This site requires Javascript to be turned on. Please enable Javascript and reload the page.

VKK 757: Archiving UP's Piazza

Louise Question 3 Photo

This page has annotations:

This page has tags:

Contents of this tag:

This page has replies:

Contents of this reply:

This page is referenced by:

Savanna “As place is sensed, senses are placed; as places make sense, sense make place” (Steven Feld in Borer 2013:966). The senses are part of people’s everyday experiences, including that of the city and other built environments (Degen & Rose 2012:3). In saying that, the actual experience of being in these environments, such as bodily and sensuous, are very often presumed, and thus are never critically analysed and interpreted. In light of this, there has been an increase in the study of the experiential dimension of urban and built environments as “lived and felt through the body’s five senses” (Boerer 2011:965). Furthermore the aim of this interactive reflective essay is to discuss and analyse people’s sensory and embodied experience of the University of Pretoria’s Piazza through the use and evaluation of various images, voice recordings and photo elicitation conversations obtained during the data collection process. Additionally, people’s sensory experience of the Piazza is discussed in relation to their walking practices as well as experiencing the Piazza as a smellscape, soundscape and touchscape (Borer 2013:965). Finally a reflection of this project is given in which perceptual memory is discusses and how it effects participants sensory and embodied experiences.

The Piazza, most commonly known as the Student Centre, is situated approximately in the middle of the Hatfield Campus. It can be seen as a hub for the students to “socialise” (Louise 2017), “interact” (Chloe 2017), relax and grab a bite to eat between lectures. Calliope describes it as having a “laid back atmosphere” whereas Adeline sees the Piazza as being “grimy” and Ophelia characterises this area as “ambivalent” . From these descriptions, one is able to see the variety of opinions and feelings surrounding this space. Moreover the Piazza can be understood as a “sensory constellation” (Degen & Rose 2012:17) and as a result, individuals will experience it different through their individual sensorium.

Degen and Rose (2012:1) suggest that experiencing a place can be mediated in various ways such as bodily mobility, more specifically, walking practices. These walking practices can be influenced by the design of the buildings and the spaces between them, which in turn, influences people’s experiences of a particular environment. Other words used to describe the Piazza are “watched” (Molly 2017) and “observe” (Lousise 2017). In saying this, many of the people involved in this study feel as if they are being “surveyed” (Molly 2017) while in the Piazza. Molly’s image of the camera sign suggests that not only are the students watching and observing one another but that the university is laying a watchful eye in this space. This feeling of being looked at influences the way in which individuals walk and move within this space. Adeline states that she “mainly walks around the circle and not directly in the center – no one walks directly in the center”. Majority of the participants tend to agree with this, however JP states that he “walks straight through” and Savanna “[does] it sometimes”. Ophelia and Loretta do not interact with the Piazza as they see it as a “fly through” (Loretta 2017) and only a space where they “pass through” (Ophelia 2017) in between lectures to get from one side of campus to the other. The design of the space can also be seen as a way to influence how people walk in the space. There is a covered area towards the back of the Piazza that people can use to cross through it and thus they do not have to walk directly through the middle.

The walking practices described above can also be explained in terms of Borer’s (2013:976) understanding of the built environment as a “touchscape” or feeling the city. The body and environment come together through the act of walking, in which individuals are able to touch and feel the environment while moving on foot through the space (Borer 2012:977). In this way, individuals inevitably touch things that come into contact with the body. The participants in this research may possibly feel the wet or dry grass on their legs and hands when sitting outside the Piazza or may even feel, through the soles of their shoes, the hot bricks that have been in direct sunlight, sunken into the concrete floor which forms a beautiful pattern of petals surrounding the center circle of the Piazza.

Another way in which Borer (2013:972) describes experiencing an environment is by smelling the space, thus the Piazza can be described as a “smellscape”. According to Borer (2013:972) different smells can have various associations as well as negative and positive connotations, which may alter an individual’s experience of a space. Several participants commented on the variety of smells in the Piazza, which were described as being “a bit overwhelming” (Calliope 2017). These smells included that of “tomato sauce” (Calliope 2017), “various foods cooking” (Chloe 2017), “cigarettes [as well as] hubbly” (Chloe 2017). The participants did not like these smells, which in fact, made the Piazza quite unappealing to them and made the area appear to be “dirty” (Chloe 2017). The litter in the area, such as the overflowing dustbins, contributed to the feeling of dirtiness and created an unhygienic space, which illustrates “a disregard of the self, others and the environment” (Lousie 2017). Some participants commented on the smell of the grass and the jacaranda flowers, however the smells of food and smoke, as described above, engulfed the organic smells of nature.

Another important aspect when experiencing a place through the senses is seeing the space as a “tastescape” (Borer 2013:974). Borer (2013:974) suggests that the consumption of food and drinks are important in an individuals experience of a space. Inside the Piazza there are many small food stalls that provide students with fast take away food options that are affordable. Situated next to this is Coffee Buzz, the local spot where students usually grab a coffee with their friends. From the data collected it is evident that if students did not like the food and coffee available they already had a negative impression about the Piazza. It can be suggested that by eating and drinking they experienced the Piazza in a visceral way, which either satisfied their stomachs pain for hunger or may have made their stomachs contract, possibly a sensation of turning, if they did not enjoy the food available.

From the above discussion it is evident that urban spaces, in this case the Piazza, are experienced by the participants with feeling and a rich range of sensory engagements (Degen & Rose 2012:28). Sight was inevitably engaged in their experience, however for the purpose of this analysis the other senses were discussed. Each participants encounters were multisensory in which they experienced the space as a smellscape, tastescape and touchscape which influenced their walking practices. From observations made on this digital archive and through the use of the visualisation tools on scalar, is it interesting to note that in Question 4 most participants answered the question based on what they felt, while Question 6 most participants acknowledged odour - so it is interesting to note that when commenting on what they don't like participants are sensitive to smell but when commenting on what they enjoy in a space participants are more sensitive to how they feel in that area. And this deduction would not have been possible without a digital archive.

It is evident that specific forms of the sensory environment elicited different forms of sensory experiences. It is important to note that perceptual memory plays a vital role in people’s experiences. This is because the sensory and embodied experiences elicited in the Piazza are related to each participants “own remembered sensory biography’s” (Degen & Rose 2012:30). This means that each individual will experience the Piazza differently and that there is no right or wrong way to experience a specific place. These sensory and embodied experiences are socially and culturally determined. Another important aspect to consider when analyzing people’s embodied and sensory experiences is that describing how others feel is a difficult task and is often “ephemeral” and “ineffable” (Borer 2013:979) and thus representing this sensory data in words has proven to be a challenging task.

In summation it is evident that exploring the multisensory experience of the Piazza has been extremely valuable in coming to understand the sensorium in greater detail. Creating the visual archive was quite confusing at first as I found Scalar is not user-friendly, however once I discovered the correct way of uploading media this process became much smoother. The manner of collecting the data and the photo elicitation discussion was extremely informative as it is an area of the research process that I am not familiar with. This will prove to be extremely useful if I decide to pursue my masters in Visual Culture Studies.

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

Borer, M. 2013. Being in the City: The sociology of urban experiences. Sociology Compass 7(11)
:965-983.

Degen, M & Rose, G. 2012. The sensory experiencing of urban design: the role of walking and perceptual memory.
Urban Studies 49(15):3271-3287.
Molly The following essay is a reflection on the data gathered from the participatory archive. The data collected is based on a group of honours students and their sensory experience of the Piazza at the University of Pretoria. The students were asked questions pertaining to this space and gathered their research by responding through voice recordings and photographs which they then uploaded onto the online academic platform, Scalar. The essay not only explores the visual aesthetic of the space but primarily the sounds, the smells, the touch and even tastes that emerged in the data analysis. The way in which the students walked in and around the Piazza and their bodily mobility is analysed because walking is a way in which one establishes new meanings and experiences of a space (Borer 2013:977). According to Degen and Rose (2012:6) sensory experiences are intertwined with memories which mediates certain experiences in different ways. Therefore, a section of this reflection will investigate the senses that evoked particular memories for the students.

The Piazza officially opened in 1995 as a student oriented space which provides various activities such as the ones mentioned by Molly (2017). Louise (2017) stated that before the Piazza was built, she recalls that there was a busy road that divided the campus. This was her own memory of the space where Degen and Rose (2012:18) state that many people often rely on their memories in order to make sense of a specific space where they either compare it to a different space, how that space has changed or it looked like previously. Both Poppy and JP (2017) describe the space as an “oasis” supported by images of palm trees, jacaranda trees and green grass. The jacaranda buds on the ground in the Piazza evoke a memory of getting stung by a bee for Savanna (2017). Memories influence ones perception of a space, this was a bad memory for Savanna (2017) therefore her experience of the space could result in a negative one (Degen & Rose 2012). One could assume that this evoked a tactile sense, and automatically reflected back to a bad memory.

There was very negative feedback regarding the student’s sensorial experience of the Piazza that is conveyed through the voice recordings, the imagery and the photo elicitation discussions. Multiple students, such as Chloe (2012) and Jane (2017), state that the Piazza was dirty and several students presented images of litter and rubbish.

The participants senses were evoked predominantly inside the Piazza and when entering the food court. Both JP (2017) and Adeline (2017) state that they felt claustrophobic in the food court and that the smells of all the different foods were overwhelming. Calliope (2017) even describes the smell of tomato sauce that seemed to bother her sense of smell. A few of the students mention the smell of smoke especially by the benches which influenced a negative perception and experience of the space. The smell of the cigarette and hubbly smoke contributes to the idea of dirtiness and “griminess” (Adeline 2017) in the space. Predominantly, the odour and sense of smell influenced the way in which the space utilized and experienced by the students. According to Borer (2013:972) odours are constructed by cultural values "and employed by societies as means" of defining and interacting with the world. Borer (2013:972) refers to Simmel (1997a, 119) who argues that the sense of smell is a "dissociating sense" in order to create a division between classes, races, ethnic groups and genders. He discusses the "stigmatization" (Borer 2013:972) of odours such as smoking and how it too creates division in the space.

The inside of the Piazza was very noisy, according to the students, which disrupted and bothered them. The food court was especially noisy due to the high ceilings and the emptiness upstairs which created an echo contributing to the loud buzz in the space. According to Borer (2013:971), when people label a space as "noisy", the space is usually regulated by authorities which is supported by the photograph of the surveillance camera. "Noise" (Borer 2013:971) is considered a major problem suggesting agitation and annoyance in the space. The empty space above the food court up the stairs was extremely dusty and one literally gets the sensation of feeling dirty themselves.

The body has become a necessary tool for interpretation (Borer 2013:976). Not only is the body a "physical mechanism for engaging"(Borer 2013:976) with the sensuousness of the space, the body also functions as a form of communication for different impressions and interpretations (Borer 2013:976). The texture of the grass was explored in the photo elicitation discussions where Chloe described the grass as “prickly” when she kneeled down to take a photograph. Ophelia also discusses the textures of the stones on the ground all over campus. She describes the texture as “ruggered as well as very smooth”. Due to the time of year, the grass is green and luscious according to Molly and invites students to sit on it instead of the benches which are described as smelling like smoke.

Borer (2013:974) explores the experience of taste in the experience of a urban space. He states that food and drink is an “important characteristics of urban cultures because taste” is used in order to identify “particular urban locales” and that taste has the ability to make personal and private connections to the material world. Therefore ones impression of the food sold in the Piazza contributes to our experience and perception of it. During the photo elicitations a student mentioned that their coffee was revolting and because it was one of the first senses that was evoked during this experience, the rest of her experience in the space was disappointing and negative. Savanna and Loretta Brown compare the food sold at the Piazza to the food sold at Tribecca and Aloha, stating that the quality of food at the piazza is worse than the food sold at Aloha or Tribecca. I have had my own personal experience of the food sold in the Piazza which resulted in a very negative perception of the space and never wanting to purchase food from there ever again.

The basic bodily movement of the participants walk through the piazza is also striking when analyzing the data. A few of the students felt like they were constantly being looked at which changed the way they presented themselves. Students such as Jane and Loretta Brown described how they would prefer to walk around the Piazza instead of straight through it. A few students mentioned how they walk through the Piazza to get to class either at a fast pace if they are late for a class or a normal to slow pace. Degen and Rose (2012:14) explore the practice of walking through and around a space and how all "the senses are integrated by the way the living body moves (Degen & Rose 2012:14).

The nature of this project is valuable because it allows one to experience a space as an embodied one, instead of just analysing it with regards to the physical appearance and design of the space. This project introduces a completely new and interesting way of researching. All of our sensorial experiences contribute to our perception of a space and forms the idea of whether we like the environment or not. I have come to realise that people would do anything to avoid certain odours and a noisy environment even if it means that they have to walk an extra few metres or even drive around to avoid it. Through the analysis of the data, it is evident that the students of the University of Pretoria, experience the Piazza as an embodied and sensual one, namely through walking practices, their multisensorial engagement with the space and the senses that evoke particular memories.

Borer, M.I. 2013. Being in the City: The Sociology of Urban Experiences. Sociology Compass, 7(11):965-983.

Degen, M.M. & Rose, G. 2012. The sensory experiencing of urban design: the role of walking and perceptual memory. Urban Studies, 49(15):3271-3287.

Simmel, G. 1997a. Sociology of the Senses: Selected Writings. Sage Publications: London.
Olivia Loots
Senses and Sensibility: moving through the Piazza

The world, inevitably, is mediated through our bodily sensations. This interactive reflection essay aims to explain how a group of research participants at the University of Pretoria experiences the Piazza, a specific space on the UP campus. This is done using information, based on specific questions posed to the participants, gathered and shared on the online academic platform Scalar. These take the form of images, voice recordings and photo elicitation conversations. In analysing this information, one can reach various conclusions pertaining to the way participants feel about the Piazza, their different associations with the space and their sensory awareness of their surroundings. Degen and Rose (2012:3271) mention two things that have an impact on the way people experience a space, namely walking practices and memory. Due to the vast amount of themes that can be discussed through analysis, I here specifically focus on on the way people move through the space, whether they know why they are doing this and what they feel when doing so, including feelings of claustrophobia, awkwardness, dirtiness or contrarily feelings of tranquility, openness and peacefulness. The discussion ends off with a brief reflection on the value of such a project.

On the university’s website, the Piazza, designed by Philip Viljoen and officially in use since August 1995, is described as the “hub of the campus for most students” and that the central circular raised platform at its middle is “used for various activities” (Van der Merwe, Viljoen, & Läuferts 2008). According to JP (2017), the Piazza should serve as an “oasis” for students. He feels that people do use it in this way, which, for him, makes the Piazza successful as a “melting pot” of a variety of students. Of the eleven participants, only two have never visited the Piazza before. Louise mentions that she has never been in this location, but have experienced it when it “used to be a very busy road dividing the campus”. According to Degen and Rose (2012:30), people often rely on their memory in order to make sense of a space, by either comparing it to how it used to be in the past, or how it is the same or different from other places that the person has visited. This links to the idea that humans respond to the space they are in not solely in terms of its material qualities, but also “in relation to the participants' own, remembered, sensory biographies” (Degen & Rose 2012:30). All of the participants, save Loretta Brown, who visit the Piazza around once a month which is, according to her, “reasonably often”, do not visit the space often. Others, such as Chloe (2017), Savanna (2017) and Jane (2017), mention that in previous years, when they were undergraduate students, they frequented the space more often. JP (2017) recalls the changes that have been made to the Piazza in the last ten years, since his first year at the university. Analysing the way people used to use the space or how they remember it, is useful in understanding how people currently think about the space and how they would (or would not) use it.

Most of the participants mention that they have in the past, bought (or still buy) some form of food or drink at the Piazza, ranging from coffee or bottled water, prepackaged snacks or meals such as wraps. Others, such as Molly (2017), Chloe (2017) and Loretta Brown (2017), mention that they (used to) withdraw money at the ATM’s in this area. Chloe (2017) specifically mentions that, since all of her classes now take place in the Visual Arts building, she rarely comes here anymore, since she can access what she needs, such as take away coffee, ATM’s and bathrooms, in spaces much closer to her lectures. Others, such as Ophelia (2017), mentions that she usually just passes through the Piazza to get to another part of the campus.

When asked whether they like this part of campus, participants have quite varying views. JP (2017) simply seemed ambivalent towards it, summarising that he “neither like[s] not dislike[s]” the space, that he actually feels “apathetic” about it because there is “nothing significantly good or bad” about it. The participants seem to experience an array of emotions when describing the Piazza, which is probably also influenced by the specific parts they think of first when thinking of the space, since it becomes clear that the open air space and the food court evoke very contrasting emotions in general. Molly (2017) feels the outside lawn is a good place to relax as it is “peaceful and beautiful”, which Poppy (2017) agrees with when she says that she finds it “really stunning” and “aesthetically pleasing”, whereas Louise (2017) comments on the “bland foreboding compound” building of which Chloe (2017) and Calliope (2017) feel the inside is “extremely noisy”, crowded, smelly and “grimy”. Most associate the outside area of the Piazza with peacefulness, tranquility, relaxation and beauty, whereas they associate the covered food court with dirt, grubbiness, claustrophobia and noise.

It might be assumed that Question Seven, pertaining to the way each participant uses the space, was initially structured as an effort to elicit information on people’s walking patterns, but when analysing the answers has proven that people more readily think about their or others’ actual activities than their walking patterns. Ophelia (2017) mentions that this is a space where she “rarely pass[es] time, but rather a space where [she] pass[es] through”, giving a vague idea of the manner in which she walks, but still not where she walks. Jane (2017) and Loretta Brown (2017) are the only ones that specifically mention the way they walk around the Piazza, whereas Louise (2017), Calliope (2017) and Savanna (2017) vaguely mention where they do not want to be (inside the food court), whilst the others focus on what they do there or see others do. However, during the photo elicitation discussions, most participants were guided by the interviewer to speak about how they walk through the space. During Adeline’s photo elicitation discussion, it becomes clear that most participants prefer walking on the outskirts of the Piazza in stead of through it around the circular feature in the middle, especially because they feel very exposed and “as if people are watching” or as if they are “on display” because one can see everything from “a lot of different angles” (Adeline 2017). Molly (2017) mentions that this, combined with the idea of security cameras surveying the area, makes her feel “really awkward”. Most prefer staying in the covered areas where they are not as exposed. Only JP (2017) and Ophelia (2017) seem to usually walk through the Piazza, the former because he feels “ignorant to the fact that people can stare at you” and “ha[s] never really thought about it until [they] mentioned it” and the latter because she enjoys the “vibe around it”, although she does not linger herself. Although some have commented on the convenience of the space or interesting architectural features such as the colourful blocks on the ceiling of the building (Poppy 2017, Loretta Brown 2017, Louise 2017), this is not enough of an incentive for participants to spend time here. Calliope (2017), who is a first time visitor, quickly decided that she will “avoid the food [court] in the future” because she finds it “terrible” due to the smells of tomato sauce and smoke, and would rather stay outside around the circular center, which has for her an almost “zennish” quality. Many mention that since Fego, a coffee shop on the outskirts of the Piazza, has closed, they prefer to buy coffee at other coffee shops on campus, such as Tribeca or Haloa (Savanna 2017, Chloe 2017).

A project such as this, has the potential to unleash an array of new experiences, as it encourages what would usually be the viewer, to now also be the taster, listener, feeler and smeller. What is discussed above, Borer (2013:965) describes as the sensescapes, or sensory associations with a space, that correlate to a specific landscape, namely seescapes, soundscapes, smellscapes, tastescapes, and touchscapes. It becomes clear that people plan, often quite unconsciously, their walking patterns around these features, either to experience certain –scapes associated with a specific space, such as tranquil silence on the Piazza lawn, or to avoid experiencing them, such as intense food smells or smoke, overwhelming noises, excessive sunlight or tightly enclosed dark spaces that have turned grimy over time. In being aware of the bodily sensations evoked by these factors, one can more easily grasp the impact of surroundings on the self. Finally, through this essay, one can gather that most participants, in general, are pushed away from the Piazza due to unpleasant sensory sensations, rather than being drawn to it by pleasant ones.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Borer, IM. 2013. Being in the City: The Sociology of Urban Experiences. Sociology Compass 7(11):965–983.
Degen, MM & Rose, G. 2012. The sensory experiencing of urban design: the role of walking and perceptual memory. Urban Studies 49(15):1–39.
Van der Merwe, SL, Viljoen, P & Läuferts, M. 2008. UPSpace Institutional Repository. [O]. Available:
https://repository.up.ac.za/handle/2263/7301
Accessed 1 November 2017.
Poppy The following document discusses the ways in which students at the University of Pretoria experience the University’s Piazza through the different sensory and embodied engagements of each person. Not only does it draw on the five senses (smell, sight, feel, taste and hear) as a way of explaining the experiences that each person may encounter but it also emphasizes the role that memory plays when a person recalls previous memories of this specific environment. It discovers the nature and value of this project through the different ways in which each person experiences and perceives the same environment.

In their 2012 document, Degen & Rose state that the framework of any piece of work “is regarded as a tool” that can make the piece of work “more attractive to more people by changing its ‘feel’” (Degen & Rose, 2012). This statement is what this document is based upon; the idea that the framework of a space or piece of work can influence the way people perceive it to be, whether it is more open and welcoming or rather enclosed and almost claustrophobic. In addition to that, “a new emergent modern consciousness” is emphasized by the “overwhelming sensorial stimulation” and “fast-paced encounters with strangers” (Borer, 2013). This creates the base as to why many students may feel trapped within a space where there are many strangers paired with unfamiliar and almost unwanted smells and sights.

Building off of this statement, the first major trend that was discovered through the discussions by the students was that although many of them utilized the Piazza in their first couple of years as students at the university, they no longer spend as much time here. Bringing in this example of memory and how one recalls fond times spent in this area but it’s not enough to make them want to spend more time here in their present day lives. This area is predominantly used as a thoroughfare for students to get to where they need to be in a shorter period of time or as a one-stop for places like the ATMs or the loans and rentals offices. This is due to the fact that the same amenities that are found in the Piazza, can also be found on other parts of campus that are “much closer to” class venues (Chloe, 2017).

Throughout the discussions and experiences of the Piazza there were multiple accounts from the students in this study that stated how the Piazza inside had an almost claustrophobic feel to it and they “found it to be quite closed off” (Calliope, 2017). This feeling of being trapped within the cafeteria of the Piazza is paired with a “strong stench of a lot of flavors of fast food” (Adeline, 2017) creates a pattern from almost all of the researchers where the smells, which are overwhelming, and the overcrowded and enclosed spaces actually end up chasing students away rather than drawing them in. This idea that the cafeteria within the Piazza being omni-sensorial (invoking all sense at one time) could provide the discovery as to why students feel claustrophobic. The smells of the different foods, paired with the sight of many strangers, along with the feeling of not much natural light and the multiple different sounds (and also possibly the tastes one might have when eating or drinking something in this environment) can overload one individual and make them almost afraid of this space. It’s not only the cafeteria that the students appear to be averse to but also the dark corridors and spaces that surround the area, this makes the space feel ominous and almost overbearing. A way to possibly rectify this would be to change the framework of the building slightly to make it more aerated and allow more natural light to flow into the darker spaces.

In addition to the smells of multiple foods which can create an unwelcoming atmosphere, there are also other smells of smoke (from both cigarettes and hubblys) which are very off-putting for non-smokers and even possibly smokers as well. (Borer, 2013) states that the smell of smoke has been stigmatized in such a way that when people are exposed to it, they become opposed to the area wherein the smell is emerging from. As stated by Simmel (1971, 325) in (Borer, 2013), when a person is placed in a sensory overloading area, the “individuals must protect themselves” (Borer, 2013) which provides the reasoning as to why many students feel averse to this area. The pairing of fast food and smoke creates an environment of a “dirty and grimey” (Chloe, 2017) and “not very clean” (Jane, 2017) area which is not very student friendly. This Piazza was designed as a gathering point for students to socialize and eat during breaks between classes and studies and there is a recurring trend in the discoveries made by the students in this study that they do not particularly enjoy the area and would rather choose to be elsewhere on campus where it is more spacious, open and not so overwhelmed by unwanted smells.

On the opposite side of the spectrum, there are areas outside of the building itself however still encapsulated by the Piazza such as the grass areas and the amphitheater. There is a definite pattern in the discussions where the geometrical design features running from the grounds around the piazza to the concrete raised center is spoken about. This design feature is admired by many and can be described as being the specific focal point where the exact centre of campus appears to be, it almost seems as if these lines connect the entire TUKS main campus up to this one point, creating a sense of unity and making the entire campus feel a lot more connected.

The Piazza as a whole brings out these ideals of “diversity” (Molly, 2017) of the different people on campus and how they are all able to “collaborate” (Louise, 2017) in one space. This “oasis” (Poppy, 2017) houses not only some amenities that students may find themselves needing but also a space for relaxation and detachment from the everyday stresses of achieving the goals set out by society. This space is said to be “very peaceful and very beautiful when there aren’t huge crowds of people” (Molly, 2017) which reiterates how it can be viewed as an oasis for each student who chooses to spend their free time here.

Taking all of the above mentioned into consideration, it can be concluded that although the Piazza does have its positive points which are sensory advantageous to students (in that they can relax and feel detached from studies), it has some very negative places. These can definitely be improved upon by the university to take this space into the next level where students choose to come to this space not only in their off time between classes or studies but just to socialize in general.
Bibliography
Borer, M. I., 2013. Being in the City: The Sociology of Urban Experiences. Sociology Compass, pp. 965-983.

Brunel University London, n.d. Sensory Cities Think-Kit. [Online]
Available at: http://sensorythinktank.com/
[Accessed 1 11 2017].

Degen, M. M. & Rose, G., 2012. The sensory experiencing of urban design: the role of walking and perceptual memory.. Urban Studies, 49(15), pp. 3271-3287.
Ophelia
Senses and Sensibilty: moving through the Piazza

The world, inevitably, is mediated through our bodily sensations. This interactive reflection essay aims to explain how a group of research participants at the University of Pretoria experiences the Piazza, a specific space on the UP campus. This is done using information, based on specific questions posed to the participants, gathered and shared on the online academic platform Scalar. These take the form of images, voice recordings and photo elicitation conversations. In analysing this information, one can reach various conclusions pertaining to the way participants feel about the Piazza, their different associations with the space and their sensory awareness of their surroundings. Degen and Rose (2012:3271) mention two things that have an impact on the way people experience a space, namely walking practices and memory. Due to the vast amount of themes that can be discussed through analysis, I here specifically focus on on the way people move through the space, whether they know why they are doing this and what they feel when doing so, including feelings of claustrophobia, awkwardness, dirtiness or contrarily feelings of tranquility, openness and peacefulness. The discussion ends off with a brief reflection on the value of such a project.

On the university’s website, the Piazza, designed by Philip Viljoen and officially in use since August 1995, is described as the “hub of the campus for most students” and that the central circular raised platform is “used for various activities” (Van der Merwe, Viljoen, & Läuferts 2008). According to JP (2017), the Piazza should serve as an “oasis” for students. He feels that people do use it in this way, which, for him, makes the Piazza successful as a “melting pot” of a variety of students. Of the eleven participants, only two have never visited the Piazza before. Louise mentions that she has never been in this location, but have experienced it when it “used to be a very busy road dividing the campus”. According to Degen and Rose (2012:30), people often rely on their memory in order to make sense of a space, by either comparing it to how it used to be in the past, or how it is the same or different from other places that the person has visited. This links to the idea that humans respond to the space they are in not solely in terms of its material qualities, but also “in relation to the participants' own, remembered, sensory biographies” (Degen & Rose 2012:30). All of the participants, save Loretta Brown, who visit the Piazza around once a month which is, according to her, “reasonably often”, do not visit the space often. Others, such as Chloe (2017), Savanna (2017) and Jane (2017), mention that in previous years, when they were undergraduate students, they frequented the space more often. JP (2017) recalls the changes that have been made to the Piazza in the last ten years, since his first year at the university. Analysing the way people used to use the space or how they remember it, is useful in understanding how people currently think about the space and how they would (or would not) use it.

Most of the participants mention that they have in the past, bought (or still buy) some form of food or drink at the Piazza, ranging from coffee or bottled water, prepackaged snacks or meals such as wraps. Others, such as Molly (2017), Chloe (2017) and Loretta Brown (2017), mention that they (used to) withdraw money at the ATM’s in this area. Chloe (2017) specifically mentions that, since all of her classes now take place in the Visual Arts building, she rarely comes here anymore, since she can access what she needs, such as take away coffee, ATM’s and bathrooms, in spaces much closer to her lectures. Others, such as Ophelia (2017), mentions that she usually just passes through the Piazza to get to another part of the campus.

When asked whether they like this part of campus, participants have quite varying views. JP (2017) simply seemed ambivalent towards it, summarising that he “neither like[s] not dislike[s]” the space, that he actually feels “apathetic” about it because there is “nothing significantly good or bad” about it. The participants seem to experience an array of emotions when describing the Piazza, which is probably also influenced by the specific parts they think of first when thinking of the space, since it becomes clear that the open air space and the food court evoke very contrasting emotions in general. Molly (2017) feels the outside lawn is a good place to relax as it is “peaceful and beautiful”, which Poppy (2017) agrees with when she says that she finds it “really stunning” and “aesthetically pleasing”, whereas Louise (2017) comments on the “bland foreboding compound” building of which Chloe (2017) and Calliope (2017) feel the inside is “extremely noisy”, crowded, smelly and “grimy”. Most associate the outside area of the Piazza with peacefulness, tranquility, relaxation and beauty, whereas they associate the covered food court with dirt, grubbiness, claustrophobia and noise.

It might be assumed that Question Seven, pertaining to the way each participant uses the space, was initially structured as an effort to elicit information on people’s walking patterns, but when analysing the answers has proven that people more readily think about their or others’ actual activities than their walking patterns. Ophelia (2017) mentions that this is a space where she “rarely pass[es] time, but rather a space where [she] pass[es] through”, giving a vague idea of the manner in which she walks, but still not where she walks. Jane (2017) and Loretta Brown (2017) are the only ones that specifically mention the way they walk around the Piazza, whereas Louise (2017), Calliope (2017) and Savanna (2017) vaguely mention where they do not want to be (inside the food court), whilst the others focus on what they do there or see others do. However, during the photo elicitation discussions, most participants were guided by the interviewer to speak about how they walk through the space. During Adeline’s photo elicitation discussion, it becomes clear that most participants prefer walking on the outskirts of the Piazza in stead of through it around the circular feature in the middle, especially because they feel very exposed and “as if people are watching” or as if they are “on display” because one can see everything from “a lot of different angles” (Adeline 2017). Molly (2017) mentions that this, combined with the idea of security cameras surveying the area, makes her feel “really awkward”. Most prefer staying in the covered areas where they are not as exposed. Only JP (2017) and Ophelia (2017) seem to usually walk through the Piazza, the former because he feels “ignorant to the fact that people can stare at you” and “ha[s] never really thought about it until [they] mentioned it” and the latter because she enjoys the “vibe around it”, although she does not linger herself. Although some have commented on the convenience of the space or interesting architectural features such as the colourful blocks on the ceiling of the building (Poppy 2017, Loretta Brown 2017, Louise 2017), this is not enough of an incentive for participants to spend time here. Calliope (2017), who is a first time visitor, quickly decided that she will “avoid the food [court] in the future” because she finds it “terrible” due to the smells of tomato sauce and smoke, and would rather stay outside around the circular center, which has for her an almost “zennish” quality. Many mention that since Fego, a coffee shop on the outskirts of the Piazza, has closed, they prefer to buy coffee at other coffee shops on campus, such as Tribeca or Haloa (Savanna 2017, Chloe 2017).

A project such as this, has the potential to unleash an array of new experiences, as it encourages what would usually be the viewer, to now also be the taster, listener, feeler and smeller. What is discussed above, Borer (2013:965) describes as the sensescapes, or sensory associations with a space, that correlate to a specific landscape, namely seescapes, soundscapes, smellscapes, tastescapes, and touchscapes. It becomes clear that people plan, often quite unconsciously, their walking patterns around these features, either to experience certain –scapes associated with a specific space, such as tranquil silence on the Piazza lawn, or to avoid experiencing them, such as intense food smells or smoke, overwhelming noises, excessive sunlight or tightly enclosed dark spaces that have turned grimy over time. In being aware of the bodily sensations evoked by these factors, one can more easily grasp the impact of surroundings on the self. Finally, through this essay, one can gather that most participants, in general, are pushed away from the Piazza due to unpleasant sensory sensations, rather than being drawn to it by pleasant ones.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Borer, IM. 2013. Being in the City: The Sociology of Urban Experiences. Sociology Compass 7(11):965–983.
Degen, MM & Rose, G. 2012. The sensory experiencing of urban design: the role of walking and perceptual memory. Urban Studies 49(15):1–39.
Van der Merwe, SL, Viljoen, P & Läuferts, M. 2008. UPSpace Institutional Repository. [O]. Available:
https://repository.up.ac.za/handle/2263/7301
Accessed 1 November 2017.
JP Multisensory experiences of Spaces

The experience people perceive of the spaces they inhabit is highly mediated by the design and interaction of these spaces. Degen and Rose in The sensory experience of urban design: the role of walking and perceptual memory (2012: 1) offers a justification of this avowal by stating that “experience is conceptualised in both academic and policy circles as a more-or-less direct effect of the design of the built environment”. The multisensory experience of spaces by individuals were clearly observed in the manner in which a group experienced the Piazza of the University of Pretoria. The interaction resulting from the experience hinted at the manners in which individuals mediate the space in mention and clearly ties to shared experiences (especially in participants that closely relate in milieu and background) through the considerations of the patterns that was perceived from the conversations. It also deserves mentioning that although there were reoccurring patterns, the individual experiences were not exactly alike and many of the participants experienced the space, again mediated through individual interactions.

The most perceivable patterns that were visible in this engagement was first and foremost filth. There were many discussions on how dirty certain parts of the Piazza was, specific reference was made to an area of benches where smokers gathered. The group was in agreement that this space heavily mediated their opinion of the space in a very negative fashion. In Chloe’s recording a contributor is quoted in saying “There is a disgusting smell of cigarette smoke mixed with food that will prevent me from eating there”. Another contributor in this recording mentions that the smell makes the whole place “feel dirty and disgusting”. In Jane’s recording the rhetoric is furthered regarding the corner when contributors to the discussion comments on the people occupying this space saying “the people there seems unwelcoming and engaged in their own groups” and “to me this seems like the slackers corner”. Although the comments in Jane’s recording are visually based there is an argument to be made that the contributors made use of multisensory modalities to draw these conclusions. The specific mention of the smell of smoke and food links to one of the three features neglected in most accounts of sensory urban experiences as outlined by Degen and Rose (2012: 4-5).

The specific area referred to here, being the multi-sensory modalities individuals make use of when experiencing urban spaces (the second feature (Degen and Rose 2012:5)).The contributors in this recording uses their multi-sensory experience of the dirty visual as well as bad smell to draw conclusions regarding the individuals that utilised the space, thus a mediation of contributors opinion of other individuals through the use and design of the space. There are many more of these occurrences that can be picked up from the patterns referring to the feeling of surveillance (as mentioned in the recordings of Calliope, Adaline and JP). In the discussion on surveillance a contributors states “I don’t walk through the middle of the Piazza because I feel that people are looking at me” another contributor stated that “people are looking by trying not to look” in the explanation of people sitting in the Piazza. The conversation of surveillance engages the topic of “the Importance of Walking” (Degen and Rose 2012: 12, 29) where the authors makes mention of the influence that the way of walking has on the experience of the areas, as well as the effect the experience of the areas had on the manner in which people walk. Another pattern was the reference to the movement in the piazza that featured in the recordings of JP and the images of Savanna, Poppy and Diversity.

Degen and Rose (2012: 7-9, 20) describes the opposing experiences that individuals reported when making mention of the same spaces. The same occurrence took place in the Piazza experience where individuals with less or no past interactions with this space like Calliope and Louise had experiences mediated with what they perceived from their visit, where the experience of individuals like Chloe was mediated more with their past experiences of the Piazza. Chloe shares an experience of her interaction when she stated “we sat on the grass to relax on study breaks or between classes in first year”. A notable element here is the memories that had an influence on the experience. Degen and Rose (2012: 19-22) substantiates the influence of memories on the experience of Bedford and Milton Keynes. This principle is observed within the Piazza experience where Chloe, through her positive memories of the space can be perceived to have a more neutral, even positive experience of the Piazza (this is clear when listening to the engagement where Chloe takes part as well as the images shared by her in many of the questions) compared to the more negative inclinations of Jane and specifically Calliope throughout the discussions.

The multi-sensory experience of a space is clearly apparent to thus far. The distinct engagement of the space with specific senses however still deserves mentioning. Although the space was engaged with a combination of senses, the discussions in particular through question 9’s photo elicitation discussions clearly brought forth that the group engaging with the Piazza experienced the space more with certain senses than others. Above clear notes the effect of vision through the consideration of “people looking at you” and mention is made of smell, from the cigarette smell to the “smell of tomato sauces” as described by one of the contributors of the photo elicitation discussions mediated the experience of the Piazza. Other senses than seeing was also significantly involved.

The sense of taste was engaged in describing the environment. In Poppy’s recording mention is made of the “smell of the Piazza effecting the taste of food” consumed there, this is furthered in a contributor stating that “I can’t stand the taste of food when someone smokes around me”. A more explicit consideration of the influence of taste in experiencing the environment comes from Louise’s image and the discussion of the taste of the coffee that was incited when discussing the initial experience of the Piazza by some of the contributors. From Molly’s image and the discussion the most notable discussion of taste is made. This discussion was based in the taste of the doughnuts in the image and how it is mediated by the visual display and surrounding smells. The discussion however cantered around the manner in which the presentation “made even chocolate not look good” and was furthered in to how the perception of display differs in consideration of the space in which something was presented.

The above mentioned discussion on taste led to the perceived health effects of food that comes from the a specific environment and finally led to a comparison of the taste of food and the perception formed by the environment when the Piazza was compared with other restaurants on campus in a different (better perceived) area. Degen and Rose (2012: 24) makes mention of this comparison in the influence expectation has on the individual’s experience. This is further strengthened with Borer’s statement in Being in the city: The sociology of Urban experiences that “the nuances of urban experienced has significantly been altered by the understanding of sensory scholarship” (2013: 965).

In conclusion the embodies mediation of individuals through a multi-sensory experience has an absolute impact on the experience of an environment. Individuals will consider many aspects other than the visual in the engagement of their world, thus significantly empowering the effect designer can have on a population through the spaces they engage with. This Piazza experience will therefore stand to prove the statement by Degen and Rose (2012: 1) “experience is conceptualised in both academic and policy circles as a more-or-less direct effect of the design of the built environment”.

Reflection:
In a world that is so heavily concerned with perception and mediated with persona it stands to reason that it is exceptionally difficult to navigate the visual overload that we experience on a daily basis to make sense of the world we live in. Through understanding the effect that the design of the environment can have on us, it positions the individual in a better space to understand him/herself in connection with the world they live in. Acknowledging the multisensory perception of our world in a very practical manner considering a space that is so integral to my direct environment I am provided with a diverse array of tools to make sense of my world. I have thus strengthened the understanding that it is easier to make sense of the world and to verbalise my understanding of such if I maintain an understanding that it is not only what I see that creates the effect of the environment on me, but also what I smell, hear taste and feel. This provides significant value to me as this allows a more encompassing way of articulating experiences, strengthening my ability to assist others and myself in considering the world we live in.

Sources consulted:

Borer, Michael Ian (2013). Being in the city: The Sociology of Urban Experiences. Social Compass, 7(11) pp. 965-983.

Degen, Monica Montserrat and Rose, Gillian (2012). The sensory experience of urban design: the role of walking and perceptual memory. Urban studies, 49(15) pp.3271-3287.