1.0. Introduction

This paper explores the emotional journey of students, the intuitiveness of space, and the influence of material culture in the N2 college wood workshop at Parsons School of Design. Utilizing Actor-Network Theory (ANT) as an analytical framework, this study examines how human and non-human actors collaborate and interact within this creative educational setting. The findings reveal the complex interplay between the physical environments, tools, cultural norms, and individual emotions in shaping design practices and craft skills.

The wood workshop at Parsons School of Design provides a rich weaving of interactions between students, tools, and the physical space, making it an ideal subject for an Actor-Network Theory (ANT) analysis. ANT, as posited by Latour (2005), views all actors, whether human or non-human, as equally influential in shaping socio-material realities. This paper examines how students navigate their emotional journeys, adapt to the workshop's space, and engage with its material culture.

 

1.1. Material as Actors

As Law (1992) states, "Materials, in their capacity as non-human actors, are not passive entities but have agency." In the wood workshop, materials such as wood, tools, and machinery are not just tools in the hands of the students; they are actors that influence and are influenced by the students' interaction with them. This interaction is a two-way street: while students learn to manipulate these materials, their design thinking and creative processes are simultaneously being shaped by the materials' properties and affordances. This agency becomes evident as students navigate the physical properties of wood, and adapt their designs to the limitations and possibilities of the materials, and learn from the material's response to their craftsmanship. It was evident from numerous interviews that students believe the more they interact with the material within the space, the better they understand its behavior. During the interviews, phrases like "how the material behaves" and "gradual evolution of the craft" were used. Furthermore, the wood project done by the researchers made it clear that familiarity and a sense of ownership of the space can be embodied through the use of tools and materials. This implies an almost personified view of materials and a mutual understanding between the person using it and the material itself. 

 

1.2. Non-Human Actors as a Shaper of Practice

The space appears raw yet organized, featuring an exposed ceiling, brick walls, cemented floors, and roll-down shutters at one entrance. Exposed vents and pipes add to the aesthetic. The place combines rawness with organized systems. The physical layout and environment of the workshop itself are also integral actors within this network. The spatial arrangement, the placement of tables, tools, and machinery, and even the ambient noise and atmosphere, all play roles in how students engage with their craft and guide the students' movements and interactions. The workshop's environment either affords or dis-affords certain types of work, directing the flow of creative energy and focus or requiring students to adapt and develop new strategies for navigation and utilization. As Latour (2005) notes, the agency of non-human actors (like the spatial layout) significantly impacts human actions and decisions. This aspect aligns with Callon’s (1986) perspective on the sociology of translation, where the environment translates the students' intentions and actions into tangible outcomes. The particularity of the materials in the wood workshop serves both as an enabler and a constraint, as the student projects we observed typically involved multiple materials. While students showed awareness and concern for the potential lack of safety or harm to others and equipment that using varied materials could introduce, this situation often prevents them from venturing beyond wood in their projects, thus creating a barrier to their creative practice. Notably, there was a deep respect observed among individuals using the space towards their fellow cohabitants, as well as the tools and infrastructure.

Many students enter the workshop with a sense of anxiety and unfamiliarity. For instance, one of the members of the team mentioned, “I felt quite out of place initially, not knowing anyone and being older.” This initial discomfort is a typical emotional response to new environments and challenges, aligning with ANT’s emphasis on the impact of new actors entering an existing network (Latour, 2005). However, as students begin to engage with the space and its tools, this anxiety often transforms into a sense of belonging and confidence.

 

1.3. Cultural Norms and Creative Expression

The workshop's culture, encompassing its rules, norms, and the informal knowledge passed between peers and mentors, acts as a guiding force. This culture not only governs the use of space and materials but also subtly influences the creative expression of the students. Students learn not only to craft with physical materials but also to navigate and incorporate these cultural elements into their creative praxis. In this way, the workshop's culture becomes a co-creator in the students' projects, embedding itself in the artifacts produced. One student reflected, “The rhythm of this place, its unwritten rules, they’re part of my design process now.” This sentiment echoes the deep integration of the workshop's ethos into the students' approach to their projects. From respecting the communal nature of the space to adopting safety protocols as second nature, these norms have become an intrinsic part of their creative journey. Another student noted, “I’ve learned to plan my work around the busy times here, it’s like a dance we all silently agree to.” This adaptability showcases their assimilation of the workshop’s temporal dynamics into their planning and execution stages. Furthermore, the shared practice of meticulous cleanup and tool maintenance, as one student mentioned, “It’s not just about respecting the space, it’s about respecting each other’s craft,” illustrates the profound mutual respect that students have developed, not only for the physical space but also for their fellow creators. These cultural norms, ingrained in the students' practices, have transcended mere rules, evolving into a collective ethos that shapes and enhances their creative expressions within the wood workshop.

 

1.4. The Emergence of Design Practices

As students progress through their projects, they constantly negotiate with these actors. The choice of material, the selection of a particular tool, or the adoption of a specific technique are all influenced by this ongoing interaction. This process exemplifies ANT’s core principle where human and non-human actors are constantly shaping each other’s roles and identities within the network (Latour, 2005). The result is a rich assembly of design practices that are as much a product of the student's creativity as they are of the material culture and environment of the workshop.

Students often learn intuitively through direct interaction with materials and tools. This hands-on experience allows them to develop a tacit understanding of the workshop's dynamics, which might not be immediately apparent through formal instruction alone. Law’s (1992) concept of 'heterogeneous networks' illustrates how diverse elements (like tools, materials, and human skills) intertwine to facilitate learning.

The workshop also functions as a social space where peer learning and informal mentorship occur. These social interactions are integral to how students adapt to and internalize the workshop's culture. As students share tips, techniques, and experiences, they contribute to a collective knowledge pool, demonstrating the ANT principle of networked learning and knowledge creation.

 

1.5. The Balance Between Rules and Creativity
The workshop presents a dynamic balance between following established rules and encouraging creative intuition. ANT helps to understand this balance as a continuous negotiation within the network of actors – students, instructors, tools, materials, and the workshop environment. While safety and procedure rules are non-negotiable, creative practices often invite  a more intuitive approach, reflecting Law’s (1992) idea of ‘strategy’ within networks.

In the context of balancing rules and creativity within the wood workshop, the role of power dynamics emerges as a key facilitator for establishing best practices that consider the well-being of both human and non-human actors. The exercise of power in the workshop stems from a place of care and is tailored to be as relevant and understandable to the community as possible. This is exemplified by the usage of memes to display important information, such as the “clean as you go” rule. This approach is critical in maintaining a safe and productive environment while also keeping things light-hearted. The workshop managers, who are themselves full-time students, bring a unique perspective to their roles. Their firsthand experience as users of the space enables them to empathize deeply with fellow students, making them particularly effective in their positions. They understand the fine line between adhering to necessary rules for safety and operational efficiency and allowing the creative process to unfold naturally. This empathetic approach ensures that the enforcement of rules does not stifle creativity, but rather supports it, creating a harmonious balance where both structure and innovation can coexist and flourish in the workshop environment.

 

Conclusion
The Ethnographic analysis of the N2 woodshop revealed a rich, interconnected environment where human and non-human actors interact in complex and meaningful ways. The woodshop culture acts as an informal educational setting where peer learning and mentorship are key components, and students learn not only through formal instruction but also through direct material interaction and social exchanges. 

In conclusion, the experience within N2 Woodshop was deeply insightful and rewarding for us as researchers. The practice proved to be grounding and a means of pushing our boundaries (and getting us out of our comfort zone), encouraging us to engage with individuals, observe and practice, and patiently await the emergence of insights. By focusing on this specific space and its occupants, we were able to extract more universal aspects of space interaction such as power dynamics, a sense of belonging, space ownership, and the negotiation of structure and freedom between rules and creativity. We'd like to stress that our perception and understanding evolved throughout the research process, which in turn influenced us, enhancing our confidence in our practice and our readiness to tackle new ethnographic challenges.

​