The Garden of the Unexpected: evaluating an innovative approach

Auroville Today: The first phase was an open invitation for people to enter a design competition for the garden. How many people responded?

Hemant: Twenty-two people originally responded, eighteen came up with designs and this was filtered down because some did not submit the necessary documents. Only eight made final submissions.

You gave a very detailed and somewhat technical brief. For would-be designers who had no prior experience of landscape design or architecture do you think it would have been off-putting?

Natasha: We wanted designers who would carry through the whole implementation process, which means they needed to be able to do technical drawings and have a comprehensive knowledge of design. At the same time, we also wanted to include those who don’t necessarily have a technical background. This is why at the beginning of the process we proposed to non-specialists that they form teams with those who had design knowledge. But there was not enough time for most of these teams to form. We also wanted people to organize children’s gatherings to get their ideas about the Garden but this didn’t happen.

Mona: Some teams did form, like ours. And some teams did interview children and one Auroville school did an exercise with the students to come up with ideas for the garden.

Natasha: The next time we do this we are planning to launch it with a community ideas festival during which people could offer design ideas in any form, including music, dance or sculpture.

The next phase was submitting initial designs to the experts. The experts were expected to give detailed feedback to the designers to help them improve their designs. Did this happen?

Natasha: No. We had wanted them to give comments to each design team but most of them just gave marks on a numerical scale for different aspects of the designs.

Mona: Some of the design groups were upset by not getting better feedback because they had put so much work into their designs. Three of the experts did give comments on our design and we did modify our concept quite radically but this was not because of the feedback. It was because we had more time to work on it.

Jyoti: I received some comments on my design and these were very useful. I changed my design as a result of this.

Hemant: The feeling we got from the three Aurovilian experts – Piero, Gloria and Narad – they were not so keen on making written comments because they were concerned about how the designers would take it. They said they would rather talk to the designers personally. However, we couldn’t allow them to do that because nobody was meant to know the identity of the designers.

Were you satisfied that all the experts really understood the concept of the Garden of the Unexpected?

Hemant: What Roger indicated about the Garden of the Unexpected was fairly straightforward, except for the reference to it being an initiatory experience for children.

Natasha: We had hoped that the experts would interact, and that the three Aurovilian experts would make any necessary clarifications needed. But this didn’t happen: there was no exchange between the experts.

So how would you improve this stage the next time?

Hemant: We need experts who are willing to give more detailed feedback online.

Natasha: We would like to contact the experts before the work starts and ensure they are on board with the process and our expectations. We would also make the evaluation forms more subjective.

After the experts had made a choice of three designs, the next phase was an information meeting for those Aurovilians who had signed up to be on the panel that would make the final decision. The meeting was rather poorly attended, and information about the three chosen designs was limited to one panel and one video for each concept, and a physical model for one of the designs. Was there not a danger that the panel would make their decision based upon inadequate knowledge?

Hemant: Ideally, the job of explaining the designs to the public panel would be the task of the designers but because we were keeping anonymity they could not do that. We felt that the designs that had been submitted should speak for themselves; we didn’t want to try to explain them.

Natasha: There was some with design expertise in the room during that meeting and we were hoping they would fill in the gaps for the people with less knowledge.

In the end, how many on the public panel participated in choosing one of the three designs?

Hemant: Ninety five Aurovilians had signed up to be on the panel. Only thirty seven turned up for the open information meeting, and out of these twenty made a final evaluation. In all, forty two people sent in evaluations, so a number of people were happy to follow the whole process online.

Natasha: A lot of people appreciated that so much information was provided online. However, I think the public information session is an important part for those who do not have the technical knowledge because there they could potentially acquire more knowledge.

Mona: When I told my architect friends outside Auroville about this public panel which would have the final say they really appreciated it. They said this kind of process could only happen in Auroville.

But then you decided to introduce an additional phase where you asked the designers of the chosen design to work with Jyoti and Lara, whose designs had also been shortlisted by the experts, to see if elements of the three different designs could be integrated into one final design.

Hemant: We came up with the integration process because many people on the panel said they wanted the different designers to work together.

John: The integration part was the unexpected bonus that came out of that open information afternoon. You could call it a manifestation of the Auroville spirit.

Mona: But in most architectural competitions the team that wins is told to change their design to integrate other designs!

How did the integration process go? Was everybody involved satisfied with the result?

Natasha: The Aurovilian public panel had a clear preference for one design so we asked this team to lead the integration process. And they proposed a very nice process about how to do it.

Mona: We used the ‘Dreamweaving’ process which was developed in Auroville and which some of us used successfully with a design for the Sustainable Livelihood Institute. In this process, a concept is put on the table and then everybody says what they want to take positively from it and incorporate: everybody weaves their dreams together. It’s a way of finding the highest common factor but also of creating a safe space where everybody is empowered and encouraged to let go of the tendency of designers to claim it as ‘my idea’.

Jyoti: This was the part of the process I enjoyed most. I was the only designer in my team so I didn’t receive any creative challenges from other designers when coming up with my design. This happened in the dream-weaving process and it was valuable. I felt the integration process was a very creative step forward but it is not the end, it is just the beginning. Other changes will be made in the future. What is important is to maintain that energy now.

Mona: We also met with other people like Jacqueline and Narad, so there was a larger integration process, and it’s important that we keep on involving other people. We want to set up a site office so people can see what’s happening on site and can contribute in unexpected ways! We want to ask people to plant the trees, and to find ways to involve the children.

John: But integration is not only about changing the elements of the design. For example, Jyoti will also participate in the execution of the garden.

What were the main changes in the chosen design that were made as a result of the integration process?

Mona: In the third garden the pathway completely changed. In the second garden we removed the labyrinth and we made some of the pathways more accessible for wheelchairs and prams. We received many comments that said there were too many elements in our gardens, so we thought it’s better to simplify. When we saw Jyoti’s really simple garden and understood the thinking behind it, it really helped us to do this.

Natasha: They also appreciated Lara’s advice regarding water and adapted their planting pattern to ensure there was more water percolation in the formerly dry areas.

On the whole, are you happy with how the process has gone?

Natasha: What really worked well was we had a clear flow from one stage to another. In the future, we want to get more community engagement.

Mona: We had some tough discussions with the organisers early on because I didn’t feel that anonymity was a good idea or that it would be possible to remain anonymous. But afterwards I realised how much the team was protecting us from other influences and forces in our small community. And the initial design brief was very helpful.

However, I’m not really for a design competition in Auroville. This time six Auroville design offices worked on separate proposals, and this takes up so much energy and time from our limited human resources. Also, I also think that competition is old world; it speaks to the ego. I think there may be better ways of harvesting the best design ideas, like dreamweaving.

Jyoti: Some people react against the idea of competition because Mother mentioned there should not be competition, but I think it’s more about attitude. We can use this system as a springboard if we have the right consciousness, if we take it as inner work. Personally, I think this process of selecting a leading team has been very successful.

Hemant: The most important thing was we sent out a general call to the community that said the Matrimandir is opening up and let’s try a new way.

John: There was a lot of talk in places like the Solar Kitchen about what was going on and many people came to look at the designs displayed in the Unity Pavilion. It really generated a happy field of energy.

So will you use this process again to determine the design of the remaining eight Matrimandir gardens?

Hemant: We are planning to open up the design of the remaining eight gardens for wider participation.

Natasha: We are preparing a proposal about how to go about it. I think we have seen during this process that a light, playful energy really helps in nurturing creativity and we want to maintain this kind of approach.

John: There will be a general information meeting in February about when the next stage of this adventure will be launched.