Workshop #2: Downtown Mall

In preparation for wandering the Downtown Mall in our groups, I was curious about the story of the Downtown Mall. Specifically, I was interested in observing various added elements throughout the decades and analyzing not only how these elements add to the space as a whole, but also how they reflect the time period in which they were added.

I collected data through pictures on my phone and notes I made in my notebook regarding the history of the elements that caught my eye. There are three elements/categories that I captured: 1) the large trees than span through the mall, 2) the silhouette statues, and 3) contrast in old versus new through buildings and artifacts.

The large trees that run along the walking area of the Downtown Mall were added in the 1970s. One interesting point I learned and observed was that they are not straight, but rather, are slightly crooked in their spacing, causing pedestrians to meander as they stroll past restaurants and shops. These trees serve to provide shade over the many outdoor

tables and seating areas, but also add great beauty to the area that simultaneously contrasts and compliments the buildings on either side.

The silhouette statues were the most fun to observe and analyze for me. Spread out thoughout the Mall, these peculiar statues showcase various kinds of people, activities, and props. Added to the Downtown Mall in the 1980s, I think the variety and diversity of the silhouette statues as well as their lack of facial features demonstrate that it could represent anyone at the Mall. They add lively energy through their activity as well as an underlying sense of inclusivity. I wanted to bring the statues to life by having my classmates recreate them and pose to match each statue.

Not only do I think these statues demonstrate the different kinds of activities that occur at this public space, but I also think that they illustrate Jan Gehl’s point regarding “activities and excuses for being in public space” in How to Study Public Life. The book shows examples of a multitude of reasons why people seek a public space, from mothers sitting while supervising children at play to a man with a newspaper as “a handy prop to use as an excuse for staying in an eventful place in the city” (p. 91). In this sense, Gehl proposes that certain activities and objects are excuses for people to fulfill their desire to be seen. From left to right, top to bottom, it appears as though a mother is walking with her child in a public space; next, a person hunches over seemingly investigating or wandering in a public space; a person is seen carrying two large bags (possibly shopping or embodying a homeless person’s things) in a public space; a woman dances in a public space; a person holds up a bust (maybe TJ? Maybe an antique from the shop down the road?) in a public space; a father carries his child and walks with his wife and pet dog across a public space. As Gehl describes, “people do not always have an obviously practical

reason for being in a public space.” As these statues demonstrate, it isn’t completely clear what these people are doing or why they need to be in a public space. However, what Gehl’s observations and these statues underline is “the importance of making sure that public space has something to offer” (p. 90). It is fascinating to me how the artist chose to conceive these sculptures and how they, though inanimate, appropriate and representatively live in the space.

There are a few pictures in which I tried to capture the contrast between old and new through the Downtown Mall.

The first is this corner of the mall, just across from the large sculpture and fountain. Though this strip of buildings is old, the corner section is very newly inhabited by Corner Juice, an upbeat, trendy establishment that promotes eating lots of fruits and antioxidants. Right next to it is the Paramount theater, characterized by the large, classic movie theater sign. Right in front of it is a Cville Pride flag for gay rights and acceptance for the LGBTQ community. These contrasts of

vintage versus new highlight the history of the Downtown Mall and how it and the culture of the people surrounding it have changed over the years.

This next picture is of the very large Urban Outfitters clothing store that now takes up one of the most beautiful and older buildings in the Mall. It was interesting to me how the majority of the building still holds its vintage appeal and is starkly contrasted by the bright lights and fashion trends prominently displayed in the downstairs window. As one of the most popular places for teenagers and youth to shop, I realized that Urban Outfitters is known to bring older fashion trends back into style today, even if they are a little funky and seem out of place in society. I thought it was appropriate for them to capture this building and hold this space.

This last picture shows an old and abandoned hotel providing shelter from the rain to a homeless person. I noticed here the contrast between what is being upkept, cleaned, and presented as new and what has been abandoned and forgotten. The cleanliness of the brick (and lack of trash), the organization of the trees, and maintenance of the lamppost present that the objects closer to the camera are paid attention to, cleaned, and in doing so, seem younger than they are. In contrast, the background of the image reveals a dark, empty, abandoned building and a hooded homeless person sitting underneath it to avoid getting wet from the rain. This is a stark contrast to the rest of the Downtown Mall and is an overall zone of abandonment. It shifted my perception of a public space in that not all public spaces are well-kept, appreciated, and a place that people necessarily want to be around. This wove some tension into the history of the Downtown Mall as well as the long-existing

issue of homelessness in Charlottesville. It also changed my thinking regarding new versus old in that our efforts as humans and architects can shape whether something is perceived and experienced as new or old.