Our Praxis

Our Praxis

At Workspace Social Sculpture, praxis is the ongoing movement between experience and reflection, between what we do and how we understand it. It is not a fixed method or a step-by-step process. It is a way of entering into relationship with others, with the institution, and with the social field that holds us.

We create spaces for embodied inquiry, where action and reflection happen together. We work slowly, deliberately, and in response to what emerges.

Each of the elements below describes what we do in practice and how it supports learning, presence, and transformation.

Sculpting the Social Field

Our practice begins with the social field. These are the subtle patterns of attention, gesture, power, and proximity that shape how groups function. In the studio, we treat these dynamics as material to be sensed, explored, and formed. The space becomes a site of artistic and relational inquiry. We work with silence, arrangement, and shared timing to invite participants into a slower, more responsive relationship with one another. This is not about performing inclusion or simulating teamwork. It is about becoming aware of how the body speaks, how presence shapes collective experience, and how we might reshape the space between us with care and imagination.

In practice, this might include:
  • Arranging chairs to reflect relational dynamics or tensions
  • Entering the space in silence and observing how the group gathers
  • Naming the experience of proximity, withdrawal, or openness
  • Attending to posture and pacing as relational gestures
  • Exploring how the placement of bodies affects trust and connection
Suggested Reading:
  • Beuys, J. (2004). What is Art? Clairview Books. (Original work published 1973)
  • Sacks, S., & Zumdick, W. (2013). ATLAS of the poetic continent: Pathways to ecological citizenship. Temple Lodge Publishing.
  • Zumdick, W. (2013). Death keeps me awake: Joseph Beuys and Rudolf Steiner—Foundations of their thought. Spurbuchverlag.

“Every human being is an artist… not because they paint or sculpt, but because they shape the social organism. (Joseph Beuys)

Dialogical Action

We understand dialogue not simply as exchange or discussion, but as a form of action. In the tradition of Paulo Freire, dialogue is the means through which people name their reality together, reflect critically on their conditions, and act to transform them. We call this dialogical action. It is both relational and political. It is grounded in presence, but it does not stop at mutual understanding. It moves toward shared responsibility and collective transformation.
In our practice, dialogical action involves verbal and nonverbal forms of expression. We attend to silence, rhythm, posture, and gesture as much as to spoken language. Dialogue happens through the body as well as through words. It unfolds in trust, in conflict, in rupture, and in repair. We create conditions where participants can stay with discomfort, ask difficult questions, and reflect together on how their relationships are shaped by histories of power, privilege, resistance, and care.

In practice, this might include:
  • Co-creating shared language to name tensions within a group or institution
  • Using silence and spatial awareness to deepen collective reflection
  • Inviting embodied storytelling as a form of relational witnessing
  • Facilitating moments of interruption or rupture as opportunities for insight
  • Supporting participants to examine how they show up in the social field
Suggested reading:
  • Freire, P. (2005). Pedagogy of the Oppressed (30th anniversary ed.). Continuum.
  • hooks, b. (1994). Teaching to Transgress: Education as the Practice of Freedom. Routledge.
  • Ellsworth, E. (2005). Places of Learning: Media, Architecture, Pedagogy. Routledge.

“Dialogue is the encounter between men, mediated by the world, in order to name the world. (Paulo Freire)

Working with Paradox

At the heart of Workspace Social Sculpture is a willingness to stay with paradox. We work with tensions that are not meant to be solved: equality and difference, safety and danger, vulnerability and strength, inclusion and exclusion. These paradoxes are not abstract. They live in the body and in the dynamics of group life. They show up in silence, resistance, and desire, and they shape how people listen, speak, and make meaning together.
Rather than seeking clarity or resolution, we create spaces where these tensions can be held with care. We support groups to move toward—not away from—complexity, contradiction, and uncertainty. This is not a therapeutic goal. It is a pedagogical, relational, and institutional one. Staying with paradox builds the capacity to remain present with difference, to resist the urge to simplify, and to hold space for transformation as an unfolding process.

In practice, this might include:
  • Naming a specific paradox and inviting the group to explore it through movement or posture
  • Using objects or spatial arrangements to externalise an inner or shared tension
  • Pausing to surface discomfort when multiple, conflicting truths are present
  • Inviting artistic responses—through drawing, sculpture, or gesture—to hold ambiguity
  • Reflecting together on what it means to honour both sides of a tension without collapsing it into a solution
Suggested reading:
  • Mowles, C. (2021). Managing in Uncertainty: Complexity and the Paradoxes of Everyday Organizational Life. Routledge.
  • Biesta, G. (2014). The Beautiful Risk of Education. Routledge.
  • Shaw, P. (2002). Changing Conversations in Organizations: A Complexity Approach to Change. Routledge.

We live paradox rather than resolve it. (Chris Mowles)

Embodied Practice

At Workspace Social Sculpture, we begin with the body. Long before a group speaks, it is already communicating. Through posture, movement, eye contact, breath, and silence, participants express what is permitted, what is feared, and what is unknown. We understand embodiment not only as a personal experience, but as a social and institutional one. The body carries histories of power, trauma, belonging, and exclusion. It is where the social field is felt and where transformation begins.
Our work creates conditions for participants to become aware of how they move through space, how they hold tension, and how they respond to others without speaking. This awareness is not just about presence. It becomes a form of inquiry. The body reveals what is known but unspoken, what has been learned through repetition, and what might be re-patterned through attention and care.

In practice this might include:
  • Guided body scans and somatic check-ins to notice subtle internal states
  • Moving with or in response to others to explore trust, tension, or withdrawal
  • Tracking patterns of gesture or posture that reflect institutional roles
  • Exploring silence and stillness as active forms of embodied attention
  • Using drawing or movement to externalise felt experience or inner contradiction
Suggested reading:
  • Burkitt, I. (1999). Bodies of Thought: Embodiment, Identity and Modernity. SAGE Publications Ltd.
  • Fricker, M. (2007). Epistemic Injustice: Power and the Ethics of Knowing. Oxford University Press.
  • Rosa, H. (2019). Resonance: A Sociology of Our Relationship to the World. Polity.

The body is not a thing. It is a situation: it is our grasp on the world and our sketch of our project. (Simone de Beauvoir)

Artistic Research

Workspace Social Sculpture is grounded in the understanding that art is not only expressive, but epistemological. We approach research as a process of inquiry that is felt, lived, and practiced—often through form, rhythm, and embodied presence. In this sense, research is not about control or certainty. It is about learning to stay with questions, to move with tension, and to shape the conditions through which something previously unseen might emerge.
In our work, the studio becomes a site of artistic inquiry. Silence, gesture, image, and improvisation are not used to illustrate ideas. They are the means through which understanding is formed. We draw on traditions of artistic research that honour ambiguity, aesthetic responsiveness, and multiple ways of knowing. This is research that cannot be reduced to outcomes. It values resonance over replication, emergence over explanation, and the situated knowledge that arises through collective experimentation.

In practice, this might include:
  • Treating movement, drawing, or voice as primary modes of inquiry
  • Using scores or spatial improvisation to surface hidden relational dynamics
  • Reflecting on artistic process not only as output, but as a way of thinking
  • Documenting experiences through visual or poetic traces
  • Attending to what is felt, paused, resisted, or hesitated over in shared work
Suggested reading:
  • Borgdorff, H. (2012). The Conflict of the Faculties: Perspectives on Artistic Research and Academia. Leiden University Press.
  • Leavy, P. (2020). Method Meets Art: Arts-Based Research Practice (3rd ed.). Guilford Press.
  • Mersch, D. (2020). Epistemologies of Aesthetics. Diaphanes.

Artistic research is not about illustrating existing knowledge, but about producing something that did not exist before. (Henk Borgdorff)

Trauma Informed & Courage-Oriented Practice

We recognize that many people carry embodied histories of harm, exclusion, and disconnection into collective spaces. These do not always speak loudly. They often show up in what is not said, in tension held in the body, in withdrawal or hypervigilance, or in the difficulty of staying present. Our work is trauma-informed in that it honors the nervous system, makes space for choice, and supports the pacing of each participant’s experience.
But we are also careful not to confuse trauma-informed practice with a promise of safety. This work is not always comfortable. It asks people to turn toward what is difficult—not to be overwhelmed by it, but to become more responsive to it. This is why we also speak of courage-oriented practice. We work to cultivate collective conditions in which people can move with uncertainty, navigate affective intensity, and take ethical risks in relation to one another. This is not a private therapeutic journey. It is a shared political and pedagogical one.

In practice, this might include:
  • Naming and normalizing emotional or physiological responses to group tension
  • Offering clear boundaries and permissions for participation and pause
  • Introducing rituals of opening and closing to support containment and integration
  • Working with slowness, repetition, and rhythm to support nervous system regulation
  • Inviting conversations about what care means in a particular group or institution
Suggested reading:
  • Macy, J., & Brown, M. Y. (2014). Coming back to life: The updated guide to the Work That Reconnects. New Society Publishers. 
  • Menakem, R. (2017). My Grandmother’s Hands: Racialized Trauma and the Pathway to Mending Our Hearts and Bodies. Central Recovery Press.
  • Britzman, D. P. (1998). Lost Subjects, Contested Objects: Toward a Psychoanalytic Inquiry of Learning. SUNY Press.

Trauma is not a flaw or a weakness. It is a highly effective tool of safety and survival. Trauma is also not an event. Trauma is the body’s protective response to an event—or a series of events—that it perceives as potentially dangerous. (Resmaa Menakem)

Institutional Transformation

We approach institutions not as fixed systems, but as dynamic and relational fields. They are made and remade through daily practices, through how we gather, speak, listen, and withdraw. Institutions live in architecture, policy, habit, and gesture. But they also live in the body. Transforming them requires more than structural change. It asks for collective awareness, presence, and a willingness to notice the subtle repetitions that hold culture in place.
Through Workspace Social Sculpture, we support organisations to become more attentive to how power and care circulate within their everyday practices. Our work is not about delivering solutions. It is about creating the conditions in which institutions can sense themselves. This means supporting moments of reflection, creative disruption, and the emergence of new relational possibilities. The goal is not control or coherence. It is responsiveness, aliveness, and co-responsibility.

In practice, this might include:
  • Facilitating embodied inquiries into culture, exclusion, or responsibility
  • Using aesthetic processes to externalise implicit norms or unspoken tensions
  • Supporting moments of shared pause, rupture, or renegotiation
  • Hosting cross-role dialogues grounded in shared vulnerability and attention
  • Inviting groups to imagine and rehearse alternative institutional futures
Suggested reading:
  • Ahmed, S. (2012). On Being Included: Racism and Diversity in Institutional Life. Duke University Press.
  • Clegg, S., Kornberger, M., & Rhodes, C. (2005). Learning/Becoming/Organizing. Organization, 12(2), 147–167.
  • Shotter, J. (2011). Getting It: Withness-Thinking and the Dialogical… in Practice. Hampton Press.

Institutions are not only structures we enter. They are atmospheres we breathe. (Sara Ahmed)