…architecture of something else

The Jakarta Post, 20 October 2007

Opinion
Paramita Atmodiwirjo and Yandi Andri Yatmo, Jakarta

Children are city dwellers, just like adults. They have the right to live a meaningful life within urban environments.

The Child Friendly Cities (Kota Layak Anak) project that has been initiated in several Indonesian cities is an effort by the government to begin to acknowledge the rights of children in cities. Following a pilot project in five cities in 2006, the State Ministry for the Women’s Empowerment is expanding the program to another 10 cities.

A range of different initiatives may be developed to promote children’s rights in cities and give them the opportunity to live in a safe and healthy environment. One may imagine a child-friendly city, where many services and facilities for all children are available, including attention and protection for marginalized and at-risk groups of children.

A child-friendly city is a place where all children have easy access to housing, health and education. It is also the place where children can happily enjoy green and unpolluted playgrounds and a safe walk to and from school.

However, the concept of Child Friendly Cities requires much more than just the physical development of the urban environment. An important aspect in this concept is the need to promote children as active agents in their environment. This implies the active involvement of children in deciding about what happen to places where they live. This is also clearly stated in the definition of child-friendly cities, which should fulfill the rights of children to “influence decisions about their city” and “express their opinion on the city they want”.

Giving opportunities to children to have a say about their life is quite a challenge in our culture. We have been culturally educated for so long that “children are to be seen and not heard”. Thus most decisions in our society are made by the adults. Within families, schools and communities, we are used to the situation where children are only passive participants, merely following the programs or activities planned by adults.

The spirit of child-friendly cities in giving children a say also suggests how our society should change its attitudes toward children. We should begin to realize that our children possess potentials that should not be ignored. And they have the ability to express their ideas and opinions on matters that we normally consider as adult business.

A number of projects in many countries have proven the successful involvement of children in making decisions about various aspects of urban life. In London, for example, a commission worked on a project involving young Londoners in the strategy development process of the Great London Authority. A forum called Munchner Kinder and Jugendforum was established in Munich to allow children and teenagers to have a say in the planning process of their city.

There are even more attempts to involve children at more micro levels. For example, children might be asked to give opinions about public transportation, to design their own school or to participate in the revitalization of a neighborhood park.

The involvement of children in making decisions about their cities brings together a range of educational values. It helps empower the children to become active citizens. It also enhances their sense of belonging to their environment. If our cities currently have so many problems, we must try our best to educate the next generation who will eventually lead our cities.

For some time, we have organized a series of workshops for primary schoolchildren. We asked the children to imagine the future of the city where they now live, and together we built a 3D model based on their ideas.

We found that this exercise is a powerful vehicle to involve children in the planning process and to give them some freedom to express their opinion. It is a way to develop their imagination and creativity about their environment, while at the same time teaching responsibility, awareness and sensitivity to what happens in their surroundings. It also provides opportunities for the children to learn about collaboration, and the importance of working together to make our environment better.

The involvement of children in the process of planning, developing and managing our cities should be at the heart of all efforts to realize child-friendly cities. The provision of physical facilities and services may have more direct effects in fulfilling the children’s short-term basic needs, but promoting their active involvement will be a more valuable investment for the future of our cities.

So, have we already asked the children what they want? Perhaps it is a question that we all need to address before embarking into any development programs for our urban children.

The writers, lecturers of architecture at the University of Indonesia, develop environmental education programs for primary schoolchildren with the Education Care Unit. They can be contacted at mitayandi@gmail.com

The Jakarta Post, 30 July 2007
Opinion and Editorial

Yandi Andri Yatmo, Jakarta

Our cities have failed to cater to the needs of residents. Regardless of never-ending efforts at physical development in urban areas, issues of disorder and chaos keep emerging in many cities. Conflicts between the haves and the have-nots are evident in most urban areas where physical development takes place.

The construction of public buildings may create happiness for some parts of society, but such new development is usually followed by further problems — the poor losing their space and opportunities for earning money, the new development cutting off access and shelter for some people and the new buildings taking up green areas.

Some attempts at urban development have tried hard to meet the needs for city inhabitants, but often the services provided are not utilized as intended. Pedestrian paths are built with nobody walking on them, open spaces are provided where no one wants to come and play, and street vendors are provided with spaces for trading where there are no ways to attract customers. Meanwhile children are content playing in dangerous places, people feel happy walking on busy streets with no pedestrian paths and street vendors keep trading in illegal spots.

The long unsolved issues of our urban environments might be best defined as an outcome of what I call “”mismatch policy””. “”Mismatch”” occurs when there is a discrepancy between two or more things. In this case, the mismatch occurs between the ideal vision of an urban environment created by urban elites and the reality of everyday life for most city dwellers.

An ideal urban environment is something that everybody may dream of. It is normal for humans to aim for perfect and harmonious surroundings. In the context of the urban environment, this ideal vision is often translated into efforts to create an orderly environment, with everything in its place. The planning of cities is conducted mostly by architects and planners, in an attempt to create orderly environments that are neat, tidy and pleasant for the eye.

But efforts to achieve such an ideal will very likely be shattered by the reality of urban life. The dynamic reality of urban life is very much different from the ideal vision of a harmonious and orderly environment. The everyday reality of our cities always contains a lot of conflicts, contradictions, disorderliness and unpredictability, which is contrary to the orderly plan as imagined by planners.

The phenomenon of street vendors everywhere in cities is a clear example of how it is hardly possible to maintain a place as orderly as planned. In fact, such a phenomenon may represent the real everyday pattern of our cities.

I believe it is time for us to realize that there is a serious mismatch between the ideal vision of the elites and the reality of life as experienced by most urban inhabitants. This mismatch is very likely to happen when the elites keep being distanced from everyday life.

Planners and designers tend to translate their ideal vision of an urban environment into nice plans that look good on paper, thus showing our cities from the top. But no one ever views our cities that way except when flying. Similarly, beautifully rendered 3-D models show nice and orderly environments as imagined by the planners. Such images are transformed and filled with disorder and unexpected things once the space is utilized by people.

The mismatch between ideal vision and reality is much related to the education of those entering the planning and design profession. There has been a tendency to educate students to create the built environment as an “”I want”” or an “”I think”” ideal. This has led to a utopian approach that only solves the issues on the surface.

What is lacking from this kind of education is the encouragement to explore deeply who we are, what is so special about us and what makes us different. That is the only way to fully understand the reality of urban life, which may differ from one location to another. The ideal should not be taken as a universal value that ignores everyday, local characteristics.

The emphasis on the materiality of the built environment has also brought the tendency for visual beauty, or how an environment should look good to the eye. In fact, often the real meaning of beauty lies in the experience when we can mingle with our neighbors, enjoy various activities, looking at and talking to one another. It is the real beauty that can be experienced through all the senses. When such simple and trivial things from our everyday life are not considered during the planning process, very likely mismatch will occur.

A good policy regarding the planning and design of urban environments would take into account the unexpected aspects of everyday life, including disorder. The vision of an ideal environment is always open to question. In fact, we need some disorder, or surprises and unexpected things, to live a happy and dynamic life in cities. And it is very important that any planning policies take into account those unexpected aspects, without being too preoccupied with the ideal visions of perfect and beautiful environments.

The writer is an architect and lecturer at the University of Indonesia. He can be reached at yandiay@yahoo.co.uk.

The Jakarta Post, 24 May 2007
Opinion and Editorial

Yandi Andri Yatmo, Jakarta

It is time for us to re-examine our principles of urban planning. Our cities, just like the majority of modern cities worldwide, should be planned based on the vision to create an ideal urban environment.

“A place of everything and everything in its place,” is an old adage that best describes the idea behind modern city planning. Each area in a city needs to be associated with certain functions, and there should be no unplanned or unexpected use of areas that may interrupt order.

Such ideal intentions should also be reflected in the geometry of our cities. Modern city planning tends to emphasize the formal arrangement of space, using axes and grids as its major tools.

Priority is usually given to the development of buildings, urban spaces and streets and structural aesthetics to achieve visual harmony. Every function needs to be sited in its appropriate location; every single building should be attractive; every single place should be appealing and every street should be nice and clean, with green areas for visual pleasure.

But the current state of our cities indicates that such approaches have not worked. Urban planning, which is based on ideal order and geometry, can only create problems for inhabitants. The efforts made to create an ideal environment do not match the reality of what we see with our own eyes on a daily basis.

One of the biggest problems in modern city planning principles is the ignorance of the important concept of connectivity. Our cities are not designed in accordance with the principles of topology — a mathematical branch that deals with position.

Topology is contrary to common geometry, which puts emphasis on how points, lines and planes are composed in order to create ideal solid forms. Topology does not deal with a single object and its visual attributes, but pays attention to how an object may be connected to or situated in relation to another object.

Understanding the principle of topology may help a great deal in planning our man-made environment. Some important concepts in topology, such as “connectivity” and “networks”, may change our perception of how cities should be planned. Until now, the formal arrangement and visual composition of building blocks, urban areas and streets have been the main focal points in designing our cities.

Topologically speaking, these are not as important as re-thinking how our places and spatial experiences are connected to one another.

In fact, life in the city cannot be abstracted into a formal and visual composition of building blocks and urban streets. Such formal and visual composition only serves well in plans or when cities are viewed from above. Topology offers something else, which is linked more closely to reality. An understanding of connectivity allows us to create urban networks that generate our everyday experience of the city.

Urban networks are more than just transportation systems, street networks, toll roads for quicker travel and transportation stations. Urban networks are also more than just the zoning of places or the grouping and separation of functions.

The important idea behind urban networks is the understanding of how our living experiences in spaces are connected to one another, and how such experiences may transform from time to time. Urban networks highlight both the dynamic of the urban experience and of space.

A planning approach that is based on topology emphasizes the definition of our everyday actions in relation to places and other people. It defines our experience of wanting space, choosing space, looking for space, comparing spaces, preferring spaces and rejecting spaces. It also attempts to understand the situation behind every such action.

Most importantly, urban networks teach us how problems in our man-made environments are interrelated. Solving a single problem in a certain area is not easy unless we consider the other problems involved. More often than not we only focus on one single part of the environment and rarely consider the intangible connections among these parts.

For example, slum areas are considered a problem in cities. They create an ugly appearance and negative image of the city, and therefore should be banished if the intention is to create an orderly, nice and clean environment. But the removal of slum areas will not be successful if we do not understand this phenomenon as a part of other interrelated networks.

It is clear that revising the planning of our cities will require a deep understanding of urban networks. We need to plan city buildings, urban blocks, streets and urban places. We need to plan how to make everything aesthetically pleasing in our cities. What we really need to consider is the urban networks that will determine our everyday experience within our cities.

The writer is an architect and lecturer in architecture at the University of Indonesia. He can be reached at yandiay@yahoo.co.uk

The Jakarta Post, 5 May 2007
Opinion and Editorial

Paramita Atmodiwirjo, Jakarta
We all agree that learning may happen anywhere. But what kind of ideal learning spaces that we could possibly provide for our children?

A classroom that they share with 48 children of their age? An air-conditioned classroom with comfortable chairs and colorful decorations? Or a laboratory complete with all the scientific equipment that you could need for an experiment?

Perhaps the idea of the physical setting as an important support for learning has not been given enough attention. Our education system still struggles hard to sort out some of the more important issues, especially the development of curriculum and the competence of teachers.

The idea of creating a classroom as a nice physical setting to stimulate the spirit of learning still sounds luxurious. Especially at the time when so many of our children still have to learn in classroom that are in poor condition.

The government survey of 15 provinces in 2004 revealed that around 38 percent of the classrooms in public primary schools were poorly damaged. The struggle to have even adequate space for everybody to sit comfortably and concentrate on their learning is still an issue in many schools in this country. So often we have been presented with pictures in the newspaper of children learning in an overcrowded classroom with not enough desks, in a classroom with no roof, or in a nearly demolished school building.

In this situation, the image of a well-arranged classroom that can amplify the desire to learn and stimulate creativity sounds very hard to reach. But such ignorance to the importance of the physical learning environment should be reconsidered. Plenty of research has shown the significant role the physical setting plays in improving academic achievement.

In other words, the better the learning space, the cleverer the pupils. In many cases, the quality of learning space usually has some affect on teachers’ and pupils’ motivation and attitudes to learning, which will eventually lead to better performance in teaching and learning.

The school and classroom that is well-arranged, well-organized and stimulates creativity will motivate pupils and teachers. But this does not necessarily have to be associated with the image of a classroom one may find in high quality expensive private schools.

It is important to understand that the stimulating aspect of the classroom can be created even in the 7×8 meter classroom found in most public schools in Indonesia. It just needs a little bit of effort and imagination to see the potential of spaces to support learning.

To begin with, furniture arrangements may have profound effects on learning. For as long time, as most of us would remember, chairs and desks were usually arranged in rows, facing the board in front of the class. But this arrangement is not the only one possible, and as we can see some schools have arranging furniture in groups or in a U-shaped formation.

These alternative arrangements may allow children to get involved in a more active learning process. They may also encourage a sense of freedom and joy, which is difficult to achieve when all children must face the same direction and do the same thing at all times.

Perhaps it is even better to have various arrangements of desks and chairs depending on the needs that may change from time to time. When necessary, teachers could even set a time when pupils should put aside all chairs and desks, gather and sit on the floor for story telling or singing.

A stimulating space for learning should also provide plenty of stimulating materials. One aspect that seems to be ignored is the role of displays on classroom walls. Very often our classroom practices underestimate the value of display as a media for learning.

By display, I do not mean the pin-up of ready-made posters of national heroes, arithmetic tables, or parts of animals and trees. In fact, the children’s works are the best materials for classroom displays. They should be encouraged to create the materials to be displayed — a rough sketch showing parts of flowers they observed, a piece of writing about their friends and family, a colored plan of their classroom, new English words they just learned, a drawing that they made during their observation of the parks nearby and countless more possibilities.

Although the sketches are rough, the figures are not drawn perfectly, and the handwriting is not neat, these materials are the expression of children’s thoughts and feelings. At the same time, they also become learning materials with which children may learn from each other.

In this way, the display will create a creative learning atmosphere and at the same time allow the children to develop their sense of identity and belonging to the classroom. Perhaps we may learn from a practice in many schools in the United Kingdom regarding classroom displays.

One of the tasks of a teacher’s assistant is to take responsibility for class or school displays, to ensure the display is updated regularly in relevance to the themes learned. A significant amount of his or her time is devoted to sorting through the children’s work to be included in the interesting display throughout the classroom and throughout school.

The displays are well planned and well decorated, but not necessarily costly, since they can utilize recycled materials. The class teachers and assistants may also arrange a specific time when the children take part in renewing their class displays.

The efforts to create a stimulating atmosphere in the classroom are not limited to furniture arrangements and displays on the walls. In fact, any materials that are useful for learning may be added to the classrooms — pots of plants, a collection of leaves, branches and shells are excellent for learning about nature; a variety of materials such as wood, sand, pebbles, clay might be useful to learn properties of things; used cardboard boxes, with some other materials and appropriate tools, may be provided for students to experiment with design and making things, or learning how things work.

In short, so many things may be put in the classroom. Gone is the time when classrooms were identical with the rows of desks and chairs and nothing else. More variety should be brought into the classroom where our children spend their days learning. And changing our classroom into a stimulating environment is not very difficult. A willingness for change, open-mindedness to see existing possibilities, together with a belief in our children’s potentials, are more than enough to realize creative learning spaces to stimulate creative children.

The writer is a lecturer in architecture at the University of Indonesia, specializing in children’s environments. She can be reached at mitayandi@yahoo.co.uk.

Kompas, 26 Juli 2003

Sungguh sebuah kesempatan yang tidak biasa, menonton pertunjukan wayang yang dimainkan oleh anak-anak Inggris di Sheffield, sebuah kota yang terletak di utara London. Sangat mengharukan menyaksikan anak-anak berusia 7-10 tahun, yang barangkali belum pernah menonton pertunjukan wayang Indonesia yang asli, memainkan sosok-sosok wayang yang mereka buat sendiri dari balik layar putih. Pertunjukan diiringi dengan pukulan nada-nada musik perkusi pengganti gamelan, serta narasi dalam bahasa Inggris yang dibacakan sekumpulan anak-anak yang duduk di deretan kursi penonton paling depan.

Sejumlah 85 anak dari delapan sekolah dasar di Sheffield menampilkan pertunjukan wayang dengan lakon Ramayana di Teater Crucible, yang merupakan salah satu lokasi pertunjukan penting di jantung Kota Sheffield.

Pertunjukan ini merupakan bagian dari rangkaian kegiatan Festival Anak-anak Sheffield ke-11 yang diselenggarakan dari tanggal 21 Juni hingga 12 Juli yang lalu. Sejumlah kegiatan dari, oleh, dan untuk anak dilangsungkan di berbagai penjuru Kota Sheffield.

Mulai dari pertunjukan musik, tari, drama, pameran hasil karya anak-anak, karnaval serta olahraga. Penampilan wayang berkaitan dengan tema festival kali ini yang banyak mengambil inspirasi budaya kesenian dari Asia. Ini merupakan suatu upaya untuk meningkatkan apresiasi terhadap keanekaragaman budaya dunia dari sudut pandang anak-anak.

Wayang tanpa gamelan

Jangan bandingkan kualitas pertunjukan anak-anak ini dengan pertunjukan wayang di Indonesia. Begitu banyak pakem-pakem yang tidak diikuti meskipun alur kisahnya masih tetap mengikuti inti cerita Ramayana. Pertunjukan dimulai dengan penampilan wayang golek, kemudian selebihnya merupakan wayang kulit ala anak-anak Inggris. Kemiripan memang diupayakan, terutama dalam pembuatan sosok wayang yang berusaha mengikuti aslinya. Harus diakui kalau kualitasnya sangat jauh dari sempurna, maklum semua pembuatnya berusia 10 tahun ke bawah. Terlihat “gunungan” yang lebih mirip bentuk oval, sosok wayang yang terlalu kurus atau gemuk, serta wayang yang sebelah tangannya tidak dapat digerakkan.

Tidak seperti wayang yang biasanya merupakan pertunjukan oleh dalang sebagai pemain utama, permainan wayang ini dilakukan oleh sejumlah 29 anak yang bergiliran menggerakkan wayang dari balik layar. Sementara itu, narasi dibawakan oleh 32 anak yang secara bergiliran membacakan bagiannya masing-masing. Sebagian membaca dengan lancar, sebagian masih terbata-bata, hingga ada yang dengan susah payah mengeja kata-kata tertentu.

Pertunjukan wayang ini juga menjadi berbeda karena tidak adanya gamelan yang biasa kita kenal mengiringi wayang. Sebagai gantinya digunakan xylophone yang dikurangi bilah-bilahnya demi mendapatkan nada pentatonis, yang dimainkan oleh sekitar 24 anak. Aransemen musiknya jelas berbeda dengan musik gamelan wayang yang asli dan kualitas pukulannya boleh dikatakan sangat amatir. Mengalirnya pertunjukan secara keseluruhan juga jauh dari sempurna. Terkadang narator tidak menyadari gilirannya sehingga perlu diingatkan oleh teman-temannya. Dalam sejumlah adegan, permainan wayang dan pembacaan narasi tidak berjalan seiring karena sang pemain tampaknya lupa untuk beraksi.

Mengapresiasi kesenian

Tampaknya yang perlu mendapat perhatian bukanlah kualitas dari pertunjukan. Tetapi, yang lebih utama adalah keterlibatan sejumlah besar anak dalam mengapresiasi tradisi kesenian yang terhitung asing bagi mereka.

Dalam persiapan dan pelaksanaan pertunjukan, anak-anak ini mendapatkan arahan dari tiga artis yang merupakan pakar dalam kegiatan kesenian masyarakat (community arts). Pembuatan wayang dikoordinir oleh Fiona Mannion, artis peminat tradisi pertunjukan boneka dari berbagai penjuru dunia. Selama kariernya, Fiona banyak memprakarsai pertunjukan boneka yang melibatkan anak-anak, remaja, dan penyandang cacat.

Permainan musik dikoordinir oleh Luke Gross, yang belajar gamelan Jawa pertama kalinya di Bate, Oxford, serta sejumlah pengalaman lain di Jawa, Bali, dan Lombok. Artis lain, Ann Hamblen, adalah seorang mantan guru bahasa Inggris yang banyak mengerjakan proyek-proyek kesenian kreatif bersama anak-anak, termasuk membantu anak-anak dalam menulis untuk pertunjukan.

Kegiatan pertunjukan masal semacam ini sesungguhnya sangat sarat muatan pendidikan bagi anak. Kegiatan ini bukanlah one man show, tetapi melibatkan banyak anak. Tiap individu diajak untuk berperan serta dan menyumbangkan upayanya. Meskipun keterlibatan masing-masing anak hanyalah sekadar memainkan wayang selama beberapa menit saja, atau sekadar membacakan beberapa baris kalimat, tetapi semua berperan serta dalam kesuksesan sebuah pertunjukan.

Pendidikan bagi anak

Pertunjukan ini tentunya merupakan hasil dari persiapan yang panjang. Dapat dibayangkan betapa sulitnya mengorganisir 85 anak dari delapan sekolah tersebut. Upaya mereka ini dimulai dari membuat sosok-sosok wayang untuk dipertunjukkan, mempelajari alur cerita hingga berlatih membacakan narasi serta memainkan musik pengiring. Meskipun hasil akhirnya tidak sempurna, keterlibatan dalam proses persiapan ini sangat berarti dalam pendidikan mereka sebagai individu.

Mengajak anak-anak terlibat dalam pertunjukan wayang bukanlah sekadar mengajarkan tradisi kesenian atau mendidik mereka untuk menjadi pakar kesenian. Banyak pelajaran lain yang juga bisa diperoleh, termasuk di antaranya muatan pendidikan bahasa, seni rupa, dan seni musik.

Aspek lain seperti kepekaan terhadap tradisi kesenian, apresiasi terhadap keanekaragaman budaya, keterampilan bekerja sama dalam kelompok, dan pembinaan kepercayaan diri, juga merupakan manfaat yang diperoleh anak-anak saat berpartisipasi dalam kegiatan ini.

Kita selama ini umumnya masyarakat memandang pertunjukan wayang sebagai sebuah tradisi kesenian yang sakral, dengan pakem-pakem yang sangat tertentu dan mengikat. Hanya segelintir dari anggota masyarakat yang dapat berkesempatan untuk benar-benar mempertunjukkan kesenian wayang.

Sekian ribu kilometer dari Tanah Air, bangsa lain berupaya mengangkat potensi dari tradisi pertunjukan wayang tersebut. Pakem-pakem sebagian dilepaskan dan penyederhanaan dilakukan di sana-sini. Tentunya hal ini sama sekali tidak bermaksud untuk mengecilkan nilai tradisi luhur wayang, melainkan demi upaya melibatkan anak-anak dalam mengapresiasi tradisi kesenian ini.

Bila anak-anak Inggris dapat belajar banyak dari pertunjukan wayang ala mereka, anak-kita kita pemilik tradisi ini seharusnya bisa belajar lebih banyak lagi. Tidak hanya dari wayang tetapi juga dari kekayaan tradisi kesenian kita yang lain.

Yandi Andri Yatmo dan Paramita Atmodiwirjo Dosen Arsitektur UI, Pengamat Lingkungan Anak