CC BY
20DOI: https://doi.org/10.34680/urbis-2022-1(2)-157-184
YEREVAN CENTER URBAN PARKS AND GARDEN SQUARES: PLACES FOR PEOPLE, PLACES OF MEANINGS
Harutyun Vermishyan
Yerevan State University, Armenia harutyunvermishyan@ysu.am
Lilit Barseghyan
Socials Expert Centre Researcher, Yerevan, Armenia lbarseghian93@gmail.com
In the article, urban parks and garden squares are considered the most important places that form and/or demonstrate the image and culture of the city. The physical spaces of urban parks and garden squares allow organizing urban everyday practices, which are the basis for reproducing the social structure. In this perspective, it is essential to describe the components of the public spaces of Yerevan city the public space of urban parks and garden squares as spaces of socially structured everyday practices. The purpose of this article is to present the characteristics of the formation and transformation of the physical, social and symbolic structures of the public spaces of urban gardens and parks in Yerevan with reference to the particularities of the formation and development of public space. For that purpose, a qualitative study was conducted. Methods of document analysis, thematic interviews, mental mapping, observations, and expert interviews were implemented. Local parks (Children's Park, English Park, and Lovers' Park) and garden squares (Al. Tamanyan, Misak Manushyan, M. Saryan, and Komitas) were chosen as the main target places. Grounded on D. Simon's triadic interpretation of place, the data analysis allows describing the issues of formation and transformation of physical, social, and symbolic structures of Yerevan Center urban parks and garden squares.
Keywords: Urban Park, Garden Square, Urban Space, Place, People in Place, Geographical Ensemble, Genius Loci, Mental Maps.
Для цитирования:
Vermishyan H., Barseghyan L. Yerevan Center Urban Parks and Garden Squares: Places for People, Places of Meanings // Urbis et Orbis. Микроистория и семиотика города. 2022. № 1 (2). С. 157-184. DOI: https://doi.org/10.34680/urbis-2022-1(2)-157-184
For citation:
Vermishyan H., Barseghyan L. Yerevan Center Urban Parks and Garden Squares: Places for People, Places of Meanings. Urbis et Orbis. Microhistory and Semiotics of the City. 2022. 1 (2). P. 157-184. DOI: https://doi.org/10.34680/urbis-2022-1(2)-157-184
ГОРОДСКИЕ ПАРКИ И СКВЕРЫ ЦЕНТРА ЕРЕВАНА: МЕСТА ДЛЯ ЛЮДЕЙ, МЕСТА СМЫСЛОВ
А. Р. Вермишян
Ереванский государственный университет harutyunvermishyan@ysu.am
Л. А. Барсегян
«Социес» экспертный центр, исследователь lbarseghian93@gmail.com
В статье городские парки и скверы рассматриваются как важнейшие места, формирующие и/или репрезентирующие образ и культуру города. Физические пространства городских парков и скверов позволяют организовать повседневные городские практики, являющиеся основой воспроизведения социальной структуры. В связи с этим важно описать компоненты общественных пространств города Еревана - публичное пространство городских парков и скверов как пространства социально структурированных повседневных практик. Цель данной статьи - представить особенности формирования и трансформации физических, социальных и символических структур общественных пространств, городских парков и скверов Еревана с учётом особенностей формирования и развития общественного пространства. С этой целью было проведено качественное исследование, сочетая методы анализа документов, тематических интервью, ментального картирования, наблюдений и экспертных интервью. В качестве основных целевых пространств были выбраны местные парки (Детский парк, Английский парк и парк Влюблённых) и скверы (Ал. Таманян, Мисак Манушян, М. Сарьян и Комитас). Анализ данных, основанный на триадной модели Д. Саймона, позволил описать процессы формирования и трансформации физических, социальных и символических структур городских парков и скверов центра Еревана.
Ключевые слова: городской парк, сквер, городское пространство, место, люди места, географический ансамбль, гениальные локусы, ментальные карты.
Introduction
The public space of the city reflects society, an integrity of unique ideological and cultural practices [Vermishyan et al. 2020]. Anything occurring in social life is being approved and realized in the structures of space and time, being materialized on the city's public space's physical, social, and symbolic levels, differentiating and creating corresponding local places [Hutchison et al. 2016; Lefebvre 2003; Lefebvre 2013; Vermishyan 2021]. Within the context of the public spatial forms of the city (such as the public square, street, bus stop, market, coffee place, or the mall) the parks and the gardens are highly important as places forming and/or demonstrating the city's image and culture [Tonnelat 2010].
The physical spaces of the gardens and the parks allow for organizing city's everyday practices whereas the daily practices are ground for the reproduction of the public structure [Bazrafshan et al. 2021; DeLand et al. 2018; Peters et al. 2010; Walker 2004].
From this perspective, it is crucial to describe the components of the public spaces of the city of Yerevan, the public space of urban gardens and parks as spaces of socially structured daily practices.
The public space of Yerevan city center is changing rapidly and with that changing the demands towards it as a social object leading to the transition of the idea of the city among the citizens, affecting people's life, plans, and spirit. Several issues appear as the result of those transitions. Not addressing these issues will lead to unexpected transformations of their symbolic meaning. In these terms, a conflict occurs between the initial meanings of these spaces and the perceptions of consumers.
The goal of this article is to present Yerevan urban gardens and parks' public spaces' physical, social, and symbolic structures' formation and transformation characteristics concerning the characteristics of the same for the formation and development of public space.
Background
Although when presenting Yerevan city, in the first place the city's respectable 2800-year history is being highlighted, the current city plan has a century-old history. The city plan designed by A. Tamanyan in 1924 added new meaning and structuring to the urban space of the city. As per A. Tamanyan's vision, a "rural town" should turn into a "city" and then into a "capital". To become a capital, Yerevan should have wide streets, accentuated architectural features, and a rich green zone. The architects' goal was to form a city, which would manifest the rebirth of a nation with an identity crisis [Yepiskoposyan 2011, 24; Vermishyan et al. 2015, 69-70].
A. Tamanyan had a clear task. The master plan of the capital should have reflected the main ideology of the new state [Balyan 2006]. Based on the elaboration of the first general plan of Socialist Yerevan, according to A. Tamanyan, the prin ciple of "city-park" was used as the best example of urban development [Vermishyan et al. 2015, 70-72].
The author of the above-mentioned principle is English sociologist and utopist E. Howard, who in his "Garden Cities of To-Morrow" book develops his concept of an ideal city. In that concept, which played a major role in urban development in the 20th century, the idea of a "garden city" was used in which the trump card was the widespread landscaping [Howard 1965].
There was one principle of city-parks planning: The parks and the main social and cultural buildings had to be centralized in the city center. The park is a symbol showing that people's life in the city is not in a "sag of rocks" but in a civil, natural environment. Hence, relying on that principle, A. Tamanyan divides the city into many zones: administrative, cultural, educational, museums, industrial, residential, and entertainment [Vermishyan et al. 2015, 72].
Per the official website of Yerevan's Municipality, currently, there are 35 functioning parks and gardens in the city [Parks of Yerevan 2022]. Fourteen of them are located in the Center administrative district. Three of these are "strolling" parks: Circular Park, Diana Abgar Park, and Children's Railway, four are parks: Children's Park, English Park,
Lover's Park, Yerevan-2800, and six are garden squares: A. Tamanyan's, Misak Manushyan, M. Saryan, Komitas, St. Shahumyan, and Moskovyan while one is Main Avenue Recreation zone.
When speaking about Yerevan city's public space the city center has a symbolic power (Vermishyan et al. 2015, 110-133) where per the Tamanyan project, the main historical-cultural, scientific-educational-administrative-political institutions and city places are concentrated. Due to earlier construction and attractiveness, the center of Yerevan is a place forming urban standards which by their nature are the main bearers of classic characteristics of public space such as indifference, freedom, and accessibility [Bauman 2003; Harvey 2015; Simmel 2012; Vermishyan et al. 2020].
Theoretical background and methodological approach
The public space of the city is a set of specific places where social processes take place, at the same time it is a socio-cultural construct, a complex system of meanings [Lefebvre 2013; Tuan 1977]. However, this physical environment is nothing without its consumers; it has no meaning without its signifiers. Therefore, the third important element of space is the person, the designer of the space, and/or the consumer. The three-dimensional model of human-place-sign is the most practical and comprehensive scheme underlying the study of urban spaces [Najafi et al. 2011]. The interrelation of these three components helps understand and explain the process of formation, perception, and consumption of urban places, and respectively, the reproduction of urban spaces. Indeed, urban space is formed due to the common human practices; creating at the same time respective urban spaces anywhere, these practices are possible. Being social, space [Tuan 1977] "produced also serves as a tool of thought and of action; that in addition to being a means of production it is also a means of control" [Lefebvre 2013, 26], while the location (with the physical objects included in it) defines space giving it a "geometric personality" [Tuan 1977], or as G. Simmel has noticed localization allows to understand people (their actions and thinking) [Simmel 2012].
Therefore, urban space is a social framework connecting and signifying urban places with physical boundaries. On the other hand, a person's successful life in the city, in his/her physical space, is mainly determined by the mental perception of the latter. K. Lynch brings up the idea of decoding "legibility" in the city, which means the ease with which different parts of the city are recognized and classified mental [Lynch 1960, 71]. Different parts of the city are legible if they contain the following components: structure of objects (interconnection of elements, ability to combine/connect with each other), cognition (ability to distinguish an element), and significance/value (subjective meaning of an object for people).
In this article we will refer to the issues of formation and transformation of urban locus, considering urban parks and gardens as physical/geographical environment/ensemble (ge), and urban local agents or people in places (city dwellers, city administration, visitors, etc.) as producers of symbolic meanings (pp) and bearers in the context of the combination of the urban space and the local symbolic meanings or genius loci (gl) of places [Seamon 2012].
From the aspect of place formation and reproduction, Dr. Simon's six models of "being a place" and "becoming a place" will be used as variations of the combination of person, symbol, and environment. The process of formation, perception, realization of urban spaces, and, accordingly, the reproduction of urban space, is understandable through the ratio of pp-ge-gl components [Seamon 2012, 12; Vermishyan et al. 2015, 50-51].
■ Place's Interactions (pp-gl-ge) - this triad defines a place as a typical trivial environment of action. It can be characterized as "local routine", when local agents, knowing the symbolic meaning of the place, consume it accordingly.
■ Place's Identity (ge-gl-pp) - this triad describes how people living in a particular place perceive it as their "local world".
■ Place Realization (gl-pp-ge) - this triad describes a process in which the physical local environment is constantly transformed into a consumption area due to the attractiveness of the physical environment.
■ Place Creation (pp-ge-gl) - this triad describes a process in which certain groups (residents, local government, etc.) influence the physical environment and give it symbolic meaning.
■ Place Intensification (ge-pp-gl) - this triad describes a process in which the physical local environment, due to its attractiveness, engages people, contributing to strengthening the local symbolic influence.
■ Place Release (gl-ge-pp) - this triad describes the process by which people condition their belonging to a physical place with strong symbolic power.
Methods
Qualitative research has been conducted, which is descriptive. It will describe each unit (garden or park) within the context of its peculiarities. More specifically,
Document analysis has been conducted, and factual or documentary sources describing Yerevan city's gardens and parks have been observed. To which a separate reference is being made in the analytical part.
Twenty-eight thematic interviews were conducted along with mental mapping to find out the mental maps of the visitors of the city center's parks and gardens. The latter is an interview with a request to draw a sketch of the park with a detailed description of the parts that are most clearly visible in memory. The criteria for selecting the respondents were gender, age, and frequency of visiting the park.
At the same time, observations were made using the thick description technique [Geertz 1973], which allows having a direct, detailed record of the urban elements extracted from the mental maps of the visitors, such as the historical, microphysical, social, behavioral saturation of the center's parks and alleys, as well as the information about the functional objects.
For data triangulation purposes and to provide reliable information about urban places, four expert interviews were conducted with architect, journalist, culturologist, and sociologist.
The research has been conducted in the summer of 2016.
Local parks (Children's Park, English Park, and Lovers' Park) and garden squares (Al. Tamanyan, Misak Manushyan, M. Saryan, and Komitas) were selected as the main target urban places2.
Main findings: English Park
The English Park is located on Grigor Lusavorich, Movses Khorenatsi, and Italian streets, amidst the Sundukyan Theater building (fig. 1), the French Embassy, and the Congress Hotel (it should be noted that the geographical description and the mental imagination of the park coincide (fig. 2)).
Fig. 1. English Park. Yerevan. Photo by H. Vermishyan. 2022
2 The "strolling" parks and the recreation zone were not observed within the frames of the research.
Fig. 2. English Park, Yerevan. Mental Map by the visitor of the park (female, 22 years old)
The first public garden in Yerevan was the so-called English Garden, which was the only one until 1920. The English Garden is one of the oldest green areas in Yerevan. When Soviet rule was established, the park turned into a pantheon of the fallen revolutionaries. The park was renamed the Garden of 26 Commissars, which the people of Yerevan abbreviated Komaygi3. At the time, wooden pop stages were built at this park, where various folk-brass bands performed, also there was a summer cinema, a dance floor, and an open-air library (reading hall). The park belonged to the city administration, which in 1850 had done some landscaping work there. In 1898, Mayor Isahak Melik-Aghamalyan made serious reforms in the park, after which canals were opened, stagnant water was removed, nurseries were established, trees were planted, and new alleys were opened in the areas free of swamps. Isahak's brother, the new mayor Hovhannes Melik-Aghamalyan, continued the renovation work of the park. The park was built and renovated in a European style, which most probably is the reason why it has been named "English Park"4.
In the second half of the 1970s, this park was rebuilt in an attempt to be turned into a small Venice. This park as well, like the previous one, was created in the Soviet times as a green zone, a place of entertainment, and one can say that mostly it has not changed its structure. English Park had various functions during the Soviet era. In those years, people
3 The leaders of the May Uprising were buried on the right side of the main alley, and in 1921, the military commissar Liparit Mkhchyan' was also buried in the park. The latter is being mentioned in Yeghishe Charents's historical ballad "My Friend Lipo". The park was later renamed "the Garden of 26 Commissars" which the people of Yerevan abbreviated Komaygi.
4 It is a garden with a free plan, repetitive natural landscape. Similar gardens appeared in the 17-18th centuries' of England [Gasparyan 2007, 195].
from different parts of the city got together there. Adults, mothers with children, and football fans gathered to have intensive discussions after football matches. In those years, for many people, the area served as a place for home sales.
"I remember the elderly always gathered there; they did nothing all day. I also remember that book speculators came on Saturdays and Sundays. In Soviet times, books were a value; there were books you could not find in stores, they were sold here at high prices. There were special resellers who gathered there. They were gathering around Pepo's statue; football fans were also gathering" (Urban journalist, expert).
"Those who rented houses gathered there, right next to those lawns, and from there to Khorenatsi Street, those who rented houses, that is, those who received tenants in their house, for example, on Charents Street, many gave houses for rent to students'' (Urban journalist, expert).
Nowadays the park still serves as a public space, a garden, but it is not convenient for recreation. Currently, the area is pleasant for young people who consider themselves modern, to gather with friends in the lawn-filled area of the park and have an exciting time (reading, playing, training, etc.).
The research results show that the park is out of the city center mental maps of residents of Yerevan. There are some confusions related to the place's name. Respondents were usually asking:
"Is it the park in front of the Sundukyan Theater?" "Is it the Park of the Commissars?" "The Park of the Comintern?", "The park of Congress Hotel?", "The Italian Park?" etc.
Few people immediately figured out which garden was referred to.
"The "English Park" name is a bit unusual and seems artificial"; "You do not understand in any way why English."; "They say English people built the park that is why it has been renamed."; "The park has been built and renovated in European style."; "If you look at it from above, it looks like the English flag."
The English Park is a physical local environment, which is being consumed by the visitors due to the fact that it is a green area, it has the characteristics of a garden. For the young ones, it is a symbolic area, they go to this park because especially in the area near the Italian buildings there are lawns comfortable to sit, lie down and spend some time. For adults, it is still an area with local symbols from the Soviet years.
The English Park is surrounded by symbols of various meanings. The most symbolizing element here is the theater. Many associate it with the Congress Hotel or the Embassy of France. When painting it, many recall the statue of Pepo. In overall, the English Park is not memorized as a garden bearing the meaning of its name. It is not an area of high importance such as, for example, the theater building, the embassy, or the hotel.
"I do not call this garden by any name, but I know they call it the English Park. For me, it is the garden next to the Congress Hotel because I've seen the entrance from that side" (Culturologist, expert).
"My friends and I call it the Italian Park. We don't even know why we call it that, when we were little, our moms used to bring us here and say we came to the Italian park" (female, 19 years old).
"Many people associate the location with the theater. They cannot imagine one without the other. English Park is the park of Sundukyan, that's how we call it" (male, 59 years old).
Almost in everyone's perception, the English Park is associated with being the first park. "This is the mother garden in Yerevan; the mother theater is the Sundukyan Theater, while the garden is the Komaygi." At the same time, it is identified with the old, not taken care of, and abandoned condition. Lately, the area adjacent to the buildings of foreigners is perceived by the youth as a place for "picnicking" and gathering with friends. In that part, even if we look at it from the outer landscape, it differs in the color of the lawn and the level of care taken. The park was an ideal public space for the adults and now they are highly disappointed.
"The sunlight couldn't reach the ground; they cut so many trees, what's left?"(Male, 70 years old).
Children's Park
Children's Park (formerly park named after Kirov) is located between Movses Khorenatsi, Grigor Lusavorich, Zakyan, and Beirut streets. It was founded in March of 1933 on the site of the old market, Khantar. In the park, there are placed the bust of the double hero of the Soviet Union Nelson Stepanyan (fig. 3), the tomb of the Soviet army colonel, division commander Simon Zakyan, the bust of the Lebanese writer, philosopher, painter, poet Jubran Khalil Jubran. In 1940, a monument was placed in honor of the heroic workers-peasants, fighters of the Red Army. In 1934, the park was named after Soviet statesman Sergei Kirov after his death. Now, it has been renamed Children's Park. As one of the experts involved in the renaming commission mentioned: "... the park was renamed to Children's Park first of all as an attempt to refrain from Soviet names; secondly, this park was really childish in those years" (male, 70 years old).
It is considered one of the largest parks in Yerevan. As respondents describe: "In Soviet times indeed, it was considered a recreational and entertainment area where thousands of children gathered daily to go to the attractions, run and play various games. In winter, they went to the rink. They played billiard and tennis. There were many adults as well then. Their main occupation was either taking their grandchildren for a walk or playing chess, backgammon, or similar games. Just like many parks in the city, it was covered with red sand" (Urban Journalist, expert).
Fig. 3. Children's Park. Yerevan. Photo by H. Vermishyan. 2022
The park is located in front of Yerevan city Municipality. It is a local neighborhood area for the residents, and it is not accidental that the main consumers are the residents of the nearby neighborhood.
In Soviet times, the park was considered a site for propaganda: "Back then, when the Red Army entered Armenia, the Armenians were excited, they happily brought this statue located it here and said, "thank you for choosing us". There was a stone with the name of Lenin on it, where they brought free newspapers. We also came and bowed to the stone to pick up the newspaper" (male, 70 years old).
Children's Park is a carrier of a unique functional-semantic contradiction. Although it was originally built for children, it still underwent semantic changes during Soviet times. It is interesting how it is presented by one who spent his youth living near the park in Soviet times: "Although the park is called children's, it has never served for the benefit of children. Gamblers and people of the thieves' subculture used to gather here. It was also a gathering place for rabiz people starting from Sundukyan Park to Children's Park..." (male, 69 years old).
In the post-Soviet period, the park was a unique late-night gathering place, identified with the LGBT community, and the main definitions given by the respondents are "intimidating", "foreign".
Just as in the past, now as well it is a hub that on one side (on Zakyan Street) gathers the elderly people and children, pregnant women, mothers, and LGBT people on the
other side. The functions of this garden are determined by time and space. It is like a sponge that has soaked something from here and there becoming a semantic hybrid.
In the case of Children's Park, the most important of its structural components is its local significance. Its local physical environment constantly evolves into a consumption zone due to its attractiveness. It is a local neighborhood, a place of daily consumption.
Children's Park for a relatively older generation is a place for entertainment and recreation. Most of the respondents have been regular visitors of the park since the Soviet times. For them, the park just as in the past, now also is a children's park and is associated with warm memories.
"We used to have a camp, the children used to gather and have fun. We fed, entertained, and sat on water boats with about 7,000 children daily. There was red sand, I would wake up in the morning and come to water the garden. We used to put the central Christmas tree here. Back in the 60s, they put the Christmas tree here instead of the main square. It was covered with red sand before, but they replaced it with stone. We used to add water which would turn to ice, and the children would come and slide" (Urban journalist, expert).
We cannot make the same statement for middle-aged and younger than middle-aged people can. The results of the research show that this area is mostly associated with LGBT groups. For them, an area is a symbolic place for the mentioned groups. Even when the garden is often called "Komaygi"* by mistake, it comes from the fact that many people think "gomaygi = komaygi" (fig. 4).
Fig. 4. Children's Park. Yerevan. Mental Map by the visitor of the park (female, 20 years old)
* Even though the Children's Park, unlike English Park, has a negative connotation, we can state that it is more memorable and fixed in mental perceptions [Vermishyan et al. 2015]. It even often takes on the name of the other - The "Komaygi".
When we asked what they have to say about Children's Park, many people asked, "Do you mean the Gay's Park?" In most people's perceptions, it is a symbolic place that carries that meaning. As a result, the park has become a place of fear. Many people avoid walking around the park at night.
As a semantic expression of symbolic elements, we could also underline the amphitheater, which was often mentioned in mind maps as a distinguishing feature of the garden. People identify the garden with antiquity and Soviet. "I hear Children's Park, I recall Soviet."
"Basically, like in the past, now too, this park is a hub, where on the one hand (on Zakyan Street) gather the elderly, children, pregnant women, mothers who spend their leisure time here, and on the other hand, the LGBT groups live their nightlife. It has also become a sensitive area for political protests. On the afternoon of March 1, 2008, it was a shelter for the activists. [...] we can say that the garden is like a sponge that has absorbed and contains something from everything" (Culturologist, expert).
Lovers' Park
Lovers' Park is one of Yerevan city's central parks. It was founded in 1949 when the construction of the building of the Central Committee of the Communist Party began. Per the official historical reference, it existed since the 18th century and was called Kozern Gardens.
Lovers' Park is now a 1.6-hectare green oasis, where every component - trees and shrubs, stones and waterfalls, a sandy alley, and an outdoor canopy - is a prototype for creating a new culture of entertainment and leisure.
If we take a look at the topography of the city, a political area is surrounding the park-the National Assembly, the residence of the President. In the case of Lovers' Park, the existence of the subway plays an important, positive role.
The new project of the park is a novelty not only in Yerevan but in the whole country, as it is the only Japanese park. The project coordinator is architect Sarhat Petrosyan. The Lovers' Park was designed by Pierre Rambach, a Swiss-based French landscape architect and author of numerous works on Japanese Oriental gardens.
The sketch of the Lovers' Park project was implemented by Rambach after studying the Armenian landscape. He studied in detail the numerous rock types in Armenia, in the territory of Nagorno Karabakh, including them in the relief plan of the park.
The official opening of the Lovers' Park was held on October 17, 2008. The renovation and reconstruction of the Lovers' Park were based on the basic principles of traditional Japanese gardens. Briefly said, it is a "piece" of nature with its own biosphere in super-urbanized cities.
Per the plan, modern elements were integrated into the park: in the eastern part of the park, an artificial pond with two islets was built. One of them is a stage with a 200-seat amphitheater in front of it, as well as 200 seats in the area adjacent to the stage (fig. 5).
Fig. 5. Lovers' Park. Yerevan. Photo by H. Vermishyan. 2022
Lovers' Park is one of the few gardens that has undergone a very interesting transformation over the years. In fact, the area used to be a cemetery. It existed since the early Middle Ages, and scholars say that pre-Christian tombs were found there. It used to be the oldest and largest Christian cemetery in the city. It started from the heights of Kond to St. Hovhannes Church up to the current location. Residents of surrounding buildings say their homes are grounded literally on human bones. The whole district was named after early 11th-century Armenian scholar Hovhannes Taronatsi. Kozern was his nickname. The word kozern means little covenant, covenant's child. Hovhannes Kozern spent the last years of his life in Yerevan, where he died and was buried. That is the reason it was named the Kozern Park. In the 18th century, a chapel was built on his tomb. It was preserved to this day as there are people who live there now. It has become a residential house. It has the same architecture, looking like an arch. No changes have been made. In fact, Catholicos Movses III, the third Catholicos of Syunik, who is buried here, and monk Melikset Vzhanetsi, both lived in the chapel in the 17th century. The third is Kozern.
The owner of the house tells: "... no one knew about this house for many years. After 1975 they found out the chapel existed. The Armenian Apostolic Church is also aware. The Catholicos visited, the head of the Ararat diocese visited, and many people visited. They came, had a look, and said they will renovate it. But it still remains as is. The four sides of the chapel are a cemetery ... It is good to sleep surrounded by the saints, and at night we play backgammon from time to time. "Sometimes we have a meal and drink together." [Grigoryan 2018]
As soon as it was founded, the park was named after Alexander Pushkin, as 1949 marked the 150th anniversary of the great Russian writer, to be celebrated in all the republics of the Soviet Union. In 1970 it was renamed "Friendship" as a sign of the unwavering friendship of the USSR people. In 1995, it was renamed "Lovers' Park".
Today, Lovers' Park is considered one of the most beautiful and well-maintained gardens in Yerevan. For many, before reconstruction, the park was considered one of the most hidden corners of the city. Interestingly, many thought that it was renamed considering the real practices, given that this area was really a hiding place for lovers. When renamed, it seemed that it might be slightly artificial, as the former name was not reflected in any way. For many respondents, it was more of a lovers' park before the construction than now it actually is named so.
"Ever since I was in school, I perceived it as a lovers' garden, because the trees were tall. At the back side, right behind, on the side of Demirchyan Street, there was an alley, where it was always dark and couples in love went to" (Journalist, expert).
As a result of the research, we realized that the name narrows the garden's functions, it actually performs a much broader function. "Lovers" name meaning is also expressed by the fact that people come here to film their wedding. In other words, the name of this park is narrowed in a purely public sense, but, interestingly, it is supposed to purely create a space for young people, yet the area becomes public as the type of place that attracts others because young people who come here do not behave vulgarly but show their love and affection in non-vulgar ways. They feel free and people like it, it is pleasant to see loving couples, for example, hugging or kissing. When we look at the elderly people sitting in the park, they don't seem strained, they might be strained in other places. The whole atmosphere of the park is such. Maybe initially it was named as such but later due to the growing number of visitors it acquired a broader meaning. The renaming of the Lovers' Park was, in essence, a legitimization of previous local practices by name, but the opposite happened here, now those practices are not applicable and "allowed".
In the case of Lovers' Park, although it can be said that local agents have also played a role, the component of the geographical environment is an important factor. The triad of ge-pp-gl meanings is active in the Lovers' Park case. Intensification took place here, a process in which the physical local environment, due to its attractiveness, involves people, contributing to strengthening the local symbolic influence.
The main symbolizing element in Lover's Park is the actual "love" phenomenon. People perceive this area as a lovers' area. The park is often associated with the Baghramyan metro station, "Achajour" café, and the ponds (fig. 6). "I do not remember any statue from there. I remember the stage because I danced once there, I remember the fountain. I do not remember anything else, no impression, it is interesting, I did not see it visually"(Culturologist, expert).
Fig. 6. Lovers' Park, Yerevan. Mental Map by the visitor of the park (female, 19 years old)
In general, the statues aren't being noticed by the young people. Statues or the name are not considered park symbols, instead, the subway, the streams, and the "Achajour" café are perceived as such.
"There is no association with lovers; we call it "Achajour". If "Achajour" was located anywhere else we would not go there, the grass is being watered in the morning, and we breathe the freshness. The garden has been well intensified, it is the green garden for us. For example, when we go to other gardens, we cannot smell the grass" (female, 25 years old).
This park, unlike the other two, is a consumption area not only for the locals, but people from different parts of the city also visit. "Achajur" cafe plays an important role in the image of the park. Many young people come to the park to work from this cafe, turning it into a unique freelance workplace.
Garden Square after Tamanyan
Tamanyan garden square is located in the lower part of the "Cascade" envisaged by Tamanyan's project. In Tamanyan Garden Square, on Moskovyan Street, towards the central part of the city A. Tamanyan's statue is placed (sculpted by Artashes Hovsepyan, designed by S. Petrosyan, 1931). The small park expanding from the statue to the
"Cascade" complex was named after the great architect, academician A. Tamanyan. The authors of "Cascade" are architects Jim Torosyan, Sargis Gyurzadyan, and Asian Mkhitaryan, who finalized the compositional axis of Yerevan city's master plan designed in 1924 by Alexander Tamanyan, the so-called "Northern Ray", which crosses the city in south-north direction. In 2002, when per Gerard Cafesjian's initiative "Cascade" renovation works resumed, the first "inhabitant" of Tamanyan garden square became a cat created by world-renowned Colombian painter and sculptor Fernando Botero (the main view in fig. 7).
Fig. 7. Garden Square after Tamanyan. Yerevan. Photo by H. Vermishyan. 2022
The garden square is located near Moskovyan Street. Cascade (including Tamanyan garden square) is the fourth most memorable and recognizable area on the mind map of the center of Yerevan. Location wise it has an advantage as it is in the city's small center [Vermishyan et al. 2015, 110].
Tamanyan garden square can be considered a tourist area. It has become a completely perceived space for the foreign consumer. After the reconstruction, it is not a park but a park-museum area. There are sculptures, works of contemporary art, or not clearly but close to contemporary art. The exhibition has turned the area into an open-air museumpark.
In fact, Tamanyan garden square is a new type of park. It has gone through a very interesting transformation. The area was intellectualized and aestheticized by the created art environment. In this respect, it is a reconstructed, reorganized park. The park has become an area for people to relax, and get away from their routine. In that context, the
area is also an innovative one as it changes people's perception of art, reforming it. If we take a look at the rest of the Cascade, the outdoor exhibition continues here including the statues next to the escalator which adds another element to the area's complex.
In A. Tamanyan garden square, the geographical location factor and the area's symbolism are the most significant components of the area's symbolic structure. Of course, the human factor also plays a role. For example, all symbols marking the area are conditioned by human factors. However, the area's physical location is the primary factor by far. Place intensification in the Tamanyan garden square occurred when the physical local environment, due to its attractiveness, attracted people, contributing to strengthening the local symbolic influence (the main symbols are well illustrated on the mental map (fig. 8)).
Fig. 8. Garden Square after Tamanyan, Yerevan. Mental Map by the visitor of the park
(female, 22 years old)
A. Tamanyan garden square is rich with symbolic elements. The method of mental mapping showed that it was easiest for people to orient themselves by drawing this place. There are many semantic expressions of symbolic elements. When mentioning or drawing the park people, first of all, recalled the Cascade stairs, then the cat and the woman. Almost everyone calls the place "Cascade".
A. Tamanyan's garden square has a positive image in almost everyone's perception. Many people associate the park with Cafesjian. Many mentioned that his efforts led to many changes, and he is responsible for the current state of the park in a positive manner. It can be certainly stated that it is the "face of Yerevan" for the locals and the foreigners.
Per visitors' perception: "It is the face of Yerevan", "It is the most beautiful part of Yerevan", "It is an aesthetic pleasure to be here", "The first place that I bring my guests to are Cascade and A. Tamanyan Park" (male, 35 years old).
Garden Square after Martiros Saryan
In 1986, the first Yerevan vernissage was formed in front of the National Academic Opera and Ballet Theater after Spendiaryan. The location was not accidental. This part of the city was mainly built and presented as a "cultural place", according to A. Tamanyan's plan.
It was in 1986 that the statue of painter M. Saryan was installed here (fig. 9).
Fig. 9. Garden Square after Martiros Saryan. Yerevan. Photo by H. Vermishyan. 2022 It coincided with the opening of a place where a new generation of artists, mostly abstractionists, gathered: "In a very short time, not only students but also professional
painters or amateur painters started gathering here and the garden square began marking a history" (Painter of the park, male, 47 years old).
Given that the artists gathering around Saryan's statue did not present themselves as "sellers of the paintings" but as "high art makers", selling their works was not as important as simply demonstrating them.
In the case of Saryan garden square, the geographical factor is important. Here arises the question if Saryan garden square can be considered a place of art. Possibly yes, because when we look at the city from a broader angle, we see that the area is surrounded by culturally remarkable figures: Khachatryan, Tumanyan, Spendiaryan, Komitas, Saryan, and streets: Mashtots, Sayat-Nova, Baghramyan, Tamanyan. Therefore, the area unites creative, intellectual symbols around Opera where there is history, modernism, and creativity. Moreover, there are almost all genres of art: music, literature, fine art, there is military, folk music, and certainly, the area is more of cultural significance.
Interestingly, this is a round place and artists gather around Saryan's statue, hence its round shape creates unity. Initially, due to the restructuring of the Gorbachev era, artists who did not have the opportunity to take part in exhibitions had the chance to organize open-air festivals and exhibition-sales here: "We used to go there, we were university senior students, we were going to see the paintings. There were abstract paintings, rejected by the official exhibitions' representatives. There were avant-gardists, and if you wanted to buy such paintings, you had to go to the vernissage. That is why vernissage became a place of art. People went there for a walk, to be close to art" (male, 40 years old).
The garden square is considered a free, creative area of self-expression. People come here to get close to art.
During the Artsakh movement of 1988, and later after the collapse of the Soviet Union, specialists in applied arts began to gather at the Saryan Vernissage, and works by engravers began to be exhibited. At that time, the area was perceived as a "spiritual center" where religious and national experiences were uniquely combined and inextricably linked to the world of art.
"Older women came and prayed in front of the khachkars (cross-stones) we had created, "I told them it was not necessary, it was not sacred, and it was not worth praying for. And they answered, "It is a work worthy to be prayed for" (Painter of the park, male, 51 years old).
In the first years of independence (1991-1993) during the socio-economic crisis of the Karabakh war, M. Saryan Vernissage became one of the most famous shopping centers in the city for a while: "Anyone would come here, and no one would ask, "What are you doing here?" Like there wasn't any other place in the city" (Painter of the park, male, 45 years old).
Thus, initially, the garden square was an area of free, creative self-expression, but after the collapse of the Soviet Union, it became one of the most popular areas of "free trade" in the city.
In 1993, after the intervention of the city authorities, woodworkers and other artisans were moved to the boulevard near Republic Square, and carpet weavers were moved to the Bangladesh market in Yerevan's South-West district. It is interesting that at this stage
the founders-painters of the area were also expelled from here. The market literally "swallowed" vernissage.
Therefore, after all, the garden square was "closed, emptied" in a semantic sense. However, in 1995, it was reinterpreted thanks to "immigrant artists" who, after a long struggle, were able to obtain the consent of the authorities. They started protesting, organizing riots, and shouting that no matter what, the statue of Saryan is traditionally a place for artists. And shortly thereafter, the government allowed the return of artists only: "They made an announcement on a high-level, they said whoever considers himself a real artist should go back, and whoever wants to stay here, let him stay" (Painter of the park, male, 55 years old).
And this is where the distinction comes from: "first vernissage" (Saryan Park) and "second vernissage" (Main Avenue leisure area in front of the statue of Vardan Mamikonyan).
Saryan garden square is an example of local interaction. It defines the place as an environment of typical daily activities, it can be defined as a "local routine" when local agents, knowing the symbolic meaning of the place, consume it accordingly.
The symbolic elements in the perception of people connected with the Saryan garden square are the paintings, the statue of Saryan, and the three cafes - "Ketikanots", "Kaziryok", and "Crumbs" (fig. 10). Moreover, these cafes, like the park, are areas of freedom. Cafes are recognizable elements in the mind maps of the visitors together with M. Saryan's statue, the statue dedicated to the film "Men" and pictures in the center.
This area is also considered an ethnic area, containing "Armenianness".
\
o \
\
Fig. 10. Garden Square after Martiros Saryan, Yerevan. Mental Map by visitor of park
(male, 56 years old) Garden Square after Komitas
Komitas garden square is located near the Komitas Conservatory and the Sayat-Nova Music School. The statue of Komitas has been installed in the center of the park in 1988 (fig. 11). Sayat-Nova Memorial (1963) is also located in the garden square.
Fig. 11. Garden Square after Komitas. Yerevan. Photo by H. Vermishyan. 2022
The garden square was an unnoticeable area for many before the installation of the statue of Komitas. This garden square is in a favorable geographical position. In terms of space, it is a large area, in contrast to the above-mentioned Saryan garden square.
Komitas garden square has not gone through any name or meaning changes. This park is often an environment for conservative actions and initiatives.
The Armenian Revolutionary Federation (Dashnaks) used to hold political demonstrations against Turkey in this place. The place is large, suitable for young people to take a break. The area is not being consumed by the general public.
Komitas garden square is a local, physical environment, which is constantly becoming an area of consumption due to the attractiveness of the environment and the convenience of its geographical location.
"I bring my grandchildren here because it is a safe place. I can watch them the entire time. I live near the garden square. We don't go to Saryan to not disturb the artists. This is a convenient place as most young children are visiting" (female, 66 years old).
The symbolic element of Komitas garden square is the statue of Komitas, the building of the conservatory, and the French Square. Many people confused this park with the Komitas Pantheon. When trying to figure out which park they were being asked about, they said "the statue of Komitas", "the conservatory", and "the park near the French Square". Per the visitors' perception, it is "The Conservatory Park". The Conservatory is the central element also in mental maps (fig. 12).
Fig. 12. Garden Square after Komitas, Yerevan. Mental Map by the visitor of the park
(female, 27 years old)
"I do not perceive this area as a park as much as Komitas's house. I have the impression that I'm visiting his house to sit cozily together and have him helping me to play well" (Painter of the park, male, 21 years old).
"We come here with friends during our break; we take a walk, sit and rehearse" (female, 19 years old).
Garden Square after Misak Manushyan ("Mashtots garden square")
M. Manushyan garden square is located in the middle of Aram, Pavstos Buzand, Yeznik Koghbatsi streets, and Mashtots Avenue. In fact, this place was part of the main avenue. Before the reconstruction, the garden square was one of those abandoned areas that bore the mark of an informal (sometimes criminal) behavior or commercial environment.
"We never entered that part as it was unknown what was there, and it was so little-known that when there was a call to save Mashtots garden square, some people thought it referred to the park of the Saryan post which is under construction now" (Culturologist, expert).
Before the well-known events, and the naming M. Manushyan Park to Mashtots, the garden square didn't have any special significance. Many can argue mentioning that it was called Margaryan Park (Soviet-era name of the Research Center for Maternal and Child Health that was located next to the garden square (see the building on the right corner of fig. 13)). Fathers were to be gathered there and waited for their children to be born. The garden square didn't have a special local symbolic meaning until 2011. Just like other open access areas, here too kids played, and mothers took walks with their children.
Fig. 13. Garden Square of Misak Manushyan. Yerevan. Photo by H. Vermishyan. 2022
In 2011, when the decision to turn the park into a commercial place was announced it brought up the issue of maintaining the green zone as open public space. After 90 days of struggle by civic activists, so-called trademarks were removed from the area and the area became a symbol of the civic movement, civic activists.
That movement led to the rebirth of Mashtots garden square. It gained a symbolic meaning. The name "Mashtots garden square" was put into circulation by the activists, it was a place that indeed didn't even have a name, so it gained meaning through the civic movement and positioning (see the illustration of protest in fig. 14).
I
Fig. 14. Garden square named after Misak Manushyan, Yerevan Mental Map by visitor of park (male, 28 years old)
In May of 2014, the garden square was named after the famous Armenian poet and national hero of France Misak Manushyan per the decision of Yerevan City's Council of Elders. It was an unexpected decision for many, especially for the activists. It led to resistance in society as it showed that the Municipality at least didn't share the values that Mashtots Park as a process brought up with it. It led to a whole triumph of "jurisprudence", "having a civic position", "responsibility", "ecology", and "victory of law". It had a symbolic meaning. It had a symbolic meaning. This positioning of the municipality can be interpreted in different ways. They may not have even delved into the significance of the park. That is the reason why this place was chosen.
"It may seem impossible for many, but there was indeed no intention in choosing this garden square. It was the only park near the French Square that was in good condition. The area didn't have a name nor any symbols as in other parks near the Square (Saryan, Komitas, etc.) and that is why this garden square was chosen for the naming and the meeting of the two Presidents. We even tried to cover with signs the balcony of one of the buildings next to the park that was in a bad condition. There was no intention" (Ecologist, expert).
Per another interpretation of the civic movement activists, it was done to abolish the phenomenon of Mashtots garden square, the fact of having a civic position, and the victory of citizens. It was an attempt to destroy all that value, so it will be forgotten.
In the case of Manushyan Garden square, the local agents are the primary factor. The garden square is a typical example of space formation. In the case of this place, the triad of pp-ge-gl worked, which characterizes a process when certain groups (residents, local government, etc.), influencing the physical environment, give it symbolic meanings.
Mashtots garden square has a unique meaning for visitors. Moreover, it does not matter how many of them took the garden square in the movement, everyone feels
ownership of this area, that's why the place has an exceptionally positive image: "Mashtots garden square is not a place; it is a phenomenon which wasn't forgotten because of renaming" (Ecologist, expert).
Conclusion and Discussion
Urban parks and garden squares are those essential elements of the urban public that help the individual to have an idea of the city. The positive impression of the city and its good image is mainly due to the way the spaces of the parks/garden squares are organized. Therefore, to give meaning to these spaces (physical, social, symbolic) means to improve the urban space.
Today, the public space of Yerevan center (streets, parks, alleys, the image of the city, its architecture, buildings) is rapidly changing, and so are the demands. As a result of these changes, some problems arise, due to which their symbolic significance goes through unpredictable transformations.
Thus, in terms of urban space organization, development, planning, and branding, the discovery of the symbolic structure of the city parks and garden squares of the center of Yerevan can play a decisive role both in the process of understanding information and managing actions.
The observations of the urban space image of Yerevan, as well as the center's parks within the context of manifestation of urban culture and the visitors' mental maps, allow identifying several factors that may contribute to or hinder, and thus increase or decrease the ranking of urban parks and garden squares for the visitors.
The research results allowed underlining the following:
1. The Location: The localization of the park/ garden square and the geographical environment.
a. Positive or negative associations, perceptions of the location.
b. The name and the main idea that was initially at the core of the creation of the park.
c. The relevance of these "ideas" and "messages" to reality.
Correspondence with perceptions and expectations of visitors.
d. The "transformations" of these over the years and the ability to control these "transformations".
e. Installed statues; explicit and/or latent symbols.
2. Functional expressions of symbolic elements.
a. Comfort
b. Leisure
c. Pleasure.
d. Security
Observing parks/garden squares within the context of people, environment, and symbols help to understand the processes of their formation, perception, consumption, respectively, the reproduction of the public space of the city. Particularly:
1. English park is an example of "localization". It is a physical local environment, consumed by visitors because of being a green area (gl-pp-ge).
2. In the case of Children's Park, local symbolic meaning is the primary structural component. Its physical, local environment is constantly turning into a consuming area due to its attractiveness. It assumes consumption by the residents. Hence, the symbolic meaning is important here. It's a garden, people know it's a garden and they go there. There is a constant process of consumption. This garden is an example of "place consumption" (gl-pp-ge).
3. In the case of Lover's Park, the component of the geographical environment is primary. Although, it can be said that the factor of local agents also played a role. The triad of ge-pp-gl is applicable for the Lovers' Park. The garden is an example of "local intensification", a process in which the physical local environment, due to its attractiveness, attracts people, contributing to the strengthening of the local symbolic influence.
4. Al. Tamanyan garden square is an example of "local intensification" when the local physical environment, due to its attractiveness, engages people, contributing to the strengthening of the local symbolic influence (ge-pp-gl).
5. Saryan garden square is a case of "local interactions", it defines the place as an environment of typical daily activities, it can be characterized by "local routine", when local agents, knowing the symbolic meaning of the place, consume it accordingly (ge-gl-pp).
6. Komitas garden square is an example of "place consumption" when the physical local environment is constantly transforming into a consumption area due to the attractiveness of the physical environment (gl-pp-ge).
7. In the case of M. Manushyan garden square, the factor of local agents appears to be primary. The place is a typical example of "place formation". Here, the triad of pp-ge-gl played a role. The latter characterizes a process when certain groups (residents, local government, etc.), by influencing the physical environment, give it symbolic meanings.
In general, the following observations can be made:
Marginal Gardens (English, and Children's Park)
These two parks are marginal not only in terms of location (located on the periphery of the south-western border of the small center of Yerevan) but also in residents' mental perception system of the public space of the center. These parks are described as courtyards and local consumption areas for the residents of the center of Yerevan.
Lover's Park as a Case of Building a Brand
Speaking of Lover's Park, it should be mentioned that it has been observed as a typical example of building a brand. This park's management is well-organized. Starting from the name of the park. It was renamed given the local practices, as the area was really a "hiding place for lovers." This was the right strategic move by the park's management. It was the first step, then the park was filled with such significance, that the area is used in that context.
Misak Manushyan Garden Square as a Sample of Place Creation
Mashtots Park gained significance because of the struggle and the civic movement. It definitely has that symbolic meaning in people's perceptions. The area is defined as having the image of "struggle", "victory", "freedom", and "civil position". This area is
associated with such phenomena as resistance, struggle, civil law, and the voice of the citizens.
Komitas Garden Square as a Space out of the Mental Structure
Here we can see that the park is an area that people cannot recall when trying to understand which park we are speaking of. They either say the park close to the conservatory or close to the French Square. It's not even a passageway, as our next two cases because it's not convenient to just cross over to be in the area at least that way. Saryan and Tamanyan Garden Square Characterized as Places Defining art Tamanyan Garden Square, in its essence, is a new type. It went through a very interesting transformation. This area was intellectualized and aestheticized due to the creation of an art environment here. In fact, after the reconstruction, it is not a park, but a museum-park area. In this sense, the space is innovative, changes people's perceptions of art, and renews or shapes them in some way. The area itself is a podium. When walking, people feel like being on a podium. It can be said that the Tamanyan garden square is an area that defines modern art, and the Saryan garden square is an "island" that defines art. This place is considered an area of art. It has a positive image by large. It can be considered a passageway.
REFERENCES
Balyan 2006 - Balyan K. City overlooking Ararat. Yerevan, 2006. URL:
https://clck.ru/rceZK. In Russian. Bauman 2003 - Bauman Z. City of Fears, City of Hopes. London, 2003. Bazrafshan et al. 2021 - Bazrafshan M., Tabrizi, A. M., Bauer, N., & Kienast, F. Place Attachment through Interaction with Urban Parks: A cross-cultural Study. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening. 2021. 61. URL: https://clck.ru/rceeF. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2021.127103. DeLand et al. 2018 - DeLand M., Trouille D. Going Out: A Sociology of Public Outings. Sociological Theory. 2018. 1 (36). P. 27-47. URL: https://clck.ru/rcei6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0735275118759149. Gasparyan 2007 - Gasparyan A. Russian-Armenian and Armenian-Russian Explanatory
Dictionary of Architectural and Construction Terms. Yerevan, 2007. In Armenian. Geertz 1973 - Geertz C. Thick Description: Toward an Interpretive Theory of Culture. New York, 1973.
Grigoryan 2018 - Grigoryan M. Episode 42. Unknown Yerevan Lover's Park. ATV TV, 2018, 5:24-7:54 min. URL:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4QtKN6CosoI&t=1041s. Harvey 2015 - Harvey D. The Right to the City. The City Reader. London, 2015. Howard 1965 - Howard E. Garden Cities of To-morrow. Classic Urban Planning. Cambridge, 1965.
Hutchison et al. 2016 - Hutchison R., Lopes J. T. Urban Space and Public Places. Research in Urban Sociology. Public Spaces: Times of Crisis and Change. Ed. by J. T. Lopes, R. Hutchison. 2016. Vol. 15. P. 3-18.
Lefebvre 2003 - Lefebvre H. The Urban Revolution. Translated by R. Bononno.
Minneapolis-London, 2003. Lefebvre 2013 - Lefebvre H. The Production of Space. Translated into English by D.
Nicholson-Smith. Cambridge, Massachusetts, 2013. Lynch 1960 - Lynch K. The Image of the City. Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1960. Najafi et al. 2011 - Najafi M., Shariff M. The Concept of Place and Sense of Place in Architectural Studies. International Journal of Human and Social Sciences. 2011. 3 (6). P. 187-193. DOI: doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1082223. Parks of Yerevan 2022 - Parks of Yerevan. URL:
https://www.yerevan.am/en/park/?page=1. Peters et al. 2010 - Peters K., Elands B., Buijs A. Social Interactions in Urban Parks: Stimulating Social Cohesion? Urban Forestry & Urban Greening. 2010. 2 (9). P. 93-100. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2009.11.003. Seamon 2012 - Seamon D. Place, Place Identity, and Phenomenology: A Triadic Interpretation Based on JG Bennett's Systematics. The Role of Place Identity in the Perception, Understanding, and Design of Built Environments. 2012. P. 3-21. DOI: 10.2174/978160805413811201010003. Simmel 2012 - Simmel G. The Metropolis and Mental life. The Urban Sociology Reader.
London, 2012. P. 37-45. Tonnelat 2010 - Tonnelat S. The Sociology of Urban Public Spaces. Territorial Evolution
and Planning Solution: Experiences from China and France. Paris, 2010. P. 84-92. Tuan 1977 - Tuan Y.-F. Space and Place: The Perspective of Experience. London, 1977. Vermishyan et al. 2015 - Vermishyan H., Balasanyan S., Grigoryan O., Kerobyan S. Local
Identities in Yerevan: The Structures of Urban Space. Yerevan, 2015. In Armenian. Vermishyan et al. 2020 - Vermishyan H., Michikyan S. The Transformation of Urban Public Space of Post-Soviet Yerevan: the Case of Northern Avenue. Journal of Sociology: Bulletin of Yerevan University. 2020. Vol. 11. 1 (31). P. 3-15. DOI: https://doi.org/10.46991/BYSU:F/2020.11.1.003. Vermishyan 2021 - Vermishyan H. Ideological and Cultural Practices in the Soviet Housing Space: The Case of Allocation and Obtaining of Apartments in Yerevan. Studies of Transition States and Societies. 2021. 2 (13). P. 23-38. Walker 2004 - Walker C. The Public Value of Urban Parks. New York, 2004. Yepiskoposyan 2011 - Yepiskoposyan Sh. Semiotic organization and transformation of urban space in the center of Yerevan. City, Migration, Markets: New Studies in Social Science from the South Caucasus. Ed. by S. Khutsishvili, J. Horan. Tbilisi. 2011. P. 13-47. URL: https://ge.boell.org/sites/default/files/scholarship_publication_5.pdf. In Russian.
Материал поступил в редакцию 02.04.2022 принят к публикации 30.05.2022
