Ain Shams Engineering Journal 13 (2022) 101527

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Ain Shams Engineering Journal

journal homepage: www.sciencedirect.com

A study of the relationship between contemporary memorial landscape

and user perception
Yousra Attwa a,⇑, Mohammed Refaat b, Yasmin Kandil c
a
Assistant Lecturer in October University for Modern Sciences and Arts, Architectural Department and a PhD Candidate in Faculty of Urban and Regional Planning, Cairo
University, Egypt
b
Professor of Landscape in the Faculty of Urban and Regional Planning, Cairo University, Egypt
c
Assistant professor of Architecture: Arab Academy for Science and Technology and Maritime Transport, Egypt

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Contemporary Memorial landscape (CML) integrated within the city and people’s life is rapidly growing.
Received 15 March 2021 It is a landscaped space commemorating individuals or events of the past and keeping them in the mem-
Revised 3 June 2021 ory of people, through physical representation in public areas, by being active rather than passive spaces.
Accepted 3 June 2021
Users experience these memorials through engagement with different perceptions, as a result of senses
Available online 03 July 202103 July 2021
experienced at that space. Placing CML in everyday life and allowing users to engage strengthen their
memory and place attachment. This research carries an analysis of CML classification, urban physical con-
Keywords:
figuration, and user sensual experience. The research is carried through literature review and analytical
Memory
Memorial spaces
studies for three examples; 9/11, Diana’s, and Jewish memorial. This research highlights the difference
Contemporary memorial landscape between monuments, memorials, and CML. The research concludes a theoretical framework, based on
Sensual experience user’s interpretation highlighting their sensual perception, helping the designers bridge their ideas to
the user, leading to memorial success.
Ó 2021 THE AUTHORS. Published by Elsevier BV on behalf of Faculty of Engineering, Ain Shams Uni-
versity. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/
by-nc-nd/4.0/).

1. Introduction engagement, by occupying, touching, hearing, and participating

Monuments are just figurative objects commemorating individ-
uals or heroes, unapproachable and viewed from far away. Memo-
rials are the products of the collective memory of social groups or
collective importance of an event, person, or circumstance, linking
the past to the present and future [1,2]. Memorial spaces are land-
scape spaces that help in keeping past events alive in the memory
of citizens through physical representation in public areas [3,4].
From the late nineteenth century into the twenty-first, changes
in the design of memorials have altered the relationship between
the visitor and memorial spaces. From a viewing perspective con-
structed as objects and figurative sculptures to one of the user’s
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: yattwa@msa.edu.eg, yattwa@msa.eun.eg (Y. Attwa),
mrefaat@furp.cu.edu.eg (M. Refaat), yasminkandil@yahoo.com (Y. Kandil).
Peer review under responsibility of Ain Shams University.
Production and hosting by Elsevier
in acts of commemoration [5–7].
There is an increasing demand for creating memorial spaces
than standing monuments while changing their design principles
to contemporary ones [8]. Memorials are used as a tool by govern-
ments to control the national memory of people [67]. CML is an
urban space with landscape features that helps in creating user-
engaged spaces and preserves memories. It provides a sense of
belonging and ownership among its citizens while increasing the
touristic and economic value of the space. CML also tends to trans-
fer history, grab user’s attention more than traditional monuments
as they become significant spaces to citizens passing through them
in their everyday life [9,10]. Furthermore, CML significance appears
in the nightlife culture of cities, specifically during celebratory and
commemoration events, as they consist of several interactive user
activities and recreational spaces which give the space more
dimension. This interaction helps in transferring information and
history among generations and different cultures in an indirect
way [11]. The shift of passive traditional monuments to active
memorial spaces was first introduced by Mayas Lin’s in 1982 in
the Vietnam Veterans memorial [12,13]. Placing an abstract form
in a landscape setup, where it provides user engagement by the
use of different architectural landscape elements and materials in

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2021.06.013
2090-4479/Ó 2021 THE AUTHORS. Published by Elsevier BV on behalf of Faculty of Engineering, Ain Shams University.
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Y. Attwa, M. Refaat and Y. Kandil
the memorial space [10,14]. The landscape elements and urban
design of the space create an intimate, tactile, physical relationship
between person and place [15,57]. After the success of Maya Lins
memorial, similar contemporary memorial designs increased in
popularity in the 2000s [16,53]. Accordingly, the contemporary
memorial landscape could be designed in an integrated way while
considering the user’s sensual experience in the space.
The research aims to define design principles for CML and to
explore the role of designers in applying architecture landscape
elements within the urban space to fulfill the user’s sensual expe-
rience in the memorial space. The study investigates what are the
design principles that configure a successful contemporary memo-
rial landscape and how various aspects overlap to create a specific
sensual experience in space from both designers’ and user’s per-
spectives. This is achieved by overlapping elements of urban phys-
ical configuration and user sensual experiences, leading to design
criteria for CML (Fig. 1). The paper highlights three case studies
that were chosen for two reasons. First, to observe and analyze
the design patterns for different CML, and second, to adopt such
patterns to come up with specific criteria for CML. Eventually, this
paper presents design guidelines for architects, policymakers to
consider users’ connection with space.
2. Literature Review: A brief history from monuments to
memorials
The history of memorials to the society is traced back to the
early nineteenth century known for nationalism where it was fos-
tered by national history writing. Monuments were constructed to
represent heroes and national events [17,56]. It began with the
construction of the pyramids and monuments resembling heroic
individuals along with the many forms of tombs of wealthy and
powerful people. Placed on pedestals, statues obelisks, and col-
umns situated above eye level where their size and form featured
monumentality [18,19]. In the late nineteenth century, design
principles of memorials had a different spatial character where
forms became closer to the ground and integrated with seating
for user occupation [9 10]. Afterward, the term memorial became
more common [20], during World War I and II, memorials com-
Fig. 1. A diagram showing the research study flow chart and research methodology.
2
Ain Shams Engineering Journal 13 (2022) 101527
memorating war victims from soldiers and individuals become
familiar [21,54]. They were constructed for tragic reasons rather
than honorary ones constructed earlier [10]. Later on, memorials
shifted from national-based to community-based ones [22,23].
Abstraction in memorial design has come ahead in recent memo-
rial design triggering more than one dimension that will be dis-
cussed in detail in the paper in the body further.
2.1. Identifying contemporary memorial landscape (CML)
They are landscape settings marked and recalled by a culture to
commemorate and remember certain events whether for individ-
ual/s, war/battles, or beliefs. They are urban spaces with architec-
tural landscape features. They range in form and scale from a single
object to a panoramic viewshed. They present collective memory
of social groups; and provides symbolic meaning to the public
[24,25,52]. The CML invites people to participate actively while
providing passive user engagement, as it enhances the positive
interaction of society [63]. This interaction is applied when urban
physical configurations are integrated into the design of the space.
These elements help users to create a sensual experience between
the user and the landscape [15,26]. CML is also specified by its
location, context, and accessibility to the public.
2.2. Urban physical configuration
The urban physical configuration of CML is designed with con-
sideration to elements and aspects which enhance the memorial’s
visual characteristics and other user’s sensual experience. Design
considerations include the space enclosing elements such as the
memorial location, form, and visual characteristics of surfaces.
Memorial space form could be large in scale, small, regular, or
irregular [27]. The variety of materials used in memorial landscape
and form sends different messages to users in space [28,58]. The
memorial space is also designed with consideration to the ele-
ments within the memorial space. Such as water features, planting,
and, hardscaping including furniture, landform, and utilities.
Y. Attwa, M. Refaat and Y. Kandil
2.2.1. Memorial space enclosing elements
CML characteristics are identified by several aspects, such as the
memorial location, the geometry of the surrounding context as
well as the architectural form of masses and materials used on
its surfaces. As in urban spaces, these elements define the memo-
rial space and its enclosure.
 The location: It could be placed in a focal point, a node, a path,
important plazas, parks, pocket parks, or significant squares in a
prominent or central place in the city [29]. The location selec-
tion is a political decision. It could be sited in the same location
as the commemorating event or at a different location [30]. The
degree of elevation, the distance of the memorial to the user, its
proximity, and the angle of interaction are all essential aspects
when placing a memorial on a specific site.
 The Form: CML requires something in their physical form that
allows us to distinguish them from their surroundings as a clear
and identifiable place [31]. The geometrical shapes, size, pat-
tern, regularity, and irregularity that define the memorial are
crucial [55]. The spatial enclosure shapes the perception and
cognition of space. Space is defined by the object’s degree of
the enclosure, its height to the width ratio, the presence or
absence of the surrounding, and the overall shape of the space
itself [32]. The holocaust in berlin (MMJE) concrete form, height,
and organization change as one walks into the interior of the
memorial Fig. 8. The view of other visitors and the surrounding
cityscape is cut off. Feelings of claustrophobia, desolation, and
confusion set in, others play, jump around and take pictures
with the blocks [33].
 Surfaces: the use of materials is essential for the memorial’s
visual characteristics as well as tactile ones. Solidity, hollow-
ness, and texture of surfaces play a great role when users
engage with surfaces. Also, integration of the chromatic organi-
zation; colors, brightness, opacity, and lighting [32]. Materials
used in Princess Diana’s Memorial Fountain differs to create dif-
ferent water effects for the fountain which results in different
tactile and sound experience for the user shown in Fig. 7 [10].
2.2.2. Elements within the memorial space
The elements within the memorial space are tools that the
designers use to imply a certain use of sensation.
These elements are mentioned below;
 Water: It is considered an effective landmark, which defines the
characteristics of space in terms of scale, location, architectural
features, material, and design criteria. It’s also easily recognized
or discernible from several directions [34]. In terms of aesthetic
dimension, water elements, provide psychological, visual, audi-
tory, and tactile effects, which are primarily perceived by users
as a ‘‘visual element” in memorial spaces [64]. It is also used for
activity and recreation. Water status differs in its effect; still,
water provides reflectivity whereas dynamic one provides
kinetic and sound effects [65].
 Plants: They help in the creation of space; they could be used for
several functions as screening or creating privacy [59]. They
provide space with the enclosure and help in the identity of
the memorial. In SEM, plants are used to unify the landscape,
provide shade, and symbolize life and rebirth for the visitors
of the memorial as shown in Fig. 5.
 Landform: It creates different sequences of revealing and con-
cealing focal points. It also directs users to the main memorial
elements. As shown in the MMJE landform has typography,
which helps in the variation of heights of the concrete blocks,
3
Ain Shams Engineering Journal 13 (2022) 101527
providing different sensual experiences to the user as they walk
deeper inside the memorial. Different scenes and views are cre-
ated with the variation of landform heights [35].
 Furniture: Space furniture plays an important role in shaping
memorial uses and activities [36]. seating for example should
be considered in CML where other senses than viewing objects
are considered. Visitors could use them for social interaction
and relaxing from the very crowded city [32].
2.3. User sensual experience
The intended feeling and the purpose of memorial creation play
an important role in forming a strategy in the process of develop-
ing the design, its form, and content [37]. The physiological impact
of the visual aspect affects user perception strongly [66]. The visual
aspect and orientation provide the user with more information
than the other senses combined. It relies on space, distance, color,
shape, textural, and contrast gradients [38,39]. CML are catego-
rized according to the way users view them, whether from distance
or close. The visual dimension of space refers to the user’s cone of
vision and its relationship with the human scale [40] Visual aspects
can provoke other sensations to the user in space. Successful CML
stimulates sensory experiences other than visual ones, such as
kinetic, static, tactile, auditory, and smell. To be able to read infor-
mation about the memorials, visitors must come closer, experience
materials through bending over and touching the memorial [61].
Some memorials have certain features such as streaming water,
which tackles the auditory senses of users guiding people to its
traces before reaching it [41,42]. Other memorials have certain
plant features which provide different scents which initiate smel-
ling [43]. Some memorial features and forms provide different
kinetic experiences for users [62]. Children run, play, and move
around. Others lay down on the ground cover or use the memorial
seating provided. As a result of using these previous senses, indi-
viduals are engaged more with the memorial through the passive
experience, and it’s recognized and inscribed in the user memory
to a stronger extent [44].
3. Method
Placing CML in everyday life and allowing users to engage with
such spaces could strengthen their memory and place [45]. To
achieve this, memorial spaces have to be designed in a way that
allows user engagement in the space. This research consists of a
documentary review of the evolution of memorials and the identi-
fication of the contemporary memorial landscape. It will study the
urban physical configuration of memorial landscape design,
including the memorial space enclosing elements, as well as the
effect of such elements on the users’ sensual experience. The sub-
sequent analysis adopts a quantitative method to conduct an ana-
lytical theoretical framework for the contemporary memorial
landscape. To validate the framework, it will be applied to three
different memorial examples. The National September 11 replacing
the World trade center that was attached in New York City, Prin-
cess Diana’s memorial fountain in Hyde Park, London, and the mur-
dered Jews of Europe memorial in Berlin.
The examples were chosen according to several criteria; their
design style, defined as modern or contemporary in literature;
their memorial controversy, with emphasis on their use and effi-
ciency; their significant location within the city, and their visual
characteristics. The research will carry qualitative descriptive anal-
ysis collected from secondary data resources from both the memo-
rials designer’s reports and official websites about the projects. The
user perception in space is collected from reports and debatable
reviews about the memorial spaces after it was constructed and
Y. Attwa, M. Refaat and Y. Kandil
used by visitors. The examples will carry the analysis of the frame-
work conducted. It will be divided into two parts. First, analysis of
the urban physical configuration (location, form, and surfaces), and
elements within the memorials (water features, planting, land-
form, and furniture). Second, the user’s sensual experience and
which senses did it trigger. This will help in examining the spatial
features of each example and main design considerations intended
by the designer to apply a specific user perception. The results
from the analysis will help in verifying the framework conducted
by the research. This framework will help in designing principles
that form successful memorial spaces. It will determine the rela-
tionship between the architectural landscape design principles
and user sensual experience. Also, it will resolve how the sensual
experience be controlled from the designer’s perspective to reach
readable users’ responses.
4. Analysis
The research conducted several design considerations for the
contemporary memorial landscape design. First the memorial
landscape visual types. Secondly, a theoretical framework with
several elements and aspects will be applied to several examples
to validate its efficiency.
4.1. Memorial landscape visual characteristics
The research concluded that the memorial’s design is catego-
rized according to its visual characteristics into three different cat-
egories. Each one affects the user differently when interacting with
the memorial. The diagram illustrates three different visual charac-
teristics of memorials and how it is perceived by the user.
The invisible memorials: The concept of invisibility emerged in
the 1960 s [46], which is the complete opposite to the traditional
ones where monuments become completely invisible memorials,
the form of the memorial is completely hidden underground and
invisible to the public nor exposed to the eye horizon as illustrated
in Fig. 2. Part of the National September 11 memorial is considered
invisible which will be explained further and shown in Fig. 5.
The Anti-Phallic Memorial (on the ground): Anti-phallic
memorials are memorials that are elevated slightly above the
ground. They are considered in level with the human’s eye cone
of vision. Their height is usually lower than the human scale as
illustrated in Fig. 2. Integrated within the landscape and human
scale. Memorials with such features as Princess Diana’s Fountain,
which will be explained further.
Fig. 2. Showing invisible memorial type, the memorial is completely hidden underground. Showing the anti-phallic memorial type, slightly above ground, visible to the user
as their height is lower than the human scale. Phallic memorial type, shown above ground, visible from far and extending in height.
4
Ain Shams Engineering Journal 13 (2022) 101527
The phallic /Ceremonial memorial (above the ground): They
are usually elements elevated above the ground [47]. The phallic
prototype memorial is considered to be visible memorials raised
above the ground, it is much higher to the human scale and cone
of vision exposed to the horizon and monumental in the scale
shown in Fig. 2. Examples of such memorials are memorial to the
Murdered Jews of Europe which will be explained later in this
research (see Fig. 9).
4.2. Theoretical framework for contemporary memorial landscape
Based on the literature gathered earlier about memorial design
aspects. The research study composed several urban physical con-
figuration elements and aspects and sensual experience aspects to
conduct a theoretical framework shown in Fig. 3. The conducted
framework with its elements and aspects will be analyzed on con-
temporary memorial landscape examples.
4.3. The national September 11 memorial (SEM), New York city
The memorial commemorates the victims of the attacks at the
world trade center (WTC) and the pentagon was designed by
Michael Arad and Peter Walker. The memorial forms are composed
of two huge voids sited in the footprints of the WTC towers and
defined by massive waterfalls and surrounded by a space full of
oak trees [48]. The memorial is an urban space for remembrance
and is also used by passengers during their everyday life [49]. Vic-
tims’ names of the attacks are inscribed on bronze panels that edge
both memorial voids. The sunken voids represent a concept of
‘‘Reflecting Absence”. The huge voids represent the two bombed
towers which are placed sunken yet visible to the users to repre-
sent a feeling of absence and shock. It is considered an invisible/
anti-phallic memorial shown in Fig. 6
4.3.1. Contemporary memorial landscape theoretical framework
application
The following Table 1 summarizes and explains the urban phys-
ical configuration and sensual experience in the SEM, memorial
space enclosing elements, tools used by the designer to fulfill the
aim of the memorial are explained below and shown in Figs. 4
and 5. The user sensation it provided in space and the triggered
individual senses in space are explained below.
The voids are the most recognized by the visitors of space. Visi-
tors remember and recognize the memory of the event once they
approach the voids, as it resembles the emptiness of the huge tow-
Y. Attwa, M. Refaat and Y. Kandil Ain Shams Engineering Journal 13 (2022) 101527

Fig. 3. Elements and aspects of the Contemporary Memorial Landscape Theoretical Framework.

Table 1
Summary of SEM urban physical configuration and user sensual experience.

Urban Physical Configuration User Sensual Experience

Elements Designers’ intensions User sensation Triggered senses
Memorial space enclosing Location Same location as Isolated place in the city, which is less dense than -Quite space Vision, auditory
elements WTC the skyscrapers -Grieving space
-Relaxing
Form Voids -Reflecting absence -Vicinity of voids Vision, tactile
QW2 -Sensation of the same tower and mass -Remembering
-Victim names written -Fear and shock
-Intimacy
Surfaces Voids and -Stones dark color marble -Grief Vision, tactile
pavements -Rough textures
Elements within the Water Waterfall voids -Marker of time and moving forward. -Dynamic, Vision, auditory,
memorial space -Visitors hear the sound of water at the entrance of -sustainable, kinetic
the memorial -beautiful.
Plants Oak trees -Shade in summer -Strength Vision
-Change Color in summer -Longevity
-Doesn’t lose its leaves in winter. -Dynamic
-Movement inwards representing the fall and -Symbolic weight
depth of the event -Life and rebirth
-Durability
Ground cover -Gathering, sitting -Mediative Vision, static and
-Accommodate ceremonies on special days -Playful kinetic
-Relaxing
Landform Glade -Rhythm and repetition of ground cover, -Distinct scale Vision, kinetic
pavements -Formal
-Grid patterns -Character

Furniture Seats -Benches placed in a formal, grid pattern -Formality Vision, tactile,
-Stone pieces from the WTC towers creating -Remembering static
seating for visitors
Lighting -Memorial names are lit on the voids at night -Remembering Vision, kinetic
-Lighting pillars for night use -Simple design, candle-
like feeling
Information Signs explaining directions and information on -Readable Vision, auditory
different spaces -Easy to access
-Pedestrian level
simple

ers. The names of the victims’ placement in an intimate and tangi-
ble place to the user makes them very remarkable. The approach of
keeping this space as a public one and not placing a building
instead is a successful idea. It’s a less crowded place than the city,
defined by a dense forest of oak trees, which provides shade and
unifies the space. The trees provide an intimate degree of the
enclosure to users in comparison with the huge memorial space
of the memorial and the voids. It also acts as a symbol of life and
rebirth, giving hope to the families of the victims as well as the
passengers through space. The soft-landscape area provides users
with a space to read or relax on typical days as well as gatherings
on ceremonies and events.
rounding landscape of Hyde Park. It’s designed to radiate energy
and draw visitors inwards towards the design uses the topography
to divert the fountain water downhill in two directions as shown in
Fig. 7. The design is humble to reflect princess Diana’s life, quali-
ties, and personality. It may also reflect the political side of the
government’s request for the memorial design to be minimalist
and acquires less recognition by the public. The fountain is ele-
vated a few centimeters above ground level which makes the
memorial an anti-phallic one. The memorial’s complex is an inter-
play of open space, tree plantings, water, and views are intended to
create an environment for public enjoyment and remembrance.

4.4. Princess Diana’s Memorial (PDMF), Hyde Park, London city
The memorial commemorates the death of Princess Diana,
designed by Gustafson Porter + Bowman. The memorial is com-
posed of an oval water feature with a form integrated with the sur-
5
4.4.1. Contemporary memorial landscape theoretical framework
application
The following Table 2 summarizes and urban physical configu-
ration and sensual experience in the PDMF, elements within the
memorial space, and how each element was used by the designer
Y. Attwa, M. Refaat and Y. Kandil
Fig. 4. Showing a plan view of the National September memorial with the voids and surrounding landscape features.
Fig. 5. Section showing the sunken voids in comparison with the human scale and landscape surrounding the space.
which is shown in Figs. 8-9, the user sensation it provided in space,
and the triggered individual senses in space.
The elements of the space designed gave the user the sensory
experience of an optimistic space rather than a trauma of the
memory of the death of the princess. The memorial design doesn’t
give the user any mournful or dramatic content. Conversely, it
offers a peaceful experience for visitors by referring to princess
Diana’s humble life. The form design encourages people-
watching an open performance, as the oval form encourages move-
ment around and through the memorial. However, more active
behaviors are often present such as inline skating, running, and ball
games. Visitors use the stem of water from the fountain to sit and
relax (static) and interact with the water fountain in different
ways. Kids use the restless stream of water for playing, running,
walking, and jumping (kinetic, vision, and tactile) where it repre-
sents happy yet complicated times. Others use the soft landscape
around the park as a sunbath or even to read a book or do a picnic.
6
Ain Shams Engineering Journal 13 (2022) 101527
The memorial doesn’t remind people about the Princess as it is
used as a recreational space in the park.
4.5. Memorial to the murdered Jews of Europe (MMJE), Berlin
The memorial is to commemorate the individuals and victims
during the Holocaust designed by Peter Eisenman. It consists of a
19,000 square meter site covered with 2,711 concrete stelae
arranged in a grid matter. The stelae vary in dimensions. They
are organized in rows, allowing the creation of long, straight, and
narrow alleys. The blocks are elevated above the human scale
and eyesight which makes it a phallic memorial. The memorial is
located in Berlin city close to the Berlin wall. The design is to pro-
duce a maze or an easy pass for visitors to explore and enjoy. Since
understanding the holocaust is impossible, the designer wanted to
create a lack of nostalgia, the memory of the past, and only the liv-
ing memory of the individual experience. As the designer
Y. Attwa, M. Refaat and Y. Kandil Ain Shams Engineering Journal 13 (2022) 101527

Fig. 6. Cross-section showing the memorial concrete blocks and human scale, grid form, and levels in landform.

Fig. 7. Plan showing PDMF, showing the urban physical configuration of the memorial and the design concept.

Table 2
Summary of PDMF, urban physical configuration, and user sensual experience.

Urban Physical Configuration User Sensual Experience

Elements Designers’ intensions User sensation Triggered
senses
Memorial space Location Inside Hyde park Isolated, close to Princess Diana’s favorite -Quite space Vision,
enclosing palace and in a park where children could play -Grieving space auditory
elements -Relaxing
Form Oval shaped Reaching out, letting in, and welcoming -Accessibility Vision,
integrated with the visitors in -Radiates energy kinetic
landscape -Allows people to sit and enjoy, a visual tactile
extension
Surfaces The oval form of the -Light colors, neutral, nature, -Expressing Princess Diana’s life Vision,
fountain -Rough surfaces tactile
Elements within Water Waterfall Expressing different stages of Princess Diana’s -Dynamic, Vision,
the memorial life -Diversity auditory,
space kinetic
Plants Soft landscape -sitting -Simple Vision, static
-Calmness and kinetic
-Mediative
-Relaxing
Landform Glade Rhythm and repetition of ground cover, -Distinct scale Vision,
pavements -Formal kinetic
Grid patterns -Character
Furniture Seats The fountain is raised above the ground to -Informal, fun, relaxed, Vision,
provide seating for the visitors tactile, static
Lighting The spaces aren’t lit at night -Visitors complain it’s very dull at night
Information Small billboard with information Not noticeable and doesn’t provide Vision
details about the design and the
memorial

7
Y. Attwa, M. Refaat and Y. Kandil Ain Shams Engineering Journal 13 (2022) 101527

Table 3
Summary of MMJE urban physical configuration and user sensual experience.

Urban Physical Configuration User Sensual Experience

Elements Designers’ intensions User sensation Triggered
senses
Memorial space Location Same location as Unique location, close to important building and berlin wall -Recognized by Vision
enclosing murdered Jews passengers
elements
Form Grid concrete -an uneasy, atmosphere and the form aims to represent a grid -Confusing for visitors. Vision,
blocks system that has lost touch with human reason. -Fear and remembering kinetic
-resemblance to a cemetery -Unclear
-huge space -Dislocated
Surfaces Concrete, grey Create a lost space Coffins, cemetery feeling Tactile,
vision
Elements within the Water none To make user feel the grief and trauma Lacks being livable None
memorial space Plants none User lacks sense of having a livable space Very dull None
Landform Leveling allows visitor to view the blocks from different heights and the Doesn’t allow vision Kinetic,
surrounding context. between the blocks static,
vision
Furniture Seats no seats available Blocks are used for Tactile
seating
Information Information center built underground of the memorial Carrying names of Vision
victims and information
Lighting

explained ‘‘field of otherness”. However, people approached this
space and were completely lost and confused about its nature, its
memorial purpose as well as everyday life usage [50].
4.5.1. Contemporary memorial landscape theoretical framework
application
The following Table 3 summarizes the urban physical configu-
ration and sensual experience in the MMJE, elements within the
memorial space, and how each element was used by the designer
which is shown in Figs. 8-9, the user sensation it provided in space,
and the triggered individual senses in space.
The sensual experience perceived was different from the
designer’s intended ones. The designer intentionally wanted visi-
tors to have a disturbing feeling and people felt that the memorial
looked like a cemetery or graveyard. As people walk between the
large concrete blocks, they felt trapped, weak, unsafe, and scared.
This is due to the heights of the concrete blocks and the narrow
corridors that passed the human scale. However, the memorial
Fig. 8. Showing the plan and form of MMJE with its blocks and concrete structure.
8
architecture form and surface texture encouraged visitors to touch
and observe its components. It also gave users a maze-like form.
Therefore, visitors experienced other sensual experiences than
the trauma of the event. As, some visitors were jumping on top
of the blocks, taking pictures, or eating and playing between blocks
[51]. The memorial hasn’t fulfilled the part of the designer’s mes-
sage about the commemoration of the Holocaust and the murdered
victims. Also due to the lack of some elements within the memorial
space such as lighting and information signage. Some passengers
pass by and yet have no idea about the memorial or what does it
commemorate. The memorial is an example of how the designer’s
physical urban configuration can be misunderstood by the users.
Thus, users’ sensual experience in the space could be different from
the expected or initially planned ones.
5. Discussion
When reviewing and analyzing the memorials, the three memo-
rials are located within significant public areas frequently used by
tourists and visitors, easily accessed and viewed from several
points around their context. Placing the SEM in the same location
as the bombed towers made a strong connection with the visitor
to recognize the commemorating event. The PDMF is sightly iso-
lated, with minimum information guidance towards its location
in Hyde Park, which caused navigation confusion to visitors. The
PDMF and the SEM architectural forms transferred the intended
senses to the users. Despite not directly expressing Princess Dia-
na’s personal life, the memorial gave people a cheerful experience.
The MMJE provides an overwhelming mute effect through the
concrete-shaped columns. The maze-like form gave some visitors
a feeling of disorientation, isolation, and instability. The materials
used for the surfaces of the memorials proved the effectiveness
to the users’ senses in both SEM and PDMF. In the MMJE, the con-
crete material was supposed to reflect tragedy reflecting the
trauma and pain caused by the holocaust. Instead, people enjoy
everyday practice in the space.
The visual characteristics of the memorials are successfully
applied in the examples. The invisible/ anti-phallic characteristics
of the SEM give the user the absent yet visible sensation. The
PMDF, the anti-phallic type fulfilled the humble concept instead
of offering monumentality to the memorial. The phallic character-
istics of MMJE gave users the feeling of isolation from the sur-
Y. Attwa, M. Refaat and Y. Kandil
Fig. 9. A close section from the main MMJE section showing surfaces, concrete form, and human scale.
Fig. 10. CML urban physical configuration and user perception model illustration.
rounding context. Elements within the memorial space are used as
tools to develop a more sensual experience for the user. Water fea-
tures in both SEM and PPDF make the space more dynamic and
diverse and provide users with auditory and tactile experiences.
Plants also play an important role in SEM and PMDF, where they
are symbols of life and rebirth, acting as unifiers by providing users
with a space of identity. Furniture used in SEM memorial provides
different spaces for activities, as well as formal seating areas for
gatherings and social interaction. In the MMJE, the leveling in the
landform helped the designer fulfill the isolation feeling for the vis-
itors by increasing the concrete blocks’ height ratio. The three
memorials provided users with many sensual experiences through
the urban physical configuration. Positive feedback is received
from both SEM and PDMF, as most of the theoretical framework
elements were sensed by the user. However, MMJE resulted in neg-
ative feedback from the designer’s original space intentions.
The limitation that faced the research process in this paper was
noted in the data collection technique. The results obtained from
the analytical examples were done through secondary data collec-
tion of reports, due to the difficulty of visiting the sites and obtain-
ing primary data from on-ground perception. Hence, the paper
followed a more theoretical approach to collect data instead of
an empirical one, which in many cases can lead to subjective
results.
6. Conclusion
The research developed a theoretical framework that sums the
urban physical configuration elements of CML and user sensual
experience for designing successful CML. It helps in understanding
how designers and governments should construct CML, expressed
in a way that allows social integration of its visitors with space. The
theoretical framework application on the examples confirms the
relationship between the design principles intended by the design-
ers and the user’s sensual experience in the space. Viewers’ feelings
are affected primarily through a sequence of visual representation
9
Ain Shams Engineering Journal 13 (2022) 101527
of the memorial, then the enclosing and architectural landscape
elements within the memorial. Hence, aside from commemoration
events, there are kinetic, textual inscriptions, auditory, and odor
experiences. Memorial spaces are located in unique public spaces,
such as urban parks, focal city points, and plazas, where they are
sites of daily life activities and ceremonial nightlife events. They
contribute to place-making and stronger individual and communal
behavior in public spaces. The form of the memorial and its phys-
ical features; complex or abstract, defines the spatial meaning and
behavioral boundaries. Simpler design forms and symbolic mes-
sages allow easier user interaction and understanding of the
memorial concept and purpose.
In conclusion, CML is considered a spatial intertwined relation-
ship between monumentality and urbanity of space. Further
research could be conducted to measure the physical elements
and user sensual experience to design a contemporary memorial
landscape suitable for the required commemorating event and
space provided (Fig. 10).
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing finan-
cial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared
to influence the work reported in this paper.
References
[1] Dimitropoulos H. The Character of Contemporary Memorials. Places 2009;21
(1):52–5.
[2] Young JE. The Biography of a Memorial Icon: Nathan Rapoport’s Warsaw
Ghetto Monument. Representations 1989;vol. 26, no. special issue:69–106.
[3] Bevan R. The Destruction of Memory: Architecture at War. London: Reaktion
Boks Ltd.; 2007.
[4] Mayo JM. War Memorials as Political Memory. Geogr Rev 1988;78(1):62–75.
[5] P. Hagopian, ‘‘The Commemorative Landscape of the Vietnam war,” in Places of
commemoration: search for identity and landscape design. ed, Washington D.
C, 2001.
[6] Stroud Scott R, Henson Jonathan A. Memory, Reconstruction, and Ethics in
Memorialization. J Speculative Philos 2019;33(2):282–99.
Y. Attwa, M. Refaat and Y. Kandil
[7] Arrhenius T. The Cult of Age in Mass-Society: Alois Riegl’s Theory of
Conservation. J Historic Preservation, History, Theory, Criticism 2004;1
(1):75–81.
[8] Ahmer C. Riegl’s ‘Modern Cult of Monuments’ as a theory underpinning
practical conservation and restoration work. J Architect Conserv 2020;26
(2):150–65.
[9] Tanović S. Designing Memory: The Architecture of Commemoration in Europe,
1914 to the present. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2019.
[10] Stevens Quentin, Franck Karen A. Memorial As Spaces of Engagement: Design,
Use, and Meaning. New York and London: Routledge; 2015.
[11] Brett S, Bickford L, Sevcenko L, Rios M. Memorialization and democracy: State
policy and civic action, in The Report of The International Conference of
Memorialization and Democracy, Santiago, 2007.
[12] Foss K. Ambiguity as persuasion: The Vietnam Veterans Memorial. Commun
Quart 1986;34(3):326–40.
[13] Wagner-Pacifici Robin, Schwartz Barry. The Vietnam Veterans Memorial:
Commemorating a Difficult Past. Am J Sociol 1991;97(2):376–420.
[14] Abramson D. Maya Lin and the 1960s: Monuments, Time Lines, and
Minimalism. Critical Inquiry 1996;22(4):679–709.
[15] Spence C. Senses of place: an architectural design for the multisensory mind,
Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, vol. 5, no. 46, 2020.
[16] Dwyer Owen J, Alderman Derek H. Memorial landscapes: analytic questions
and metaphors. GeoJournal 2008;73(3):165–78.
[17] Heathcote E. Monument Builders: Modern Architecture and
Death. London: London Academy; 1999.
[18] Skelton Tim, Gliddon Gerald. Lutyens and the Great War. Oxford: Frances
Lincoln; 2009.
[19] Murtic A. Cultural memory in urban context: Post-conflict urban landscapes.
EFLA J 2011;1:37–9.
[20] Glassberg D. Review: Monuments and Memories. Am Quart 1991;43
(1):143–56.
[21] Inglis KS. War Memorials: Ten questions for historians. Guerres mondiales et
conflits contemporains 1992;167:5–21.
[22] S. Waldek, ‘‘architecturaldigest,” architecturaldigest, 4 july 2018. [Online].
Available: https://www.architecturaldigest.com/gallery/10-monuments-and-
memorials-that-changed-america-forever. [Accessed 3 may 2021].
[23] Bailey S. Memory Of Designing Contemporary Memorials. Phaidon Press;
2020.
[24] Canton SL. Contemporary Trends in Landscape Architecture. John Willys &
sons 1996.
[25] Deriu Davide, Kamvasinou Krystallia, Landscapes Emerging. Between
Production and Representation. London: Routledge; 2016.
[26] Huyssen A. Memory Sculpture: 1; Unland: The orphan’s tunic’, Presents pasts:
urban palimpsests and the politics of memory. Stanford: Stanford University
Press; 2003.
[27] Etlin RA. Symbolic Space: French Enlightenment Architecture and Its
Legacy. Chigaco: University of Chicago Press; 1994.
[28] Maki Rie, Niihata Tomoko. Landscape design in Hiroshima Peace Memorial
Park: Transition of the design by Kenzo Tange. Japan Architect Rev 2020;3
(2):193–204.
[29] Macleod J. Memorials and Location: Local versus National Identity and the
Scottish National War Memorial. Scottish Historical Rev 2010;89(227):73–95.
[30] Alderman Derek H, Dwyer Owen J. Memorials and Monuments. Int
Encyclopedia Hum Geogr 2009;7:51–8.
[31] Abusaada Hisham, Elshater Abeer. Revealing distinguishing factors between
Space and Place in urban design literature. J Urban Design 2020;26(3):319–40.
[32] Moughtin C. Urban Design: Street and square. Oxford: Routledge; 1992.
[33] Brody R. The New Yorker, 2012 July 12. [Online]. Available: https://www.
newyorker.com/culture/richard-brody/the-inadequacy-of-berlins-memorial-
to-the-murdered-jews-of-europe. [Accessed 3 4 2021].
[34] Lynch K. The Image of the City. Cambridge: The MIT Press; 1960.
[35] Benjamin W. The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction. New
York: Schocken Books; 1969.
[36] Carney LS. Not Telling Us What to Think: The Vietnam Veterans Memorial.
Metaphor Symbolic Activity 2009;8(3):211–9.
[37] Rainey RM. The Choreography of Memory: Lawrence Halprin’s Franklin Delano
Roosevelt Memorial. Landscape J 2012;31(1/2):161–82.
[38] Gibson JJ. The Perception of Visual Surfaces. Am J Psychol 1950;63(3):367–84.
[39] Carmona Matthew, Heath Tim, Oc Taner, Tiesdell Steve, Spaces Public Places
Urban, Edition Second. The Dimensions of Urban Design. New
York: Routledge; 2003.
[40] Pandey A. Perception Of Urban Spaces With Respect To Visual Dimension. Int J
Adv Sci Technol 2020;29(12):3005–19.
[41] Stevens Q. Nothing more than feelings: Abstract memorials. Architect Theory
Rev 2009;2:156–72.
[42] Abd Ahmed S, Elrahman Randa A, Mahmoud. The post-revolutionary effect on
the urban harmony of Cairo’s built environment in relation to the collective
memory of the population: Urban context of the ‘‘after the revolution”
between contravention and elaboration. Ain Shams Eng J 2016;7(4):1099–106.
[43] Connerton P. How societies remember. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press; 1989.
[44] Mohamed O. The contemporary Memorial Landscape: How to convey meaning
through design. a study based on cases from London and
Palastine. Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh; 2016.
[45] Abusaada Hisham. Abeer Elshater, ‘‘Effect of people on placemaking and
affective atmospheres in city streets,”. Ain Shams Eng J 2021:1–15.
10
Ain Shams Engineering Journal 13 (2022) 101527
[46] Michalski S. Public monuments: Art in political bondage 1870–
1997. London: Reaktion books; 1998.
[47] Kaufmann E. Claude Nicolas Ledoux: A Pioneer of Modern Architecture in the
Eighteenth Century, Parnassus, pp. 50-62, 2015.
[48] Senie HE. Memorials to shattered Myths: Vietnam to 9/11. NewYork: Oxford
Press; 2016.
[49] Gessner IS. The Aesthetics of Remembering 9/11: Towards a Transnational
Typology of Memorials. J Transnational Am Stud. vol. 1, no. 6, 2015.
[50] Young JE. The Texture of Memory. New Haven: Yale University Press; 1993.
[51] Carney LS. Not Telling Us What to Think: The Vietnam Veteran’s Memorial”,
Metaphor and Symbolic Activity. Metaphor Symbolic Activity 1993;8:211–9.
[52] Coser LA. On Maurice Halbwachs on collective memory. Chicago: Chicago
Press; 1992.
[53] R. W.-P. a. B. Schwartz,. The Vietnam Veterans Memorial: Commemorating a
Difficult Past. Am J Sociol 1991;97(2):376–420.
[54] Bonder J. On Memory, Trauma, Public Space, Monuments, and Memorials.
Places 21 2009;21(1):62–9.
[55] Michalski S. Paradoxes of form and function in modern public monuments.
London: James & James 2001.
[56] Ulrichs T. Kunstpreis Nord/LB 1983. Hannover: Norddeutsche Landesbank;
1983.
[57] Starken M. The Wall and the Screen Memory: The Vietnam Veterans Memorial,
Tangled Memories: The Vietnam War, The AIDS Epidemic, and the Politics of
Remembering. California: in University of California Press; 1997.
[58] Huyssen A. Twilight memories Marking time in a culture of Amnesia. New
York: Routledge; 1995.
[59] Anderson Elizabeth, Maddrell Avril, McLoughlin Kate. Catherine Mary
McLoughlin. Memory, Mourning, Landscape: Alana Vincent; 2010.
[61] Wright EA. Rhetorical Spaces in Memorial Places: The Cemetery as a Rhetorical
Memory Place/Space. Rhetoric Soc Quart 2005;35(4):51–81.
[62] Petterson A. The monumental landscape from below: public statues, popular
interaction, and nationalism in late nineteenth-century
Amsterdam. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2019.
[63] Stevens Quentin, Franck Karen A, Fazakerley Ruth. Counter-monuments: the
anti-monumental and the dialogic. J Architect 2012;17(6):959–72.
[64] Violi P. Landscapes of Memory, Trauma, Space, History. Oxford: Peter Lang;
2014.
[65] Fatmaelzahraa Hussein, John Stephens, Reena Tiwari, Towards Psychosocial
Well-Being in Historic Urban Landscapes: The Contribution of Cultural
Memory, Urban Science, vol. 4, 2020.
[66] Sci SA. (Re)thinking the Memorial as a Place of Aesthetic Negotiation. Culture,
Theory Critique 2009;50(1):41–57.
[67] Shanken AM. Planning Memory: Living Memorials in the United States during
World War II. Art Bull 2002;84(1):130–47.
Further reading
[60] Micieli-Voutsinas J. Affective Heritage and the Politics of Memory After
9/11. London: Routledge; 2021.
Yousra Alaa El Din Attwa Cairo, Egypt. a PhD Candidate
in the Faculty of urban and regional Planning, Cairo
University. Bachelor and master’s degree from the Arab
Academy for Science and Technology in 2009 and 2016
respectively, Master’s thesis titled ‘‘Infill Development
as an integrated approach to enhance urban growth,
Case study: Antoniadis city compound, Alexandria).
Worked as a part-time teaching assistant in AAST
(2011-2016), and a junior architect in multiple design
Offices in Kuwait (2009-2011). Currently working as a
freelance Architect, and an Assistant Lecturer in the
October university for modern sciences and arts.
Professor Mohammad H. Refaat, graduated from the
faculty of Urban & Regional planning Cairo University
(Hons 1989). He was appointed as a teaching assistant
and later was awarded a Chevening scholarship to
obtain his PhD in Landscape Architecture from Edin-
burgh University, UK (1995) with a thesis on ‘‘ The
Egyptian Landscape and Tourism a Study of the Red Sea
Coast Landscape Planning Process”. From 1995 till 2014
he acted as an assistant and associate professor at Cairo
University teaching and conducting the Landscape
Planning, Landscape Architecture, Urban Landscape and
Sustainable Landscape ecology courses on both levels
under and postgraduate. At present, he holds the chair of a Professor of Landscape
Architecture at the Faculty of Urban & Regional Planning, Cairo University. His
research interests include landscape planning, landscape design, sustainable tour-
ism, urban parks and eco-parks, waterfronts cultural landscapes.
Y. Attwa, M. Refaat and Y. Kandil Ain Shams Engineering Journal 13 (2022) 101527

University, Dammam Al Khobar, with an award of excellence in teaching certificate.

Back to the AASTMT since 2018 until now. Since 2019 she is the head of technical
Assistant Professor Yasmin Kandil, Alexandria, Egypt. team of the Erasmus plus project entitled ‘‘UPGRADE”, Urban and transportation
graduated from Faculty of Engineering, Alexandria regeneration for Reducing Automobile Dependency in mEna area, this project was
University, (with the honor degree, 2000). She was shortlisted in 2018, resubmitted in 2019 and won and running from 2020 till 2023.
appointed as a teaching assistant in the Arab Academy Her research interests include Urban design, transportation in Urban design,
for Science Technology & Maritime Transport (AASTMT), Architectural Education, street design.
College of Engineering and Technology, Department of
Architectural Engineering & Environmental Design,
Alexandria, Egypt. Finished her master degree at the
AASTMT, 2003 with a thesis entitled ‘‘Communication
Systems and Urban Space Characteristics”. Received her
PhD from Cairo University in 2011, with a thesis entitled
‘‘Managing Street Environment: Shared Street Concept
as An Approach”. From 2011 till 2013 she acted as an assistant professor at AASTMT.
From 2013-2018 she acted as an assistant professor at the Abd El Rahman Bin Feisal

11