DESIGN THINKING FOR INNOVATION: BUNKER II Contemporary Art Container
1
Empathize The inception of this project began by finding commonalities amongst us. After discovering we were all part of the Toronto arts and culture community, we began to discuss the issues and annoyances that we encounter when engaging with events/services/spaces within it. The contemporary art gallery serves as an incubator for nurturing a community emerging artists and art-appreciators, in addition, it fosters a space for critical discussions. However, we observed that the community is still very exclusive and inaccessible to many different identities that seek to engage with it. From here we chose a space (Bunker II) to use as an example of where these issues manifest and where we could provide tangible solutions.
The gallery itself is situated in a discrete corner of a parking lot. It focuses on exhibiting installation, new media, performance, and painting works. Its demographic includes emerging artists, students, critics, among others.
2
Fig. 1 Bunker II location just north of Dupont and Campbell Ave., Toronto, ON. “Bunker 2 is a contemporary art center based out of a repurposed shipping container in Toronto, ON. Our collaborative model emphasizes artistic agency by supporting creative autonomy and experimental research” (from Bunker II website) Since the project used design thinking for social innovation, great emphasis was placed on accessibility and inclusivity as the norm, not the exception. Our design took on a human-centred approach by nature of the problem. To gain greater insight on the art community and Bunker itself, short interviews were conducted with members of the community, some of the questions we asked were: How can we improve the user experience of an independent art gallery (bunker 2)? How can we promote inclusivity and accessibility in a way that is cost effective? How does the physical space interrupt the visitors experience? How can we expand the target audience beyond an insular community of artists? We found that people engaged with the space as a piece of work itself. So we explored what differentiates the realms of public vs. private. We also found that many people believed Bunker was promoting itself as integrated with public life but lacked
any real interaction with its users/visitors. We acknowledged the space as intimidating to people unfamiliar with the community and found it to be non-conducive for socializing. It also has zero accessibility, and therefore excludes potential audiences/artists and any collaborators that are not able-bodied. From the insight acquired, we proceeded to our second phase of the design process, defining the problem.
3
Define
In order to define our problem more specifically, we divided it into two parts: physical and psychological barriers. From here, we developed a comprehensive problem statement: We seek to renegotiate both the physical and psychological barriers of an independent contemporary art gallery. The independent nature of the gallery has originally promoted itself as an inclusive space, however fails to do so in an aspect of areas in relation to different intersecting identities. After establishing our direction, we listed the issues within each category. The physical being accessible entrances/exits, lack of enough space for visitors and central location. The psychological were more difficult because usually that requires a reworking of the system/structure at large. However, we believed that by implementing holistic solutions, we could in turn encourage a shift towards a more accessible and inclusive art scene. For the psychological barriers, we observed the ongoing desire for more socialization and promotion for the artists themselves.
Fig. 2 An example of repurposed shipping containers by HIBINOSEKKEI + youji no shiro
4
Bunker, and most independent art galleries, prides itself in innovation, experimentation and artist autonomy. Being mindful of this, we wanted our prototype to be as cost-efficient and true to the ethos of the independent community. We emphasized this because it is part of the ideology and framework of the artist-run space. The various solutions would provide a new structure for opening nights and experiencing the space entirely. Our final prototype would address the issues identified and resolve them through a redesign of the space. Ideate For this phase, we began by drawing three different potential prototypes. The first through the perspective of a child, the second an idol/icon and the third a superhero. Each of us created very different sketches, varying in different shapes and concepts. However, after completing the activity, we compared our final prototypes that we each came up with and found many similarities. All of our prototypes embodied solutions for our issues identified. Expansion, increased accessibility and a social foyer were included at least once in each of our sketches.
5
Our team was concerned with remixing our original prototypes and merging them into one cohesive design. In order to better frame our final prototype, we took the best qualities of each individual sketch, to create a final product. We decided on prototype 3 as our physical structure. We took prototype 4’s glass wall, prototype 5’s multiple entrances, prototype 1’s location and prototype 2’s traffic circulation. We explored different kinds of industrial containers such as silos and tubes but ultimately decided to stick with the shipping container. In addition, we researched different models of repurposed shipping containers around the world and sought to emanate them in our own prototype. Our conclusive design was a collaborative effort and would consist of a list of features and characteristics of the new space/experience that worked and we agreed on. Prototype Our final prototype came together seamlessly, as we had thoroughly discussed, challenged and remixed our idea over and over again. This assisted in determining exactly how we wanted the final prototype to look like. By narrowing our scope and focusing on very specific features, we were able to design our prototype that achieved our ambition in creating a new and improved, accessible and inclusive Bunker II. We first sketched our final prototype on paper and then rendered it on photoshop. We wanted to keep it simple and comprehensible, so that anyone could understand what we were trying to convey. We chose to do it in a line-drawing style and used colours and simple shapes to show our green roof, glass wall, foyer and bookshop. In addition to our rendering, we created two different floor plans to showcase views from both the exterior and interior of the space. Our group took into consideration the class’s feedback and sought to make sure that we weren’t simply adding two more shipping containers to the original space, but
6
instead differentiating and developing it. We did this by adding a green roof and bookshop in the gallery, furthermore, placing the redesign in a public and more central location, Christie Pitts park on the Bloor subway line. These three features were pivotal to the success of our prototype.
Fig. 4 Our final prototype
Fig. 5 Floorplans
7
Test
We did not have the chance to present our final prototype to our classmates but remain curious to hear what they think. We will most likely want feedback on the impact of the design and how to increase the engagement of the larger public. We garnered positive feedback about the enhancement of the experience through our consultations with other groups, however, we would like constructive criticism on improving the physical design moving forward. An interesting suggestion we received was partnering with an art organization that specializes in making spaces fully accessible and inclusive, through braille translation and spatial renovation and design. I believe the strength of our group/design lied in our openness towards alterations, integrity, concern for social issues and unique/innovative ideas. In addition, our leveraging of interdisciplinary skills and backgrounds assisted in our creative process and collaborative methods. Our final prototype is a reflection of the growing concern for accessibility and inclusivity, while still supporting the DIY movement. We as members of the arts and culture community would like to engage with a contemporary art gallery by making it a place where anyone who desires to experience art, can do so in a well-designed space.