日本建築学会東海支部設計計画委員会　話題提供07｜𣘺本雅好先生（椙山女学園大学）

Main ideas, concepts, and lessons

1) Speaker background and focus

Hashimoto (𣘺本雅好 / “Hashimoto” in the subtitles) explains his career path and teaching background:

• He teaches:
  • Architecture / interior / interior design
  • Product design
  • (Students originally began in industrial design.)
• After completing graduate school (master’s + doctorate), his research focus shifted toward ancient architecture.
• Teaching timeline:
  • Began university teaching in 2002 (interior design field) at Heianjo University
  • Joined Sugiyama University in 2005, where he now teaches interior + product design
• He notes he teaches at multiple universities and is often asked what his “specialty” is—yet he positions himself as working across fields rather than staying in a single niche.

---

2) Core approach: signage and public-building design rooted in the local community

The talk centers on work for community/public facilities (e.g., integrating an elementary school with a community center). Hashimoto emphasizes that design here is not just “putting predetermined letters” in place.

Key principles:

• Design should reflect what local people feel attached to.
• Signage/marks must be earned, not simply applied at the end—through research, negotiation, and community activity.
• The process requires early discussion (more than a year before completion) and ongoing collaboration with students and stakeholders.

Methodology/process for signage & iconography (as described)

Stakeholder involvement & timing

• Collaborate with relevant parties well before completion.
• Work with community partners who already planned zoning and usage, including checks related to agricultural law.

Community immersion through workshops

• Participate in farming-related activities:
  • Visit farmers’ homes
  • Help plant seeds and do hands-on work from the beginning
  • Share meals/lunch during the process
• Join other community activities:
  • BBQs with locally grown vegetables
  • Walk through and observe wetlands and local ecosystems
  • Visit local history museums; study folktales and local crafts/tools

Motif research

• Collect motifs connected to everyday life and local stories, including examples such as:
  • “Ryu (flow)” linked to grades/characters and folktales about love becoming “Ryu”
  • “Tengu” linked to specific grade-level storytelling
  • Learning/knowledge symbols tied to names or families in stories
• Also observe local plants/animals and seasonal/habitat elements (e.g., egret orchid, crested toads, reeds/grass).

Design decisions with constraints

• Convert motifs into signage components/icons that must fit specific locations and sizes:
  • Entrances
  • Classroom spaces
  • Fire doors
  • Toilet signs
  • Ceiling/ceiling-adjacent areas
• Add “hidden” features:
  • Arrange symbols/icons so close observation reveals them.

Student participation

• Students create characters/icons and adapt ideas so the design fits:
  • Physical constraints
  • Community expectations

Output intent The resulting signage/marks aim to:

• Build attachment and local pride
• Transform “wayfinding” into a discovery experience
• Make visitors feel something special when they “find” hidden characters or patterns

---

3) Example projects illustrating the “living” and collaborative design philosophy

A) Integrated school/community facilities (signage, toilets, nature-themed rooms)

Hashimoto describes designing/curating elements including:

• A multipurpose hall used like a school gym and for local events
• Branding for a lunchroom/media center/“principal’s office”
• Toilet signage with a theme (straw hat + boots), based on local character/visual logic
• Collision-prevention markings and reused-material-based graphic elements (including “cocoa glass” / reused glass motif references)

Design elements are tied to:

• Local ecology and folktales
• Community learning “maps”
• Grade-level identities and the educational/experiential layout of rooms

B) “Living room on a tray” concept (community-used installation/event)

Concept:

• Create a portable “living room” placed on a molded tray and moved around community spaces.

Process described:

• Put effort into moving and freezing/positioning it at gates and multiple locations.
• Use it as a gathering place in courtyards of:
  • An elementary school
  • A community center
• Build it with a repeating “fair-like cycle” (a project that returns repeatedly).

Outcome:

• Used like a playground; Hashimoto estimates repeated involvement many times (hundreds), emphasizing ongoing connection rather than one-off participation.

C) Nishiyama Shopping Street: “Mikan Museum” (adaptive reuse, student collaboration, patchwork wall)

Collaboration details:

• Working with local architect/partners (including Kohei Uemura)
• Mention of students working part-time

Approach:

• Use an existing nagaya-style structure with a warehouse-like atmosphere.
• Aim to “awaken” the space by creating a community-rooted micro “art museum.”

Build concept:

• “Mikan Museum” theme philosophy:
  • Different wall treatments on each side (white cube idea + plaster/leaves embedded)
  • Leaves/materials patchworked onto walls (referenced in the subtitles with imagery like “happy mouth”)

COVID impact:

• Final naming becomes “3-Museum” due to constraints.
• The keyword is “completed as it is made” (gradual construction).

D) Student housing interiors (guest design role; wallpaper + furniture coordination)

Hashimoto describes interior design coordination for rooms in an APA Mansion project focused on female university student housing:

• Students create concept proposals.
• Hashimoto coordinates:
  • Marker work/signage
  • Interior layout decisions

Key constraints:

• Must fit budgets
• Furniture must be part of the “rental experience”

Creative wallpaper strategy:

• Trial-and-error experimentation with:
  • Bold color changes
  • Reversing patterns
  • Visual transformation of room elements (curtains/walls/pattern interactions)

Emphasis:

• Student-driven concepts, implemented with professional coordination.

E) Overwintering architectural art project in Kiso Village (temporary hut + photo display)

A project linking architecture and art:

• A graduate student studied how “Kiso Village Effect Painting” could translate architecturally, but COVID disrupted the plan.
• Instead, they built a small hut using discarded local materials.

Method:

• Workshops with local people
• Measure and fabricate parts in the university context (rig/testing), then assemble/joinery on site
• Design the structure for assembly/disassembly and transport to galleries

Artistic concept:

• Related to a specific “light time” (“3 o’clock light”) and photo symbolism
• The exhibit traveled and was dismantled afterward

---

4) Discussion/Q&A themes: collaboration, local listening, student involvement, and continuity

Participants reinforce themes aligned with Hashimoto’s approach:

• Collaboration vs. “just doing what you’re told”

  • Designers must listen to local thinking.
  • But designers should not force locals to accept the plan exactly as-is.
  • The result should feel created for the community, not merely smoothly delivered.

• Underscoring process

  • The core work is in negotiation and relationship-building—not only the final artifact.

• Educational significance of field involvement

  • Student involvement is educational.
  • It’s also framed as an “escape/quality” experience: less rigid, more exploratory.

• “Meaning of being in the place”

  • Run experiments and also “give back,” from a position not constrained by “capital” (i.e., outside purely top-down institutional logic).

• Sustainability and handover

  • Concern: if designers are always central, projects may not persist.
  • Hope: community members later maintain/operate the outcomes.
  • Use local fixtures/resources so people can protect and continue them.

• University role

  • Universities shouldn’t only “teach classes.”
  • University networks can support long-term regional revitalization through practical design research and engagement.

---

Speaker(s) / sources featured (as identifiable in subtitles)

1. Hashimoto (𣘺本雅好先生 / “Hashimoto here.”)
2. Mr. Kubo (“Fujihata” appears; “Mr. Kubo from Fujihata”)
3. Mr. Horibe Stan (Horibe / Horibe-san)
4. Mr. Okibe (Okibe-san)
5. Mr. Ashimo (Ashimo-san)
6. Nagae-san
7. Uemura Kohei (上村 / “Kohei Uemura”)
8. Yonemura (also mentioned as designing; “Mr. Yonemura”)
9. Ebura (mentioned as “Mr. Ebura” in the subtitles)
10. Marsh (mentioned as wondering about the light/art)
11. Buber (referenced in participant reflection; likely Martin Buber)
12. The participants / panel audience (multiple Q&A voices; not individually named in subtitles)
13. EVA Air (mentioned as a collaboration example; referenced as a company/organization, not a person)