Ingold characterizes “ground”, and our conceptualization of soil comes close to this, not as a flat surface but as a “deep surface” with an unmeasurable “inner depth,” as an intense “zone of interpenetration” or a “world” wherein “agencies” and “patiencies” of composing elements and inhabitants alternate.

S for Soil Times presents a reforesting and composting tower that functions as a ‘world’ in the making within the specific landscape of a streamlet valley. Here, care—for soil—is consciously taken central, proposing it explicitly as an interdependent relationship between human and more-than-human.

That aim is of a metalevel as well as modest, as it relates to grand ecological challenges but at the same time just is “rather about modest changes in our ethos of living with many others, by creating mundane paths for our doings that acknowledge how we are already ordinary everyday companions”

Architecture, although literally founded in and thus highly depending on them, uncritically involves with the soils it stirs and smothers them.

In this also the role of the interior-architect is relativized, shifting it towards that of a care-taker or constant gardener.

...the field of interior-architecture as the ultimate field of embodied,immersive experience. And so the child dug and probed the soil, and vice versa. However, the child’s involvement with soil and more-than-human cohabitants differed from that of the other humans cohabiting the hovering greenhouse domes...
to care for soil was also a currency in a productionist scheme, rendering soil a controlled and commodifiable substrate and care-taking for soil rather a matter of exploitation.

In the research group Architecture & Wicked Matters the toilet is conceived thus not as an un(re)presentable architectural element but as a valuable seat of learning and discovery when exploring relationships between interior and soil.