Reading Reflection 3

INDIGENOUS PLACEKEEPING 1issue 01

ind ige

no us

pla ce

ke ep

ing :

cam pu

s d es

ign +

pla nn

ing

Wanda Dalla Costa

Evidence abounds that Indigenous peoples have long been imaginative and ingenious designers, insofar as by design one means an innovative solution to a people’s practical needs. Adapted to the plethora of environments in which they dwell, Indigenous designers created everyday utensils (eg, baskets, cooking implements, cradleboards, animal and fishing traps), ritual paraphernalia (eg, medicine bundles, rattles, drums, altars), housing and ceremonial structures (eg, hogan, tipi, ki, kiva, wikiup, longhouse), not to mention landscape architecture, such as mounds, canals, and forts. All of which were developed and refined long before the first European settlers began colonizing Indigenous lands. The volume in hand, Indigenous Design and Placekeeping at ASU, is a stimulating example of these values and principles are being adapted for the twenty-first century. Equally important is the fact that Indigenous peoples, while maintaining a deep respect for the traditions handed down to them from their ancestors, continued to innovate as their nations went through the upheavals of invasion, war, disease, forced removals, genocide, and the indignity of being locked up, in the case of the United States, into a reservation system overseen by an authoritarian Indian Bureau. Yet, from Navajo silversmithing to the pervasiveness of frybread, Indigenous peoples kept addressing the needs of their communities, making the most out of what they had on their respective reservations. There was a time, namely the 1870s-1930s, when the focus was on adapting non-Indigenous customs, values, and institutions into Indigenous communities, be it farming, education, or religion. While these adaptations were frequently done under the duress of an intolerant Indian Bureau, which sought to enforce the federal government’s so-called civilization policy—in which scores of people were to forego their Indigenous ways of thinking and living for a supposedly “progressive” form of lifestyle—the adopted changes were for the purpose of enabling communities to endure as nations. Such tribal self-awareness, if you will, can be seen in a variety of modernized traditions, such as art school trained artists and

2

Indigenous Placekeeping: Campus Design and Planning Copyright © 2018 Wanda Dalla Costa All rights reserved. No parts of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the copyright owner, except for the inclusion of brief quotations in a review.

This book is sold subject to the condition that it shall not, by way of trade or otherwise, be lent, resold, hired out, or otherwise circulated without the publisher’s prior consent in any form of binding or cover other than that in which it is published and without a similar condition including this condition being imposed on the subsequent purchaser. Under no circumstances may any part of this book be photocopied for resale.

For information about this title or to order other books and/or electronic media, contact the owner: Wanda Dalla Costa [email protected] www.rqarc.com

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Dalla Costa, Wanda Indigenous Placekeeping: Campus Design and Planning/ Dalla Costa ISBN: 978-1-7328936-0-3

Cover and graphic design by Selina Martinez. Printed in the United States of America.

INDIGENOUS PLACEKEEPING 3

indigenous placekeeping: campus design + planning We dedicate this book to the First Peoples of North

America who attended residential and boarding schools.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS4

1

2

3

4

5

p4 INTRODUCTION

p12 DESIGN PROCESS

p26 DESIGN RESEARCH

p60 DESIGN IDEATION

p96 THE LIVING PROJECT

1.1 forward 1.2 contributors 1.3 introduction

2.1 international indigenous design charter 2.2 indigenous design principles for campus development 2.3 how other universities are honoring indigenous culture 2.4 project timeline 2.5 methodology: design work in a good way 2.6 indigenous design journeying

3.1 Hohokam canals: the history of Phoenix 3.2 statistics: indigenous students at ASU 3.3 the 22 Native American tribes of Arizona 3.4 indigenous dwelling structures of Arizona tribes 3.5 overview of four ASU campuses

4.1 indigenous campus design matrix 4.2 16 proposals for indigenous design at ASU

5.1 indigenous students at the Design School 5.2 creating a comprehensive campus-wide strategy

INDIGENOUS PLACEKEEPING 5

6

We would like to acknowledge the land on which ASU is built as the territorial homeland of the Akimel O’odham

and Pee-Posh peoples.

INDIGENOUS PLACEKEEPING 7

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 forward

Evidence abounds that Indigenous peoples have long been imaginative and ingenious designers, insofar as by design one means an innovative solution to a people’s practical needs. Adapted to the plethora of environments in which they dwell, Indigenous designers created everyday utensils (eg, baskets, cooking implements, cradleboards, animal and fishing traps), ritual paraphernalia (eg, medicine bundles, rattles, drums, altars), housing and ceremonial structures (eg, hogan, tipi, ki, kiva, wikiup, longhouse), not to mention landscape architecture, such as mounds, canals, and forts. All of which were developed and refined long before the first European settlers began colonizing Indigenous lands. The volume in hand, Indigenous Design and Placekeeping at ASU, is a stimulating example of these values and principles being adapted for the twenty- first century. Equally important is the fact that Indigenous peoples, while maintaining a deep respect for the traditions handed down to them from their ancestors, continued to innovate as their nations went through the upheavals of invasion, war, disease, forced removals, genocide, and the indignity of being locked up, in the case of the United States, into a reservation system overseen by an authoritarian Indian Bureau. Yet, from Navajo silversmithing to the pervasiveness of frybread, Indigenous peoples kept addressing the needs of their communities, making the most out of what they had on their respective reservations. There was a time, namely the 1870s-1930s, when the focus was on adapting non-Indigenous customs, values, and institutions into Indigenous communities, be it farming, education, or religion. While these adaptations were frequently done under the duress of an intolerant Indian Bureau, which sought to enforce the federal government’s so-called civilization policy—in which scores of people were to forego their Indigenous ways of thinking and living for a supposedly “progressive” form of lifestyle—the adopted changes were for the purpose of enabling communities to endure as nations. Such tribal self-awareness, if you will, can be seen in a variety of modernized traditions, such as art school trained artists and

contemporary tribal governments. These developments, moreover, coincided with the 1934 Indian Reorganization Act, which initiated an era of self-governance that Indigenous nations had not enjoyed for decades. However, the reawakening of Indigenous nations’ sovereignty did not end with the writing of constitutions and bylaws. As of the 1950s, when self-governance developed into calls for self-determination, the Red Power movement that arose empowered Indigenous peoples everywhere to demand more political and cultural sovereignty. In the case of the innovation and design traditions enumerated above, Indigenous peoples wanted to do more than emulate their Euro-American counterparts—they wanted cultural revitalization and the political autonomy to sustain it. Consequently, as tribal governments strove at liberating themselves from Bureau of Indian Affairs regulation and oversight, which culminated with the 1975 Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act, there was a concomitant effort at reinvigorating traditional religion, which gave birth to efforts at language revitalization, arguments for repatriation, and a quest for greater land and water rights. Paralleling this drive for a reconstituted tribalism was a renaissance of cultural pride and creativity as Indigenous writers, poets, artists, musicians, and scholars of an almost infinite variety began producing works that are still informing the pursuits and aspirations of today’s young people. Because the current generation is accustomed to thinking of themselves in terms of representing sovereign Indigenous nations, their work as thinkers, designers, and problem-solvers is reflective of this renewed sense of self-determination. Most significant is the ambition that many are showing, not only asserting their nationhood on their respective reservations, but also affirming their claim to their historical homelands beyond reservation boundaries. As more Indigenous peoples actively embrace their inter-community identities as urban and reservation denizens, they are increasingly seeing the need to embrace Indigenous living, working, and learning spaces in their multifaceted worlds. Among the most important of these are the colleges and universities that thousands of Indigenous students—and

INTRODUCTION8

Maricopa (Pee-Posh) women gathering saguaro fruits, circa 1905

an increasing number of faculty and staff—attend across the United States. At Arizona State University, its four Phoenix Valley campuses, namely Tempe, Downtown Phoenix, West and Polytechnic, are home to one of the largest Indigenous student populations in the US. In the middle of Akimel O’odham, Pee-Posh, Yoemi, and Yavapai homelands and sacred places, the ASU campuses are an essential part of the contemporary Indigenous experience in this region today. With that in mind, Wanda Dalla Costa (Saddle Lake Cree Nation), ASU professor of architecture, has created a unique contribution to the design curriculum, in which Indigenous students have the opportunity to learn about Indigenous design practice and theory, complete with applying what is learned to the needs of ASU’s Indigenous students, faculty, and staff community. What follows is the result of their hard work at rethinking ASU through the Indigenous worldviews that the students, their teacher, and a bevy of guest speakers each brought to the table, coming up with plans and ideas that will compel readers to change their understanding of architecture and design—not as media for progress away from custom and tradition, which is what America once wanted from Indigenous peoples, but as a means for recovering the integrity of identities that endured much hardship in order to see a day when they can plan a future without reprisal from a non- Indigenous world that once presumed they would vanish.

David Martínez

David Martínez (Akimel O’odham/Hia Ced O’odham/Mexican) is an associate professor of American Indian Studies at Arizona State University, Tempe Campus. He is also the author of Dakota Philosopher: Charles Eastman and American Indian Thought (2009), the editor of The American Indian Intellectual Tradition: An Anthology of Writings, 1772-1972 (2011), and author of the forthcoming book Life of the Indigenous Mind: Vine Deloria Jr and the Birth of the Red Power Movement (2019).

INDIGENOUS PLACEKEEPING 9

1.2 contributors FA

C U

LT Y

S TU

D E

N TS

R E

S E

A R

C H

+ G

R A

P H

IC S

Wanda Dalla Costa AIA, LEED A.P. Saddle Lake Cree Nation Institute Professor, Herberger Institute for Design and the Arts Associate Professor, School of Sustainable Engineering and the Built Environment

Rhonda Harvey Navajo Urban Planning BSD + Arch Grad Student

Lauren Slim Navajo Landscape Architecture

Daniel Tulie Navajo Environmental Design

Brian Skeet Navajo Industrial + Graphic Design

Ravenna Curley Navajo Industrial Design

Selina Martinez Pascua Yaqui Tribe ASU Architectural Studies BSD Graduate

INTRODUCTION10

Michelle Hale Navajo Asst. Professor American Indian Studies ASU

Jerome Clark Navajo ASU Graduate: Student: English (Literature) Liberal Arts & Sciences

Special thanks to the following people for offering dialogue in support of this process...

S P

O N

S O

R Bryan Brayboy

Lumbee Tribe Special Advisor to the Pres. on American Indian Affairs

President’s Prof. of Indigenous Education and Justice

Jacob Moore Tohono O’odham Assoc. VP Tribal Relations ASU

Michael Begaye Navajo Dir. Amer Indian Student Support ASU

David Martinez Gila River Indian Community Assoc. Prof. Amer Indian Studies ASU

Jacob Meders Mechoopda Indian Tribe Asst. Prof. New College of Interdisciplinary Arts & Science ASU

Renée Dennison Navajo ASU Graduate Student: Photography

Royce Manuel Salt River Pima Maricopa Indian Community Tribal and Cultural Educator

Ted Jojola Pueblo of Isleta UNM Regents and Distinguished Professor

Sequoia Dance Shoshone-Bannock. Assiniboine ASU Graduate Student: Social and Cultural Pedagogy

INDIGENOUS PLACEKEEPING 11

1.3 introduction

This publication is intended to serve as a framework for universities interested in integrating Indigenous design within their campuses. This Arizona State University (ASU) independent study was spearheaded by Bryan Brayboy, Special Advisor to the President on American Indian Affairs. The aim is to initiate a dialogue and approach for honoring 22 Arizona tribes on four ASU campuses, including Sun Devil 365 Stadium. The all-Indigenous team, led by Dalla Costa, an architect and member of the Saddle Lake Cree Nation, included Indigenous students in Architecture, Landscape Architecture, Urban Planning, Industrial Design, Graphics Design and Environmental Design. The class took place in the spring of 2018, and the team worked through the summer of 2018, engaging in conversations with Indigenous scholars, community members and knowledge brokers, to develop this living document.

ASU provides a rich backdrop for this study, as it is situated within the homelands of the Akimel O’odham and Pee-Posh peoples. Ancestors of Hohokam peoples, they occupied this land long before the City of Phoenix was incorporated in 1881. Archaeological studies categorize this region as a desert-adapted irrigation agriculture society active from A.D. 300 to 1450. Evidence can be found across Phoenix, including the original Hohokam-engineered water canal network that

spanned 500 miles and provided water for 110,000 acres of land in and around the city.

Emerging globally, arising from similar studies across North America, is the start of a framework referred to as Indigenous Design Thinking, Indigenous Placekeeping or Indigenous Placemaking. What Indigeneity adds to the development of other equitable design practices, such as Creative Placemaking, is a way of accessing, understanding and working through complex holistic systems - the integration of people, kinship networks, community, place, knowledge systems, values, worldview, history and storytelling – all vital elements in creating meaningful built environments.

We envision this project as a yearly studio, led by Indigenous ASU students, working in partnership with local community members and scholars across ASU’s four campuses. ASU is a tremendous host for this emerging work: welcoming to principles of social embeddedness, home to national thought leaders in equitable practices, and uniquely situated in a place of deep history.

Wanda Dalla Costa, AIA, LEED A.P.

INTRODUCTION12

Definitions

creative placemaking: public, private, not-for-profit, and community sectors partner to strategically shape the physical and social character of a neighborhood, town, tribe, city, or region around arts and cultural activities.

design thinking: a solution-based methodology aimed at solving complex problems by re-framing the problem in human-centric ways, reiterative brainstorming sessions, and a hands-on approach. The typical stages are: empathize, define, ideate, prototype and test.

What is Placekeeping? By Wanda Dalla Costa

The term keeping place was first introduced to me in 2010 by a Kainai (Blood Tribe) Elder. I was designing an on-reserve building for repatriated artifacts. The Elder explained that they preferred the term ‘keeping place’ instead of museum. The distinction was vital. They explained, that this building would not be a place for objects to die, or be taken out of use, but instead would act as a repository for living objects. The objects could be removed and used for the cultural practices still underway. I have since heard the term Placekeeping used by Australian Indigenous architectural practitioners to refer to the act of architecture , an act which is about creating living repositories, for living cultures.

Placekeeping, is unique as a process from Creative Placemaking and Design Thinking in that it prioritizes the traditional and cultural setting, negotiates an expanded role of citizen experts and knowledge brokers, and utilizes Indigenous methodologies as a mean of accessing local narrative.

INDIGENOUS PLACEKEEPING 13

14

2

INDIGENOUS PLACEKEEPING 15

DESIGN PROCESS

2.1 international indigenous design charter

The following 10 points, borrowed from the Australian Indigenous Design Charter: Communication Design AIDC:CD, is a useful guiding framework for this study. The AIDC:CD charter is intended to guide designers to produce informed, authentic and respectful outcomes. While the charter originated in Australia, the principles reflect Indigenous design process and protocol in North America.

Indigenous led 

Ensure Indigenous stakeholders oversee the creative development and

design process. 

1 Self-determined 

Respect the rights of Indigenous peoples to

determine the application of traditional knowledge

and representation of their culture in design practice. 

2 Community specific

Ensure respect for the diversity of Indigenous

culture by acknowledging and following regional

cultural understandings. 

3 Deep listening

Ensure respectful, culturally specific, personal engagement behaviors for effective communication and courteous interaction

is practiced. Include recognized custodians.

4 Indigenous knowledge 

Acknowledge and respect the rich cultural history

of Indigenous knowledge including, designs,

stories, sustainability and land management with the understanding that

ownership of knowledge must remain with the

Indigenous custodians. 

5

Shared knowledge

Cultivate respectful, culturally specific, personal engagement behaviors for effective communication.

Develop cultural competency frameworks to remain

aware of Indigenous cultural realities. 

6 Shared benefits 

Ensure Indigenous people share in the

benefits from the use of their cultural knowledge,

especially where it is being commercially applied. 

7 Impact of design

Consider the reception and implication of all designs

so that they protect the environment, are

sustainable, and remain respectful of Indigenous cultures over deep time; past, present and future. 

8 Legal and moral 

Demonstrate respect and honour cultural

ownership and intellectual property rights, including moral rights, by obtaining appropriate permissions

where required. 

9 Implementation

Ask the questions if there is an aspect to the project, in relation to any design brief, that may be improved with Indigenous

knowledge. Ensure the implementation of the Charter to safeguard

Indigenous design integrity.

10

DESIGN PROCESS16

INDIGENOUS PLACEKEEPING 17

“Indigenous peoples are natural designers. Our approach to design is based on observation and the teachings of our elders. Before the colonization of the western world, the local Indigenous Peoples of this land had already figured out a canal system to deliver water for agriculture from the north. To this day, some of those same canals are used to deliver water from the north to help provide electricity to the city. It’s time for Western Design Thinking to appreciate, value and respect Indigenous Design Thinking and history. This means making Indigenous Design history more than just a few paragraphs in a design history course. Manifesting and repurposing buildings/spaces is only a start for Indigenous placemaking to be relevant at Arizona State University. Our impact can only be made when we carry these accomplishments and manifestations forward. This living document is our way of passing on the torch to the next leaders of Indigenous designers to strengthen Indigenous placemaking at Arizona State University.”

Brian Skeet Navajo

Industrial Design

2.2 indigenous design principles for campus development

The following principles were created by the University of Manitoba. Although the terminology is unique to U of M’s context and associated worldview, we find these a useful starting point for future conversations here in Arizona. We copied the original text and added ASU in place of U of M, in order to imagine the principles here at ASU. The formation of a design and planning subcommittee composed of Elders, knowledge brokers, citizen experts, and local leaders would be a great next step for development of principles specific to Phoenix, Arizona.

The Principles are Rooted in the Concept of Interdependence The various components of campus planning and design are not isolated entities, but interdependent and interconnected. An Indigenous way of seeing/being that recognizes the interdependence of all things underlies the principles. Effective planning must recognize that all components of a place – such as the land, water, transportation networks, buildings, infrastructure, open spaces, and the people that inhabit it – are linked in complex ways. Each one affects the other, and they must be viewed holistically.

Commit to Relationships and Listening Relationships are the foundation. For Indigenous perspectives and priorities to be represented in the design and development of University lands, local teachings must inform relationships between Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples providing a collaborative foundation for future planning and design projects. These relationships must reflect the Nation-to-Nation character of the Treaty Relationship; bringing together all stakeholders on equal footing in a spirit of reconciliation, listening, honesty, and openness. As a community, we acknowledge we are not there yet, but we are committed to making this university a truly shared and common place for all its diverse users. Without a relational foundation, this goal will not be realized.

Demonstrate Culturally Relevant Design Plans and designs are not gratuitous; rather, they convey underlying values. Arizona State University is uniquely located within traditional territories, and the spirit of this place, along with its Indigenous cultures and values, must be reflected in planning and design on University lands – not just in the design of buildings, but woven through University campuses and spaces. This can make the University’s lands truly distinct, fostering a “sense of place” rooted in the particular land and cultures found here. This can be encouraged through the naming of places and key features to reflect the pre-colonial legacy of the area, Indigenous languages, and contributions of Indigenous peoples to this place; through public spaces with ceremonial significance that are also open to broader public use; and through interpretive, educational, and artistic elements (especially around special areas, public spaces, features, views, and trails).

DESIGN PROCESS18

Respect Mother Earth The natural environment of University lands is sacred, and should be celebrated and enhanced. It should reflect the interrelatedness between land, animals, and people; and a respect for life and all that is required to sustain life. This includes a stronger acknowledgment of key natural features; the conservation and restoration of local species and ecosystems whenever possible; and the exploration of “working landscapes” that are not just aesthetic but have other uses such as educating, harvesting/growing, healing, and engaging people with natural systems. It is important that – where possible – campuses strike a balance between public access to natural areas on one hand, and maintaining their qualities as habitat and as “quiet” natural spaces on the other.

Foster a Sense of Belonging and Community Campus planning and design should strive to increase a sense of belonging for everyone. In particular, the University should be an environment in which Indigenous students, faculty, staff, and visitors can see themselves, and feel that they belong here. It should be a place where Indigenous groups and individuals can not only feel at home but also feel free to be part of the wider University community (as opposed to feeling isolated or segregated). Spaces that are welcoming to all people, Indigenous and non-Indigenous – offering the opportunity for paths to cross and for social gathering to happen – are an important part of this.

Embrace a ‘Seven Generations’ View  ‘Seven generations’ refers to an Indigenous way of being that looks seven generations forward and seven generations back, while being rooted in our present generation. Building on this, campus development and design should be an expression of our own time, learning from history and those who came before us while taking into account the generations to come. This requires a long-term view of how University land is developed and used, engaging with traditional knowledge holders, children, and youth today, knowing that initiatives and projects may not be realized in our lifetimes but will have effects on future generations. 

INDIGENOUS PLACEKEEPING 19

2.3 how other universities are honoring Indigenous culture

The following universities have embedded indigenous culture on their campuses through programming, design, planning, and policy. The list is not comprehensive, but intended to illustrate a variety of ways to honor Indigenous culture on campus.

Haskell Indian Nations University (HINU) Laurentian University (LU)

Michigan State University (MSU) Northern Arizona University (NAU)

Northland College (NC) Oregon State University (OSU)

Portland State University (PSU) Diné Shiprock + Tsaile College (CDC) University of British Columbia (UBC)

Univeristy of Manitoba (U of M) University of Minnesota (UMN)

University of Montana (UMT ) University of New Mexico (UNM)

University of Saskatchewan (U of S) Washington State University ( WSU)

DESIGN PROCESS20

Haskell Cultural Center Indigenous Sharing and Learning Centre Indigenous Law + Policy Center Native American Cultural Center Native American Museum Native American Longhouse Native American Student + Community Center John Pinto Library First Nations House of Learning Indigenous Planning + Design Principles Native American Medicine Gardens Payne Family Native American Center Indigenous Design + Planning Institute The Gordon Oakes Redbear Student Centre Elson S. Floyd Cultural Center

Left to right: Native American Medicine Gardens (UMN), John Pinto Library (CDC),

Payne Family Native American Center (UMT), Native American

Student and Community Center (PSU), Native American Cultural Center (NAU), Elson S

Floyd Cultural Center (WSU)

INDIGENOUS PLACEKEEPING 21

01/19 Jacob Meders / Local Artist + ASU Faculty

02/02 Michael Begaye / Director of AISSS

03/16 Roy