From London, we spoke with Heidi Jalkh, teacher of Make Design 1 y Design and Systems, experimental designer, master's degree from the Humboldt University of Berlin, whose practice is situated at the intersection of biofabricated materials, interdisciplinary research and craft-based processes.

She is currently pursuing a PhD at the Faculty of Architecture, RWTH Aachen University, Germany; she leads the Material Systems group and participates in an artistic residency at Delfina Foundation, inside the program Making and Materiality, which brings together international artists to investigate the intersections between contemporary practices of making.

His work explores how knowledge emerges through making, experimentation, and material behavior.

“I’m always on the fringes. I studied industrial design, I teach, I do research, but I’m never completely confined to one field. I’m at an interface between art, design and science". 

This positioning defines projects such as Material Interactions, the exhibition he presented alongside Nadya Suvorova At ArtLab, kinetic sculptures developed with biomaterials, fungal systems, and electronic devices explore matter as an active agent. The pieces (closer to organisms than machines) react to proximity, time, and interaction, activating with the presence of the public and blurring the boundary between object and organism.

More than a specific work, it functions as a synthesis of his practice: a way of designing that questions limits, roles, and methodologies. 

—Material Interactions proposes a “new kind of design.” How do you understand that idea within your practice? 

It's more of a provocation to consider other possibilities and other ways of working within design. In my case, it involves a much more interdisciplinary, collaborative, and cooperative practice, not only among the people working on the project, but also in relation to the materials. It's about moving away from the logic where one designs and the material responds, and starting to think about a more horizontal relationship. 

I am interested in the idea of ​​approaching materials from an experiential perspective. The interest shouldn't stem so much from theory or explanation, but from direct encounter, from what you experience in that moment. It's a genuine reaction, something that happens there, and that might later lead you to delve deeper, but doesn't necessarily originate from there. 

—What kind of experience were you looking to activate with the sample? 

I'm looking to move away from the traditional venues where art or design is displayed. In the case of the exhibition at ArtLab, many people weren't there specifically to see the show, but were there for something else and stumbled upon it. That creates a different kind of connection, more direct, less mediated. 

The way the work was presented was part of that shift: there was a very technical, industrial design approach, but with materials whose functionality wasn't defined in classical terms. They weren't utilitarian objects; rather, their functionality was more symbolic, related to... the experience and the connection with the subject matter. 

The space allowed us to amplify those capabilities: the scale, the audiovisual installation, the interaction. We even developed a device that functioned as a “materials oracle,” as a mediator between you and what was happening there. 

It's a multi-layered project: there's design, but also sound, interaction, a digital dimension, and material behavior. Then the question arises of what exactly it is. And that difficulty in categorizing it is part of the project; its value lies precisely in that mix. 

—What is the process of taking a project from idea to materialization? 

There's a fairly clear initial intention, but there's a huge gap between the idea and what actually happens. It's something I work on a lot with students: the same idea can materialize in many different ways. 

In the case of Material Interactions, the process was very rich and ongoing. It grew as we went along. Some decisions were made from the beginning, but many others emerged along the way. 

The connection with industry was also key. We worked with workshops and processes that were more metallurgical—laser cutting, bending, embossing—which aren't necessarily designed for these kinds of objects. And that's where an interesting contrast emerged: harsh, industrial processes, with results that then had a softer, more organic quality. That blurred space is something I'm very interested in exploring. 

—Do you feel that design is changing towards more experimental forms? 

Yes, at least in my experience there's more openness to experimentation, both in design and industry. Before, the answer was often that something couldn't be done; now there's more willingness to try things out, to experiment, to see what happens. 

There is also a questioning of the practice itself. And within this questioning, alternative forms begin to emerge that coexist with the traditional ones. The underlying processes remain the same, but the manifestations change. 

These works lack a transactional logic: they aren't conceived as objects to be sold, nor do they entirely fit within the realm of art. They function more as communication devices or as ways of envisioning alternative possibilities. And that, for me, is the most important thing: to be able to project other ways of making and thinking about the world. 

—What interests you about the intersection of materials, behavior, and life? 

—It was interesting We work with systems that already have their own logic, even a life or growth, and see how to interact with that. In some cases, we use electronics to activate or mediate those behaviors, but we don't generate them from scratch. 

For example, there are samples where organisms continue to grow even after being removed. This makes the experimentation more like a scientific experiment, but in a different context, where that type of interaction wouldn't make sense in a traditional laboratory. 

—What personal reflection do you have on your journey? 

I realized that I've been doing many things one after the other, guided by what interests or excites me, but without stopping to think about what it all means together. Now I'm starting to look back and recognize that there's a practice that has been building up over many years. And I'm trying to understand what it's about, to give it a framework. 

I'm always on the fringes. I studied industrial design, I teach, I do research, but I'm never completely confined to one field. I'm at the interface between art, design, and science. That's uncomfortable, because you never quite belong anywhere, but at the same time, it's something that really appeals to me. And now it becomes quite an existential question: why am I here, what do I want to do with it? 

—What does your experience at Delfina Foundation bring you? 

It's a very powerful space for reflection. Being in contact with artists from different countries, with very diverse practices, exposes you to other ways of working and challenges you greatly, making you question the perspective from which you approach your work. It's also an intense experience: there are moments of deep doubt, and others of great enthusiasm. But it's valuable to have that time to pause and reflect. 

That also impacts my teaching. While I continue to teach, I try to convey that it's possible to forge your own path, that you don't necessarily have to stick to what your degree program tells you. It's about understanding what drives you, what that inner drive is, and creating a path based on that. 

At the same time, a management dimension emerges: often these projects lack visibility or funding, so part of my job is to create the conditions for them to exist. I work with a group called Material SystemsWith whom we created exhibitions, a book, and various other initiatives. And often the question is why we continue doing this if there's no direct financial incentive. The answer is that it's something that arises spontaneously, something that needs to be done: if we don't create these spaces, they don't exist. It's a way of building the place where we want these practices to happen.