Originally uploaded by rvangurp
For my StoryCube, I chose to focus on the positive and negative aspects of the university’s architecture and planning, in order to contribute to a discussion about how the built aspects of the campus either aid or are an impediment to the establishment of a unified socio-cultural and academic environment.
Two particular issues that I chose to examine regarded how the campus layout functioned in creating a cohesive and utilitarian environment, and how the aesthetics of the buildings and grounds reflected or were conductive to this concept of social unity in Waterloo’s multisocial, multicultural environment.
Not wanting to impose my views on the discussion, I chose to exploit the reversible aspect of the cube and dedicate one side to the visual facts (photos) and the other to my written interpretations (found below).
Six Topics of Discussion:
- Top – “One Waterloo”: Slogan for campus initiative celebrating the diversity of Waterloo students. My theme.
- Green Space: A positive aspect of the campus, slowly disappearing. Does it have unexplored potential as a student gathering space?
- EIT: Elegant, post-modern design emphasizing light and open space. A peaceful place to study or grab some lunch. In contrast to more dilapidated arts buildings, also demonstrates lack of equality in funding.
- Davis Centre: An integral social centre due to the library, food court, and access to transportation. Kitschy colours, open and inviting. However, caters to non-arts students.
- Dana Porter Library: Caters explicitly to arts students. Has few other resources, and is not very accessible to vehicles. Represents the uninviting modern aesthetic common to the university’s architecture. However, excellent use of minimal ground space, and an important directional marker.
- Bottom – Directional Signage: Demonstrates the divisive nature of campus (separating the arts from the maths and sciences). Poor quality, fails to help students locate specific buildings.
