Collaborative Realities

Abstract

In Collaborative Realities, I will introduce and critically reflect collaborative realities, methods and practices probed during the artistic research project visions4people, that was realized in a cooperation between weißensee academy of art berlin and the Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy at Campus Charité Mitte by high degree students from khb and people of the psychiatry from 2016-2018. It questions scientific research preconceptions and accentuates the impact of transdisciplinary and participatory methods that elicit the potential of art and artistic activities in health care environments and in academia and thus redefines the scope and impact of knowledge productions

Full text

Theory and History in the Human and Social Sciences
MeikeWatzlawik
SkaSaldenEditors
Courageous
Methods
in Cultural
Psychology

Theory and History in the Human and Social
Sciences
Series Editor
JaanValsiner, Aalborg University, Aalborg,Denmark

Theory and History in the Human and Social Sciences will ll in the gap in the
existing coverage of links between new theoretical advancements in the social and
human sciences and their historical roots. Making that linkage is crucial for the
interdisciplinary synthesis across the disciplines of psychology, anthropology,
sociology, history, semiotics, and the political sciences. In contemporary human
sciences of the 21st there exists increasing differentiation between neurosciences
and all other sciences that are aimed at making sense of the complex social,
psychological, and political processes. Thus new series has the purpose of (1)
coordinating such efforts across the borders of existing human and social sciences,
(2) providing an arena for possible inter-disciplinary theoretical syntheses, (3) bring
into attention of our contemporary scientic community innovative ideas that have
been lost in the dustbin of history for no good reasons, and (4) provide an arena for
international communication between social and human scientists across the World.
More information about this series at https://link.springer.com/bookseries/15826

Meike Watzlawik • Ska Salden
Editors
Courageous Methods
in Cultural Psychology

ISSN 2523-8663 ISSN 2523-8671 (electronic)
Theory and History in the Human and Social Sciences
ISBN 978-3-030-93534-4 ISBN 978-3-030-93535-1 (eBook)
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-93535-1
© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature
Switzerland AG 2022
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether
the whole or part of the material is concerned, specically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of
illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microlms or in any other physical way, and
transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar
or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication
does not imply, even in the absence of a specic statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant
protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book
are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the
editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any
errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional
claims in published maps and institutional afliations.
This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland
Editors
Meike Watzlawik
Sigmund Freud University
Berlin, Germany
Ska Salden
Sigmund Freud University
Berlin, Germany

v
Preface by the Series’ Editor
Ordinary Courage: How toMake aMethodological Revolution
Without Anybody Noticing It Is Going On?
Psychology is hopelessly stuck in its focus on methods and has overlooked their
wider context—methodology. Separating methods from theories and phenomena
has led to the creation of “empirical science” that is hyper-productive formally and
dead intellectually. It is not the question of which kinds of methods are used (quan-
titative or qualitative, standardized or creative). Rather, it is the question of what
kinds of knowledge the insertion of one or another method into the methodology
cycle (see Fig.1) allows us to produce.
Answers to that question are the privilege of the meta-codes—basic assumptions
about the whole effort of research. In a basic distinction, non-developmental meta-
codes (which characterize most of psychology) make no knowledge about develop-
mental phenomena possible. The empirical research efforts are thus comparable to
the blind guiding the blind (Fig.2).
The biggest danger in twenty-rst-century methodolatry is the proliferation of
the belief that the move from quantitative to qualitative methods (or their hybrid/
mixed methods) in itself solves the methodological problems the social sciences
have inherited from their history. Replacing quantitative empiricism by its qualita-
tive counterpart is merely a translation of the basic problem from one domain to the
next. General knowledge does not accumulate inductively—a bitter lesson for those
who are proud of psychology being “an empirical science.”
The alternative is obvious: We need to restore the primacy of methodology—as
an epistemological cycle leading to knowledge—in the discussions about methods.
How can this be done? In Fig.1 we can see that it all starts from the deep subjective
desires of a researcher. The researcher is similar to an artist in the desire to under-
stand—even if the tools for art and science are different (cp. Pollmann, Chap. 12,
this volume).

vi
The researcher educates oneself in relation to phenomena—by feeling into some
aspects of it (and overlooking others). This exposure to phenomena is crucial for
psychology where we may meet our computer screens more often than real human
beings. This primary contact is followed by counterclockwise move through the
methodology cycle—from phenomena to the discovery of one’s own basic assump-
tions. As an example, I may look at some phenomenon (Z) via two opposite
meta-codes:
Mechanical causal assumption—factors X, Y cause it (Z). The passive role of the
organism—treated as intentionless mechanical system of no action potentials—
is in the focus.
Organic assumption—the organism resists any inputs—the focus is on RESIST-X,
RESIST-Y leads to Y.The active role of the organism is in the center of focus.
The two meta-codes are exclusive of each other, leading to vastly different ways
how research questions are asked. Consider the ever-asked question about how par-
ents participate in child development. The rst assumption focuses on the causal
inputs from the parents to the child. If something turns out not well, it is the parents
who failed to provide the input. The child is a passive receiver whose role is to be
critical or laudatory about parents. The child does not constructively participate in
one’s own development.
Fig. 1 The methodology
cycle
Preface by the Series’ Editor

vii
In contrast, the second (organic) meta-code focuses on the acts of resistance to
the various inputs from parents. The child actively—and selectively—accepts or
rejects (or transforms) the parents’ educative efforts. The inputs are not causes of
development but resources for development.
Needless to add that our contemporary child psychology mostly operates on the
basis of the mechanical axiom—even as it is clearly mistting if viewed from the
standpoint of phenomena. Any parent or teacher understands instantly that children
are active persons, the resistances of whom are to be carefully circumscribed.
After the meta-codes are made explicit in our counterclockwise move through
the cycle, the researcher moves on to the construction of a theoretical scheme that
remains adequate to the phenomena and is explicitly guided by the meta-code.
Theory consists of abstract statements about the phenomena that would lead further
to empirical work that can reveal new knowledge—rather than repeat what has been
found already. After discovering the rst example of something new in our empiri-
cal observation, we have all the necessary material for generalized new knowledge.
Paleoanthropologists discover fragments of a skeleton of a fossil and can set together
the full view of the given species. Discovery of thousands or more of similar skel-
etons does not add to this knowledge—even if it is important for specifying how
widespread the species was at its time. But this is already a different research
question.
Following setting up one’s own theory—completely new or combining parts of
other already existing theories—the researcher only now moves on to the construc-
tion of methods. I need to emphasize that any decision about methods is a construc-
tive act by the researcher—even if the latter uses methods created by others. The
methods set up are to be contextualized in the given research project—and that
contextualization is always new. This eliminates the value attributed to “standard”
Fig. 2 The blind leading the blind (Pieter Bruegel d.A., 1568)
Preface by the Series’ Editor

viii
in description of methods, and even a “standard method” applied in a particular
context is always new since the researchee—through one’s own resistances and
non-understandings—creates a message that differs from the mechanical assump-
tion of “standardization.” There can be standard questions in a psychological
method, but answers to these questions are either explicitly or implicitly non-
standard. This follows from the meta-code of all biological, psychological, and
social organisms being open systems that constantly innovate themselves.
This look at methods eliminates the perceived differences between “quantita-
tive” and “qualitative” methods—all methods are coordinated methods. This coor-
dination pertains to the importance of juxtaposing the rich reality (phenomena) with
abstract questions (stemming from theory) in the making of a method. A number—
even a real number—is a qualitative sign that represents some feature of the phe-
nomena. If that number is that of a binary code (0, 1), it involves two
domains—non-being (0) and being (1). Both of these are basic philosophical terms
of wide implications. Zero (0) simultaneously indicates everything and nothing. The
Fig. 3 Where silent scientic revolution happens (marked in red)
Preface by the Series’ Editor

ix
different ways of being (1) are likewise of very different concrete forms. There is no
quantity in itself present in numbers other than researcher’s invented conventions
treating such qualities as if these were quantitative.
To conclude, the new silent methodological revolution in the social sciences hap-
pens through restoring the centrality of the meta-code to guide the triangulation of
phenomena-theories-methods coordination (see Fig.3).
What also follows from Fig.3 is the importance of selective entrance into the
phenomena via adequate methods. The data are relevant only if the theory in its
abstractive schematic form relates meaningfully with the phenomena. If they do not,
the method is useless and needs to be reconstructed. Researchers are in constant
search for methods, but that search is organized by the ne-tuning of the theory and
further penetration into the intricacies of the phenomena. And that is the beauty of
empirical research—nding the rare and beautiful previously unknown ower in the
middle of the vast meadow.
Aalborg, Denmark
JaanValsiner
Preface by the Series’ Editor

xi
Contents
Part I Setting the Stage for Courageous Methods
1 The Crooked Relationship Between Method and Matter . . . . . . . . . . 3
Carlos Cornejo
2 Reading Traces in Eels and Faces: Historical Roots
of Semiotic Thinking in Psychology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Martin Wieser
3 Why We Have Two Ears: Particularized Meaning Beyond
Language or the Benefits of Musicalization in Research . . . . . . . . . . 37
Sven Hroar Klempe
Part II Courageous Methods in Application
4 Unfrozen: A Voice-Centered Listening Analysis of Self-Acceptance . 55
Natalie Huf
5 Breaking Down Complex Realities: The Exploration of Children’s
Prosocial Actions Using Photographs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
Deepa Gupta and Nandita Chaudhary
6 How Do People Make Meaning? A Methodological Dialogue Between
Social Anthropology and Developmental Psychology . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
Paula Nurit Shabel and Mariana García Palacios
7 Studying the Stream of Experience at Memorial Sites:
The Subjective Camera Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
Brady Wagoner, Ignacio Brescó de Luna, and Lisa Herbig
8 Multimodal Interaction Analysis in Cultural
Psychology Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131
Carolin Demuth

xii
9 Multisensory Ethnography as a Tool for Reconstructing
the Subjective Experience of a City . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157
Bogna Kietlińska
10 How Research Can Support
a More Embodied Pedagogy in Psychology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191
Kate Sheese
11 Art as a Domain of Psychological Reality: Morphological
Art Research and Art Coaching . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213
Herbert Fitzek
12 Collaborative Realities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 231
Tyyne Claudia Pollmann
Part III What Does Being Courageous Mean After All?
13 Researching in Spite of Resistance: Courage and Responsibility
in (Re)Breaking New Ground . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 265
Meike Watzlawik and Ska Salden
Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 277
Contents

xiii
Contributors
IgnacioBrescódeLuna is an assistant professor at the Autonomous University of
Madrid (Spain) and external researcher at the Centre for Cultural Psychology and
The Culture of Grief, Aalborg University (Denmark), where he has worked as asso-
ciate professor until 2021. His research topics revolve around collective memory,
grief, and experience of memorial sites.
Nandita Chaudhary sought premature retirement from the University of Delhi,
India, to pursue her own academic interests in the year 2017 after over three decades.
She now takes on freelance work in publishing, research and lectures in the eld of
cultural psychology, child development, and family studies while continuing to
guide doctoral dissertations.
CarlosCornejo is a professor at the Ponticia Universidad Católica de Chile. He
works on human speech and interaction, making use of both quantitative and quali-
tative methodologies. He also researches the history and philosophy of psychology.
Carolin Demuth is an associate professor at Aalborg University, Denmark. She
takes a discursive approach to cultural psychology and draws on multimodal video
analysis, positioning analysis, and discursive psychology. Her research covers
socialization practices in early childhood as well as narrative identity over the
life span.
HerbertFitzek is Professor of Business Psychology and Cultural Psychology; pro-
rector for research at the Business School Berlin, Germany; and a psychotherapist.
In his work, he focuses on the history of psychology, psychological methodology,
organizational psychology, and the reception of art works.
Deepa Gupta is a doctoral research scholar at the University of Delhi, India.
Presently, she is studying prosocial behavior in children. Her research interests
include cultural psychology, social psychology, and child development.

xiv
LisaHerbig is a Ph.D. candidate in Political Science at the Amsterdam Institute for
Social Science Research (AISSR) of the University of Amsterdam and the Duitsland
Instituut Amsterdam (DIA) where she studies the impact of the COVID-19 pan-
demic on support for the European Union.
NatalieHuf received her Master of Psychology at the Sigmund Freud University in
Berlin, Germany. Her main research interests revolve around the questioning of
injustices in societies and exploring their impact on individuals.
Bogna Kietlińska is an assistant professor in the Institute of Applied Social
Sciences at the University of Warsaw, Poland. Her most recent work explores the
nature of sociology of theater in the perspective of the symbolic interactionism. She
is also interested in urban sociology and anthropology, visual research, and multi-
sensory ethnography.
Sven Hroar Klempe is a professor in the Department of Psychology at the
Norwegian University of Technology and Science. He is a former professor of
musicology. His main research interests are the history of psychology, methodol-
ogy, music, and communication as well as aesthetics.
MarianaGarcíaPalacios is a full-time certied career researcher in the National
Council of Scientic and Technical Research, Institute of Anthropological Sciences,
Universidad de Buenos Aires, Argentina. She has been researching children’s con-
stitution of social and religious knowledge from an ethnographical perspective.
TyyneClaudiaPollmann is Professor of Anatomy and Morphology at Weißensee
Academy of Art, Berlin. As a conceptual artist with an artistic (ne art) and scien-
tic background (medicine), she has been creating transdisciplinary art projects and
has worked in clinical research. Her research interests lie in understanding and
enabling ways of knowledge productions and investigating non-discursive and poly-
phonic working arrangements.
SkaSalden is a scientic staff member as well as PhD student at Sigmund Freud
University Berlin, Germany. Their main research interests are the intersections of
social psychology, anti-discrimination, and gender as well as queer studies.
Paula Nurit Shabel is a postdoctoral grant recipient in the National Council of
Scientic and Technical Research, Institute of Anthropological Sciences,
Universidad de Buenos Aires, Argentina. Her research deals with children’s knowl-
edge building and political processes involving children.
KateSheese works as a research associate at Sigmund Freud University in Berlin,
Germany. Her research focuses on the moral/psychic costs of working in emergency
and the challenges and possibilities of international solidarity work in the context of
Contributors

xv
migration/displacement. She also works with organizations in contexts of crisis,
conict, and war to develop contextualized, responsive staff care structures.
JaanValsiner is a cultural psychologist with a consistently developmental axiom-
atic base that is brought to analyses of any psychological or social phenomena.
From 2013 to 2018, he was the Niels Bohr Professor of Cultural Psychology at
Aalborg University, Denmark, where he continues his research on cultural psychol-
ogy, in combination with collaborations with the University of Luxembourg and
Sigmund Freud University in Wien and in Berlin.
BradyWagoner is Professor of Psychology at Aalborg University and Bjørknes
Høyskole, Denmark. He completed is PhD at the University of Cambridge, develop-
ing a cultural psychology of remembering. Some of his other research areas include
the history of psychology, social representations, science communication, and
developmental theories.
Meike Watzlawik is Professor of Developmental, Cultural, and Educational
Psychology at Sigmund Freud University, Berlin, Germany. In her research, she
focusses on identity development, sibling relationships, and phenomena at the inter-
section of clinical and cultural psychology.
Martin Wieser is an assistant professor at Sigmund Freud University Berlin,
Germany. His research focusses on the history of psychology and the connection
between psychological concepts, methods, and practices in relation to their histori-
cal, political, and societal context.
Contributors

231© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022
M. Watzlawik, S. Salden (eds.), Courageous Methods in Cultural Psychology,
Theory and History in the Human and Social Sciences,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-93535-1_12
Chapter 12
Collaborative Realities
TyyneClaudiaPollmann
12.1 Run-up
I would like to thank the editors for including me in this compilation of courageous
methods designed to promote getting off the beaten track and seeing things from
new perspectives. The “walking off in the wild” we performed with our project,
visions4people, led us to discover the backwoods amidst our common daily reality,
as we entered spaces of entanglements around, among, and inside ourselves.
The presented project, visions4people, started out as a collaboration between an
art school and a psychiatric clinic. Originally designed as an artistic educational
endeavor, its role soon broadened so as to challenge basic assumptions and routines
of thinking in the eld of knowledge production.
I am a professor of anatomy and morphology at the art academy (kunsthoch-
schule berlin, khb), with experience in the eld of clinical research and decades of
practice in the conception and implementation of artistic transdisciplinary projects.
Based on these backgrounds, as the author of this essay, I speak from the perspec-
tives of an artist, a project leader, and a citizen. To emphasize my subjective view-
points, I will at times take the rst-person narrator position rather than using
generalized forms of wording.
This essay investigates some important aspects of courageous methods and is
therefore titled “Collaborative Realities.” It started with a rocky run-up that modi-
ed the topics and text, and I will use it to initiate my contribution.
After having read the open call, I submitted an abstract for visions4people,
describing one of the most courageous methods as “the waiving of questionnaires.”
With my invitation to publish, I received an introductory text with eleven questions.
T. C. Pollmann (*)
Weißensee Academy of Art, Berlin, Germany
e-mail: info@t-c-pollmann.de

232
I studied them for quite some time. My concerns related to my experience that
asking a question focuses attention on nding a certain answer.
Now I was sitting in front of the outlined book proposal with eleven focal points,
pinning down my not-yet-written text. Writing about events means reenacting them
in the shape of a story that develops its own ow. You will emphasize those aspects
that you want to convey, and “the way in which events are emplotted—the precise
manner in which the story is told—affects the meaning of the information the case
contains. […] Moreover, emplotment requires making numerous decisions, each of
which is theory-laden” (Bolinska & Martin, 2020, p.38). However, I decided to test
this preset and delivered the essay. When I received my revised text version, I dis-
covered that my subtitles had been replaced and found a quantity of follow-up ques-
tions, including dozens of requests as to the project’s goal. I had obviously failed to
meet certain rules or expectations.
The situation posed an essential question: Who decides on the form and content
of a contribution? An implicit but tangible question of power was at stake. This in
turn made the conict interesting. What was the origin of misunderstandings, and
what was to be done now?
After conversations with Meike Watzlawik and Ska Salden, we agreed that I
would include the initial production problems, retain the questions, and elaborate on
incongruent terms as required.
This is how we had stumbled our way into “collaborative realities.” Of course,
neither of us had intended or planned this rocky run-up, and I thank the editors for
our profound thought exchange, which had a strong impact on reworking the essay.
12.2 The Researcher andtheMagnifying Glass
As I reread the invitation text, the following passage engaged me: “In research, we
always need to somehow break down complex realities to be able to grasp certain
phenomena, as if one approaches a certain aspect with a magnifying glass. By doing
so, the aspects outside the focus become blurred.”
Firstly, I was attracted by the image of the blurred rims, and from there I trailed
backwards into the sentence. I imagined using a magnifying glass, lingered with the
image, and focused on the surrounding words.
I would assume that the use of magnication of objects makes new details visi-
ble, leading to a multiplication of complex realities. Breaking down realities is, in
my understanding, a cognitive act that is interspersed with affective parts and that
either precedes or follows the investigation. In the rst case, you “look for” some-
thing, you focus on what you are supposed to nd, and ignore the rest; in the second
case, you record everything that becomes visible, and afterwards, you try to deci-
pher certain aspects. This also means that you will end up with quite an extensive
and messy data set. With visons4people, we eventually opted for the second case.
The image of the researcher using a magnifying glass to focus on a particular
spot appears arguably static to me. The glass has a determined focal length,
T. C. Pollmann

233
restricting the researching person to a dened and unchangeable distance from the
object. It xates the agent in a “gaze,” the tool being a spacer, held by the onlooker
from an external “locus operandi.”
Here I want to ask: How to re-move the stasis? Imagine being the agent: Moving
your head and/or the magnifying glass will change your focus. By moving, you can
successively observe the phenomena that were previously blurred, as being out of
focus. Now you are not gazing anymore, you explore your eld of interest in two
dimensions (width and length), but you cannot change your distance: You are still a
“voyeur,” a disconnected bodiless agent out there in the distance.
To change this, you now let go of the glass and rely on your human vision. You
will gain an additional quality: Your lenses are exible and have variable focal
points. This allows you to either focus on a detail in close-up, or zoom out to a dis-
tance for a wide view of higher-level structures. So now you can modulate your
approach in three dimensions, and approach or retreat from the object of interest.
And you even gain a third advantage: Your two eyes create two incongruent images
of our object from two different perspectives. Cerebral performances fuse the two
images, a step that remains conscious to you.1 Your perception of your visible sur-
roundings thus contains information from two perspectives, and improves your abil-
ity to spatially fathom your points of interest.
Intellectual activity, however, requires a conscious effort to take different per-
spectives. And by making them conscious, we become aware that they are made. We
learn to see phenomena from different perspectives and can only now perceive their
complexity and multidimensionality.
So, in awareness of our mental and perceptive potentials, we are now t to roam
around outside mainstream approaches and off the beaten track.
However, we may have to accept that we will slow down in unknown territory.
And we may need to acquire new tools or change behaviors.
We will also see and experience different things.
And we will arrive somewhere else (Fig.12.1).
12.3 visions4people
vision4people was a collaboration between the art academy (kunsthochschule ber-
lin, khb) and the Clinic for Psychiatry and Psychotherapy Charité Berlin Mitte
between 2016 and 2018. This cross-disciplinary endeavor included higher-degree
students from eight art and design disciplines, who gathered empirical knowledge
on-site in direct exchanges with the psychiatric patients. The input was recorded,
and formed the basis for artistic and participatory designs, works, or interventions,
1 Under certain circumstances (e.g., alcohol intoxication), the brain can no longer perform image
processing, and you will see two images of a single object.
12 Collaborative Realities

234
leading to transformations that improved the patients’ quality of living or contrib-
uted positively to their recovery process.
I conceived visions4people in 2015 and led it with a small transdisciplinary team
for 2years. The project is placed at the intersection of cultural production, educa-
tion, and research, and was funded by the Berlin Senate for the Sciences Quality and
Innovation Initiative (Berliner Qualitäts- und Innovationsoffensive, QIO).
Our activities consisted of different forms of communication and interaction, on-
site visits, interventions, workshops, lm evenings, lectures, scientic discussions,
a survey, a reading, performances, individual as well as group work, collaborations
with patients, artistic outcomes, exhibitions, and the generation and collection of
comments, notations, narratives, ideas, drafts, analyses, and new cross-connections
to professionals from other disciplines.
With visions4people, a self-reexive structure was created in which previously
unknown situations or arrangements could be designed and tested. We created open
elds of activity and entered into direct contact with the patients and staff before
and during our theoretical and/or aesthetic discussions. We articulated the experien-
tial values gained here in “scape research narratives.” The people, namely, the
patients and the staff, with their sensitivities, ideas, and desires, were the central
starting point for our activities, which were transformed into the visions as multiple
artistic and scientic productions.
In this chapter, I will introduce you to the project according to the impulse ques-
tions, and emphasize aspects that might be of overarching interest.
Fig. 12.1 “Harmonic
distortion,” photo from an
architectural model of the
Psychiatry Charité Berlin
Mitte.
T. C. Pollmann

235
12.3.1 How Did YouDecide onaParticular Aspect
ofandPerspective onYour Object ofInterest?
The basic concept, which I might understand as “the very aspect of and perspective
on your object of interest,” was the idea to involve and work with the groups, for
which the respective cooperating institutions were initially created, addressing stu-
dents and patients. With this constellation, we would try to improve the situation
on-site.
I am aware that my focus does not meet the possibly implicit request of focusing
on a single parameter. The “very” aspect that is requested tells me that one aspect
would be desired.
I return to the image with the magnifying glass: “[…] as if one approaches a
certain aspect with a magnifying glass.” Here we see three expressions in singular
mode: one, a certain aspect, a magnifying glass. The metaphor depicts someone
investigating one thing with one method. To my understanding, research is highly
connected, aspects are interrelated, and different tools are being applied, all this
leading to often contradictory results. Looking at scientic activities, I see vast
elds of attempts and results, constantly questioning what appeared to be safe and
overwriting knowledge that so far seemed set in stone. I see a rather liquid process
of splitting and recombining, which leads to advanced or disruptive outcomes. This
perception might lead to different project types, conducts, and outcomes.
12.3.2 Goal
The term “goal” might be a potent marker in which we can visualize this word’s
varied uses and meanings. To give you an impression of the project’s starting point,
I will quote from the original QIO application:
A joint eld research captures the specic needs and desires of the building users and leads
to artistic transformations that result in specic spatial designs, exhibits, models, and drafts.
These results can ow as an integrative component into the scientic therapeutic action,
supporting and extending it. The artistic and creative view can question the working condi-
tions, quality of stay, and therapy methods in a consultative and experimental way, and
develop innovative solutions. Possible spatial, aesthetic, artistic, and participatory
approaches are dened as elds of work.
The application was signed by Prof. Andreas Heinz, Head of Psychiatry, Leonie
Baumann, rector of khb, and myself. None of us would have been able to forecast
the direction or the outcomes of the project.
The goal remained open and broad for several reasons: After two initial visits, I
had sparse input about the actual situation, needed to rely on my past experiences,
and was forced to create a concept “from scratch.” To aim at a goal means to direct
one’s actions towards achieving an intention. However, the strict pursuit of a goal
12 Collaborative Realities

236
might cause side effects and collateral damage, especially if people are involved. I
was aware that I was dealing with a complex situation.
12.3.3 Complexity
Not only was the project bi-disciplinary to start with, but each cooperating group
consisted of multiple disciplines, contexts, and personalities.
As an example, I will show you the heterogeneous composition using two param-
eters: profession and cultural background.
The visions4people team included a psychiatrist, an architect, an interior
designer, a sociologist, an assistant educated as a media scientist, and myself, as an
artist with a medical background. The team members’ cultural backgrounds included
Germany, the United States, Columbia, South Korea, and Finland. The student par-
ticipants were from the disciplines of painting, sculpture, stage/costume design,
visual communication, fashion design, product design, textile and surface design,
and art therapy. Furthermore, guest students from Technische Universität Berlin
(architecture), Humboldt Universität Berlin (media sciences), and Freie Universität
Berlin (anthropology) joined the group. The students had international cultural
backgrounds from the countries of Germany (10), France (3), Japan (2), the United
States (2), Greece (2), Mexico, the Netherlands, Poland, Romania, and Vietnam.
Each of our two courses included 12 students and ran for one semester, so 24 stu-
dents attended the project visions4people. Clearly, we enjoyed heterogenous group
constellations in terms of study professions and cultural backgrounds.
The participants from the psychiatry cooperation group were no less diverse;
some of the professions that were revealed to us during our conversations included
administrator, biologist, chemist, drug dealer, occupational therapist, domestic
worker, information scientist, engineering scientist, journalist, lawyer, food-
chemistry specialist, mathematician, musician, politician, government employee,
nurse, occupational therapist, professor of architecture, psychiatrist, researcher, and
therapist. Cultural backgrounds among this group included origins in Austria,
Germany, Palestine, Spain, and Syria.
The project visions4people meets the characteristics for complexity according to
Funke’s list, as it shows
(a) A multitude of variables involved.
(b) Cross-connections within the involved variables.
(c) Dynamics as an indicator for the temporal changes, which led in a more-or-less
short time to a change of the original problem situation.
(d) Non-transparency as an indicator for the fact that not all the information that a
problem solver would ideally be required to know is available.
(e) Polytely as an indicator for the need to optimize more than one criterion (in
contrast to problems where exactly one criterion has to be considered).
T. C. Pollmann

237
A characteristic of complex decision-making situations that has stood out from the begin-
ning is that of polytely […]. This means that no one-dimensional evaluation of a proposed
solution is possible, but rather that multiple, and, under certain circumstances, even con-
icting evaluation criteria must be combined to form an integral judgment (Funke,
2004, p.29).
If you are working with participants who can decide about their contributions, you
will encounter a polyphony that almost inevitably engenders a polytely. In artistic
elds, this is not a problem. The challenges are located in the performance of the
project.
12.3.4 How Did YouChoose What YouWanted toInvestigate?
In late 2014, Prof. Heinz, head of the Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy
at Charité Campus Mitte, and his colleague Bernhard Haslinger visited our art
school and suggested a cooperative endeavor. After the presentation, a short thought-
exchange led to an invitation to the psychiatric clinic. On site, the need to improve
the patients’ living situation was so palpable and impressive that the challenge did
not leave my mind. I drafted a concept that was well received by the heads of the
respective institutions. There were attempts to modify the basic structure—to
involve and work with the groups for which the respective cooperating institutions
were initially created—but, in the end, I was able to keep the essential parts
untouched. Over the following year, a series of negotiations and substantial cuts
were performed, including halving the staff and reducing the project time from 3 to
2years. Finally, the trunk version was approved by the quality initiative QIO of the
Berlin Senate for Science.
12.3.5 Special Conditions
As a psychiatric clinic is a particularly protected environment, it was not possible to
use standard participatory practices, such as handing out cameras or accompanying
the patients during therapy sessions. So, we had to develop appropriate methods and
means of exploration for artistic investigation in the eld of psychiatry.
Some initial practical tasks had to be performed in advance. The formation of a
small transdisciplinary team would bring different specialists’ perspectives, in the
form of discussions and workshops, into the study group.
I acquired six project spaces within walking distance of the psychiatric clinic; the
lengthy negotiations lasted almost a year. While waiting for approval, we worked in
my private studio spaces.
Other time-consuming aspects were the bureaucratic and institutional prepara-
tions. These included permission to visit the psychiatric clinic and contact the
patients, and adherence to discipline-specic formalities while drafting a teaching
12 Collaborative Realities

238
program for students from higher levels of the eight departments. We started
researching, reading, and selecting scientic studies concerning our project so as to
generate a basic information pool for the students and created an anonymous survey.
We applied for and received permission to use the patient’s café or the clinic
foyer for our live sessions, letting the patients make decisions about contact with us,
and avoiding an intrusion in their private space on the wards.
As patients and staff could voluntarily opt for talking to us, our descriptions and
estimates refer to the people we met and cannot be generalized for all patients or
staff members of the clinic.
Also, our experiences were limited to the Clinic for Psychiatry and Psychotherapy
Charité Berlin Mitte. To our relief, we learned from the patients that the clinic is
popular with them, as methods such as forced xation (i.e., physical restraints),
medication intake control, and coercion to eat are not carried out, and more patient-
friendly guidelines are applied.
12.3.6 Language andContext
There is an essential challenge to our developing visions and the investigation of
existing sets of rules, or the creation of a new approach for tackling unknown situa-
tions. This consists of recognizing and identifying the determined, dened, expected,
and implicit meanings that permeate one’s own language and way of thinking in
countless modications. Such recognition is vital because these thought- and affect-
routines obstruct or distort our view of novel connections and phenomena.
Here are my reections on our own use of words and language, and our attempts
to change and correct wording during the visions4people project, and also for the
production of collaborative realities:
Vision The term “vision” is derived etymologically from the Latin word visio,
which means the act of seeing. In our context, the emphasis is on the seer rather than
the object of interest. The seer might envision a future, but this vision also uncovers
information about the seer and the cultural or social conditions in which the vision
is developed. A vision is therefore a valuable vehicle for drawing conclusions about
the present. For every person participating in the course, this means grounding one’s
own projections, perceptions, and visions in a self-reexive step. Visions therefore
do not drift around in vague futures but indicate important things about the person,
the present, the action, the source, and the context.
Visions for People to visions4people I had drafted the working title “visions for
people” in an extremely short time frame of conceptualization. It was meant to
emphasize the intention to create visions for people, not for products. But after a
while, the preposition “for” stuck unluckily in our minds, as it held the unhealthy
implication that the visions would serve “for” people and not be initialized by their
needs and desires. Finally, we decided to replace the word “for” with the digit “4,”
T. C. Pollmann

239
irritating the semiotics and at least producing some distance from the preposition
while introducing ambiguity for reading the title.
Patient As members of an art academy, we were not part of the healthcare system,
and therefore our visits to the clinic did not have a predened purpose of conform-
ing to existing roles. When interacting with the people in the clinic as externals, for
us, the use of the term “patient” did not seem appropriate, considering the informal
and personal contact we had with our conversation partners. A solution would have
been to refer to the patients and the staff generically as “visitors” to our sessions.
However, this would have blurred the different roles within the psychiatric system
and would have created a rhetorical surface behind which the known structures
persisted, without our being able to study the roles and relationships of these struc-
tures. So, the term “patient” will remain in this text, with the consciousness that it
merely describes the role people were placed in when we met them. During our
discussions and in our narratives, we used the individuals’ rst names, and when
staff members introduced themselves with surnames, we used those.
I want to stress, once again, that the term “patient” refers to a transient role. The
people we met as patients had assumed different roles, as already mentioned, and
they will take on still other roles again after treatment. Also, some student partici-
pants had rsthand experience with psychiatry. A segregation based on the role of
“patient” was thus always seen as a temporary transient condition. Also, we some-
times only found out after our talks whether our conversation partner had been a
patient or a staff member.
12.4 Practices
Methods vs. Practices The term “method” is derived from the Greek methodos,
which means “pursuit of knowledge,” derived from meta- (expressing development)
and hodos (way). It is further understood as “a particular procedure for accomplish-
ing or approaching something, especially a systematic or established one (lexico.
com/denition/method).” In pondering what to call our ways of developing a certain
approach and procedure, it might t. Still, I will refer to our methods as “practice,”
accentuating the empirical aspect and “the dening in the making.” Our approach
was inuenced by Breuer’s grounded theory methods, which include cultural praxe-
ological theories.
12 Collaborative Realities

240
12.4.1 Data
We have followed the perception that all is data, meaning “[…] that something can
potentially be learned everywhere, that things that can validate, falsify, enrich or
extend one’s own theory, can in principle appear everywhere and in all forms in the
world” (Boger, 2019, p.65).
Data derives from the Latin data, the plural of datum, “(thing) given,” the neuter
past participle of dare, “to give.” I will use this term and honor the original meaning,
including the fact that data have been given to us, or that we have been extracting
them from somewhere, or someone.
12.4.2 Retooling: FromUsing toCreating
During the preparation period for this project, my son and I downloaded a prefabri-
cated survey form to generate an anonymous survey comprising experiences and
assessments by people who had been in touch with the psychiatric system, as we did
not nd such information in studies or articles. The format had been produced for
data collection and quantitative verication of a previously dened working hypoth-
esis. Instead, we transformed and thus retooled the survey into a platform for people
who could contribute their knowledge and experience with psychiatry by creating
open text elds, which would enable individual, anonymous articulations within a
bilingual (German/English) version suited to international participation.
The survey link was distributed through the mailing lists of the institutions of
Charité and khb, and was passed on by the team members. Based on the personal
details they provided, those who responded to the questions included persons
affected by psychiatric disorders, as well as their relatives and friends, physicians,
nursing staff, teachers and students from health care and the artistic disciplines.
In a really simple way, we had had re-tooled the survey form and created an
assemblage that allowed individual diverse voices to be heard. We made the state-
ments available to the team, to our students, and later to the visitors at the two exhi-
bitions. For the last exhibition, we printed the statements on large sheets of paper,
hung them in the hallway of the project space, and supplied pens that allowed visi-
tors to add further comments (see Fig.12.2).
12.4.3 Initial Task
The initial task for each visions4people student was to visit the psychiatric clinic—
not in a group, but as a single person. Before their individual visits, they were asked
to note their expectations on a piece of paper, and do the same while actually in the
building, and nally, after their on-site experience. On the second day, we discussed
T. C. Pollmann

241
the outcomes of this task. The students received access to our information pool: a
collection of papers, studies, and essays from the elds of psychiatry, philosophy,
and architecture, including the results of the above-mentioned survey. The info pool
was continuously extended by new texts and students’ contributions.
During the course of the project, it also extended into a narrative pool, as all
visions4people participants would upload their individual “scape research narra-
tives.” The receptive mode changed into a productive one, and the pool remained a
vital source for further discussions, documenting our rsthand experiences.
12.4.4 Waiving Questionnaires: FromApplying toCreating
In preparation for our joint visits, some students had drafted specic questionnaires
for the patients to ll in. The results were intended as starting points for the creation
of visions meant to improve the conditions at the clinic.
We distributed invitations in the clinic and some patients appeared in the café. To
our surprise, they unanimously waived the prefabricated questionnaires or lled
them in with absurd comments. They made it quite clear that they would very much
like to spend time with us but were not willing to ll in forms or answer predened
questions. Also, they rejected taped interviews and live notations with a computer.
They explained that they had been the objects of analysis and data retrieving in
Fig. 12.2 Detail of comments from the visions4people survey
12 Collaborative Realities

242
countless ways, and they were tired of it. And despite intense efforts to distribute
their knowledge, so far this had not had the effect of improving any aspect of their
living situation. They were also very curious about us, and asked us lots of ques-
tions. When they found out that we were from an art school and not involved in the
healthcare system, there was a palpable sense of relief. Intense and open-hearted
discussions commenced, with topics determined by the patients. We talked about
politics, professions, philosophy, treatment, medication, roles, stigmatization, bore-
dom, the future, art, food, activities, hierarchies, family, money, and the meaning of
life, to name a few.
This experience encouraged us to drop prefabricated formats, and thereafter, we
had individual exchanges and open communication with the patients and the staff.
These events and exchanges were our sources for the artistic outcomes.
12.4.5 Field to_Scape
During our eld research, we felt uneasy with the term “eld,” as it implies a
research environment as a cultivated area with ordered conditions—which, of
course, applies to the area of psychiatry. However, if external persons—like artistic
researchers—enter a eld yet unknown to them, the realities unfold to them as new
landscapes. Customs or rules that are “normal” for patients and personnel are not
obvious.
For externals, “eld” research is “scape” research: the exploration of an unknown
“land_scape” in which unforeseeable events appear in an unmediated manner and
will be perceived as new phenomena. Herein lies an enormous potential. The per-
ception does not follow any habitual routines and remains sensitive to any situation,
constellation, or event.
Our artistic eld research—now “scape research”—took on the shape of an ad
libitum sampling of events. The openness toward the observations led to further
research questions and artistic ideas, as the noted events were not ltered through
the premises of a specic intention.
12.4.6 From Reporting toNarrating
Having omitted the questionnaires, we had no documentation of our sessions. With
this in mind, I encouraged the students to create narratives after each session,
describing our experiences. As some participants felt insecure about this form of
writing, I drafted a template with very open questions, such as: How did you feel
during your visit? What was most important to you?
Two students and I tested the template and discovered that it was still channeling
the memories, and therefore, possibly excluding notations that would not t in.
T. C. Pollmann

243
Also, it pinned down the memory in particles or answer segments, dislocating the
ow of events, affects, and thoughts.
Finally, all the students acted out their unique narratives. In our scape research
narratives, the researcher was integrated as a rst-person narrator, instead of using
“objective” and passive wordings so as to eliminate a subjective speaker. This
allowed individual perspectives to appear and to be compared and analyzed in a
multilayered manner. As we did not attempt to perform eld research reports, we
decided to call the writings “scape research narratives.”
We created 56 narratives by 24 authors that amounted to more than 100 DIN A4
pages of raw material. The anonymized versions were compiled as nine clusters of
quotes, identifying the most immediate and crucial issues. These were:
1. Communication.
2. About the Charité.
3. Self-reection.
4. Stigmatization.
5. Difcult situations.
(a) Exhibition.
(b) Boundaries.
(c) Overstraining.
6. Patient ideas.
7. Cooperation.
8. Interventions.
9. Spatial analysis.
The method of clustering was generated by working through the texts and coloring
the passages according to their content. In this way, the topics could be determined
and organized into the legend of nine clusters with three subsections; admittedly, a
very simple method. A comparative analysis using professional software is planned
for this year and will include the release of the DIN A4 pages, which are to be used
for further transdisciplinary research on the correlation between the application of
different analytical methods and their respective outcomes.
12.4.7 From Expected Data toUnpredicted Experience
The decision to let go of several framings made us more vulnerable, as we were no
longer able to channel our perceptions or hide behind a role or a prefabricated task
or paper. But the benet was that we met people, and we were regarded as people.
The intensity of the discussions led to little joint events: The patients and staff
showed us around, and we had walk-alongs inside the clinic and gardens. The
patients wanted to “do something” together with us, so we prepared interventions
and surprised them with shared activities. We created helium balloons with wishes
12 Collaborative Realities

244
to release (see Fig.12.2), writing with light (Fig.12.3), and joint Santa Claus and
Christmas events.
We created helium balloons with wishes 12 Collaborative Realities to release
(see Fig. 12.3), writing with light (Fig. 12.4), and joint Santa Claus and Christmas
events. In response to the communication topics that were introduced by the patients,
we also started discussing artistic ideas with them, and they happily shared their
opinions. The interventions and shared time developed into a collaboration between
students and patients, and some patients also visited the project rooms. The planned
interrogation had been transformed into a shared experience and artistic
collaborations.
12.4.8 Feedback toSource: FromData toArtistic
andScientic Outcomes
For their artistic or scientic productions, the students had a free choice of topic,
genre, or medium. Discussions, notes and suggestions, plans and methods, topogra-
phies and translations, and problems and solutions were exchanged among the stu-
dents and our transdisciplinary team members in a way that also changed the project
and its development.
The outcome was a spectrum of interactions that led to 19 concrete yet extremely
different results, which were presented to the public in two exhibitions.
Fig. 12.3 “Balloon” intervention at Charité Psychiatry Berlin Mitte. (For privacy protection, the
faces were covered with purple circles)
T. C. Pollmann

245
In the summer of 2019, Jovis Verlag published my exhaustive color publication
based on our project. Entitled visions4people, it includesprerequisites, schedules,
practices, narrative excerpts, challenges, and multiple images, reenacting our proj-
ect and presenting all the student outcomes (Pollmann, 2019).
12.5 Analysis
12.5.1 From Thread toThreat
After the rst visions4people course, I analyzed its positive and negative aspects.
Positive aspects included the students’ lively interest in patients’ states of mind and
clinical symptoms, the intensity of the patient–student exchanges, the commitment
of the team members, the intensity and seriousness of the involvement, the personal
questionings, the social and philosophical aspects of the project, and the students’
dedication in producing the outcomes.
Negative aspects concerned the project as a whole: too much input, too many
demands, and time pressure. The workload could not be realized within the standard
teaching framework and consumed an enormous amount of extra time. This led to
constant tension, and an extra effort to meet expectations.
Being taught that changing the concept during an investigation is an almost
impossible interference, my analytical efforts rst went into checking the details of
problems, but the crucial challenge was to see and admit that the path I had initially
drafted was altogether overexerted. The project-guiding “thread” turned out to be
a threat.
Fig. 12.4 “Painting with light,” intervention at Charité Psychiatry Berlin Mitte
12 Collaborative Realities

246
I could neither shake off the feeling that I had been trying to fulll expectations
from two institutions, nor could I dene precisely what these expectations were.
More dangerously, I noticed that I had been under constant pressure to fulll these
vague demands, and I had transferred this burden onto the team members and stu-
dents as well. Here, it caused friction. I realized that I had been caught in what
Deleuze (2001) might call “the other’s dream”: “Beware of the other’s dream,
because if you are caught in the other’s dream you are screwed” (p.103).
I reviewed the rushed concept-phase and found indicators for my apprehensions.
A closer look at my colleague-advisors who had proposed—if not imposed—goals
and methods for the project made me discover that they had never been active in
psychiatry, nor had they performed artistic research, or carried out a comparable
project.
I urgently needed to revise the concept and its implementation. No more steam-
ing through the course with content that excluded the consolidation of experiences
gathered during the contact with patients and staff: We needed more time for dis-
cussing and becoming aware of what was happening to us.
I relaxed the tense schedule, and to create space/time for openness and dedica-
tion for unexpected events and fragile developments, I did the following:
(a) Secured more time for thought and awareness at the initiation phase.
(b) Devoted more time to the writing of narratives.
(c) Changed the obligatory workshops to facultative ones and
(d) As we were told by the patients that they would love to “do something with us,”
I secured time for planning and preparing for interventions at the Charité.
We started the second course in the winter semester of 2017/18, again with 12 new
students, and experienced a much more relaxed ow of energy. The workshops were
still well visited, we had more open discussions in smaller groups, the writing was
unproblematic from the start, and we got heavily into communicating, as well as
realizing artistic concepts together with the patients.
These positive developments made me take things one step further and imagine
a project extension that included the patients in the design and decision-making
processes—which, unfortunately, remained a utopia, as a project extension was not
granted.
But daring to change the project mode and experiencing the positive effect liter-
ally mobilized my perspectives. I turned my head around, posing this disruptive
question: Since we were investigating the clinic’s needs and desires, rules, restric-
tions, aws, hierarchies, and underlying structures, why not look at our own institu-
tional background, with its needs and desires, rules, restrictions, aws, hierarchies,
and underlying structures?
T. C. Pollmann

247
12.5.2 Neglect
Although we were becoming more aware of its importance, we could not further
investigate the topics surrounding time. I elaborated on this factor in relation to my
own project, but we also identied specic issues about managing time in psychiatry.
Too Little and Too Much Time The patients are mostly treated with medication
and can book occupational therapy by the hour in the psychiatric ward. However,
there are long periods of waiting—in the patient’s perception, “time does not pass,”
and “nothing happens.”
This is in stark contrast to the time commitment of the staff. Our visiting nurses
and doctors could only spare a few minutes, as they had to cope with an enormous
daily workload. This is the effect of understafng, which again is caused by the
underlying concept that sets hospitals as economic, prot-oriented enterprises. In
fact, we met people who also worked under truncated project versions and suffered
from constant work overload.
In addition, staff at the clinic face the problem that clinical pictures differ indi-
vidually, and one person might show symptoms of several diseases, so that a diag-
nosis is not easily achieved. As a result, therapies cannot be transferred in the form
of an instruction manual and must be constantly reviewed and readjusted. All of this
requires a subtle examination of the patient’s symptoms, as well as ne-tuning and
repeated adjustment of therapeutic measures. This, in turn, requires time for dedica-
tion, which is not available in the actual schedule.
Anxiety (Entängstigung) The other form of neglect was not being able to investi-
gate the special atmosphere at the clinic. We had some mind-opening transdisci-
plinary discussions about the atmosphere of “Angst” (anxiety) and the need for
“Entängstigung” (dissolving anxiety) with some Charité staff members. This phe-
nomenon would require a more detailed dedication, as it is certainly one of the most
outstanding challenges for working in psychiatry, and affects both patients and staff
in different ways within a psychiatric ward.
Patients are in a psychiatric clinic because they have experienced a state of men-
tal emergency or great psychological distress, and are afraid that this state of dis-
tress might continue, or that it might not improve under psychiatric treatment. They
are anxious about what will happen in the ward, the effects of medication, and how
their diagnoses will affect their lives. As improvements might be slow, they fear that
the current episode might “last forever.”
The nurses, doctors, and therapists share their days with people who are in states
of exception, often exhibiting behavior that does not correspond to the usual pat-
terns of interaction. Moods can change abruptly, and behavior can occur unexpect-
edly so as to demand instant action. The patients also might not be able to assess the
behavior of some of their fellow patients. There is a strange atmosphere of constant
tension—an atmosphere that has also, of course, affected us.
12 Collaborative Realities

248
Because of the unpredictability and intensity of the experienced events, our situ-
ational awareness often circled around the discussions of inter- and intrapersonal
topics. We could only partly examine situations on social, political, structural, hier-
archical, and environmental levels, but the project made me aware of unretrieved
potential to transform teaching and learning interactions that I would only be able
to implement in novel projects.
12.5.3 Obstacles
An enormous amount of time and energy went into bureaucratic stipulations con-
cerning the cooperation contract, module denitions, data restrictions, negotiations
for a project space, renting contract, and embedding the teaching and research activ-
ities in both the art school and the clinic. I was taken aback by hardships such as
delays, deferred answers, weird requirements, and ignorance. I learned to work my
way around refusals, but the energy wear was enormous, and should not be
underestimated.
Working with a truncated project version resulted in a massive workload for each
participant. This seems to be typical: projects are only granted in slashed modes,
triggering work overload and friction during conduct. Discussing these mishaps
with other project leaders disclosed that these methods are part of the common neo-
liberal bureaucratic toolkit for thwarting activities.
Changes take time, and the shortage of time means that nothing changes.
12.6 Outcomes
A result means the consequence of an action intended to produce an expected out-
put. I would therefore rather choose the term “outcomes,” as it allows a wider range
of inuences of unforeseen factors and unpredicted developments in modifying the
product.
The interventions performed on site during our project were an important out-
come, changing ad hoc the patients’ situations in the course of our work. We created
an open space for communication, interaction, and surprise, which was overwhelm-
ingly visited and appreciated.
The students produced outcomes, partly among themselves in groups, and partly
with the patients. The exhibitions made it possible to feedback the outcomes to the
initiating and collaborating participants in the clinic (patients and staff). This is an
important loop, as the participants saw and explored the outcomes and could respond
to them.
As I cannot present all the contributions, the titles and brief descriptions might
give you an idea of what was realized (see list of contributions after the next
paragraph).
T. C. Pollmann

249
The list starts with artistic contributions for external environments of the clinic,
proceeding to situations inside the building, and leading to system-immanent ques-
tions and internal processes.
12.6.1 Contributions
As artists, we did not have the goal of achieving a consensus or a general claim. On
the contrary, it was obvious, expected, and desired to end up with a variety of out-
comes, in spite of having been to the same place, and sometimes even experiencing
the same situations.
I am happy to share descriptions of the different outcomes, which might give you
a glimpse of their diverse focuses.
List of contributions:
(a) Pavilion toolkit: Wooden posts, textile elements, by Juri-Apollo Drews,
Abigail F.Wheeler, Amélie Cayré, and Maria Jacquin.
(b) We are the universe: 1:50-scale model of a garden installation at the Campus
Charité Mitte, by Pao Kitsch.
(c) Synesthesia: Cellulose reector for light situation in the long oor of the psy-
chiatric clinic, painted, model 120×55×10cm, by Felix Rasehorn.
(d) The colors of waiting: Two hard-cover coloring books for distributing in the
therapy waiting rooms at the wards, each 31× 33×2 cm; 25 hand-colored
pages, rearranged on the wall, each 30×30cm, second edition of the book
with 25 pages assembled to form a picture, by Maria Evridiki Poulopoulou.
(e) Light modulator: Light installation (lamp, microcontroller, motors, plexi-
glass, glass) for the waiting rooms, by Eunseo Kim.
(f) Shel[l]ter: Light and privacy screen (felt and light) for the shared bedrooms in
the clinic, by Johanna Taubenreuther.
(g) Growing greenhouse: A mini planting kit for the patients’ rooms, by Eleni
Mouzourou and Aki Makita.
(h) At home: Handmade lampshade (clay, wool) for the common rooms at the
clinic, by Luisa Lauber and Almar de Ruiter.
(i) Bead: Padded scarves made from various fabrics for the patients to wear, each
27×140cm, sewn-in wooden beads, by Elena Eulitz.
(j) Voyage sonore: Sound installation in dual stereo, mattress, and light for the
recreation room, by Auriane Robert.
(k) Picture of thought: Dark brown synthetic hair and glue, diameter approx.
50cm, artwork for exhibition, by Magda Domeracka.
(l) Acoustic materialization: Sound installation (dual-stereo, drawing on paper),
artwork for exhibition, by Raphael Jacobs.
(m) On/Off 1&2: Wood, tanned black goat leather, rope, industrial pencils, each
drawing 97×128cm, artwork for exhibition, by Lukas Maibier.
(n) A little history of thinking automatons: Essay, poster, by Daniel Neumann.
12 Collaborative Realities

250
(o) The hand of the prophet: Essay about coping strategies by means of the
senses, poster, by Florin Cristea.
(p) Dilemma: Multimedia installation (photographs and projection), artwork for
exhibition, by Quang Duc Nguyen.
(q) Psyki-1F20–29: UNIVERSUM GRAS: Wooden box, 120×120×200cm,
paper, paint, glitter. Music: Τέχνη και Θάνατος, voice, algorithm, loop, as art-
work for exhibition, by Chloe Pare-Anastasiadou and Daniel Miehe.
(r) A true story: Video installation, cabin made of steel, sheet metal, and Plexiglas
(192 × 160 × 106 cm), video (40 min), artwork for exhibition, by Marlies
Pahlenberg.
(s) You are my window: Mixed-media installation (paintings on silk, glassware,
ladder, booklets), artwork for exhibition and a performance, by Eri Qubo.
To give you a stronger impression of the multitude and individuality of our
results, I chose ve images with the artist’s summaries.
“We are the universe” by Pao Kitsch (Fig.12.5)
To emphasize the importance of fresh air and nature, not only for visitors but also
especially for patients of the Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Campus
Berlin Mitte, I decided to create installations in the two campus gardens. I was addi-
tionally motivated by the fact that when developing a spatial intervention, many
people overlook outside spaces such as gardens. While talking to patients, I was
often told that they would love to go out into the gardens; however, since the gar-
dens appear neglected and nothing happens there, the patients usually decide to
stay inside.
Since my artistic practice in recent years has focused on installations in open
spaces, I thought about how I can restore to a place the magic that it needs. The rst
thing that struck me was the lack of color in the gardens. So, I decided to make a
subtle intervention by introducing movable full and half spheres painted in mother-
of- pearl color. Light plays an important role in this installation, since the sunrays
Fig. 12.5 Garden
installation at the Campus
Charité Mitte, 1:50-scale
model
T. C. Pollmann

251
will animate the spheres by making them shimmer in a range of different tones
and colors.
However, the idea behind my installation is not only to make the place more
beautiful but also to allow the people using the garden to engage with their environ-
ment, and thus actively participate in creating a dynamic landscape. For this reason,
both the full and half spheres will be movable. By moving the spheres around and
arranging them according to personal preferences, patients will be able to create
their own universe within the Charité gardens. In addition to the larger spheres,
which could be used by patients to sit or lie down on, I will also attach smaller
spheres to the trees. The half spheres incorporated into the trees will remain static
and simulate organic outgrowths. To attract attention to the gardens from within the
clinic, I will cover the windows with an iris lm. This iridescent material shimmers
in different colors, depending on the light and the perspective of the spectator, thus
allowing the patients to experience the garden in novel ways.
“Synesthesia” by Felix Rasehorn (Fig.12.6)
The oor plan of the psychiatric clinic building already reveals what appear to be
endless corridors. The effect of this becomes clear on site, as a lack of daylight
along with the monotonous doors lining continuous stretches of up to 35m inevita-
bly evoke feelings of disorientation, abandonment, and anonymity. Nevertheless,
the clinic’s corridors are truly indispensable as a communicative space, comparable
to a public street where different residents come together to talk and possibly form
a community. What can help a space—primarily dened only in functional terms—
to support its social and communicative qualities? This project focuses on changing
the experience of space through the use of light. Light strips and indirect lighting,
reected by colored surfaces on the wall and ceiling, will be installed to replace the
Fig. 12.6 Cellulose reector for the light situation in the long oor of the clinic, painted, model
120×55×10cm
12 Collaborative Realities

252
constant, direct lighting that currently dominates the entire corridor. This will create
a rhythmically changing intensity of light, making the corridor itself a kind of lumi-
nary. The differentiation of color will help to create distinct ambiances in the corri-
dor and a common synesthetic space.
“The colors of waiting” by Maria Evridiki Poulopoulou (Fig.12.7)
As a painter, I asked myself: What are the colors of waiting? My aim was to
develop a collaborative project that would actively engage both patients and visitors
of the Charité—those waiting a short time for an ofce door to open as well as those
waiting for weeks and months for their therapies to end so that they can leave
the clinic.
I came up with the idea of developing a coloring book. As a starting point, I used
my own painting that depicted a woman looking out of a window. I transformed this
painting into an abstract image consisting merely of outlines. Then I divided the
image into nine sections, each of which became a separate page with an abstract
pattern of black lines. Since I repeated each of the nine motives three times, the
coloring book contains 27 pages. Finally, I made two copies of the book and attached
nine coloring pencils to each of them.
I left one of the books at the Charité Outpatient Clinic for 2weeks, whereas I
took the other one with me during the weekly visits to the Department of Psychiatry
and Psychotherapy, Campus Charité Berlin Mitte. I asked those who were interested
to ll the pages with colors of their choice using the black outlines as mere sugges-
tions—they could decide to paint within the lines or disrespect them. Each page in
the book was perforated so that it could easily be torn out. Those who contributed to
the books were offered the possibility of either tearing out their page and keeping it
Fig. 12.7 An assemblage
of 25 hand-colored pages,
rearranged on the wall,
each measuring
30×30cm, second copy
of the sketchbook
T. C. Pollmann

253
for themselves or leaving it in the book. By combining 25 pages from different parts
of the two books, I reassembled the sections of the abstract image based on my
painting. The result is a new image created through a collaborative exchange. The
coloring book thus allows me to engage in an open dialogue with those who wish to
paint or draw in it.
“Shel[l]ter” by Johanna Taubenreuther (Fig.12.8)
The extended stays and extraordinary living situation of patients often result in a
eld of tension, especially in the psychiatric ward’s shared bedrooms. Perception is
strongly affected by one’s own state of mind and by fellow patients in a place where
there is a lack of privacy, and personal needs can hardly be met. Shel[l]ter is designed
to reduce this internal and external tension. The organic membrane combines lumi-
nous, sound-absorbing, and sight-protecting elements.
Intuitively, it can be placed in different positions to allow the patient to create the
desired degree of shielding. Like an extended physical gesture, it can express the
need to delineate one’s own territory or open one’s space to others. With its concave,
shell-like shape, inspired by a clamshell, it conveys the feeling of an interior space
that offers security and protection.
“You are my window” by Eri Qubo (Fig.12.9)
The central components of my ongoing project, “You are my window,” are
painted portraits based on a series of extensive interviews I conducted with indi-
viduals who are neither afraid of facing nor of showing their vulnerability.
In this project, I explored the self-image of the individuals as well as the possibil-
ity of sharing the experience that arises from self-reection. The point of departure
for each interview was the question: What would your ideal self-portrait look like?
I continued interviewing each person until I had the feeling that I could visually
grasp their self-image. I then created their painted portrait by using my own visual
Fig. 12.8 Light and privacy screen (felt and light) for the shared bedrooms at the clinic
12 Collaborative Realities

254
style to faithfully express their self-image as I understood it. The image that arises
from this process is necessarily a collaborative portrait, a result of the interaction
between the personal information willingly disclosed to me by the interviewed per-
son and my own personal and cultural heritage. Thus, the interviewee’s self- image
is ltered through my reections on myself and the world around me.
Furthermore, I decided to examine how my own self-image is transformed
through interactions with other people. Out of this examination, I developed a sto-
rytelling performance as a form of self-portrait. In the performance, my personal
experiences and stories are intertwined with words told by others and accompanied
by various sounds and song fragments.
In visions4people, the individual results emerged through our experiences and
reections during our performances. The individual contributions of the participants
accentuate problematic situations, offer critical reections on fundamental ques-
tions, and suggest prospects for change. For the overall concept, the development of
a conclusion itself became a performative practice, especially during the publica-
tion’s conceptualization and elaboration.
Fig. 12.9 “You are my
window,” mixed-media
installation (paintings on
silk, glassware, ladder,
booklets), artwork for
exhibition and a
performance
T. C. Pollmann

255
The Publication visions4people (Fig.12.10)
In this publication, the narration of the project shifts from its chrono-topological
localization and listing of methodological aspects to an articulation of challenges
and complex situations. Readers can actually revisit the psychiatric clinic and
immerse themselves in the experiences via quotes from the _scape research narra-
tives, images, and descriptions. The publication opens the space for the contribu-
tions of all participants and ends with an outlook that concludes with four essays on
varied futures. It is thus, at the same time, a beginning.
The authorship extends from a single speaker to a polyphony of narrations, and
the project outcomes are the result of the transdisciplinary and collaborative
encounters.
At other psychiatric establishments in the future, visions4people can provide
contexts, possibilities, and experience values for similar activities, situations, and
arrangements.
These results and all our activities were realized by people. Here is an alphabeti-
cal list of the contributor’s rst names. (Due to privacy protection, the patients’
names are pseudonyms.) I presented the names regardless of individual roles, and
deliberately did not aggregate these roles. Thus, I emphasize that the credit goes to
individuals whom I here make visible:
Aaron Pollmann, Abigail F.Wheeler, Agata Kycia, Ahmed, Aki Makita, Almar de Ruiter,
Amélie Cayré, Andreas Heinz, Andreas Jäck, Andreas Kallfelz, Andreas Ströhle, Anke
Grünow, Arthur, Auriane Robert, Beatrice Günter, Bernhard Haslinger, Britta, Bruno,
Charlotte Mende, Chloe Pare-Anastasiadou, Christiane Pries, Christine Tkotsch, Christin-
Luisa Amann, Daniel Neumann, David, Dimitrij, Dirk, Donald, Doris Kleilein, Elena
Eulitz, Eleni Mouzourou, Elionor Sintes, Eri Qubo, Eunseo Kim, Felix Rasehorn, Ferdinand
Fig. 12.10 Cover image of the publication: harmonic distortion, photo from an architectural
model of the Psychiatric Clinic, Charité Berlin Mitte
12 Collaborative Realities

256
Köhler, Florin Cristea, Frank, Frederike Rehfeldt, Frida Grubba, Hanna, Heide, Heike
Reuter, Henri, Jan Liebscher, Jannis Kempkens, Jason Danziger, Jinan Abi Jumaa, Johanna
Ewert, Johanna Taubenreuther, Johannes Jansen, Johannes Regente, Joost van Kessel, Julia
Bahn, Julia Emmler, Juri-Apollo Drews, Karina, Karla, Kathrin Mähling, Katrin Bergner,
Kim, Klara, Klaus, Lars, Leonie Baumann, Lisa, Lloyd, Luisa Haase-Kiewning, Luisa
Lauber, Luise, Lukas Maibier, Lynne Kolar-Thompson, Magda Domeracka, Maria
Bierbaums, Maria Evrdiki Poulopoulou, Maria Jacquin, Mark, Marlies Pahlenberg, Martin,
Matthias, Max, Maximilian Hinterecker, Michael Thomas Taylor, Michael, Miriam, Mirko
Rachor, Mr. Hellwig, Mr. Schröter, Nassim Mehran, Nick, Niels Walter, Nina Fürstenberg,
Olaf, Osmel Brooks Morejon, Pao Kitsch, Paul, Pedro Moraes Landucci, Peter Wiezorrek,
Philip, Phillip Krüning, Pierre, Quang Duc Nguyen, Raphael Hofmann, Raphael Jacobs,
Roland, Sabine Biedermann, Sam, Sarah Bäcker, Shelley Tootell, Sophie Schmidt, Stefanie,
Susanne Rösler, Sven, Theresa Hartherz, Thomas Stodulka, Tim, Ulrike Kluge.
12.6.2 How Can Your Results Help Us Understand theMore
Complex Reality?
From Being Affected to Getting Involved In the eld of psychiatry, visions4peo-
ple led to a critical questioning of the approaches of design thinking, participatory
design, and artistic activity. Some of the attempted approaches and methods were
not adequate for our specic situations. In our assessment, the use of methods such
as prefabricated questionnaires and readymade interaction kits build up and main-
tain a distance that prevents the initiators from getting in contact with the people
they want to interview. The roles of the researchers and researchees remain prefab-
ricated and predened by the tools, channeling the contact and the outcomes and
keeping a distance that obstructs an exchange of knowledge and information. If the
participatory act is methodically reduced to lling out forms, the activity is data
extraction and not participation. Cooperation and collaboration are excluded, along
with all possibilities for opening decision-making processes.
For the area of psychiatry, as well as for many other areas of public and social
participation, an interpersonal exchange between affected and researching subjects
with the objective of a cooperative or even collaborative way of working is a prereq-
uisite for participation to take place.
The notion of social participation is no more than lip service if the active design
and structuring of public and social spaces do not include participation in decision-
making processes by the affected parties. The question is always, however, who
initiates these processes, and out of what interest. In the worst case, “participation
is used as a veiled tactic to increase protability” (Miessen, 2012, p.35).
Working in transdisciplinary contexts means encountering one’s own restrictive
viewpoints rst, then nding out about the political foundations, rules, and restric-
tions—and making others aware of them. Framed by a profession, a role, a disci-
pline, or a code of behavior, and at the same time changing that role will inevitably
cause friction in your respective eld. The challenge is to articulate destructive
T. C. Pollmann

257
framing and routines of conduct, and to prepare the ground for concepts that open
up space and time for improving energy ows and forces among involved people.
As far as my experience goes, science is not the only source for knowledge pro-
duction, but part of it, with a strong emphasis on analytic activities. Still, science,
knowledge production, and practice are treated as different areas: Science does not
actively extend into the improvement of situations, while scientic results do not
change destructive practices, behavior, approaches, or processes.
A ow from scientic investigation to practical consequences seems to be a rare
phenomenon. The effect on the eld that was data-extracted often remains slim:
“Not all authors express this in such a decisive form as Wolcott (2005), who declares
outright: ‘The researcher has nothing to offer the eld’ and points out that research
is ultimately of use especially for the researchers themselves” (Hamm, 2013,
p.68,Wolcott 2005,p.128).
Here, it might be time to extend the eld of responsibility, and voice options for
offering something for that eld.
Also, knowledge production advances often in heterogenic elds outside aca-
demia and its disciplines. The sources for novel approaches to knowledge produc-
tion might not be found solely in conventional institutions.
Made-Ness The six words “from being affected to getting involved” outline the
conclusion of visions4people. They refer not only to the roles of the patient, but also
to those of the psychiatrist, psychologist, or researcher, and can also be transmitted
to their respective institutional roles.
As a consequence of this conclusion, I developed teaching and learning modes
that enable decision-making processes as a joint activity.
In awareness of the made-ness of structures and knowledge, I learned to ask:
What am I actually “making”?
Whom am I “making” it for?
Is my “making” helpful to those who are affected by it?
Are their voices heard—and if not, how can I “make” them heard?
Do they have the power to decide, and if not, who is “making it” for them? (Fig.12.11)
12.7 The Bigger Picture
I would like to explain how visions4people is embedded in the two interleaving
elds of transdisciplinarity and artistic research.
12 Collaborative Realities

258
12.7.1 Transdisciplinarity
Transdisciplinarity has emerged over the last few decades as an attempt to address disci-
plinary fragmentation. It presents an alternative to the paradigm of simplication, reduction
and disjunction, taking on the challenge of complexity and proposing to connect and con-
textualize knowledge. […] Its goals are to propose generative frameworks that can integrate
new perspectives and raise different questions. It also tackles problems that have historically
not been addressed because they are blind spots in disciplinary discourse, living in between
disciplinary perspectives, or are simply considered too large to be addressed by hyper-
specialized researchers (Montuori & Donnelly, 2016, p.752).
Today, transdisciplinary projects are being performed in all artistic and scientic
disciplines. They share the awareness that our knowledge is constructed, developed
in the contexts of existing cultures, and can be linked and exchanged in an overarch-
ing manner. The implicit reexive process questions each individual researcher and
their theoretical and cultural basic assumptions.
Transdisciplinarity offers no rmly established research methods, but instead
entails examining, integrating, and developing possibilities and approaches from
various disciplines in order to mutually explore new trails of scientic, social, or
cultural change. But these endeavors are not wonderlands; they contain stubborn
structures, unmentioned rules and restrictions from participating institutions, and
your own and your research partner’s fears, reservations, prejudices, avoidance
strategies, routines, mannerisms, objectives, idealizations, and ideologies.
Conicts cannot be avoided when collaborating in a transdisciplinary manner, as
different backgrounds, assumptions, and perspectives collide—with the enormous
benet that the outcome might depict problems more plastically and thoroughly.
Fig. 12.11 After Vernissage, visions4people on Brunnenstrasse, Berlin Mitte
T. C. Pollmann

259
Whether bridging disciplinary divides between different ways of knowing within academia
(inter-disciplinarity), or extending the “right to do research” to marginalized communities
and groups (trans-disciplinarity), a key feature of these processes is that of reection—both
on the world and on one’s role in that world (Toomey etal., 2015, p.1).
12.7.2 Artistic Research
If “art” is but a mode of perception, “artistic research” must also be the mode of a process.
Therefore, there can be no categorical distinction between “scientic” and “artistic”
research— because the attributes independently modulate a common carrier, namely, the
aim for knowledge within research. Artistic research can therefore always also be scientic
research […]. For this reason, many artistic research projects are genuinely interdisciplin-
ary, or, to be more exact, indisciplinary (Klein, 2010/2017, 11th para.).
Artistic research is carried out in all artistic disciplines and is heterogeneous in
terms of content, methods, practices, conducts, and outcomes. Topics and methods
for investigating can be selected from all areas of human activity, and will be com-
piled for the specic project. Projects might not follow the linear structure of a sci-
entic study, but apply iterative, spiral constructions. Each artistic research project
creates its own composition of starting points, methods, and outcomes. In the con-
text of visions4people, the term “artistic research” lent itself as a possible denition
of what we were doing—perhaps the only one.
A more specic aspect might be disclosed by Gilles Deleuze, who has had a
strong impact on artistic research. We also intensely discussed the revolutionary
step towards a complete transformation of psychiatry in la Borde, initiated by
Guattari, Deleuze, and Oury. Deleuze thought of art and “[…] literature as a clinic
that complements or corrects medicine, for it situates itself at the level of a symp-
tomatology of real effects rather than an etiology of abstract causes” (Sauvagnargues,
2019, p.15).
According to Deleuze, artistic activity does not consist of a production of aes-
thetic forms but of capturing the forces that permeate our bodies and societies. The
assembling, disclosing, and displaying of these forces allows intensications, sub-
verting stereotypes and clichés, thus unleashing political power through the artwork.
A reason for the interest in artistic research from other elds of knowledge pro-
duction—but also for the challenges in transdisciplinary projects—is provided by
the following quote:
But the image is not a statement and, according to Deleuze’s distinction, requires semiotics
and not semantics, that is, a theory of non-discursive signs that is not content to duplicate
the rhetorics of signication or to imitate linguistic operations. Semiotics denes itself as a
system of images and signs independent of language in general. Hence the difculty of an
analysis of the non-discursive arts, for it is necessary to learn in discourse what is not
derived by it, and to extract thought from a signaletic, non-linguistic matter that is neverthe-
less not amorphous but semiotic (Sauvagnargues, 2019, p.12).
12 Collaborative Realities

260
12.7.3 Massive Serialized Collaborative Fictions
Agnes Bolinska and Joseph D.Martin (2020), scholars in the history and philoso-
phy of science, offer this perspective:
Science, therefore, does not resemble a television show so much as a more sprawling c-
tional world, the product of many (often competing) authorial visions, with diverse and
interlocking, but not necessarily unied, sub-plots, that evolves through multiple media.
Cook (2013) calls these Massive Serialized Collaborative Fictions (MSCFs).
This novel approach to science places art and science in the same eld of engage-
ment in collaborative ction. Following this plot, I recapped what we had experi-
enced with visions4people and found a term—and a title. We had experienced
collaborative realities.
12.8 Conclusion
I see knowledge production as an extensive, multi-dimensional structure that is con-
tinuously deformed and reformed, deconstructed and reconstructed, formalized,
expanded, and disrupted. These transformations rearrange and reshape approaches
to past, present, and future events and circumstances, whereas visions—be they
scientic, science-ctional, or ctional—are the rst potential anchor points for
future realizations.
Fig. 12.12 Harmonic distortion mirrored, photo from architectural model of Psychiatry Charité
Berlin Mitte
T. C. Pollmann

261
This constant information is entwined and entangled with cultural, political,
societal, social, psychological, ecological, and as-yet unlabeled activities of knowl-
edge production. They appear massively interconnected, with overlaps and exclu-
sions, evolving, uniting, dividing, vanishing, or morphing into something
novel—thus creating exponential complexity.
We humans live among, on, in, and with these formations, shaping and being
shaped by them. We are in-formed by and dividuals of them: part-givers and
part-takers.
Our individual perspective’s starting points: an indisciplinary mélange of aims
and desires; polyphony, polytely. From here, we emplot our collaborative ctions in
interactions with complex realities. And when facing the target points of our inves-
tigations, we nd them constructed—by us (Fig.12.12).
References
Boger, M-A. (2019). Die Methode der sozialwissenschaftlichen Kartographierung (edition assem-
blage). Rosenblatt.
Bolinska, A., & Martin, J.D. (2020). Negotiating history: Contingency, canonicity, and case
studies. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 80, 37–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
shpsa.2019.05.003
Cook, R.T. (2013). Canonicity and Normativity in Massive, Serialized, Collaborative Fiction, The
Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism (p.271), 71:3. Summer 2013 C_2013 The American
Society for Aesthetics.
Deleuze, G. (2001). What is the creative act? In S.Lotringer & S.Cohen (Eds.), French theory in
America (p.103). Routledge.
Funke, J. (2004). Komplexes Problemlösen (Complex problem solving). In J.Funke (Ed.), Denken
und Problemlösen (Thinking and problem solving) (Enzyklopädie der Psychologie, Topic
Area C: Theorie und Forschung, Series II: Kognition, Volume 8: Denken und Problemlösen).
Hogrefe.
Hamm, M. (2013). Engagierte Wissenschaft zwischen partizipativer Forschung und reexiver
Ethnographie: Methodische Überlegungen zur Forschung in sozialen Bewegungen (Engaged
scholarship between participatory research and reexive ethnography: Methodological reec-
tions on research in social movements). In B.Binder, K.Ebel, S.Hess, A.Keinz, & F. von Bose
(Eds.), Eingreifen, Kritisieren, Verändern!? (Intervene, criticize, change!?). Westfälisches
Dampfboot.
Klein, J. (2010/2017). What is artistic research? Journal of Artistic Research. Recallable via:
https://www.jar- online.net/what- artistic- research
Miessen, M. (2012). Alptraum Partizipation (Participation nightmare]. Merve.
Montuori, A., & Donnelly, G. (2016). The creativity of culture and the culture of creativity
research: The promise of integrative transdisciplinarity. In V.P. Glăveanu (Ed.), The Palgrave
handbook of creativity and culture research (pp.743–765). Palgrave Macmillan.
Pollmann, T.C. (2019). visions4people. Jovis Verlag.
Sauvagnargues, A. (2019). Ethologie der Kunst, Deleuze, Guattari und Simondon (Ethology of art,
Deleuze, Guattari and Simondon). August Verlag.
Toomey, A. H., Markusson, N., Adams, E., & Brockett, B. (2015). Inter- and trans-disciplinary
research: A critical perspective. Recallable via: https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/con-
tent/documents/612558- Inter- %20and%20Trans- disciplinary%20Research%20- %20A%20
Critical%20Perspective.pdf
Wolcott, H. (2005). The Art of Fieldwork. Alta Mira.
12 Collaborative Realities

277© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to
Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022
M. Watzlawik, S. Salden (eds.), Courageous Methods in Cultural Psychology,
Theory and History in the Human and Social Sciences,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-93535-1
A
Academic psychology, 25, 30, 32, 33
Acoustic map, 181
Aesthetical ambiguity, 224
Aesthetics, 160
Affective structures, 178
Amazonian culture, 40, 41
Ambiguity, 27, 33
Americanization, 30
Anthropology, 91, 93, 97, 137
Anthropology theory, 99
Anxiety, 247
Apperception, 47
Art
morphological psychology of, 219–221
Art coaching, 219–221, 226, 227
with Moses of Michelangelo, 226, 227
Art coaching, from art research to, 224–226
Art research
morphological studies in, 221–224
Audio-video data, 110
Ausdruckspsychologie (as “psychology of
expression”), 26–32
Ausdrucksuntersuchung (examination of
expression), 29
Authentic ethnographic visual data, 80
Autobiography, 57–60, 67
Autoethnography, 57, 58, 65
B
Bigger Picture, 257
artistic research, 259
massive serialized collaborative
ctions, 260
transdisciplinarity, 258
C
Calculus, 41, 45, 50
Cultural artifact, 266
Childcare, 72, 78, 79, 83, 86, 87
Child-directed communication (CDC), 137
Childhood, 86
See also Prosocial behaviour, children’s
Circle time activities, 143
Clinical-critical method, 99, 104
Cognitive production, 104
Cognitivistic approaches, 134
Collaborative realities, 231, 232
analysis
from thread to threat, 245, 246
neglect, 247, 248
obstacles, 248
approaches and methods, 256
made-ness, 257
methods vs. practices, 239
outcomes, 248, 249
researcher and magnifying glass, 232, 233
Shel[l]ter, 253
social participation, notion of, 256
Synesthesia, 251, 252
vision4people, 233, 234, 255, 256
Common sense, 48, 49
Communication, 37, 42, 47–49
Communication systems, 41
Index

278
Communicative devices, 146
Competence, 37
Compulsory heterosexuality, 198
Computationalism, 11
Conception of space, 46
Confrontation
vulva assignment as, 199–201
Constitutional typology research, 271
Constructivist psychology, 92
Contemplative solitude, 40, 42, 47
Contemporary academic psychology, 21
Contemporary discursivism, 13
Contemporary qualitative methods, 6
Context-specic interviews, 99
Conversation analysis, 133, 150
Counter-memorial turn, 111
Counter-memorials reverse, 111
COVID-19 pandemic shutdown measures, 8
Cult of empiricism, 6
Cultural methods, 87
Cultural psychology, 108, 219, 265, 266
Culture, 266
Curiosity, 273
D
Data collection, 111, 112
Disability, 56, 57, 60, 61, 66
Discursive psychology (DP), 134, 136,
137, 150
Discursivism, 3, 12
E
Ecological psychology, 120
Education, 49
Embodied and material devices, 140
Embodied expression, 146
Embodied knowledge, 202–204
Engagement
listening for voices of, 204–207
discovering new relational selves,
207, 208
Entängstigung, 247
Epistemology of ignorance, 195–197
Escaping voice, 62
Ethics, 269, 272, 273
Ethnographic approach, 92
Ethnographic research tool, 108
Ethnographic work, 96
Ethnography, 57, 74, 80, 91, 95, 96, 100, 104,
108, 109
Ethnomethodology, 133
Everyday practices, 91
Expert interviews, 169–172
F
Field observations, 76
Figuration, 219
Flechsig’s method, 20
Franco’s grave, 126
Freud, Sigmund, 214, 215
academic habitat, 18
Ausdruckspsychologie, 27–31
early publications, 18
method of “catharsis”, 21
Freud’s “latest method”, 18
Freud’s psychology of art, 218, 219
Friedrich, C.D., 226
From-tools-to-theories, 4
Frozen (lm), 59, 62–65
G
Galileian models, 24–26, 30–32
Galileian paradigm, 24
Gendered violence, 198
Gestalt analogies, 222
Gestalt psychology, 219
Ginzburg, Carlo, 22, 24–26, 30
Ginzburg’s argumentation, 22
Ginzburg’s semiotic model, 22, 24, 32, 33
Good child/bad child analogy, 76
Gold-chlorid method, 18, 19
Graphology, 28
Groundbreaking theory, 136
Guilt/over-responsibility voice, 62, 64
H
Handlungsuntersuchung (examination of
conduct), 29
Harmony, 47
Hermeneutics, 50
Hiding voice, 58, 61, 67
Homogenized cultures, 93
I
Idealization voice, 62
Ideological message, 121
Interaural time difference (ITD), 45
Interdisciplinary approach, 93
Interdisciplinary dialogue, 100
Interdisciplinary methodology, 96
Index

279
Interpretative sociology
multisensory ethnography and, 161, 162
ethnographic walks through
Warsaw, 172–174
expert interviews, 169–172
journals of sensory experiences,
174, 175
mental maps of city, 163, 165–167
Introspection, 55, 57, 65, 67
Intuitional understanding, 31
Invisible voice, 67
IRE question, 141
J
Julius II, 221
K
Knowledge-building processes, 94
L
Language, 12, 13, 158, 270
musicalization, 39
musicalized use, 38
rational use, 37
systems of communication, 41
Language exchange, 266
LGBTI* communities, 273
Linguistic data, 266
Linguistic turn in philosophy, 3, 11
Listening for voices, 58
Logic, 38
Loureiro, Paes, 40, 41, 43, 49
M
Made-ness, 257
Mainstream psychology, 4–6
Map of hearing, 183
Map of taste, 186
Map of touch, 185
Maps of senses, 175–179, 181, 184, 187
Massive serialized collaborative ctions
(MSCF), 260
McDonaldization, 268
Meaning
formations of, 219–221
Meaning-making processes, 128, 267,
270, 271
Medical gaze, 56
Medical semiotics, 22, 24
Memorial, 116
Memorial pool, 118, 121
Mental maps, 163, 165–167
Message/meaning, 218, 219
Methodological adaptation, 110
Methodological fetishism, 6
Methodological toolbox, 37
Mobile methods, 128
Mobilities, 107
Modern cultural psychology, 18, 33
Moses guration, 219–221
Moses of Michelangelo, 217, 218, 220
Moses of Michelangelo, art coaching with,
226, 227
Multigenerational households, 79
Multimodal analysis, 138
Multimodal interaction analysis, 131–135
Multimodal video analysis, 137, 150, 151
Multisensory ethnography, 13, 158
and interpretative sociology, 161, 162
city, twenty sentences
about, 162, 163
ethnographic walks through
Warsaw, 172–174
expert interviews, 169–172
journals of sensory experiences,
174, 175
mental maps of city, 163, 165–167
preconceptions, 159, 160
reconstructing realities, 158, 159
Music, 44
and the erotic, 48
rationality, 47
Music and psychology, 39
Musical harmony, 45
Musical systems, 41, 47, 50
Musicalization, 39, 42, 44, 48
Musicology, 40
N
Narratives, 42–44, 50
Negative sociocultural representations, 197
Neo-Marxism, 11
Noise pollution reduction, 8
Nomothetic sciences, 6
Nonnito, 221
Nonprobability sampling techniques, 72
Non-reective behaviors, 112
O
Objectication, 61
Operationalism, 30
Othering, 56, 59
Index

280
P
Parent–child interactions, 148
Parent–child relationships, 78
Passing phenomenon, 56, 57
Pedagogical disembodiment, 208–210
People with disabilities (PwD), 55–57
Performance, 271
Personal commitment, 7–9
Personal involvement, 9, 10
Personal knowledge, 8, 9
Physical disability, 57
Piaget’s clinical method, 94
Pleasing-other voice, 62
Polyrhythm, 43
Positive reconnection voice, 63
Post-visit interview, 111, 117
Post-walk playback interview method, 118
Poulopoulou, Maria Evridiki, 252, 253
Practical psychology, 272
Predictability, 268
Projectional method, 163
Prosocial acts, 73
Prosocial behaviour, children’s, 73
classication, 74
culture-specic form, 78
expressions, 71
history of research, 74
laboratory-based experimental studies, 74
pictures and their analysis, 81–87
prosocial acts, 73
prosociality, 74
sharing, 76–77
sibling interactions, 78–79
theoretical frameworks and
methodologies, 79–80
visual data, 73
Prosociality, 79, 87
Psychoanalysis, 21, 22, 24, 29–32
Psychological art research, 214, 215
Psychological examination, 26, 31
Psychological methodology, 4, 31, 33
Psychology, 93, 96, 107
Psychology of art, 218, 219
Psychotechnics, 25, 26, 31, 272
Q
Qualitative research, 6, 7, 268
Quality criteria, 268
Qubo, Eri, 253, 254
R
Rasehorn, Felix, 251, 252
Reading traces, 18, 22, 33
Repair mechanisms, 134
Repetition, 43
Represented voice, 63, 68
Researcher–participant
relationship, 267
Resonance, 269
Responsibility, 62, 65, 67
Rhythm, 43
S
Scientic knowledge, 5, 8–10, 38
Self-acceptance, 63
Self-accepting voice, 63, 66
Self-blaming voice, 62
Self-care/love voice, 66
Self-observation, 47
Self-othering, 60, 67
Self-reection, 267
Semiotic analysis, 33
Semiotic model, 24, 25, 30, 32, 33
Semiotics, 32
Sense impression, 38, 42, 43, 45, 48, 50
Sensosphere, 178
Sensus communis (1907), 47, 49, 50
Sexual education, 199
Sexual orientation, 273
Sharing, 75–77
Sibling interactions, 78–79
Silence, 196
Situational ethics, 273
Smellscapes, 179
Social interaction, 71–74, 85, 87, 271
Social interactional models, 79
Social justice voice, 66, 68
Social practices, 104
Social psychology, 49
Sociocultural representations, 192
Socio-relational circuits
embodied knowledges, 202
Sound, 44
Space, 44–46
Subcam interviews, 112
Subcam video, 116, 117
Subcams, 107
Subjective camera, 108–113,
115, 118
Subjective camera method, 13
Subjective Evidence Based Ethnography
(SEBE), 109
Subsidiary, 8
Symptomatology, 22, 24
Synesthesia, 42, 251, 252
Synesthetic process, 43, 46–49
Synesthetic rationale, 43
Index

281
T
Tacit knowledge, 8
Tactile sensations, 184
Taste map, 187
Taubenreuther, Johanna, 253
Technological
advancements, 71, 87
Technology, 10
Tender empiricism, 214
Thematic map, 181
Thematic sense maps, 178
Time, 42–44
Traditional conception
of science, 5
Traditional memorial, 111
Transcription conventions, 151
Transdisciplinarity, 258, 259
Transitions, 138
Triangulation, 101
Twenty Statement Test, 163
V
Verbal communication, 37
Video analysis, 135, 150, 271
Vision, 238
Vision4people, 233, 234, 255, 256
Visual ethnography, 80
Visual research, 271
Voice-centered listening approach, 58
Vulva assignment
as confrontation, 199–201
W
Walk-along method, 108, 109
Written autobiography, 57
Wundt’s Völkerpsychologie (1900–1920), 271
Y
You are my window, 253, 254
Index