Life Itself Research Sub-site — Brief

Situation

Life Itself conducts ongoing research with collaborators, outputs, and a distinct epistemic posture, but currently lacks a dedicated public home in the new web system.

Complication

Embedding research directly within the main Life Itself website blurs audiences, slows iteration, and risks reopening unresolved questions about overall identity and narrative.

Question

Why a separate research sub-site, and what must it deliver now?

Answer

The research sub-site is a distinct public home for inquiry, provisionally separate in order to maximise clarity, speed, and focus.

Rationale for separation

Distinct audience (researchers, funders, intellectually engaged readers)
Different cadence (ongoing inquiry rather than orientation)
Enables shipping without resolving whole-organisation identity
Architectural separation remains reversible later

Scope (in)

Clear framing of research purpose and approach
Core pages (about, themes, people, outputs)
Initial content live and navigable
Visual coherence with Life Itself, without being subordinated to the main site

Scope (out)

Full academic polish
Final or exhaustive research taxonomy
Integration with courses, hubs, or residencies

Audience

Researchers, intellectual collaborators, aligned institutions, and serious readers.

Definition of done (this phase)

Live, publicly accessible site
Research identity legible within a single visit
Content easily editable and extensible
Designed for iteration, not perfection

Jobs to be done (landing page + site)

Primary jobs

As a researcher or intellectual collaborator, quickly understand what this research collective is, how it thinks, and what it is working on.
As a funder or institutional ally, assess seriousness, coherence, people, and outputs within one visit.
As a prospective collaborator, see how to engage (calls, reading groups, brown bags, contact).

Secondary jobs

As a returning reader, find recent outputs (papers, essays, notebooks, talks).
As a member of the collective, have a stable public home to point to and publish from.

Non-jobs (explicitly not optimizing for, now)

Mass onboarding or public education.
Marketing funnels, courses, or community-building features.
Exhaustive archival completeness.

Implied landing page components

Clear one-sentence research orientation (epistemic stance + domain).
Prominent list of recent or flagship outputs (papers, essays, notebooks).
People (core contributors, collaborators).
Lightweight participation hooks (subscribe, attend a talk, contact).
Signals of seriousness (cadence, continuity, intellectual lineage).

Brand identity and feel

Direction A: Quiet research institute (closest to Meaning Alignment)

Minimal, calm typography; generous whitespace.
Muted, warm palette; restrained gradients.
Language emphasizes inquiry, alignment, and long-term questions.
Feels legible to funders and senior researchers. Best if: you want institutional credibility and continuity with adjacent research orgs.

Direction B: Living inquiry lab

Still minimal, but more “working notebook” energy.
Clear separation between finished outputs and in-progress thinking.
Emphasis on cadence, questions, and open threads.
Slightly more visible structure (themes, notebooks, talks). Best if: you want to foreground inquiry-as-process rather than authority.

Direction C: Embedded but autonomous Life Itself research

Visual continuity with Life Itself, but reduced narrative flourish.
Research-first tone; fewer metaphors, more clarity.
Signals reversibility and integration later. Best if: this is a provisional separation with likely reintegration.

Our recommendation, based on the brief

Start with A + B: institutional calm with visible ongoing inquiry. This matches stated goals of clarity, speed, and reversibility, while avoiding premature narrative closure.