Martien Luteijn: the visual heart of the Solidarity University – “At one point I started talking to Petra and we just never stopped”

What do you do at Solidarity University?
In practice, I talk through many things with Hans and Petra. The idea behind that usually is to think of ways to present to the outside world what the Solidarity University does. Making a step from a complicated story to something that you can use. I am never the original deviser of the intrinsic part; that is something that Hans and Petra do. But I do contribute to the intrinsic development. I try to convert their story into something we can use. And during that process, I never lose sight of the fact that you always have to remain on the lookout for ways to disentangle and simplify things. I feel that that should always be possible. The Solidarity University works on complex matters in a sometimes surprisingly simple way. I ensure that we show you the tip of the iceberg and that we also indicate to you that there is something more as well. A deeper layer.

How did you start working for the Solidarity University?
At one point I started talking to Petra and we just never stopped. We have never analysed that, really. It is exactly the same with Hans, by the way. I got to know Petra when she organised projects on architecture. But Petra never works on just one subject. I should, in fact, say that I got to know Petra when she tried to find out how the world works and she did so from an architectural point of view. Back then, she already worked from a basis of visualisation. I think that for her that is part of the gestation process. She makes an image in her head and that is what I connected to. That you create a project on living rooms and you set to work from actual living rooms, for example. When you look at it like that, there is, actually, always some kind of visual component in the thought process. And that is probably why what I do, suits the Solidarity University so well.

How does this visualisation work in practice?
I am never the original deviser of the subjects the Solidarity University works on, but when I make an image for Hans and Petra, it is useful in their developmental process. It sets something in motion because it forces one to think about what does and what does not fit into that image. What kind of arrow do you use? One that shows you where something originates from or one that shows that something is set in motion? A visualisation forces you to make choices and it compels you to be concrete. I would actually really like to know whether Petra and Hans see our work process in the same way. That this visual component is so important and that it contributes to the shaping of ideas. What I really like about all this, is that I can sometimes just see them thinking: “So that is the way what I talk about looks.”

What does the collaboration bring you?
The Social Theory is something that you can regard both from a very conceptual/scientific and a practical point of view. And then, my point of view is more of visualisation, but I always take into account that it is about people, because that, in the end, is what the theory is all about. I think that that means that I have made progress in my trade as a designer. Because I don’t want to just make drawings, I am actually looking to do something with a little more depth. I often work in a very intuitive way, but for the Solidarity University that doesn’t cut it. The Solidarity University offers me the depth that I am looking for in my work. It has made me regard my work in a different way.

When did you realise that the Solidarity University offered you more depth or more layered work?
Right from the first project I did for Petra, actually. She is always busy adding extra layers to projects. She involves artists or scientists and is always on the lookout for those kind of combinations. Because she feels that you should look at things from all sides. Every project needs free spirits. Maybe that is also a part of my role and maybe that is why within no time at all, I was involved in much more than just design. To get back to your earlier question about what the collaboration brings me: the Solidarity University has influenced my work. I see how Petra and Hans work and how they regard their work. They always just start working, but they always do so on the basis of an idea. And they are always critical about the right form and approach, plus they are always concerned with deeper layers. That matches how I already used to work, but because I work with them now, I have become much more aware of this and I apply it better and more often as well. I would dread to think of designing a book without getting an idea of what it is about, for instance. When I have a meeting with Hans and Petra we can easily talk about the subject matter of the project and after that we focus on the design for about ten focussed minutes.

I am always curious about the story behind things and what things are really actually about. That is why just designing logos is no longer enough for me. I do make them, and they look really good as well, but they are always part of a larger story.

That drive to always look for extra layers… was it also present in projects that followed?
Yes. That way of thinking resulted in DEEL& Ulrum, for instance. A unique project at the time. “We have an issue and we will go and visit the location where this issue is relevant, and on top of that, I will invite people over to come and look into it as well.” We had the same feeling about this right away and Petra guided me through exactly how she wanted to do it. Our approach took a lot of explaining when we wanted to involve policy makers, for instance. And you have to take care that you put sufficient spotlight on the outcome of such a project. It stands or falls with what you present or tell or what you let people experience. Back then, I spent a lot of time with Petra just figuring out how to showcase the project and how to present it to others. This resulted in a blog as a form of communication and the result of this was that all participants understood right away that what was learned would not get lost. It is a way of showing ‘we are looking at the bigger picture here’ but at the same time there is room to talk about a playground that must be realised NOW to keep the village liveable.

In the Zeeuwse Huiskamer project, we used the same kind of blog setup to present things but the issue behind it was totally different. And from that project came the Solidarity University. An umbrella under which all of Petra’s initiatives (as well as those of Hans who had joined her by that time) are gathered, including their Social Theory. The fact that all projects that are instigated and executed by Petra and Hans (as well as all the stories that go with them) now fall under the Solidarity University, is actually a logical consequence of how we are constantly busy with form and checking whether the way we work is still the right way. It was time to catch everything under one common denominator.

Will there ever be a blog again? It was, after all, a really great way to work.
It certainly was at the time. But now that is over. That is also part of the Solidarity University’s approach. You constantly check whether something works and whether it still makes sense. That form fitted what we did back then; now we work in a different way. I can imagine that there will come a time that it does fit again. We keep on evaluating those kind of things. And for now, we still have some ways of working we still employ. Interviews and stories. Those have remained.

I quite like it that we keep on searching. And that we both thought at the same time: “And now we will go for a new form. One that suits us better.” In the EMPOWERCARE project on Tholen, the inhabitants of Sint-Maartensdijk realised that they needed a paper. That works so much better there. Can you imagine making a blog for blog’s sake just because we ‘always do a blog’. With a paper, you don’t reach everyone, but that is fine, because the idea behind it is that we just have to be able to involve the people that matter.

What is your current role like?
I still find it hard to define my role in the whole. I often call it art director because I tend to work from a visual basis, but at the same time, that term feels a bit like I only decide what colour a certain report will be. I see it like this: I have a role in deciding how we want to tell things as well as what we want to tell. What is the story; what is the theory beneath it and how do we show what kind of organisation we are?

That is quite an expansion on the standard term art director, right? When I talk to Petra and Hans, I am often the one asking questions like: ‘What do we do? What projects do we want to do? Which direction do we want to head in?’ That feels more like I’m occupied with positioning. And when we publish something I also take a critical view: how does this publication fit in with who we are? I feel like my work is slowly progressing towards designing organisations.

Is there more that you like about your work for Solidarity University?
The Solidarity University approach is to just start working. Let’s have a chat with people first before you instigate complicated plans. Now, that doesn’t mean that there is no idea behind it. But that idea can develop in an entirely different direction and you should definitely not cling to it.

You were closely involved with the I KNOW HOW project. Every project entails a search for the right form. What was that like with I KNOW HOW?
With I KNOW HOW there was a fundamental issue concerning the approach. With a project on cancer, you automatically get to emotions. Do you want to use those? And for me, things became quite emotional anyway (which I don’t mean to sound as sentimental as it does), because cancer got to be a relevant issue in my personal life.

Of course there had been subject matter before that touched me. With DEEL& Ulrum and the Zeeuwse Huiskamer I strongly felt that I came from a village just like those that the project was about. But I KNOW HOW is about cancer and how it relates to your work and exactly at the time that we worked on it, I got cancer. At first I was occupied with “How do we present this project”; then I got to see the other side of it all of a sudden. For instance, I could be working on the visualisation of our knowledge bank together with Hans and I recognised the stories people shared with us to a tee. Think of how colleagues or people I met reacted, for instance.

How did you experience I KNOW HOW due to all that?
I did not keep on working the entire time, but I did resume my work (and therefore also my work for I KNOW HOW) when I was still in the aftermath of things. So work and illness were truly intertwined. I participated in many co-creation sessions and was truly touched. That is still the case. When I observe a co-creation session on something else now, I still feel the same. Maybe it has turned me into a more optimistic person. Like: ‘People really aren’t that bad when they can do things like this together.’ I am convinced that people can leave many of their qualms behind if they are invested in an issue or if there is a connection with the people they work with.

Did you learn something from that?
For me it was quite the epiphany. My work for Solidarity University and I KNOW HOW were things I already truly believed in before I got cancer. But when I got sick, the feeling that we are doing something right got doubly reinforced. Because a project like this leads to concrete results. Right now we have an extensive knowledge bank. But we aim for  more – there are still steps to be taken and more knowledge needs to be made available, but it will render great results – that much is clear to me already. Especially if we can take those extra steps.

I shared my own story during the co-creation session and I have really got the hang of that now. I can now not just ensure that I KNOW HOW is presented in the right way, I can provide valuable input and enthuse people. That is something I would like to do more with. A next step and something new. It feels like quite a great challenge.