From found objects to found landscapes

Marcel Duchamp stated that found objects are:

“every day objects based on a reaction of visual indifference, with at the same time a total absence of good or bad taste”

After my research on found objects I discovered that they are a way of understanding the landscape we collect them from.

Updating the booklets from Transylvania:

a sample from the booklet



Gathering all the information from the objects in a table of contents in order to extract the general characteristics of the landscape


Updated booklet for Dungeness:

samples from the booklet



Based on mu research on found objects and the original definition from Duchamp I concluded that they are:

” every day objects that reveal information about the landscape they were taken from, and create to the recipients a series of emotions, by distracting them from the reality”

In order to understand Dungeness as a landscape the following maps show some basic information:

Map showing height contours, samples of the flora and fauna


map showing the specifised areas in Dungeness


map showing the roads in Dungeness


map showing the location of the found objects


Addressing the urban spatial structures as found objects:

experiment I


experiment II


experiment III


As a result from my research a question has been raised. What is an imaginary museum? Collecting information and displaying them into a space without walls? Inspired from Marlaux’s “Le musee Imaginaire”

Is there an aesthetic and sensory dimension in the archiving process?

Feedback from last tutorial:

  • what are the found houses? used, abandoned?
  • what makes these specific houses ‘ found houses’
  • change the drawings as plans and start drawing on perspective views

additional things to do for Tuesday:

  • drawings of the found objects. How they are and how they used to be
  • research on how the materials decay
  • Date them from their decay
  • operational catalog of corrosion techniques


One thought on “From found objects to found landscapes

  1. – ‘The Found House’ (or found road, or other ‘found’ object at an architectural scale) is a provocative idea. Drawing and thinking through what the ‘found house’ is will be important in establishing the found object at an architectural and urban scale. You might choose to extend your narrative methodology to conjure what the found house is, but this should result in drawing.

    – An interesting and important conversation on Tuesday came up when you said that a found object was an object encountered for the first time. Do you want your objects to always be encountered for the first time? Is this a requirement to maintain their status as found objects? How might this be achieved? Is the object always different, does it change somehow? Or do we see / understand it differently each time, ascribing a different value to it?

    – Elif commented that the different scales presented in your work do not correspond to each other as there is not consistency in the drawing style. Look back over the work and reflect on this and we can discuss on Tuesday. Maybe reflect on what you like, what you think is successful about drawing and presentation so far and how this can become a strategy that is carried through the work.

    – Again, we discussed how your invented categories and creation of a value system suggest the way decisions are made about how (or if) architecture continues into the future. Referring to decisions about preservation which are made on an assessment of ‘significance’ that exposes a set of value judgements.
    Do your categories become an alternative set of values for making decisions about what the landscape of Dungeness means and how it is preserved?

Leave a Reply