نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 پژوهشگر دکتری معماری، دانشکده معماری و شهرسازی، دانشگاه شهید‌بهشتی

2 استادیار گروه معماری، دانشکده معماری و شهرسازی، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران.

3 دانشیار گروه طراحی شهری، دانشکده معماری و شهرسازی، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران

4 استاد گروه معماری، دانشکده معماری و شهرسازی، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران.

چکیده

معماری و شهرسازی با محیط ارتباط دارند. محیط، ظرف تجربیات فردی و جمعی افراد است و خاطره را شکل می­دهد. مطالعات خاطره یک زمینه تحقیقاتی رو به رشد است که بر روی طیف وسیعی از رشته‌ها از قبیل علوم اجتماعی، علوم انسانی، مطالعات منظر و معماری و شهرسازی تمرکز دارد. پژوهش­هایی در ایران و جهان در رابطه با خاطره در محیط­های انسان­ساخت صورت پذیرفته و هریک از دیدگاهی متفاوت به موضوع نگریسته­اند. مقاله حاضر با هدف تحلیل و تفسیر آنچه تاکنون در ایران منتشر شده و نیز برای پیشگیری از تکرار در این زمینه و یافتن شکاف­های تحقیقاتی موجود، به بررسی کیفیت مطالعات انجام شده، پرداخته است. این پژوهش به مرور نظام­مند مطالعات پیشین پرداخته و تعداد 38مقاله و چهار رساله دکتری که خاطره موضوع اصلی آنها بوده، بر اساس شکل پریزما(موارد ترجیحی در گزارش مقالات) انتخاب و بررسی شده و با مطالعه ساختار و محتوای آنها به ترسیم چشم­انداز کنونی پژوهش­های با موضوع خاطره، دست یافته­است. نتایج بیانگر حجم روزافزون مطالعات خاطره با محوریت خاطره جمعی است. تکرار محتوایی پژوهش­های خاطره، توجه بسیار اندک به کاربران ویژه محیط مانند کودک، سالمند و ...، تمرکز تعداد زیادی از مطالعات بر شهر تهران، عدم بررسی خاطره در دوره­های سنی مختلف انسان و عدم توجه به خاطره فردی افراد از مکان­های ویژه مانند مکان­های کودکی، از جمله مشکلات مطالعات در این زمینه هستند. از جمله مقوله­های پرتکرار ترکیب­شده با خاطره می­توان به هویت، تعلق مکانی، دلبستگی مکان و احیا و بازسازی اشاره کرد. همچنین بیشترین تعداد مطالعات به خاطره در فضاهای شهری و میدان­های شهری پرداخته است.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله [English]

A Study on Place Memory in Persian language research (An overview of the years 2006-2022)

نویسندگان [English]

  • Nina Ghaslani 1
  • Azadeh Aghalatifi 2
  • Marjan NematiMehr 3
  • Hamid Nadimi 4

1 Department of Architecture, faculty of architecture and urbanism, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran.

2 Department of Architecture, faculty of architecture and urbanism, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran.

3 Department of Urban Planning, faculty of architecture and urbanism, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran.

4 Department of Urban Planning, faculty of architecture and urbanism, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran.

چکیده [English]

Highlights:
- A systematic classification of Persian language studies on place memory and an analysis of their structure and content using a systematic review.
- Research gaps in place memory studies are highlighted to guide future studies.
- Keywords related to the memory of place and frequently appearing components are identified and discussed.
Introduction:
Architecture and urban planning are deeply intertwined with the environment, which serves as a vessel for individual and collective human experiences that form memory. Memory studies, a rapidly growing research field, span various disciplines, including social sciences, humanities, landscape studies, architecture, and urbanism. In Iran and worldwide, research has explored memory in built environments from diverse perspectives. This article seeks to analyze and interpret the body of work published in Iran, aiming to prevent redundancy in this field while identifying existing research gaps.
Methodology:
This research adheres to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement list for information collection and document screening. The study sample was selected based on internet searches of related keywords (e.g., memory and place memory) across Mogiran, SID, and Ganj-Irandoc scientific databases. No time limits were set for the search, but the focus was on publications between 2006 and 2022. Initially, 206 articles were retrieved from the Mogiran site, 101 articles from SID, and 16 doctoral theses related to architecture and urban planning. Following a thorough screening process that involved reviewing titles, abstracts, and content relevance, a final selection of 38 articles from scientific research publications was made, rated from A to D in the Ministry of Science, Research, and Technology's scientific publications portal. Additionally, 4 doctoral theses were selected for in-depth review after similar screening.
To systematically extract and categorize information, a table was designed based on each article's publication year. The data analysis and interpretation were conducted through coding and grouping similar content. This systematic approach enabled the authors to interpret and describe various aspects of the phenomenon under study, ultimately contributing to a comprehensive understanding of place memory in Persian language research.
Results and Discussion:
This research focuses on the publication and evolution of scientific studies on place memory in Iran, examining both the structure and content of these studies. A central theme in the research is the concept of collective or individual memory. The majority of studies emphasize collective memory, a shared memory among the people of a region or city, often detached from individual experiences.
In the context of place memory, the processes of memory formation, recording, transmission, continuity, and recall are distinct yet interconnected. Depending on the research's case study—whether it involves a city, village, single building, or urban space—these processes include various components. Generally, these components can be categorized into three main groups: spatial, social, and emotional.
Sociologists like Maurice Halbwachs and Pierre Nora have noted that the sociability of a space significantly influences collective memory. One result of sociability is face-to-face communication, which relies on the space's ability to accommodate people together—a crucial factor in memory studies. In essence, a space's potential to become memorable is closely tied to its capacity for social interaction and presence.
Interestingly, few articles explore the topic of memory in relation to homes that are not linked to childhood experiences. Another notable issue is the relationship between age and memory. From an early age, individuals develop positive and negative feelings toward their environment, which can be shaped by physical changes in residential areas. Such changes not only impact children's spatial behavior but also influence their psychological development.
When public spaces fail to consider children's needs, expectations, and desires, their design—crafted solely by adults—can negatively affect children's social, cultural, and mental development. Public spaces are often the only areas where children can play and socialize outside their homes and schools. This underscores the importance of creating environments that engage children constructively, making residential areas where significant childhood memories are formed more livable.
Conclusion:
The growing volume of studies in various fields necessitates summarizing and interpreting existing research, identifying frequently studied areas, and finding research gaps to inspire new topics for future exploration. This study addresses the critical issue of place memory within Persian language research through a systematic review.
The relatively small number of existing studies in this field suggests that place memory research is still in its infancy, with limited depth and focus. The concept of memory has not yet reached saturation in any of the discussed fields, presenting future research opportunities. The most critical factor in strengthening memory in a place—sustaining mental patterns—has been scarcely discussed in the literature. Topics related to memory, such as revival and reconstruction in historical contexts, identity, belonging, and attachment to place, have been repeatedly examined. The importance of understanding identity and the solutions some researchers offer by referencing the past, alongside the growing trend of memory studies, highlight the significance of further exploring this topic.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  •  Memory
  • collective memory
  • place memory
  • systematic review
Abna, H., Ayatollahi, S. M. H., & Iranmanesh, M. (2021). Nostalgia and Architecture, a Survey of Past Emotional Concepts in the Architectural Space, with a Case Study of the “Shokoohi” Traditional House of Yazd. journal of architecture in hot and dry climate, 8(12), 63-82. https://doi.org/10.29252/ahdc.2021.14266.1373. [in Persian]
Aghalatifi, A. (2012). Man and house; Explaining the pattern of interaction between man and contemporary house in Iran University of Tehran].
Alshamari, H. A. (2022). Employing nostalgia to reuse obsolete open public spaces. Journal of Urban Planning and Development, 148(4), 05022036. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)UP.1943-5444.0000867. [in Persian]
Assmann, J. (2011). Communicative and cultural memory. In Cultural memories: The geographical point of view (pp. 15-27). Springer.
Bachelard, G. (1964). The poetics of space. Penguin.
Casey, E. S. (2009). Remembering: A phenomenological study. Indiana University Press.
Dehkhoda, A. (2002). Dehkhoda dictionary compact disc. University of Tehran publication.
Dickinson, H., & Erben, M. (2006). Nostalgia and autobiography: The past in the present. Auto/biography, 14(3), 223. https://doi.org/10.1191/0967550706ab048oa
Ewing, R. H., Clemente, O., Neckerman, K. M., Purciel-Hill, M., Quinn, J. W., & Rundle, A. (2013). Measuring urban design: Metrics for livable places (Vol. 200). Island Press Washington, DC.
Gehl, J. (2011). Life between buildings.
Habibi, M. (2004). City without memory, city without identity. New Cities. [in Persian]
Hafezi, S., & Simoni, P. (2021). An Analysis of children's Interaction and Memory in correlation with Plan Design and Digital Space. Armanshahr Architecture & Urban Development, 14(36), 15-28. https://doi.org/10.22034/AAUD.2021.232573.2219 .  [in Persian]
Halbwachs, M. (1980). The Collective Memory. Harper & Row Colophon Books.
Halbwachs, M. (1992). On collective memory. University of Chicago press.
Hall, J. R., Neitz, M. J., & Battani, M. (2003). Sociology on culture. Psychology Press.
Hasani Mianroodi, N., Majedi, H., Saideh Zarabadi, Z. S., & Ziari, Y. (2019). A Comparative Study of the Memorability Level of Urban Spaces Using Semiotic Patterns; Case Studies: Azadi and Hasanabad Squares. Armanshahr Architecture and Urban Development, 12(29), 241-255. https://doi.org/10.22034/AAUD.2020.103363.  [in Persian]
Hasani mianroudi, N., Majedi, H., Saeide Zarabadi, Z. S., & Ziari, Y. (2018). Exploring Concept of Collective Memory and its Retrieval in Urban Areas with Semiotic Approach (Case study: Hasan-Abad square). The Monthly Scientific Journal of Bagh-e Nazar, 14(56), 17-32. http://www.bagh-sj.com/article_56136_72fc0865663d0ba09c8355c91b9a45e5.pdf. [in Persian]
Hodge, C. J. (2011). A new model for memory work: nostalgic discourse at a historic home. International Journal of Heritage Studies, 17(2), 116-135. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/13527258.2011.541065 
Kalami, M., Bagheri, M., & Hashemi, M. (2021). Architecture and memory, forty narratives of the memory of the place-maker and the place of the memory-make. publication  of University of Zanjan.
Kenny, M. G. (1999). A place for memory: The interface between individual and collective history. Comparative studies in society and history, 41(3), 420-437. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1017/S0010417599002248
Lewicka, M. (2008). Place attachment, place identity, and place memory: Restoring the forgotten city past. Journal of environmental psychology, 28(3), 209-231. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2008.02.001
Liberati, A., Altman, D. G., Tetzlaff, J., Mulrow, C., Gøtzsche, P. C., Ioannidis, J. P., Clarke, M., Devereaux, P. J., Kleijnen, J., & Moher, D. (2009). The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. Annals of internal medicine, 151(4), W-65-W-94. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-151-4-200908180-00136
Mayor, M. (2010). Longman dictionary of contemporary English. Pearson Education India.
Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary, E. (2003). Merriam-Webster.
Momeni, F., Farjoudi, A., Mozhgan, H., & Korosh, S. (2016). Intimate urban space designed with an emphasis on memorable anthology of Yazd in History [Research]. Urban Management, 15(44), 481-498. http://ijurm.imo.org.ir/article-1-1200-fa.html. [in Persian]
Mowla, Q. A. (2004). Memory association in place making: understanding an urban space. Memory, 9(52-54).
Nora, P. (1989). Between memory and history: Les lieux de mémoire. representations, 7-24. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2307/2928520
Paez, D., Basabe, N., & Gonzalez, J. L. (2013). Social processes and collective memory: A cross-cultural approach to remembering political events. In Collective memory of political events (pp. 147-174). Psychology Press.
Prashizky, A., & Remennick, L. (2018). Celebrating memory and belonging: Young Russian Israelis claim their unique place in Tel-Aviv’s urban space. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 47(3), 336-366. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/0891241616649235
Radvansky, G. A. (2021). Human memory. Routledge.
Rossi, A. (1984). The architecture of the city. MIT press.
Stevenson, A. (2010). Oxford dictionary of English. Oxford University Press, USA.
Truc, G. (2011). Memory of places and places of memory: for a Halbwachsian socio-ethnography of collective memory. International Social Science Journal, 62. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2451.2011.01800.x