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

VKK 757: Archiving UP's Piazza

Molly Question 6

This page has annotations:

Contents of this annotation:

This page has tags:

Contents of this tag:

This page is referenced by:

Adeline
SCALAR INTERACTIVE ESSAY

INTRODUCTION

The following essay deals with the way in which a group of students experience the Piazza at the University of Pretoria. The sensory element that this essay focuses on is smell. Smell is linked to the role of memory. Memory is significant in understanding the way the participants experience a space. Additionally the participants walking practices will be examined. Key patterns and themes will be discussed using visuals, voice recordings and photo-elicitations. Lastly the essay will provide a short reflection on the nature and value of this project.

SMELLSCAPE

According to Simmel smell is a “dissociating sense”, used to divide class, racial, gender and ethnic groups (cited by Boer 2013:972). In recent times the smell of smoke has been stigmatised (cited by Boer 2013:972). Majority of the participants mentioned their aversion to the smoke. This is evident in the photograph taken by Chloe which falls under the question "what she dislikes about the Piazza". Furthermore Calliope said she found the smoke to be "overwhelming". The benches in the Piazza are known for being the smoking hub of the university. The participants agreed that the group of students who sit and smoke in this area are viewed as “lazy” individuals who do "not go to class" (Savanna, 2017). Thus the smell of smoke is a “dissociating sense”, which creates divisions and distinctions between groups of students at the university.

According to Porteous stigmatisation is not only a result of biological and psychological influences but also cultural and social sensations (cited by Boer 2013:972). Thus the dissociation concerning the smell of smoke may be due to the decline of social acceptance towards smoking. The health risks of smoking is widely known which leads to the negative stigma attached to the practice. This is evident in the many photographs the participants took of cigarettes and hubbly bubbly. These cigarettes were photographed to demonstrate the parts of the Piazza the participants dislike. Thus, how individuals interpret smells is an outcome of cultural values which are influenced by society. According to Classen this is a mean for how individuals define and interact with their environment (cited by Boer 2013:973). As a result of this knowledge and the stigma attached to the smoking area, some of the participants avoid the bench area.

Another area many of the participants avoid is the cafeteria. Majority of the participants find the smell of all the different foods "overwhelming" (Chloe, 2017). According to Waskul and Vannini the meaning individuals endow on smells become context dependent and place based (cited by Boer 2013:973). This is evident in the Piazza where the distinct stench of food is directly associated with the Cafeteria. This is apparent in the photographs Molly and Savanna took of the cafeteria. They have categorised them under odour. This reveals they associate the cafeteria with food smells. Odours can also manipulate the meaning and experience of a place (Boer 2013:973). As indicated by many of the participants the smell puts them "off of the area" (Chloe, 2017).

A lot of the participants had spent time in the Piazza in their first and second year due to its centrality and convenience. However a large majority of them no longer visit the space. This is due to negative past experiences with odours being a key influence. This is evident in Jane's answer of "why she does not enter the Piazza anymore?" where she answered "it smells". Evidently smell plays an important role in recollections of a place as said by Porteous, Rodaway 1994, Waskul (cited by Boer 2013:974). When asked about a place she dislikes on campus Adeline mentioned the food court. She recalls how she would "quickly buy something and leave" due to "the food smells". Thus the smell played a key role in her recollection.

THE ROLE OF MEMORY

Evidently the participants did not only engage with the existing space, they also engaged with their previous memories of how the Piazza looked, smelt and sounded (Degen, Monica Montserrat and Rose, Gillian 2012:5). Louise and JP reflected on how the place has since changed. JP discussed the change in the appearance of the building and Louise discussed what the space used to look like before the Piazza was built. She also commented on where the previous social hub was in the university before the existence of the Piazza.

Furthermore the participants discussed their present memories with memories overlaid from the past of the same space. This is evident where Chloe, Adeline and Molly discussed how they used to enjoy the Fego which closed two years ago. They recalled their memories of the Fego which played a central role in how they experienced the Piazza. They used to walk to the Piazza to get food from Fego as the taste of the food was of a high quality. However since the Fego has closed down they "avoid" the area (Chloe, 2017)

Many of the respondents compared the eating areas in the Piazza to other cafes on campus. These juxtapositions were often comments of judgement (Degen, Monica Montserrat and Rose, Gillian 2012:23). Memories of other cafes on campus prompted judgement about the space's sensory element. The cafes were seen as "less claustrophobic" and the taste of the food was rated as "higher quality" (Adeline, 2017). As a result majority of the students disengage from visiting the Piazza's eating areas. They would rather go to other cafes of campus.

WALKING PRACTICES

Memory also plays a role in routine walking patterns. Participants who have walked through and around the Piazza regularly are almost on ‘autopilot’ (Degen, Monica Montserrat and Rose, Gillian 2012:14). As noted by Savanna she "just follow[s] the path". Evidently her walking pattern is not a conscious decision. Most of the participants have a clearly mapped route of the Piazza which they usually follow when entering the space. This is shown where Adeline, Chloe and Savanna agreed that it is “easier to follow the path” in the undercover section (Savanna, 2017). They usually take the same path in the Piazza as they had classes in the "Humanities" (Chloe, 2017).

Additionally the notion of voyeurism is highlighted where Adeline says that she feels “everyone is watching” when she walks through the centre of the Piazza. Consequently she prefers following the covered path. Both Molly and Louise also commented on how they “are the subject of observation” (Louise, 2017). Molly feels "surveyed" in the Piazza which is evident in the photograph she captured. This indicates that some higher power is always watching. However JP and Ophelia usually walk through the centre of the Piazza to reach their destinations. Thus individuals interact with the space differently depending of their perspectives of the area.

Furthermore the sensory environment produces patterns of how people walk (Degen, Monica Montserrat and Rose, Gillian 2012:16). This is apparent in Savannas walking pattern where she avoids the inside area of the Piazza as it is visually unappealing, odorous and “claustrophobic”. She “finds it to be quite dirty” and she dislikes the smell “of food and cigarettes” that surrounds that area. She experiences a negative cross-sensory reaction and so she avoids this space. The Piazzas’ physical and sensory environment produces a multiplicity of patterns for walking (Degen, Monica Montserrat and Rose, Gillian 2012:16). This is shown in Adeline’s walking patterns as she is willing to walk inside the Piazza. However she avoids “the dark and dingy areas” such as the tunnel by the bathroom. She prefers to walk on the pathway next to the FNB “as it is spacious and light”. This reveals the connection of the building’s design and her sensory experience (Degen, Monica Montserrat and Rose, Gillian 2012:18).

Adeline, Savanna, Poppy and Louise are all drawn to the grass area as they prefer to be in nature because it is “spacious” (Adeline,2017), “relaxing” (Savanna,2017), “calm” (Poppy, 2017) and “light” (Louise, 2017). JP, Louise and Savanna comment on the contrast of the outside area which “is [a] clean and comfortable space” (JP, 2017) compared to the inside area which “is all over the place" (Savanna, 2017).

Whereas Ophelia’s interaction with the Piazza is only when she is “passing through” to get to her destination. Similarly Loretta calls the Piazza her “fly through” as she gets what she needs from the space and then exits the Piazza. She only visits the area if she needs “something to eat”, to “go to the ATM” or to use “the bathroom” (Loretta, 2017). Otherwise she does not use the place for recreational use.

REFLECTION

This study is valuable as there has been little research conducted on individuals' sensory experiences in urban spaces. I was surprised when I realised how smell and noise had influenced my experience of the Piazza. While photo-documenting the space I was only focusing on visuals. However without noticing all my senses influenced my choice of photographs. Creating the visual archive was initially challenging as Scalar is not user friendly. However once I understood how to use the platform I found the process of uploading my media easy. It was fascinating to hear an array of opinions during the photo-elicitations. I found this discussion was particularly beneficial for my reflection as the participants built upon each other’s answers. The participants provided information rich answers which created depth and clarity to the research. I found that the visuals also assisted the participants in remembering the space which allowed them to give greater detail to their answers. In future studies I may use this method as it is extremely effective.

CONCLUSION

It can be concluded that all an individual’s senses influence their experience of a space. It is apparent here that smell plays role in how the participants experienced the Piazza. In the case of the smoking area and food court smell was a dominant sense which negatively influenced the participants' perception on the space. These smells are mediated through cultural and social influences. Furthermore smell plays a key role in an individual recollection of a place. Memory is central to how an individual experiences a place. This is evident in the participants' previous and comparative memories. Memory also links to individuals’ walking patterns and where they move in and around a space according to their recollection of that space. It is apparent that each individual engages and interacts with the Piazza differently.

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
Louise
“It is through the daily smelling, touching, seeing, hearing and tasting that places become known to us, familiar.”

~ Monica Montserrat Degen and Gillian Rose (2012:3276)

1.         Introduction

On Tuesday 10 October 2017, students from the University of Pretoria’s Visual Arts department embarked on a sensory exploration of the Piazza, a communal space, central to student life on campus. Each participant engaged with the space as a flâneur, Baudelaire’s urban stroller (Borer 2013:968), moving across the space and recording the individual multi-sensorial embodiment via photographic and voice recording. Paul Rodaway (Borer 2013:977), suggests that walking is a primary way in which we touch and perceive a place. When moving on foot, one’s whole body comes into contact with the environment. Of the 11 participants in this walk, two confirmed that they were visiting the place for the first time. Nine participants indicated that the Piazza was a space they frequented during the first and second year of their undergraduate studies. Due to reasons such as location, convenience and personal preference regarding the amenities and ambience, most preferred alternative options on campus with some participants, such as Chloe, citing off-campus ATM facilities preferential to those offered by the Piazza.

2.         The Piazza – a sensory exploration

Historically, the Italian Piazza is described by Richard Fusch (1994:424) as “an opening in the city fabric that allows activity in various forms – walking, riding, driving, shopping, socialising, and playing.”. Likewise, the UP Piazza has been structured in a similar manner to provide indoor and outdoor facilities where students can purchase food, socialise, relax, fulfil a number of administrative tasks, but mainly to act as an ‘oasis’ in the centre of campus. The student centre can be accessed via multiple walkways situated on the periphery of the space. This structural phenomenon guides the flow of pedestrian traffic from the outside space into the student centre and food court. The majority of participants preferred to enter the building from these walkways as opposed to walking across the central open court area. Jane stated, “I walk around it, instead of through it.” This sentiment is echoed by Loretta who referred to the walkways as a type of ‘tunnel’, getting you to where you want to be, a means of avoiding the various activations that occur within the space from time to time. She stated, “I don’t want people to pick on me... I prefer not to be seen.” In a comparative study of Milton Keynes, Degen and Rose (2012:3277) found that participants displayed similar routinised patterns of walking. A participant in the Milton Keynes walk Susan observes “You find people walking in synch with each other, so if you want to get across it’s really hard.”
“I experience; therefore I am.” ~ George Simmel
In a sensory twist to the philosophical proposition put forward by René Descartes, George Simmel motivates our investigation of the experiential dimension of social life (Borer 2013:967). Simmel observed that within a city, individuals strive to protect themselves from sensory overload. Simmel views this notion as a necessary adaptation. This “protective organ” that has developed has had a profound effect on how individuals relate to each other, resulting in what Simmel refers to as a “blasé attitude”. When asked the question “Do you like this part of campus?”, JP replied with, “there is nothing good or bad”. According to Simmel this attitude is necessary for individual survival and to maintain social order (Borer 2013:967).

Vision is the predominant means by which we experience our life as “social life” (Krase cited by Borer 2013:970). It is the visual aspects of the space that provide us with clues to the interactions and activities that need to take place. Sight, however, cannot provide a full bodily engagement with a space and define the individual experience. When driving through an urban area for example, reliance on sight alone takes away from the experiential nuances provided by the other senses. In this respect a walk through, such as that conducted within the Piazza, provides one with a more comprehensive sense of place. Although the majority of the participants provided negative feedback regarding the ambience at the Piazza, it was the visual structural elements that received the most positive review. Chloe, Molly and Poppy liked the outside sections of grass which they described as “cooling”, “calming” and “relaxing”. The lines created by the brickwork lead the visitor to the central, circular area which acts as a podium, with a range of possibilities as pointed out by Calliope. On the inside of the student centre, architectural features such as the ceiling also received positive feedback from Poppy, Loretta and Louise, and the radial layout is deemed as the most striking feature by Ophelia. “Seeing” and “being seen” are also attached to a negative connotation of surveillance, and this influenced the manner in which the participants described their utilisation of the Piazza, choosing not to “linger” in the space. Adeline stated that she preferred not to walk through centre of the outdoor area as it felt as if everyone was looking at her.

It is only when the other senses are explored that alternative viewpoints on both the interior and exterior of the Piazza are provided. In terms of the sound experience, the inside of the student centre and food court are described by many as loud, noisy and chaotic however visitors seem to spend time both inside and outside working or socialising. Noticeably the “protective organ” as posited by Simmel, is deployed in the form of personal music players. This is a strategy that enables the visitor to retreat to a privatised world by “tuning out” or “sounding out” (Borer 2013:972). The keynote sounds within the food court consist of voices, laughter, movement of cutlery and crockery. The constant noise is punctuated by soundmarks, such as the calling out of orders, from the many fast food outlets available.

The sense of smell and odour featured predominantly as an influencer in the manner in which the space is used. In general, participants preferred the grassy area outdoors, to the inside of the student centre due to the “overwhelming” odour of the cooking process, food and the cigarette smoke prevalent in the benched area adjacent to the building. Simmel (Borer 2013:972) views the sense of smell as a “disassociating” sense and results in the stigmatisation of certain practices such as smoking. This notion came to the fore during the subsequent photo elicitation in which Savanna mentioned that the area is associated with the “lazy people” who “smoke, play cards, chill and don’t go to class”. The sense of taste also featured as a means of division between those who frequented the food court at the Piazza and those who preferred to buy food elsewhere on campus. The notion of taste suggests a social class distinction whereby “taste classifies, and it classifies the classifier” (Bourdieu cited by Borer 2013:975). Borer (2013:975) is of the opinion that our tastes are not individual but a result of socialisation and re-socialisation according to a particular context. Poppy claimed that when one compares the donuts, for example, to “other” donuts they are “not that appealing” and Savanna supported this opinion in her observation, “Now it sounds like I’m being a snob but I’d rather go to Tribeca or Aloha.”.
“There is no perception which is not full of memories.”
~ Henri Bergson
Memories can result in comparisons between specific aspects of two places. Judgements are made when comparing the sensory qualities of each (Degen & Rose 2012:3281). The majority of participants who frequented the Piazza, during the first and second year of their undergraduate studies, now preferred to make use of alternative facilities on campus due to what is perceived as an improved sensory experience to that which is offered by the Piazza. The two participants that visited the Piazza for the first time experienced the place somewhat differently. Louise commented on the positive aspects the Piazza had to offer, such as an opportunity to engage with other students and collaborate on projects in an informal manner. Chloe viewed the external central area as a “blank canvas”, an opportune area on which activations could occur, not as a place to be avoided as indicated by the other participants.

3.         Conclusion

The way in which we engage with a space on a sensory level is influenced to a large degree by our perceptual memory. This project provided significant evidence of this as the majority of participants provided similar feedback in terms of their sensory embodiment of the space. Memories associated with alternative facilities on campus served as a basis for comparison and categorising the Piazza as the loud, noisy and chaotic “other”. The process of photo documentation and elicitation provided first-hand and individual feedback regarding the multi-sensorial embodiment of this space. Besides the verbal feedback received during the elicitation session, the use of photography also provides other clues in terms of the participants’ individual engagement with the space. What is interesting is that few participants chose to frame areas with a close shot which suggests a disassociation from the space. However, the use of a camera encouraged participants to notice structural details that had gone unnoticed on prior visits such as the image of the surveillance camera captured by Molly and the ceiling detail captured by Louise. As the group of participants are quite homogenous in terms of culture, interests and age, the feedback was very similar in terms of the majority of sensory experiences. It would be interesting to repeat the process with a heterogenous group of randomly selected and willing participants on campus. The value of such a project on a larger scale, within an urban area, would be crucial in terms of the design and expansion considerations of urban planning that often places too much emphasis on the purely visual and aesthetic elements within a space and ignores the culturally diverse sensorial aspects.

4.         Bibliography

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.

Fusch, R. 1994. The piazza in Italian urban morphology. Geographical Review:424-438.
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.
Chloe This interactive and reflective essay aims to unpack and explore the ways in which various students experienced the Piazza space at The University of Pretoria. This essay focuses on people’s sensory engagements and bodily modes whilst experiencing the space and involves a combination of text, image and voice recordings done by the participants. Walking practices, touch scape, smell scape and the role of memory are discussed in terms of the piazza space and with reference to the theorists Degen and Rose (2012) and Borer (2013), these aspects will be enhanced. Furthermore, a short reflection on the value and nature of the project is provided so to reveal what has been learnt from the process of using photo elicitation and documentation within a visual archive surrounding the sensory experiencing of urban spaces.

Degen and Rose (2012:3) state in their article titled “The Sensory Experiencing of Urban Design: The Role of Walking and Perceptual Memory” that “senses are part of people’s everyday experiencing and these sensory experiences are central to the design of urban built environments.” Therefore, it is important for town planners and architects to acknowledge that when buildings and urban spaces are being constructed and designed, one’s sensory experience needs to be considered. Thus, Degen and Rose (2012:5) stress the significance of how urban spaces are experienced through multiple sensory modalities and not solely through the visual or through sight. Similarly, Borer (2013:966) recognizes the importance of the senses for making connections between individuals and their environments by referring to places as “sensescapes.”

The piazza has a variety of walking practices owing to the different types of walk-ways within the area. The inner section contains several corridors that channel students to walk in a hurriedly manner and to follow a certain path. Degen and Rose (2012:13) stipulate that it is through such "habitual practices and routine engagements that one is able to attach particular experiences and memories to places." Ophelia's (2017) image below for displays her experience of walking through the corridors and reveals the dark, dinginess of the avenues while Savanna comments on walking through this area and her feeling of "claustrophobia" (Savanna 2017). Degen and Rose (2012:14) mention that this type of space creates a tendency for it to be like a two way street and forms streams of traffic whereby people walking in this confined space are almost on "autopilot." Additionally, Savanna (2017) mentions that she frequently attended the piazza in her first two years of study but no longer visits this space; thereby linking to the concept of memory and how students have fond memories of their younger days whilst sitting or socializing under the trees. Therefore, this space is viewed differently to that of someone whom may be experiencing the piazza for the first time as "there are no perceptions without recollections" (Degen & Rose 2012:18).

On the contrary, the walking practices in the open space of the piazza are more free flow and in a "spidery-like movement" as the area is bigger and allows for many pathways and directions to 'stroll' through (Degen & Rose 2012:16). There is a lack of uniformity in this environment except for the flow of students walking directly through the piazza from one entrance to another, following the straight path. Loretta (2017) describes walking through the piazza as her "fly through" of which Molly (2017) agrees with this as these students prefer to quickly pass through the area owing to the feeling of being watched or judged by onlookers or even viewed by surveillance. Other students, however, do not merely "fly through" this area to get to another destination but optionally choose to spend time in the piazza so to interact with friends or work on group projects together. JP's (2017) image reveals how this space produces a multiplicity of patterns of walk which, in turn, results in individuals reacting differently to forms of sensory stimulation (Degen & Rose 2012:16). It is the body and the space that come together through the process of walking.

The piazza can be considered in terms of a "touchscape" and a "smellscape" in which the space can be assessed through the sensuous experiences and the accompanying meanings embedded (Borer 2013:969). One of the positive experiences students had with the piazza, in terms of a touchscape, is the various grass areas and the feeling of the lush grass under one's feet or hands whilst being able to sit and enjoy the tranquility under the trees (Molly 2017). Molly (2017) further infers that while the grass areas are clean and relaxing, students refrain from touching any other aspects of the space as it appears "grubby."

These sensory engagements with the grass areas are also mediated by memories of other places that contain grass in which comparisons were made between the piazza grass area and the Engineering grass patch. Borer (2013:977) infers that "touch is more than the action of the fingers feeling the texture of surfaces, in this case the grass, as it involves the entire body reaching out to certain items and those items in the environment coming into contact with the body." This is evident in the circular podium that protrudes out and causes the body to come into contact with this environment and connects individuals to the larger spatial whole (Borer 2013:977). Jane (2017) states that this is one of her favourite features in the piazza as she finds the design and symmetry of the bricks aesthetically pleasing; linking to Degen and Rose's (2012) thoughts of how the "design of a certain area should enrich people's experiences." The circular podium is thus synonymous with the piazza space.

The "smellscape" can be considered the most prominent sensuous experience of the piazza as every student commented on how the smell deters them away from the area. According to Borer (2013:972), smell is a "dissociating sense that creates divisions and distinctions between classes, cultural groups, races and even practices like smoking." Memory plays a key role within smellscape as many students remembered and recalled the space according to the overwhelming stench of hubbly bubbly and cigarette smoke as seen in Loretta's image.

Not only is there an overpowering smell of smoke but also the various smells of food cooking and being prepared. Linking to the above quote, smell evidently creates divisions as one is able to divide the space according to the smokers and various cultural groups that are sitting and eating, or waiting in the ques to purchase food (Borer 2013:972). Thus, smells are connected to certain places and particular types of people. This is evident in the cafeteria space as it has an extremely distinctive smell. Additionally, owing to so many people residing in this area, the bins are often overflowing which causes a stench of garbage and creates a lot of litter, ultimately resulting in a "disregard for others and the environment" (Louise 2017) . Thus, the smells associated with the piazza are almost entirely negative and will result in an odorous identity. It is apparent that students predominantly experience the piazza in terms of smell and sensory engagement.

This project is extremely relevant as it places emphasis on the importance of analyzing urban spaces according to walking practices, memory, touch and smell: the sensory experiences. I found the nature and value of the project meaningful as it enabled and encouraged me to experience the space through a multi-sensory process and not primarily through sight which, in turn, created an awareness of my surroundings and how I interact with the environment. By fully immersing myself into the multi-sensory process I found new insights, likes and dislikes, and aspects of the space that enlightened my overall view of the piazza as well as building on my previous memories or perceptions that mediated my experience. I became aware of the process of walking, my awareness of presence and touch, as well as the odorous impressions. I found the photo documentation and elicitation effective as both methods capture the essence of what one aims to convey: the atmosphere and sensorial qualities. I enjoyed using these methodologies and implementing them into a group, visual archiving project on a new platform: Scalar.

Therefore, from the above essay it is clear that students at The University of Pretoria do indeed experience the piazza space in terms of their senses: namely walking practices, the role of memory, touch and smell. It is furthermore clear from the inputs of the theorists Degen and Rose (2012) and Borer (2013) that urban spaces do allow for multisensorial experiences which ultimately enhance one's encounter with the space, its environment and its design features. Thus, the UP piazza contains an experiential dimension.

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.
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.
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.
Lorretta Brown Sense of place: the sensory experience of the UP Piazza.

When we think of the way in which we navigate through spaces/places, we rarely recognize the role our senses play in piecing the place together. Often, we consider what we will see and what we will do, rather than pay attention to the way in which our other senses experience the space. According to Borer (2013: 956), “sense experience is the vital communication with the world, which makes it present as a familiar setting of our life”, however we pay little attention to senses other than sight and sound. The following is a reflective essay that will focus on the sensory experience of UP Piazza. In the discussion I will consider the ways in which sight, sound, and smell, shape the way we navigate space and place.

The body is a physical that directs our movement, however it does not work in isolation as it relies on our senses for perception of the environment. The body works as a communicative agent that tells us where to go, what to do, and how much time to spend at a place, however, the “amount of control over the information the body gives off is variable and often situational” (Borer 2013: 976). The UP Piazza is always buzzing with people walking through it on a daily basis. It can be assumed that the people who frequent this space are either staff or students trying to get through the day. In one way or another, all participants have stated that they have been to the Piazza before, however their encounters with and within the space differ. Degen and Rose (2012:3), argue that there are “two ways that sensory encounters are shifted and altered: by particular practices of spatial mobility; and by memories of previous visits to the same or similar places”. When asked about what they do at the Piazza, Loretta mentioned that she mostly uses it as “a vehicle to get to another destination on campus”, while another responded by contrasting the differences in her movements between now and as an undergraduate student.

Students prefer to walk around the Piazza to avoid being looked at and/or feelings of being watched. As Loretta mentions, she “prefers to not be there as it very crowed and she doesn’t like to be seen, [so] would much rather make use of alternative routes”. Molly says that she dislikes the space as it is “uncomfortable to walk through” as she feels like she is being watched and would rather walk on the outer area. This strengthens Borer’s sentiment that “the frequent interaction with strangers creates a unique problem for urban dwellers” (Borer 2013: 967). An image taken by Molly suggests that the Piazza is in actual fact a space where people are watched as they walk through and/or socialize. Thus, this highlights that people who walk through the Piazza spend little time looking as they fear that they themselves are being looked at [insert Molly elicitation], which is why they often take on a “blasé attitude or an indifference to others and the cacophony of sights, sounds, and smells that constitute the urban environment” (Borer 2013: 967).

Every city has a landmark(s) which can be considered as “objects [or] places [which] help groups identify the city and also provide a means for personal identification with the city” (Borer 2013: 970). One such object which can be found at the Piazza is the piazza. This podium is somewhat an attraction on campus as Chloe describes it as “aesthetically pleasing” and Calliope calls it a “space of opportunity and possibility”. The outside area of the Piazza is also considered very inviting, Ophelia has likened being outside as walking “from darkness into the light”. “Lush” is a word which is used by Molly to describe the place, as students are found relaxing or “chilling on the grass between classes”. Poppy has likened laying on the grass and looking up as “being somewhere tropical". The grass areas make the student feel relaxed and are considered a welcome and lovely break, not only from class but also from the building which is “very dull and outdated and needs revamping” . The inside is also often avoided by the respondents as they feel it that can get “very crowded and overwhelming with smells of tomato sauce".

The sense of smell is one we pay little attention to. According to Borer (2013: 973), “their [smell] meanings are often accepted without reflection, and their presence can go unnoticed as scents often simply accompany the air we breathe”. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said of the smells in the Piazza. Chloe does not like the atmosphere of the space as she exclaims that there is an “strong smell of food” make the space uninviting.

There is a general consensus amongst respondents that the Piazza is ‘noisy’ and ‘too crowded’ – with students constantly walking about, interacting, and engaging with and within that space, such is not hard to believe. According to Borer (2013: 971), “sounds of the city labelled as “noise” are often regulated by authorities”, however this is ironic as JP describes the space as having “no ownership; where a diverse group of people get together to do their own thing”. The Piazza is essentially a student centre where students go to relax and socialise with friends away from lecturer halls and assignment deadlines, and where very little attention is paid to rules and regulations. As each city has a distinct object which they use to identify it, the city can also be identified by the sounds which frequent it. According to Borer (2013: 971), “soundmarks are like landmarks in that they indicate a particular or unique quality of a specific neighbourhood or area”. The Piazza is synonymous with noise which is why most respondents avoid the area. However, when walking around, it is not a sore sight to see students sitting around the tables and working/studying, as depicted in Louise's image (perhaps they have become immune to the sounds at the Piazza).

My experience of the Piazza

The responses gathered from the group archive reveal certain truths about the Piazza that I had not considered before. This project has revealed to me the ways in which senses really shape an experience. While taking images and listening to my voice recordings I noticed that my encounter with the Piazza mainly based on what I saw and heard, as well as my past memory of the space. Learning the ways in which the body works to give us clues about our encounters with daily life has made me value my experiences. I recognize the importance of the bodily perception as it can add more substance to my daily experiences. The body is more than just the physical presence that moves from A to B, rather it is a means of connecting with the environment, and therefore to have be fully embodied being means to be fully aware of the responses the body makes.

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