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

VKK 757: Archiving UP's Piazza

Savanna Question 7 Audio

This page has annotations:

This page has tags:

Contents of this tag:

This page is referenced by:

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.
Jane This interactive reflection essay aims to examine the ways in which students experienced the University of Pretoria’s Piazza, with specific focus on the sensory engagements by the participants, in terms of sight, sound, and smell, while moving through the space, involving a combination of images, text, and voice recordings. The experience of the Piazza space through bodily modes, certain walking practices, and the role of memory will be discussed with reference to theorists Degen and Rose (2012) and Borer (2013). A short reflection is also provided on the nature of the project and its value, to convey what was learnt from the process of using documentation and photo-elicitation in the creation of a visual archive.

In his article, “Being in the city: the sociology of urban experiences”, Borer (2013:979) suggests that “urban experiences are almost inevitably attached to sensory stimulations”, and states that “sensuous experiences” (2013:969) take place during interaction with urban places, expressed through what he refers to as “sensescapes” (2013:966), also suggesting that specific places within a city can be evaluated through its sensory stimuli. However he argues that one should not focus too heavily on only the visual. Similarly in their article, Degen and Rose (2012:5) state that the “city is experienced through multiple sensory modalities, not just the visual”.

Borer (2013:971) describes the “texture of the urban soundscape” as being made up of various noises and “distinctive rhythms”, he goes on to state that sounds like these are usually associated with specific places, around the Piazza there is a certain buzz, made up of noise from foot traffic and various conversations going on at the same time, as Chloe (2017) states “the space is still predominantly a very loud area”, and Adeline (2017) feels that the cafeteria is overcrowded, perhaps creating a claustrophobic feeling, mentioned by Savanna (2017), with the noise and smells being quite overwhelming to the senses, similarly, Loretta (2017) prefers not to spend too long in the space because it gets “too crowded and is very busy”.

Scent plays a significant role in the memories of places, as indicated by Borer (2013). One can argue that what Borer (2013) describes as the “smellscape” was the most common “sensuous experience” (2013:969) among the participants’ experience in the Piazza, as most students commented on the smells within the space. Within the vicinity of the Piazza, there is a strong smell of smoke, from cigarettes and hubblys as this is a popular area for smokers, as Chloe (2017) mentions that the space is filled with the “smell of hubbly and various foods cooking”. Some students avoids sitting on the benches in the area because of “the smoke and the smell” (Adeline 2017). Borer (2013) suggests that odours become “place-based”, therefore, “particular smells are connected with particular places and, vis a vis, particular types of people” (2013:973).

As scent plays an “important role in recollections of places” (Borer 2013:974), the smells in the Piazza area, or the scentscapes, seem to have an overwhelmingly negative impact on the participants, as is evident in their responses to what they dislike about the Piazza space. It may be argued that memory, as stated by Degen and Rose (2012), engaged with recollections of the Piazza space, memories of other occasions when he students have interacted with the Piazza space, including the statements about the area usually being a popular hub for smokers, as seen in Molly’s (2017) image, may influence opinions of the Piazza because the space becomes connected with the specific smell of smoke, as Borer (2013:973) suggests, “smell is such a powerful cultural force that it is often taken for granted”.

Degen and Rose (2012:14) state that “different ways of walking integrate quite distinct sensory impressions”, and suggest that sensory encounters can be altered “by particular practices of spatial mobility; and by memories or previous visits to the same or similar places”. (2012:15). Specific walking practices within the space are evident, due to various paths through and around the Piazza, as seen in the images by Adeline (2017) and Ophelia (2017). Chloe states that she is “uncomfortable to walk through” the center on the Piazza, she feels a sense of being watched so she prefers to walk on the outside, around the Piazza, as does Jane (2017),who prefers to “walk around it instead of through it”. The centrality of the piazza may be one of its focal points, the reason why this space is so occupied and busy may be mainly due to the convenience of shops, bathrooms and ATM’s being located in one space, being described as “one of the most central places on campus” (Chloe 2017), and a “communal” environment (Savanna 2017). However, views on the Piazza differ, Loretta (2017) states that she is usually “only in that space to use the bathroom, buy food and use the ATM”, and Ophelia (2017) states that this is an area that she passes through on her way elsewhere, saying that it is not a space that she would want to spend time in because she is “not particularly fond of this part of campus”, while Caliope (2017) viewed the space as “inviting and practical”. Many of the students stated that although they have interacted with this space on previous occasions, they no longer make use of this particular space and would rather avoid it and spend time in other spaces on the campus.

Degen and Rose (2012:16) state that “individuals react to different forms of sensory stimulation around them”, this is evident in the sensory experiences had by the students within the space of the Piazza. While students had multisensory experiences, scent appears to be the dominant sensory engagement had in the Piazza space, noting the smells of smoke and various food smells from the cafeteria. Walking practices and memories of a particular place play an important role in an individuals’ interaction within spaces, but it is also apparent that experiences of places, particularly the Piazza, are heavily influenced by direct sensory engagements.

Bibliography
Borer, MI. 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): 3271-3287.