeling of freedom you get from being able (albeit economically barely) to not dedicate your entire life to work controlled by somebody else, and the freedom of not being dictated by the mindless squirrel wheel.

Mind you, as this article shows, the time not working for your bread is not spent idle, this time gives one the opportunity to work and study something that really interest you without fear of not following the company agenda. One is free to concentrate on what one loves, and interests of love are seldom treated lightly. This kind of passionate work is much more productive than work done only for money.

Progressive working environments are starting to grasp the idea of “working for love” slowly. There are some books (that immediately became cult books) on the issue, for example “The Rise of the Creative Class by Richard Florida” a book that keeps coming up on seminars time after time. One can hear the cry in the air for a solution from companies and government on what to do when educated people will not dance after the same steps employers have made them dance the past years. What will companies do, when money is not any more the primus motor of the creative class they need so badly?

`The squatted office´ is also close at heart because it brings to mind a friend of mine who as early as the 1970-80´s turned his government work place into something that I could now call a “creative nest” (…or borderline “anarchist nest”). Imagine one of those city bureaus of monotonous facades and people in cubicles (koppikonttori), and suddenly one cubicle with a grand piano in it, music, books not directly related to the work being studied, and an employee not following the 9-17 time scheme. Of course in those days in ultra-conservative small town Finland it was bound to create a lot of stir…well, in most of the Finnish governmental offices it would still do that, when even trying to get the time card coded not to call security after 20.00 is impossible. The rise of the creative class has not by far yet entered our governing institutions.

The issues brought forward by the article touch also on many flaming themes in our society. Not long ago, the press announced that manly because of high housing costs, to be able to live in Helsinki, a family needs to earn minimum 3000 euros/month. This exceeds the earnings of many. Could squatting your work place be part of a solution? If you feel at home on your work place, if you also could bring family and friends there, spend time and cook there, could it replace some of the costly space in your big home?

Employers should take a close look on the concept of work attached living (tulevaisuuden työsuhdeasunto). //aito

Romantic Stories from the Revolution in the Attic

This just in from our friends in Bulgaria. We thought it was worth sharing here as an Eastern European counterpoint to the article about squatting one’s workplace that appeared in the first issue of Rolling Thunder.

This story starts a little before the end of my last term in the university. I’d spent four really crazy years in the students’ hostels in the well known “Students’ Town” in Sofia. The end of the term was coming and my life in the students’ hostel was about to end, too. I had to find a new place for living very fast if I wanted to stay in Sofia. I thought over a lot of options for renting, but all the rents were very expensive for me. I was working for a web page at that time. The job was pretty nice—I used to write news and concert reports, prepare photos, and do kind of a primitive book-keeping at the office. The best thing was that I had one or two free weeks every month and I was able to travel all around the country during this time, but the bad thing was that my salary was very low. It appeared that if I wanted to rent a lodging I had to find more “serious” and well-paid job. For me this was like putting a chain around myself and working the whole month only to get enough money to pay my rent and food, and hopefully to save some money to enjoy the weekends. I didn’t like this idea at all, because I didn’t want to sell my leisure time for a wage.

Then a great idea dawned on me. I thought of squatting my workplace. My boss was living abroad and he was staying in Bulgaria only for some periods of time. I had nothing to lose, so I decided to try it. The office was an attic with two rooms and an anteroom. I had little baggage in Sofia at that time, because my future was unclear and after I left the students’ hostel I was sleeping at the homes of my friends. With my backpack, I was like a snail with my home on my back. So I quietly moved in my office and hid my stuff in a cardboard box. >continue