Time: 16h00-17h30 (PT) / 17h00-18h30 (ESP; IT)

Monday, June 23: Presentation of the team and educational materials, including platforms. Organization of the work plan, discussion of the program and evaluation system. General recommendations.

Tuesday, June 24: Introduction to the field site.

Wednesday, June 25: Introduction to techniques and methodologies: Anthropology and Archaeology.

Thursday, June 26: Introduction to techniques and methodologies: Geography and Architecture/Urban Planning.

MAIN LOCATIONS (other locations are indicated in the day by day program):

• Coordination point: SAGAS DEPARTMENT, via San Gallo 10, Firenze (https://g.co/kgs/XBD7xMB)

• Program inauguration and opening lecture: Sala d’Ercole, via San Gallo 10, Firenze (https://g.co/kgs/XBD7xMB).

• Meeting point for fieldwork and afternoon lectures: GIARDINO DELL’ARDIGLIONE, via D’Ardiglione 30, Firenze (https://g.co/kgs/6p8b83s)

  
  

NORMAL SCHEDULE OF ACTIVITIES (variations to the schedule are indicated in the day by day):

• Morning: from 9:30 to 13:00

• Afternoon: from 15:00 to 17:00

  
  

DAY BY DAY

Monday, June 30 – INTRODUCTION

• 09.30: Introduction to the program.

• 11,00: The evolution of Florence’s historic centre (Lecture by Prof. Gaetano Di Benedetto, Laboratory of Social Geography, University of Florence).

Meeting point: Sala d’Ercole, SAGAS Department, via San Gallo 10 (ground floor)

• 16.00: – Guided tour of the historic centre (with Ilaria di Mantova, former student of the Master’s Degree in Geography and tour guide)
  

Tuesday, July 1 – EXPLORING THE CITY GATES

• 9:00: Field exploration: Guided tour of BIP city gates (with Ilaria Di Mantova, former student of the Master’s Degree in Geography and tour guide)

Meeting point: Porta San Frediano (https://g.co/kgs/NFwv7Fp)

• 15:00: The UNESCO Management Plan for the Historic Centre of Florence (Lecture by Tatiana Rozochkina, Ufficio Firenze Patrimonio Mondiale e Rapporti con UNESCO, Municipality of Florence)

Meeting point: Lecture room 12, SAGAS Department, via Capponi 9

Wednesday, July 2 – INVESTIGATING PLACE ATTACHMENT

• 9:00: Meeting with the association Gli Amici del Nidiaci

• 10:00: Lecture by Mónica Alcindor @ Giardino dell’Ardiglione, via D’Ardiglione 30, Firenze (https://g.co/kgs/6p8b83s

• 14:00: Group fieldwork at the city gates, with professors alternating to provide tools and guidance
  

Thursday, July 3 – THE ETHNOGRAPHY OF PLACE

• 9:30: Group fieldwork at the city gates, with professors alternating to provide tools and guidance

• 15:00: Lecture by Waltraud Müllauer-Seichter @ Giardino dell’Ardiglione

• 20:00: Social dinner at Ristorante Cafaggi, via Guelfa 35 rosso.
  

Friday, July 4 – ARCHIVES

• 9,30: Group fieldwork at the city gates

• 12.00: Guided visit to the photographic archive Locchi, Via del Corso, 21/R

• 16:00: Screening: “Room with a view” @ Cinema ‘La Compagnia’, Via Camillo Cavour, 50/Rosso
  

Saturday, July 5 – MIDWAY REVIEW

• 9:30: Review of the week’s work and planning for the second week

Meeting point: Giardino dell’Ardiglione

Sunday, July 6 – REST DAY

• No scheduled activities

• 9:30: Group fieldwork at the city gates, with professors alternating to provide tools and guidance

• 15:00: Lecture by Leonor Amarilis Placido de Medeiros @ Giardino dell’Ardiglione
  

Tuesday, July 8 – HEARING (WITH) THE CITY

• 9:30: Playing with listening practices in urban spaces, field activity with Radio Papesse

Meeting point: Giardino dell’Ardiglione

• 17:00: Field visit to Le Cascine Park with Dr. Cecilia Pasini and aperitivo @Ultravox

Wednesday, July 9 – VISUAL ART AS A METHOD

• 9:30: Field activity with Nicola Giorgio

Meeting point: Giardino dell’Ardiglione

• 16:00: Lecture by Sonia De Gregorio Hurtado
  
  

Thursday, July 10 – GROUP WORK

• 9:30: Finalization of materials

Meeting point: SAGAS Department, via San Gallo 10, Firenze.

• 17:00: Visit to San Miniato al Monte and aperitivo at La Casa del Popolo di San Niccolò / meeting with student representatives from the University of Florence
  

Friday, July 11 – GROUP WORK

• 9:30: Final organization of collected documentation

Meeting point: SAGAS Department, via San Gallo 10, Firenze.

• 15:00: Final organization of collected documentation
  

Saturday, July 12 – CONCLUSIONS

• 9:30: Final group presentations

Meeting point: Giardino dell’Ardiglione

President of the Master in Geography, spatial management, heritage for international cooperation at the University of Florence.

He holds a Master's degree in Geography from the University and Polytechnic of Turin (2006), following which he obtained a PhD in Spatial Planning and Local Development from the Interateneo Territorio Department of the University and Polytechnic of Turin (2010). Subsequently, he served as a temporary researcher at the Universities of Cagliari (2012-2015) and Florence (2015-2018).

His research interests lie at the intersection of social, political and environmental geography, and include sustainability and socio-environmental conflicts, urban transformations, tourism and spatial justice, as well as geography didactics and education.

He has conducted field research in several countries and cultural contexts (including, besides Italy, Tunisia, Morocco and Myanmar).

Mirella Loda is Professor of Geography at SAGAS Department. She holds a PhD from the Geographisches Institut der Technischen Universität , Munich (1989), where she qualified as Full Professor (2001).

She manages the Laboratory of Social Geography that she founded in 2005. Since 2008 she has been supervising cooperation projects in Afghanistan and Myanmar in collaboration with the Italian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Cooperation and the Italian Agency for Development Cooperation.

She cooperates with the Municipality of Florence and the Tuscan Regional Authority in the field of urban development and sustainable tourism.

Panos Bourlessas holds a European Master’s degree in Urban Studies (University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria) and a PhD in Urban Studies (Scuola Universitaria Superiore GSSI, L’Aquila, Italy & Scuola Universitaria Superiore Sant’Anna, Pisa, Italy).

His field research so far has explored the issues of care spatialities, homelessness and subjectification in Athens, Greece, and of foodification of retailscape in Turin, Italy.

Before entering the SAGAS Department and the LaGeS team, Panos worked for two years as research fellow at the Department of Cultures, Politics and Society of the University of Turin, Turin, Italy.

His research interests broadly revolve around social and cultural geography, urban studies and qualitative methodologies, and publications can be found on the journals Mobilities, Area, Social & Cultural Geography, and Urban Geography.

Leonor Plácido de Medeiros is a researcher and lecturer specialised in industrial archaeology, heritage management and innovative education.

Currently affiliated with Universidade NOVA de Lisboa, she holds a Master's degree in Heritage Management (2008) - University of Birmingham (UK), followed by a Doctorate in Industrial Archaeology & Heritage (2018) at Michigan Technological University (USA).

Her studies focus on Industrial Archaeology and its economic and social valorisation; on Heritage Management with innovative approaches. She uses advanced teaching methodologies, including virtual learning and creative techniques.

Her research contributes to redefining the role of industrial heritage in communities, promoting not only its preservation but also its reuse in a contemporary context.

Mafalda Batista Pacheco is a professor and junior researcher at CHAM-Center for the Humanities at the FCSH - Universidade NOVA de Lisboa and Universidade dos Açores and co-coordinator of the research group Art, history and heritage.

Degree in Architecture (2004), Master in Architecture (2009) and Ph.D in Architecture (2018) by the Instituto Superior Técnico-Universidade de Lisboa, with a FCT Ph.D scholarship  (2012-2016).

Co-coordinator of Architecture Summer Courses at IST - UL (2013-2018) and coordinator of the summer course "Vernacular Architecture in Portugal" at FCSH - NOVA (2023). Under the scope of Erasmus + Teaching Mobility plan she has taught in different European and African universities.

Social Anthropology and Hispanic Studies at the University of Vienna (PHD 1995, University of Vienna, Institute of Social and Cultural Anthropology).

From 2000 to 2002, at Spanish Scientific Research High Council (CSIC) as a postdoctoral (2nd) researcher (green public space and park uses) Since 2002 part of the academic staff of the Department of Social and Cultural Anthropology, UNED, Madrid. Since 2004 comparative approach on this topic between European and Latin American urban experiences in this domain (Perú and Colombia) paying attention to inequality, social exclusion and racism, as variables that may explain differences in processes of decision making in urban transformations through public urban space and urban social green places and use.

Keywords of Investigation:

History of Anthropology, Urban Anthropology, citizen’s participation, public space, Urban Social Green, children and young people, social inequality and inequality, racism.

Department of Urban and Spatial Planning of the School of Architecture, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid (UPM).

Before joining UPM she developed her professional activity as practitioner in architecture and urban planning in Europe, North Africa, Asia and Center America, and as research fellow in CEDEX (research center of the Spanish Ministry of Public Works). She has been visitor researcher in the European Institute for Urban Affairs, the Boku University (Vienna), and the University Istituto Universitario di Architettura di Venezia, among others, and lecturer in a number of European Universities.

She has participated, coordinated, and directed national and international research projects and is member of a number of public initiatives and committees on urban matters. Sonia develops a sustained activity of knowledge transfer from Academia to concrete public policies.

In this regard, she has participated as expert in the framework of national and international policy working groups and policy processes (e.g.: Expert in the framework of the Urban Poverty and Urban Regeneration Partnership of the Urban Agenda for the European Union, España 2050, etc.), and the evaluation of urban instruments (e.g.: Urban Innovative Actions of the European Commission, Horizon 2020, JPI Urban Europe).

Her research focuses on the analysis of the urban dimension of the EU policy, and urban national and local policies, applying a comprehensive analytical approach in which, climate action, urban regeneration, mobility, governance, and the gender dimensions are integrated and addressed.

PhD in Architecture at the Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya- UPC, Spain (2011). Bachelor degree in Social and Cultural Anthropology at the Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia – UNED, Spain (2019). Postgraduate degree in heritage intervention techniques at UPC, Barcelona, Spain (2010).

She is currently an Associate Professor and Director of CIAUD-UPT (Research Centre).

Due to the interdisciplinary nature of her training, she has delved into a social perspective in the analysis of architectural heritage issues, in line with anthropology of architectural heritage.

Keywords: Anthropology of building systems, anthropology of built heritage, intangible heritage, traditional architecture.

City gates - Le porte di Firenze

The 2025 Florence edition of "Gazes upon the City" shifts focus from the historic center to its physical and symbolic boundaries—spaces that both separate and connect. By examining these liminal zones, the project seeks to transform urban perception from static and inward-looking to dynamic and relational.

Though remnants of city walls (or their modern replacements) reinforce the idea of historic centers as enclosed, autonomous entities, gates complicate this narrative. Once primary points of contact with the "outside," they now serve as fluid intersections where spatial, temporal, and social transitions unfold.

Florence’s eleven gates—some tangible, others only traces—embody this urban porosity, challenging rigid heritage discourses that freeze the city in time. Three case studies demonstrate how gates operate as active thresholds, where material and immaterial flows intersect, continuously reshaping the historic center through mobility and exchange.

Rather than static monuments, gates are recast as Janus-faced mediators, simultaneously gazing inward and outward. This perspective reframes Florence (and historic cities broadly) as evolving networks of connection rather than preserved enclaves.

The methodological approach of this year’s BIP project is structured around a dynamic alternation of activities that foster both theoretical reflection and experiential learning.

The program includes field visits aimed at exploring the historic centre of Florence, with a focus on the spaces under investigation and ongoing research sites.

These visits will be complemented by seminars on sensitive issues related to the transformation of the city’s historic core, encouraging critical discussion and contextual understanding.

Participants will also engage in fieldwork activities, guided by professors and supported by a multidisciplinary toolkit that includes ethnographic methods for collecting data and insights from the field.

These activities will draw on perspectives from history and archaeology, urban studies, geography, anthropology, and related disciplines, fostering a rich and integrated approach to urban inquiry.

Additionally, there will be dedicated time for group meetings and collaborative work, supporting the collective elaboration of field experiences and fostering peer learning.

This edition of the BIP project focuses on the interdisciplinary study of the historical centre of Florence, with particular attention to the city’s gates—physical and symbolic thresholds that offer a new perspective on the relationship between the centre and its surroundings. The project is coordinated by a team of professors from universities in Italy, Portugal, and Spain, and involves a diverse group of students from various academic and national backgrounds.

The program unfolds over three weeks and combines online learning, fieldwork, and collaborative production. The first week, held online, includes four 90-minute sessions introducing the main themes, methodologies, and the selected field sites—three city gates chosen for their capacity to exemplify Florence’s urban porousness and transitional dynamics.

During the second and third weeks, students will be physically in Florence, working in small, mixed teams to investigate one of the three gates. Each team will explore the spatial, social, and historical context of its site, using ethnographic and urban research methods informed by geography, anthropology, history, archaeology, and urban studies. The aim is to reflect on how these gates function as spaces of contact, transformation, and negotiation in the contemporary city.

The project will conclude with a public presentation of the podcast series, offering a collective and creative insight into Florence’s gates and their role in shaping urban experience.

WhatsApp: +39 388 362 0966

Contact person for all the activities of the exchange program, he will be there to help students during their stay in Florence.

He holds a Master's degree in Geography from the University of Florence. He studies the tourism industry and its relation with the city and he is passionate about labour geography and urban transformations.

Grew up in San Frediano he will guide the participants in the discovery of the neighbourhood.

Feel free to contribute in every way to it's making and don't forget to take photos and sketches!

Here they are:

Carlota; Celeste; Sara; Lucía; Cristina Michaelle; Rosana; Carmen; Asunción; Isabel; Jesús; Malena; Andrea; Paula; María José; Miriam; Dinis; Antónia; Vasco; Beatriz; Constança; Catarina; Alexandra Hebe; Sara.

Today we have been introduced to the program that will guide our stay and work, to the university, and to the city.

At 09.30 Prof. Matteo and Prof. Panos presented the Gazes Upon the City project.

At 10.00 Gianmarco Ferrarelli told us the history of Palazzo Marucelli, where the SAGAS Departement is located.

At 11.00 Prof. Gaetano di Benedetto explained us the evolution of Firenze from the Roman foundation to the present time, passing through the 'city of towers' and the restyling of the 19th century.

After lunch, at 14.00 we get over the whole program, trying to imagine our path for the next few days.

Finally, at 16.00 we started a tour in the city centre guided by Ilaria di Mantova. She made us discover the main squares of the historic centre and their monuments.

Just a bit tired by the extremely hot temperature, we are now ready to get into work, with more and more complex questions than before!

At 09 am we started the walk from Porta San Frediano and we reached every other gate of the neighbourhood: Porta Romana, Porta San Giorgio, Porta San Miniato, and Porta San Niccolò.

After that we climbed up to Piazzale Michelangiolo and we enjoied the view of the city from above.

At 03 pm we get to via Capponi 9 and discussed about the Unesco policies and regulations with Tatiana Rozochkina. The explaination given us by Tatiana and the following discussion have been really interesting and stimulating for the study we will conduct in Firenze. Unfortunately we had to quit before having explored it properly... but surely it will fuel our next days' discussions.

At 09am Miguel Rodriguez told us the whole story of the garden, where we will be hosted for our lectures. Learning about the origins and the struggle for the protection of one of the few green spaces in San Frediano has been interesting and stimulating.

After a small tour of the garden and a break, Professors Monica Alcindor discussed with us about the impact of tourism and the affection of local inhabitants towards their built heritage; then Waltraud Mullauer-Seichter explained us how to use some materials for the ethnographic part of our future research.

Finally we splitted in groups and started thinking about our next steps... city gates, get ready, we are coming!

Throughout our fieldwork sessions, we were all in agreement that our observations were not particularly distinct between mornings and afternoons, but the hour before and after sunset is a completely different story.

Our morning and afternoon sessions, while incredibly productive, felt fairly quiet. We witnessed many locals primarily using the space to find parking, go through the gate for commuting, or walk their dogs. Many non-locals had pulled up the directions to Piazzale Michelangelo on their smartphones and would look around the Porta and area more curiously and also cautiously. On our first day, we adapted as the rain started pouring and we ducked into the Casa del Popolo in San Niccolo, where we chatted with some locals about the neighborhood and how things have changed. Our other morning and afternoon sessions included surveying the perimeter of our buffer zone and conducting various tallies, not only of the age and gender of people passing through the gate, but also of registered B&Bs, businesses, green areas, vehicles, and so on.

The most distinct session was an evening session on Friday evening, before and after the sunset. The number of people in this one timeslot was unlike any other time we saw, with over 150 people passing through in less than ten minutes around 20:20. We noticed significantly more young people heading outside the gate (uphill towards Piazzale Michelangelo) before the sunset, with older pedestrians primarily walking into the gate (downhill into the UNESCO protected zone) at the same time. People heading uphill/ outside of the gate were mostly dressed up for dinner and carrying bottles of wine or beer with takeout boxes of food.

Our main focus for Monday, the 7th of July, is to interview locals near the Porta (without disturbing/distracting them too much from their daily lives) to gather observations and opinions on the past, present, and future of the gate and the area surrounding it. How would locals improve the space? Would they change the area itself at all? How do they feel about the presence of tourists in the area?

Sharing the results of task 1 among ourselves, we noticed that there were several connections aroused by the observation of details of the area, which united us. These were basically the strong impact of the soundscape (characterized at that moment by the loud sound of cicadas), capable of activating significant space-time jumps, and the fact that all the other details observed by each of us (an ancient street lamp, an olive tree, the uphill road, the caper plant, the ring to attach the horses’ reins, the warm climate, the high walls…..) referred to elements of our family past, as well as to “worries” regarding the future.

This led us to reflect on some themes. What connects the past and the future? The present. The moment of the “here and now”. Symbolically, this door has then transformed into an element of this landscape that asks us to “be present, listen, and that’s it”. At the same time, we have reflected a lot on the suggestion that we all had regarding this door, relating to the fact that it reveals itself as a small hidden treasure, which requires an effort to be discovered (the climb up Costa San Giorgio that we do every time we need to get to the door). Apparently, this is a door that can easily be almost ignored (and in fact, observing the passers-by these days - tourists and locals - who pass under it, it seems to be so), few, almost none, are the people who stop to observe it.

And it is here that the door reveals itself, if we discover it. It is a door that seems to ask us “do you see me?”.

Discussing these themes, brainstorming, the word and theme of the “secret” came to us very naturally. Here we imagined Porta San Giorgio as an entity that, once discovered, appreciated, is able to keep and reveal secrets. It is someone/something you can confide in, and that at the same time can also reveal secrets about itself.

And here is our idea of ​​“artistic intervention” (still to be developed), connected to this input of the “secret” and of the “be present”. We imagined sentences divided in half (Projected? Sticked in some way? Drawn on the ground? Or postcards to be fished out of two boxes?....?), half on one side and half on the other side of the door. This leads the visitor to be pushed to observe the door from both sides, and to live the experience of the door with attention, curiosity, even fun, in an almost “personal” relationship with it.

On the floor, near the door, we imagined a writing, in both directions that says: “if you got here…”

And on the door, on one side we have:

“if you listen to me…”

And on the other: “you can discover my story…”

On one side: “If you remember me…”

On the other: “we can meet again…”

“If you see me…” “you can tell me a secret….”

“if you feel me…” “you can understand me….”

These halves of sentences can be exchanged with each other, each combination takes on a different meaning. This is the beginning of a possible artistic intervention that came to mind, to restore value to this place, and to reconnect in an almost “playful” way the passerby (whether a tourist or a local) with the door.

For the week's field work, we have tried to exist in the space as part of the elements and experience and feel the place while observing other people.

The most important characteristic of this gate is the fact that it is not as connected as the other four since it doesn’t have the walls connecting to it, and it exists in the middle of the plaza. It portrays uniqueness in structure as well because it is a tower at the same time. Hence, the gate plays a role more as a monument than a gate for the people who work as a border between the inside and the outside space. The space surrounds the gate from all directions, making it more flexible.

Then, the plaza we all thought was very beautiful and pleasant did not seem like it was reaching its full potential. Despite some locals walking their dogs, talking on their phones, or passing through for a pause to get some water after their workout, there weren't many who stayed for a longer time to actually use the space on the grass or benches. For others, like tourists, the place even seemed almost invisible, and everyone rushed to the big tourist point, the Plaza of Michelangelo. We have analysed that the factors, such as a lot of parked cars in front of the entrance to the gate plaza, are responsible.

The following are the elements and keywords we have selected for the place (Positive and Negative);

History: A place with deep and important history related to the city.

Abandonment: The place seems to be ignored and forgotten.

Life: The place includes a lot of elements of life, such as greenery, people, and water.

Waste: these elements seem not to be fully taken care of and are wasting their potential for being something richer. Identity: it has a strong identity that connects to the city’s and people’s history, and in their present.

Gentrification: The gated area population is being gentrified into a rather touristy plaza, and the view.

Resistance: The place identity is very based on the resistance, such as the protected gate during the demolition period, and it is still used as the place for protests and fairs that remind of the resistance, like the 25th of April.

Global Capitalism: The whole urban and population distribution structure seems to be the result of global capitalism.

Pause: The place provides us a moment to pause, and reminds us to take a deep breath and enjoy the moment.

Rush: Yet, it is overlooked due to many people rushing through the busy schedules of either daily life or tourism.

Community: The place has people who come and spend time regularly, although the number is not that high, and it could be a good place for community engagement.

Individuality: However, there are no interactions between other groups at the moment.

Connection: all these factors have shown that the place can provide so many connections between people, nature, history, and so on.

Boundaries: Unfortunately, the place is still limited in its potential to become for people and cities at most interest due to several boundaries that are structural and social.

Therefore, our group raised a frase, that expresses that we are at the moment, at that place, and we hear its story.

At first, we wanted to understand how people use and experience the physical space of the neighborhood. But as we talked to different people and observed the area, we realized that the idea of the neighborhood is not just about streets or buildings. The real boundaries are more social—each group seems to have a different way of understanding what the neighborhood is and what it means to them.

This makes us think about how public spaces could help connect these different views and experiences. Parks, streets, and squares are shared places that can bring people together. Without suggesting big changes, we believe it's important to reflect on how these spaces can be used in ways that allow everyone to enjoy the neighborhood and feel part of it.

At such a time, in the neighborhood, there is some form of accessibility regulation for vehicular movements.

If I had a voice, what would I say about myself?

I would say I am "a living door amidst stones and breath".

This writing can be positioned in front of both sides of the wall, above the center of the arch door.

Today, Monday, July 7th, we have been researching the frescoes at the gate. At the entrance, where there used to be an ancient fresco welcoming foreigners to Florence, there is now a contemporary one. This new fresco, facing the gate, continues the tradition of greeting those arriving from outside the city.

Still researching on fresco at the gate…

It made us think: what happens when a gate, historically built to separate and defend, now accelerates flow instead of offering friction? What kind of urban experience does this “non-place” produce?

Perhaps, in today’s cities, speed has replaced significance. And some gates, instead of opening possibilities, erase presence.

Then we made the second exercise where we were looking to the Archaeological Profiles of Place. From the proposals we had we find that our door was identified with the pace as sense, in a way that this door stimulates our imagination and curiosity; the place as ideology, we looked for the changes that the meaning of this door had had; and finally the place as problem, because we think that this door represents the social issues and challenges we actually have like the contrast between in our social relationships: the public-private uses of space or the lack of social places just for being present (like benches or shadow spaces).

This two tasked also made us realize how material preservation is essential to imagine the uses of the space, for example, it’s easier to us to imagine the presence of the first door, because there are a lot of material evidences from it presence, but it is harder to make this exercise with the second door (there aren’t those material evidences). And that made us talk about the the difficulties of making future projections about the use of space (some years ago we couldn’t imagine that a house near to the door it would be transform in an air bb).

However, through careful on-site observation and documentation, we gradually became aware of the multiple layers of time embedded in the structure, including traces of use, repairs, and meanings added during different historical periods.

What struck us most was that this space does not only tell its story through what has been preserved, but also through what has been lost. The original city wall is no longer present; the newly added metal staircase, the patched joints in the stonework, and even the projecting latrine structure all challenged us to reconsider what a “heritage space” actually is. The tower is not a fixed fragment of the past—it is a dynamic structure, continuously shaped by time, function, and urban transformation.

This process also made us realize that heritage is not only about preservation, but also about interpretation. As observers, learners, and city dwellers, we are not only expected to look, but also to ask questions: What is the role of this structure in today’s urban environment? What meanings does it carry in the present context?

Overall, this fieldwork helped us understand that even small physical details—such as a metal ring, a modern staircase, or a fading fresco—can serve as important clues for understanding architecture, memory, and the evolving life of the city.

This is what a homeless man told us in the park near Porta San Frediano. He was upset, yet generous with his words. On the bench beside him: a carton of wine and a novel (Gli dei torneranno) borrowed from Biblioteca Santa Rosa.

That image — wine and book, survival and culture — refuses binary thinking. It’s a fragile, lucid reminder of the multidimensionality of marginal lives. Public benches, in this context, become both beds and desks. The city shelters, expels, and educates — often all at once.

What does it mean to read while being read out of the city? The photo of the man with the book on the bench is a quiet but deeply political image.

This sentence, from the staff of Angeli del Bello, struck us deeply. Framed as an effort to “de-stigmatize” the tourist or student figure, it also reveals a deeper ambivalence. There’s an edge to the tone — a tension between hospitality and rejection, activism and aestheticization.

Volunteering, here, appears as a ritual of symbolic integration: a way to make outsiders feel momentarily “inside,” without truly disturbing the structures of displacement, pricing-out, or cultural erasure. Is this a new form of gentrified coolness — being socially engaged but only for a semester?

Later, we learned that one of their regular activities is removing graffiti from city walls. “We only erase the non-artistic ones,” the manager clarified. But who gets to decide what qualifies as “art”?

Not long after, we came across a raw message spray-painted on a wall:“Tourist Go Home.”

Is that art? Protest? A desperate whisper from locals losing their space? Walls, in cities like Florence, are not just surfaces — they work as emotional and political archives. Cleaning them might also mean silencing them. In this context, the act of cleaning is not neutral: it curates San Frediano´s voice.

This courtyard evoked some psychological responses as it worked on my sense of vision, hearing, and feeling.

In my world of silence and focused observation, feathered activities dominated the courtyard soundscape, birds making rhythms and melodic chirps similar to a sustained violin note, which felt so natural and contributed to creating an atmosphere of serenity, concealing any kind of noise.

Also, the chomp of gravel under my foot triggered a strong memory as I recalled my childhood experiences in school, I felt at ease being there.

The Brunelleschi courtyard has a thick positioning of green vegetation, which attracts diverse bird species. I noticed a black bird with red fluff, a small yellow-and-black feathered bird too.

The presence of stagnant water on the grass patches created some sort of little habitat for the bees and birds that came drinking out of the water, and the presence of stagnant water on the grass emitted an earthy scent that intensified and appealed the natural experience as I watched the birds perch between trees.

The absence of human interference developed a sense of isolation that helped my introspection as it developed emotions of nostalgia, pleasure and tranquility from the sound of the gravel, to stirring of a sense of visualizing an environment with the birds and their songs, the green around, being in a state of seclusion that encouraged some mediation, it was enjoyable as this exercise did not just enable sensory but also emotional comfort.

“But in some moments of the day… you don’t feel safe. There are addicts, people acting aggressively.”

This ambivalence — between familiarity and fear, belonging and displacement — is etched into the atmosphere of San Frediano.

You can still see grandmothers with grocery carts, but they now share the street with digital nomads and Airbnb tourists sipping €5 cappuccinos.
Prices rise. Languages shift. Cultural density dissolves.

We began to see Porta San Frediano not as a gate, but as a paradox.

Centuries ago, gates like this were built to defend the city from outside threats. Today, the threat might lie inside: tourism, gentrification, identity loss...

San Frediano has become a membrane that accelerates entry, but filters out permanence. It may be opening for those who pass through — not for those who stay.

May be the gate no longer marks a border. It is a lens, a scar, a question...

In the photo we can see Porta San Frediano from the front, flooded by incoming traffic — a powerful visual metaphor for this urban condition.

• It visualizes the gate as an inverted threshold: open to flow, but closed to belonging.

• The one-way traffic intensifies the metaphor of accelerated entry and expelled permanence.

• The absence of pedestrians or resting points reinforces the image of a point that devours but does not care — a place optimized more for circulation, than for life.

• Aesthetically, the photo suggests speed, despersonalization, and a rupture in human scale, in sharp contrast with the emotional geography evoked by the neighborhood’s living elements — botteghe, dogs, nonnas, memory.
  

Carola, Irene and Tessa, from Radio Papesse guided us in exploring soundscapes that are usually hidden by visual perception.

We exercised our hearing abilities through different activities, both in combination with sight and movement, and using our ears only. We gained familiarity with these approaches inside the Giardino dell'Ardiglione until we moved to three different squares in the neighbourhood: Piazza del Carmine, Piazza Santo Spirito, and Piazza Tasso where we finnaly drawed a map based on sounds, signals and noises we heard.

After that we had a walk in Cascine park with Cecilia Pasini, sharing ideas about historical gardens and green gentrification.

With Nicola Giorgio we explored different ways to express ourselves graphically.

Starting from the sharing of definitions and representations, boundaries and connections, we then used the shapes of the object surrounding us to create a new gaze expressing feelings related to the specific gate we are studying.

After lunch, prof. Sonia De Gregorio Hurtado talked gave us a lecture and discussed with us about urbanism and the relationship between the gates and their context

Then we met at Giardino d'Ardiglione in order to organize our materials to the final presentation. We decided the general topics we would like to mention:

-Impressions about the space and flows

-Geographical localization and space limitations

-Historical background (linked with the archaeological evidences and gazes upon the landscape)

-Future proposals for the square

-Door sounds (through interviews)

-An artistic view: what would the door says (and to whom), ways to interact with the door (we would like to link this with our future proposals to the square).

We divided the topics to collect the final information and we are working on that during the afternoon.

Firm on nature’s rise where Florence hills begin,

you stand as one of the Oltrano’s oldest gates.

Wars have scarred your beauty, yet you hold your ground,

a testament to the builders' minds’ precision and hands.

Your arched stones, your heavy doors of wood

Twin staircases ascending like time’s own spine,

each line speaks the language of the medieval,

a dialect of endurance and resilience.

And though some call you unremarkable,

you are a living threshold.

Generations pass beneath you,

races, objects, and voices influx,

you are a highway to the Piazzale Michelangelo,

an artery to the religious al Monte,

a vein threading the Oltrano’s pulse.

Like a chameleon, you shift with the hours.

Sunset glides over and through your stones,

and you are not just a gate but a centre stage,

music, chattering, laughter, emotions,

the clink of glasses, silhouettes moving in the air.

You live quietly in the margins of guidebooks,

but loudly in the memory of those who pause,

who see not just a relic,

but a bridge between the past and the present,

the present and hopefully the future,

between the stones and the breath of life.