Navigating Uncertainty and Collective Engagement
Reflecting on the NiuKou project, I recognize areas of hesitation and uncertainty as both a maker and a researcher. While NiuKou began as an intuition and has significantly clarified my intentions and possibilities within the framework of "Re-Membering," concerns about ethical decision-making and maintaining a clear direction may have diluted some of the project's initial strong intentions.
The Nature of the Collective
A crucial reflection concerns the nature of the "collective" itself and the relationships within it. Is it truly a collective if participants primarily connect through the passed button, or is their strongest connection to me? It seems some missed opportunities might have lessened participants' sense of togetherness with each other, making the connection primarily between them and me, rather than fostering a broader interconnectedness within the collective. This was a missed opportunity to cultivate a more meaningful bond with the idea of the collective and among its members.
Sharing Stories and Ethical Considerations
A key ethical consideration revolved around sharing the stories of the buttons with participants. My navigation of ethics and transparency heavily influenced this decision. Initially, to kick-start the project, a batch of buttons was purchased from a market rather than sourced from individuals with existing interactions. This led to a "spiral" of concern: "Do these buttons lack lived interaction?" or "Is it fair for participants if some receive a more meaningful experience while others receive a market-bought button?"
There was also a worry about "asking too much." Even with the introduction of the red thread theory, I kept the re-sewing with red thread optional. This stemmed from my ongoing process of balancing respect for participants' intentions and boundaries with the aesthetic choices and designed research structure.
Perhaps a more transparent approach, acknowledging the market-found buttons and embracing the actual sharing of stories during the sessions, would have been more meaningful. This could have added significant value to the concept of "exchanging." Furthermore, incorporating participants' direct contributions, such as their own cultural references and language interpretations related to buttons, could enrich a collective narrative.
With the later sessions, I ask the question, If a button is not an mere object that holds the two panels of our shirt, but a being of its own, a being with consciousness that’s able to hold its own memories, its own record. Being on your chest, close to your heart, watching, feeling, listening.
Now, we take this button, on our hands, what does your button remember?
This is an update of the question, “If this button could "record" something from your life, what memory do you think it holds?” Like previously mentioned, buffing the question with a more narrational context, easing the participants into the mindset and better clarifying the intentions.
With this question, I started to ask my participants to write down a direct quote after mentioning this question in our conversation.
The mentioning in previous conversation is vital, helping the participants to already start processing what to be considered, and when they wrote down the quotes, it can me more clear and to their points.
The decision of asking them to physically write down the quotes has to do with the decision of excluding too much direct information of the participants, but still wanting some other information that can indirectly showcase their characters and presence.
By doing so, asking them to fill out a sentence and quote themselves, also gave me, the maker and the researcher, quotes to be directly quoted from their mouths, with their own wording, delivery, and understanding that is more precise and adaptable than audio recordings, which I found helpful for further inspection of what the “lens” of button could reflect.
My Role: Balancing Engagement and Observer Status
As the maker and researcher, I initially positioned myself as the primary agent and ultimate filter for perception within NiuKou. However, the project's inherent nature dictates that its method and intended outcome are not solely about my contributions; they fundamentally rely on the presence and input of others. Reflecting on my observation approach, I found my level of active participation fluctuated, at times feeling insufficient and at other times potentially excessive.
As the initiator and guiding force behind NiuKou, I largely shaped the primary meaning and narrative. There were moments when it felt as though I was advocating my own vision for NiuKou, perhaps without fully integrating the participants' narratives. From a research perspective, this might represent a missed opportunity to broaden the scope and uncover unexpected insights. Given that my primary insights came from conversation-centered observations, participants should be more than just "proof of concept."
The question of equality within this collective, where individuals are linked by NiuKou, is complex. As the project's creator, true equalization with other participants may not be entirely feasible.
Nevertheless, I believe there's a point where I should strive to reposition myself back into the collective. My initial proposal emphasized not only initiating the project but also being an integral part of what it created.
Throughout NiuKou, the transition from initiator to a full member of the collective wasn't fully established. For instance, my own buttons were never incorporated into NiuKou. This stemmed from uncertainty about "who should sew my buttons" and a fear of making hasty or unclear decisions.
Ultimately, I am still learning to navigate the delicate balance of maintaining my agency while ensuring I don't merely self-affirm my own ideas, constantly discerning the boundaries of this spectrum.
The consciousness and our understanding of the social construct we’re immersed in are intertwined and inseparable from the language we use. Whilst choosing to mainly use English in NiuKou first started as practical necessity, as it was the only language me and my international participants can communicate with, it actually presented an interesting middle ground not only for communication but also allowing one to reflect on their own language through having this communicative middle ground.
Within NiuKou, allowing the idea of English as a second language to take the guide, some individuals were inspired to use this foreign but familiar language to reflect on their own language and ultimately culture.
For example, during their sessions, Umi from Japan and Joost from the Netherlands had their own reflections and inspirations.
“繋がり (tsunagari)” Umi
Umi mentioned that this narrative of buttons introduced in NiuKou, and the social interaction it seemingly represents, reminded her of he action/ term 繋がり (tsunagari) in the Japanese language. Where the action implied a lose-thread like link, where the connection of contact may be temporary, but could be strengthened if both sides hold on tight, connected and holding on to each other.
“Knoop—Knopen” Joost
When introducing NiuKou, Joost shared his connection of the word for “button” (Knoop) and “to tie” (Knopen). He found this metaphor of “button also being like a tie” similar to NiuKou itself, where the individual buttons become tie and points of social interaction, connection through people, whether its the maker—the participant or participant—participant.
This aspect of anchoring and rooting NiuKou and the notion of investigating what button holds not only through the lens of a production-driven capitalistic contemporary society we live in, but through culture built by lived experience and interactions centred around the mundane of human lives, and interaction between people, emerges more when I was challenged to “name” this project.
Until the middle of the process (around 1.5 months in and 10ish sessions in), this work was still state as “The Button Exchange”. The name mostly only covers the practical message of the work, not yet able to reach into a more meaningful tittle than reflects its purpose and nature.
After reflecting onto my own culture and understanding, I realise that the part of my culture and language embedded philosophy and social construct already reflect and foreshadow the purpose and urgency I’m exploring in NiuKou.
“紐扣 (NiuKou)“
The character 紐 can be translated to “ a thing to hold on to”;
the character 扣 can be translated to “ a pause, a connection, clutching close to”
Futhermore, the character 紐 includes the character 糸, that represent threads;
And the character 扣 is a combination of the 扌(手) which means hand, and 口 which means mouth or an opening.
Being inspired by the language and how metaphors and philosophy of a social construct is deeply played and woven into, in this case, how a button was named and given meaning, helps deepen and reference potential ties to the world out of my research and projects.
As mentioned in the page “ Encounters” in the RC, starting from the invitation, the scenography of the experience of the NiuKou sessions has started.
The choice of an actual letter like invitation started from wanting a physical invitation instead of a social media post, text messages or email. Since NiuKou is about actual physical buttons, it only made sense for the invitation to also be something physical.
The letter format also serves as an invitation that have a slight “personal” feeling and had to be revealed (unfold and read), in contrast to an invitation card. It helps established my approach to the participants, where their individuality were acknowledged and the premise and core value of NiuKou is something that has to be revealed through an action.
Within the letter, apart from disclosing the practical information of NiuKou, it also set a tone of the project, giving the participants an idea of what to be expected but still maintaining a more poetic, open to interoperation narrative.
Welcome to NiuKou (this small holding),
I would like to invite you to exchange buttons with me.
Take a button from my button box, with buttons left by someone else.
I’ll sew them onto your shirt, while taking one from you.
A brief words of exchange will follow also follow, for the story of the button to unraval.
A little send off, a new beginning,
on a journey to discuss what is a button and what is more than a button.
Within NiuKou, traditions like "Taking the button closest to the heart"(in relation to the Japanese tradition of gifting the second button) and "Sewing on the exchanged button with red thread (in relation to the red thread theory)" are rooted in social interactions. These practices not only highlight the meaningful role buttons play but also embody lived philosophies and beliefs, offering a deeper insight into the significance of buttons.
However, these rich cultural references might be more impactful if they were integrated directly into the work itself, rather than serving merely as an introduction or verbal mentions.
Reflecting on this, it could be meaningful to welcome more diverse references, including those offered by participants themselves. Furthermore, the referenced interactions could potentially be re-enacted or woven into NiuKou through actions, moving beyond a simple introductory explanation.
Reflecting, maybe it would be meaningful to also welcome more references, even from the participants themselves.
Furthermore, can the referenced interactions also be reenacted or incorporated into NiuKou also through actions or something that’s more than an introduction?
This approach could transform the interaction with NiuKou from a passive observation of cultural elements into an active engagement, allowing participants to experience and embody the traditional social nuances and values inherent in the button exchange ritual.
“ The shift from didactic explanation to embodied practice could deepen the affective engagement with the cultural narrative, fostering a more profound connection to the historical and social dimensions of the work.”
NiuKou aims to revalue the button, transforming its exchange into an initiative for social interaction.
By combining the inherent meaning of the object with its potential as a lens to re-examine ourselves and the world, we can foster a unique "culture" based on these interactions, (exchanging, sewing, tearing of the buttons, and conversations that are initiated because of NiuKou). Exploring such social customs and culturally rooted historical interactions helps clarify NiuKou's possibilities and intentions, guiding the development of meaningful rules and decisions for its sessions.
Rapport: a close and harmonious relationship in which the people or groups concerned understand each other's feelings or ideas and communicate well. In the case of sociological research, between a researcher and their subjects, this can be important when it comes to getting people to open up and have the confidence to speak at length or engage in research at all.
“Are you trying to decenter the human from this question? To strip away all human-centered bias in how the button is perceived?”
“Are you trying to characterise a button? Perhaps the choice of framing a consciousness for the button is to humanise the button further, allowing spectators and participants both a sense of familiarity and an alternative way to look at buttons.”
I was able to learn and find clues by reflecting on some of the replies,
(i.)“My button remembers a whole person before me. My face in the mirror, pingpong battles on summerdays, two relationships, and the faces of two ex-partners. It has remembered a grey cotton shirt, unspecular but very comfortable.”
(ii.)“My button remembers embracing my partner and the safety that brings this moment.”
(iii.)“This button holds two different lives, my father’s younger-earlier years and my current ones. It probably remembers everything, where we overlapped and what made us different, the journey of both our lives separately, before I met him and after I left him to walk my own journey.”
(iv.)“People meeting for the first time, then being nervous but excited. The smell of sweaty armpits, people drinking wine and beers.”
(v.)“My button remembered the shift between daylight to night, temperature, and the smell on the street in Shanghai.”
(vi.)“This button remembers the warm summer I moved to the Netherlands and the light breeze from my first bike ride to uni.”
From the quotes like (i.), it’s clear that what the participants implied that their button remembers was still coming out of their own subjective consciousness; it is clearly still their memories, their experiences, just reimagined through a different angle (their chest) and format.
With (ii.), (iv.), (v.), (vi.),
The imaginary senses of the buttons were more prominently implied, and the buttons were given more of an individual agency away from the human body and the shirt carrying them. Again, since this “remembering of the buttons” are still rooted from the participant’s memories and human perception, this is not a method that urges to completely strip away all human-centered connection, in contrary, it is to embrace and as a possibility for re-imagining through the buttons imaginative extensive senses. The button is positioned and perceived by the participants in their own remembering process through the buttons, and focus on remember through different scales and focus.
From (iii.), the button has become an agent of complete re-imagination, taken a remembering that’s based on a complete imagination of memories. It is placing it as a being that was not directly attached to them, a being that had a pre-existed history that’s only up for the participant’s assumption and makings.
To conclude,
When implying a button remembers, furthermore, the use of buttons in NiuKou and Re-Membering, it is a mirror-like lens to be look into, and reflect upon. The button offers a way to reposition oneself in relation to memory, opening possibilities for re-examining, exploring, and re-imagining experiences and subjective realities from new angles.
Key scenography quality mentioned, an object that serves as a portal or reflective lens for memory. It doesn’t erase the human-centered perspective but instead allows participants to reposition, re-examine, and re-imagine lived experiences from new angles and possibilities.
NiuKou began with an object and is not locationally bound. In examining the “space” it disclosed, I reconsidered the boundaries of the concept of space and how its “relational quality” can be understood as spatial, with scenographic implications.
Space, in this sense, does not need to be tied to a fixed location. Wherever objects and events assume relative positions and directions, space emerges. As Kassem argues, “This perspective enables a conceptualization of space that extends beyond physical dimensions, encompassing performative and theatrical qualities” (Kassem, A Performative Understanding of Spatial Design: Learning from Exhibitions, 2019).
Such space is therefore not confined to geography but arises through interaction and dynamic relationships.
In NiuKou, space and scenography are constituted through the relational. The work establishes a frame that positions spectators and offers a lens through which they can reposition, re-examine, and re-imagine perspective. The object functions as the starting point, an intentional core to be expanded and investigated. By centering on buttons, the work interrogates personhood, the lived world, and the re-definition of mundane objects as vessels of individual and collective experience. Within this framework, the relations between spectators and emergent narrative take shape, fostering a subjective engagement with the work.
It operates as a metaphorical re-examination of interpersonal relations, situating space within the evolving dialogue between object, spectator, and environment. The relational framework enables a dynamic interplay between spectators’ perception and the unfolding performance, valuing an active co-creation of meaning within the emergent spatial construct.
I am particularly interested in further developing this concept of “relational space” in my artistic research. The notion of re-membering, as I approach it, similarly depends on the relational, rooted in shifts of perception and subjective consciousness. While NiuKou implicated “relational space” primarily in its methodological construction, my aim is to deepen this aspect in future explorations.
This line of inquiry is also informed by Mallgrave’s Architecture and Embodiment: The Implications of the New Sciences and Humanities for Design (2013), which situates space in relation to embodiment and perceptual dynamics.
The making of the apron also tied into the framing of NiuKou. It helps create a “zone” for the sessions and signalling my character in the sessions and NiuKou itself. It’s like a portable banquet tent in the Taiwanese culture, where it temporarily “host” an event and social interactions in a pre-established location.
By extent, the “wearing” and “taking off” plays an equally important part of the apron itself. It signals an onboard and offboard of NiuKou. For a project/ work that’s not location bound in any ways, I find this extremely signalling method quite helpful. I also find it as a way for me to reexaime and reflect my own position as the maker of NiuKou, and/or part of the NiuKou collective.
Yet, reviewing feedbacks from participants, colleagues and tutors, the apron brought a sense of the role of “caretaker” to my presence, and in relation the idea of “mending/mender”.
I’m not sure how I felt about this, the act of sewing button has its designated relation to the idea of “care taker” and “mending”, but I was’t sure that something I want to incorporate in NiuKou. Especially when I was trying to focus on the “button” itself and the act of exchanging, by relation tearing off and sewing back on, not so much “fixing a garment”.
“I don’t really like the image of you with the apron, sitting slightly lower than the person across from you; it sort of read as you’re a servant to me.” ~feedback from participants
Perhaps the apron as an actual apron though tied in to the visuality of NiuKou and its concept, needed some more abstract form or non-familiar form to distance from the pre-existent idea of normal aprons.
Overt Observation, the observation that asks for permission, introduces the project and is transparent about the role participants play in the project and how it benefits or is aiming to benefit.
(In contrary to the convert observation)
Key scenography quality mentioned, an object that serves as a portal or reflective lens for memory
It doesn’t erase the human-centered perspective but instead allows participants to reposition, re-examine, and re-imagine lived experiences from new angles and possibilities.
Phases of Participant Observations —1. Description of the Research Environment/ Situation
There is a familiarisation phase where the researcher first remains mostly in the background, noting certain observation points that help further develop the research methods.
Most importantly, building up the “Rapport” with individuals.
Reflection on the first sessions,
There’s a awkwardness throughout the first few sessions. The questions felt too rigid and sudden, and most of the participants had problems understanding the purpose of the questions.
I reflected on what the intention and the character of the project was, what’s the atmosphere I should create for theses sessions? What’s the character and quality of NiuKou?
It felt more like a questionnaire instead of an actual exchange of words, sharing of lived experiences, and I found my self more drawn to a casual conversation format, with certain questions and talk points to be implemented, but not afraid for the conversations to venture.
The format of “Casual conversations” allow me to create a more natural organic connection with my participants, providing more engagements and insights that are equally focused on the person I’m talking to and the urgency II’m trying to highlight.
Furthermore, I realised there must be a build up to the more conceptual questions.
The more conceptual questions, i.e. “What can the button record” etc, the build up and format of casual conversations would help, but there needs to be a better established frame. A transparent frame that not only showcase to purpose, character and intention of NiuKou, but also almost like a story and narrative to be invested in.
I also found that there should be a sharper focus on the button. Since discussing buttons, other objects/ beings that has inseparable relations such as shirts and threads will also emerge, it’s important to make sure to position these beings with the right balance. In other words, even though embracing and tracing the connections these beings have with the button, I must be clear in the structure that the button is still the main focus and the main point of the build up.
These beings/ objects of relation may help leading the participants to ease into the mindset of the project, for example the gradually zooming in of “person—shirt—button”... (i.e. first addressing them and their presence, asking about why they brought the shirt, where did they got it and what occasions they usually wear it to, then finally go more in details on positioning on the buttons).
Shirts and threads also help the framing and establishing a character/ narrative for the buttons, since NiuKou is also about interactions, the interactions of the buttons and other objects/beings help disclose some metaphoriacal qualities into the project. (i.e. the button clutching onto the panels of a shirt, being positioned mostly on the front of the torso/ the threads holding onto the button and the shirt it’s holding on, when the thread eventually fell, the button will be left behind etc)
To sum up, the first few sessions weren’t ideal, but helped found some important starting point and foundation of NiuKou, and my preferred method in communication-centered, people- centered research method.
When “NiuKou” first started, the design of the sessions was still rough and not yet structured.
The connection of my artistic research on “Re-Memering” and it’s relation to NiuKou was also more surface level and without clear organic immersion.
I invited a few friends via oral invitation, briefly explained the project and the premise then meet up with them at their preferred location.
I sat them down, and ask them the following pre-written questions printed on a paper,
-Where and when did you get this shirt? What occasions do you wear this shirt the most
often?
- When you hold or wear old clothes, do they bring back memories of where you were at
the time?
-Do you associate buttons with any specific memories from your life?
-Try setting a scene in your head that feels the most familiar, who would usually be the one would be sewing back your buttons when it’s lost? What kind of shirt is it? Trying to imagine that location, where will you be at?
-Does this act of sewing buttons remind you of a specific person, place, or time in your
life?
-If this button could "record" something from your life, what memory do you think it
holds?
-When you think about this button you’re giving away, does it remind you of a particular
moment, place, or feeling?
-If you could place this button somewhere meaningful now it’s been taken away form your shirt, where would you think it belongs?
The questions weren’t with a clear direction and mostly posed as a tryout, trying to fish from my first few participants’ response, to be inspired from some answers and find much of a precise connection and approach for my research on re-membering and Niukou.
The following is a more detailed description and reflection of the methods and methodology used in NiuKou,
which was briefly introduced in the previous pages.
Phases of Participant Observations —2. Focused Observations
After investigating the environment/ situation the researcher is in and the participants the researcher’s approaching , the researcher starts formulating more targeted conversations.
The Researcher may immerse oneself in situations that directly contribute to answering one’s own research questions.
More clear and purposed inquires starts to emerge in this phase, in the case of NiuKou, through repetition and anchoring, specifically by examining how the acts of sewing, tearing, and urgency connect to broader social and cultural frameworks that can be referenced to strengthen the project’s purpose. Through this repetition, the essence and metaphor of the inquiry, "what is a button, the re-membering of buttons" gradually comes into focus.”
Welcome to NiuKou (this small holding),
I would like to invite you to exchange buttons with me.
Take a button from my button box, with buttons left by someone else.
I’ll sew them onto your shirt, while taking one from you.
A brief words of exchange will follow also follow, for the story of the button to unraval.
A little send off, a new beginning,
on a journey to discuss what is a button and what is more than a button.
With the “NiuKou” all methods are “trial and tribulations of trying and seeing what reflects and what works”,
and everything is highly intertwined with people, and the reflection from the maker’s consciousness as the anchor.
For me, the Artistic research of Re-Membering, and the NiuKou comes from the yearning of understanding parts of a universal personhood,
and presents my findings within my scenographic work while continuing this cycle of form feedback of the work to build further on the searching itself.
The methods are essentially people-centered, more specifically “communication-centered”,
with a continuous reflection from the maker’s awareness of the “ I-We-It (The maker/observer-participants/people/the social-the object/scenographic lens chosen).”
Through further inspections, I’m drawing some parallels in Participation Observation methods in social science fields to help organize and certify certain methods and reasoning.
“I want to understand the word from your point of view. I want to know what you know in the way you know it. I want to understand the meaning of your experience, to walk in your shoes, to feel things as you feel them, to explain things as you explain them. Will you become my teacher and help me understand? ~ James Spradley (1979)
With the implication of the word “Observation”, it is also to state that it is still a method from the maker/observer’s own consciousness and view of what they aimed to study, in contrast to methods like expert interviews and surveys that rely on participant and information accuracy, it is no doubt that the researchers subjectivity takes on one of the largest role. Everything is ultimately filtered by the researchers own perceptions.
This may be a justification, but also a statement of agency. With the research on re-membering and by extension, NiuKou, my body and consciousness as the maker and researcher is the agent that translates meanings, the sail of the ship.
Further on, certain texts would be labeled with green, blue, and orange, pink
Observation and Interaction With Participants: Setting Up the Exchanges
Examination of Gathered Documentation and Materials: Rooting and Refilling the Artistic Vision
Parallel methods with Participant Observation Methods used in social science and anthropology, helping to explain and conclude certain concepts
Key Scenographic Reflection
To help categorise the development of the methods used in NiuKou.
After around 8-10 sessions of NiuKou, certain points started coming clear, in relation to NiuKou’s connection to the bigger research topic of re-membering and what I’m actually interested in disclosing. “What is a button, and what is more than a button?"
NiuKou is about the interaction initiated by the act of exchanging button.
NiuKou is about re-valuing an object that’s present in human life for hundreds of years.
NiuKou is looking through the materiality of the button, disclosing an essence, a metaphor of its presence and existance.
Yet, like previously mentioned, with a conceptual question/topic like this, a building up and an easier approach to the core of the question is needed.
I first ask what the participant would define a button.
“ If there’s an external being that had no idea or concept of what a button is, let’s say an alien, what would you, not as the human representative, but you as an individual person, tell them?”
With this question, it’s intended to lighten up the sense of responsibility of the question, focusing on their own simple impression.
Since when first asked straightforwardly, “How would you define a button”, participants were met with hesitation and felt the need to cover all aspects of definition of the button, and some felt awkward with their self identified lack off knowledge of the buttons. This format poses as an boost of agency of this question.
Yet, perhaps there is another way of asking this question, one that doesn’t break the atmosphere so abruptly, and whose tone aligns more naturally with the others.
Using the ‘fill-in-the-sentence’ method elevated the questions into metaphors, offering participants a clear response format while allowing me to organize answers more effectively. This structure highlighted both unity across the questions and the variety within participants’ responses
" A button is like a bridge."
"A button is like holding hands."
"A button is like glue."
"A button is like jewellery for the shirt."
"A button is like ......"
As maker, I find that the interplay of these responses contributes to shaping the narrative of NiuKou. Through the spoken words of participants, meaning emerges as a collective network, enabling a multiplicity of voices beyond my own.
Yet from a researcher’s perspective, however, I remain cautious: the recurrence of similar responses (such as those centered on ‘connection’) may reflect an implied echo chamber rather than genuine re-valuation. Instead of opening space for participants to generate meaning, the process risks becoming an extension of my own framing, an act of introducing and convincing rather than co-creating.
