Dwelling Otherwise: Material Practice, Natality, and the Contestation of Philosophical Space

The expression of philosophical and art-historical change through the language of successive “turns”—material, linguistic, pictorial—has become a familiar way of indicating epistemic shifts. However, such periodizing shorthand risks hiding the slower, more uneven reconfigurations through which concepts are experienced, practiced, and contested. This paper argues that dwelling, as both a philosophical and material condition, provides a vital site for understanding these reconfigurations. Instead of viewing dwelling as an abstract ontological category, I see it as a lived and embodied practice, shaped by material engagement, social relations, and local forms of making. In doing so, I highlight modes of philosophical inquiry that arise not only through textual interpretation but through everyday practices of inhabiting, fabricating, and wearing.

If the objects of inquiry are seen as “silent messengers,” their communicative power cannot be limited to symbolic or discursive forms alone but is grounded in materiality (Dupré, 2011). Ernst Gombrich’s observation that even a teacup invites inquiry into its substance, structure, and conditions of production highlights how material itself initiates the interpretative process (Gombrich, 1988). Materiality is not secondary to meaning but integral to it; it shapes the possibility of philosophical engagement from the outset.

This proposition gains particular significance within an ostensibly object-oriented discipline. The reliance on methodological “turns” may paradoxically obscure the continuities that connect art-historical and design inquiry—specifically, the ongoing interplay of matter, form, and meaning. To focus on material is therefore not to establish a new methodological approach but to recognize a persistent condition that is variably foregrounded and occluded across different historiographical moments.

This paper situates these concerns within a practice-led investigation of dwelling, drawing on a range of thinkers—Heidegger, Arendt, and Bachelard—and examining their concepts in tension with the lived experiences of female practitioners in Titirangi, Aotearoa, New Zealand. Such a gathering creates dynamic tensions through which dwelling can be reconsidered.

Heidegger or the Limits of Authentic Dwelling

Heidegger’s account of dwelling remains fundamental. In “Building Dwelling Thinking,” he regards dwelling as the essential condition of being, proposing that humans do not merely occupy space but inhabit it meaningfully (Heidegger, 1971a). Art and architecture, in this view, do not simply exist within space but reveal it; art “is space” insofar as it creates a clearing where beings can appear (Heidegger, 1971b). As Tonner (2010) elaborates, the “work” of art is its ability to disclose a world rather than simply represent one.

However, Heidegger’s critique of modernity is characterized by a nostalgic tendency that favors a return to an original mode of being. As Berardi (2009) argues, such a stance risks excluding the transformative potential of technological and social change. More importantly, Heidegger’s work largely ignores considerations of gender and social differentiation. The figure of the dweller remains abstract, disconnected from the material conditions that shape lived experience.

This limitation becomes apparent regarding modernist domestic spaces. The idealized transparency of the modernist house hides gendered labor and restrictions. Pajaczkowska (2005) describes suburbanization as creating the “anomie of the deracinated,” a state of alienation especially strong for women. In this context, Heidegger’s concept of authentic dwelling is inadequate.

Natality and the Reopening of Dwelling

Hannah Arendt’s idea of natality provides a vital counterpoint. In The Human Condition, Arendt (1958) highlights birth rather than death as the key aspect of human existence. Natality refers to the ability to start anew, bringing unpredictability and change into the world.

This reorientation alters the philosophical significance of dwelling. Instead of a return to authenticity, dwelling becomes an ongoing process of emergence shaped by diversity and relationships. Arendt’s framework is particularly resonant for feminist inquiry, as it highlights agency and the possibility of change within constrained conditions.

Within this research, natality is enacted through engagement with femme-makers in Titirangi. Their practices demonstrate dwelling as an ongoing process of re-making, carving out forms of belonging within the constraints of suburban modernity. Jewellery, as a medium, becomes a site where this temporal and material layering is made tangible.

Bachelard, Reverie, and the Politics of Imagination

Bachelard’s The Poetics of Space emphasizes imagination and interiority (Bachelard, 1994). Spaces are seen not as neutral containers but as sites of memory and affect. While often considered apolitical, Bachelard’s focus on reverie connects with political thought through its attention to possibility.

Loizidou (2015) expands on this connection, contending that imagination is essential to political action. The ability to envisage alternative realities fosters resistance and transformation. This view is reflected in the collective practices of femme-makers, whose work constitutes a form of “chorusing”—a shared, non-neutral mode of expression that challenges dominant narratives of modernity.

Jewellery as Philosophical Practice

The theoretical concerns outlined above are realized through my creative jewellery practice. As an intimate, wearable form, jewellery enables a mode of dwelling in time, holding memory and identity in material form.

The modernist picture window acts as a conceptual starting point. Linked with transparency and visual oversight, the window is re-scaled into jewellery, transforming its qualities into tactile, embodied experiences. This translation reveals tensions between openness and constraint, visibility and exposure.

Through making and wearing, philosophical concepts are enacted rather than merely represented. This approach aligns with a broader understanding of philosophy as practical—spread across material, sensory, and social spheres.

Poetical Dwelling Revisited

Heidegger’s idea of poetical dwelling, based on Hölderlin, places poetry at the heart of human life (Heidegger, 1971c). However, this view can be broadened through other perspectives.

Emily Dickinson’s “I dwell in Possibility” presents a broader view of dwelling, characterized by openness and diversity (Dickinson, 1890/1998). Her focus on windows and light as metaphors for creativity reframes dwelling as a site of potential rather than restriction.

By juxtaposing Dickinson with Heidegger, the research emphasizes the need to diversify philosophical discourse. Dwelling becomes a contested field shaped by multiple perspectives.

Conclusion

This paper describes dwelling as a lived philosophical condition, grounded in material practice and marginalized perspectives. By emphasizing making as a mode of inquiry, it challenges the abstraction of philosophy and highlights its presence in everyday life.

Materiality, rather than marking a distinct “turn,” is shown to be a persistent and generative force. Through engagement with objects, spaces, and bodies, philosophy becomes tangible, accessible, and open to debate.

References

Arendt, H. (1958). The human condition. University of Chicago Press.

Bachelard, G. (1994). The poetics of space (M. Jolas, Trans.). Beacon Press. (Original work published 1958)

Berardi, F. (2009). The soul at work: From alienation to autonomy. Semiotext(e).

Dickinson, E. (1998). The complete poems of Emily Dickinson. Back Bay Books. (Original work published 1890)

Dupré, S. (2011). Silent messengers: Materials, meaning, and materiality. LIT  Verlag.

Gombrich, E. H. (1988). The Story of Art (16th ed.). Phaidon.

Heidegger, M. (1971a). Building dwelling thinking. In Poetry, language, thought (A. Hofstadter, Trans., pp. 141–160). Harper & Row.

Heidegger, M. (1971b). Art and space. In Poetry, language, thought (A. Hofstadter, Trans.). Harper & Row.

Heidegger, M. (1971c). …Poetically, man dwells…. In Poetry, language, thought (A. Hofstadter, Trans.). Harper & Row.

Loizidou, E. (2015). Anarchism and the politics of utopia. Manchester University Press.

Pajaczkowska, C. (2005). Urban Memory/Suburban Oblivion. In Mark Crinson (Ed.), Urban Memory: History of Amnesia in the Modern City (pp. 23-48). Routledge.

Tonner, P. (2010). Heidegger, metaphysics and the philosophy of art. Edinburgh University Press.

About the Author

Gina Hochstein is a lecturer in the School of Architecture at Unitec, Aotearoa, New Zealand. She has recently submitted her PhD titled Dwelling in Jewellery. Her creative research explores the intersection of craft practice, body politics, and spatial experience through feminist and practice-based methodologies. Working across jewellery and architectural discourse, she produces wearable artefacts that critically examine scale, ornament, and the gendered dynamics of modernist space. Grounded in research on the modernist community of Titirangi in Auckland, her work investigates how embodied knowledge and material processes shape relationships between bodies, buildings, and landscape. Through exhibitions, publications, and collaborative projects, Hochstein contributes to international conversations on craft, design innovation, and feminist spatial practice.