How do we imagine the future? Urban studies give us an insight into the future character of the city, consisting of urban design, urban furniture, and architecture. But the image of a place is mostly made up of human activity, how do we imagine the activity of a future place? In places where there will be flats in the future, for example, the activity of a performer arises, which demonstrates future activity. This means that I transfer the material from the interior of the "future apartment" to the current context and thus create speculation of space and stress the problematics of newly reconstructed areas which they transform from public to private and unaffordable, that demonstrates the possibility of gentrification at those area. Extensive data collection embodied in motion, liminal character of the area and performer itself creates together a composition that creates imaginative space and thus creates a deep connection between the observer (public) and the area. This method connects the future image with the present.
The three selected localities represent the liminality of Rohan and show the complex process of the brownfield. Phase 1 is closest to the renovation area, movement in the locality is higher, the area is busy, construction occupies the whole territory, one does not see any barriers, but still is not sure whether he can move freely between the cycle path and construction materials. The second phase of the site is nestled between two major constructions, the site is deserted, far enough from both constructions, but the soundscape from a distance still resembles the hustle and bustle of construction. The third phase is located on a plain very far from the construction of Rohan City. People in this area most often get from Karlín to a cycle path. From this place you can see into the distance the horizon of new buildings. Runners and dog walkers are most often seen. Dancer, performer is using the same task as in the previous experiment, moreover, gathers information from the accurate area. Soundscape, image of the city, movement of people are being reflected. At first phase I was “spending time” in unexpectable way and I was noticing what “stories” and situations will be created by putting unconventional figure, with unconventional clothes and unconventionally spending time at the first phase. What happened was that the truck came to collect building materials (which was my floor at that moment), so it became a conflict of public space, who has a greater right to their activity? In second phase, there were dog walkers passing by and observing what am I doing there, I was more protected, that area was not so frequented. What was explored was the soundscape, because the location is between two different reconstruction the sounds were overlapping, other observed detail was the floor, where the moss met the tiles of the previous building, which created a special scenography - significant image. At the third place/phase I was at open space and I hurt the reconstruction from distance, I could also hear birds and people talking, I was more part of the “movement”, activity and thus runners passing by were in proximity in open area which created an identical image.
