Rebranding

Some thoughts about the rebranding of my project. I feel this better communicates my core ideals:

–Interaction / subculture / bio– seed ideas to keep from original branding

“Censorship has been described as the antithesis of propaganda and its necessary adjunct..”

“Propaganda may be overt or covert, black or white, truthful or mendacious, serious or humorous, rational or emotional. Propagandists assess the context and the audience and use whatever methods and means they consider most appropriate and effective. If we can widen our terms of reference and divest propaganda of its pejorative associations, its significance as an intrinsic part of the political process in the twentieth century will be revealed. One contemporary writer has even suggested that we need more propaganda, not less, to influence opinions and stimulate active participation in the democratic process.” – from “Propaganda and mass persuasion: a historical encyclopedia, 1500 to the present” by Nicolas John Cull, David Holbrook Culbert, David Welch. both from the introduction, pg. Xx

pro-pa-gan-da noun :the spreading of ideas, information, or rumor for the purpose of helping or injuring an institution, a cause, or a person; :ideas, facts, or allegations spread deliberately to further one’s cause or to damage an opposing cause; also :a public action having such an effect – from merriam-webster.com/dictionary/propaganda?show=0&t=1301605366

instutition of/as propaganda:

[the Portland Museum and Library of Propaganda] [the Portland Metamuseum of Propaganda]

[Propaganda]

-concerning humans and culture, big idea (visually and intellectually) in skate culture and other subcultures, -extension of the ‘peoples republic of portland’

-propaganda as hub for self and cultural questioning, activism, neighborhood outreach, grassroots organizations, community education and other contextually-interactive cultural phenomena.

[Interaction]

-As the building acts as propaganda and a local hub for all types of cultural interaction, the building is the catalyst which causes human interaction with their environment. Interaction between people and between program functions on a smaller scale within the building can act as additional catalysts towards this end. Based on these things the building and it’s program are essentially about interaction and catalyst, above art, propaganda, subculture or human culture as a whole.

By extension, the space and architecture itself acts as propaganda: what type of propaganda depends upon the individual and how that person interacts (intellectually or otherwise) with the space. The building acts as a contextually-mutable object of propaganda, reacting and interacting with the issues which influence culture in real time, and interacting with it’s human inhabitants to initiate questioning (and other arms which come off of the propaganda hub). I imagine a scenario in which the collective modern, Portland-based interpretation of this deals with the ecological and sustainable side of politics.

[Bio-]

-space centers around human interaction, humans and their culture are part of the bio-sphere. The human key to cultural change is the central species in this program as well: since cultural, environmental, and political change all start with humans (which are all closely related in the global climate today), the education and support of environmental movement in human culture will be at the center of this program’s environment.

-brings biohabitat into built environment (in the spirit of interaction between humans and their habitat, interaction between the bubble of human culture and ecological culture will foster a more creative and overall better interior habitat for humans

[use of propaganda]

-Reading these quotes illuminates the fact that the word itself does not have an inherently negative quality, but instead lies on a positive to negative scale. Everything is experienced in a multi-sided way.

-When considering that, even though the word itself isn’t necessarily negative, it has popular connotations of being negative and therefore might repel a certain group of potential users, it’s important to think about the provocational nature of the word and how useful that quality may be in the ultimate goal of architecture and program as propaganda and the spread of social interaction and change.

-Additionally, propaganda is the most appropriate word. Other options: indoctrinate, inculcation {Both definitions are inherently neutral. The former is equally negative socially as propaganda but doesn’t have as much of a presence in subculture, the latter has an institutional quality.} disinformation, promulgate {both are too corporate; the former is inherently negative and would therefore bias the program, the latter refers to law which does not speak to subculture} brainwashing, evangelism, proselytism {all biased in addition to having a socially negative quality}

[use of museum and library]

-Neither word if quite sufficient on it’s own. Pairing the two words makes a more complete description of the program. The words working together with propaganda creates an interesting dichotomy: the institutional nature of museum and library and the controversial nature of propaganda could bring a wide and potentially opposing array of users onto the site.