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

VKK 757: Archiving UP's Piazza

Ophelia Q3 Visual

This page has tags:

Contents of this tag:

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.
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.