WALKING THE THOUGHT Walking and Mapping in Santiago

1. WALKING THE THOUGHT Walking and Mapping in Santiago Hosted by Santiago de Compostela City Council Managed by Incipit and Gestión del Patrimonio Cultural (Complutense University of Madrid)

2. Walking in Santiago

3. Before the Mapping

4. Mapping

5. Mapping Unlike Like

6. Areas and groups Camiño Cervantes San Roque Fonseca Inmaculada Toural Obradoiro Alameda

7. No people at this time (Outside of Contemporary Art Museum was empty). Visitors and locals identified over the walk Some pedestrians in San Pedro and Casas Reais. Maximum 20 people Homeless in Cervantes There were no people. Only the waiter in Camalea Bar. The junkies of Cervantes We walked under the arch + heard about how the musicians share the space during the day it’s decided each morning – expand lets for some of us who heard singers last night

8. Marks on the ground in Porta do Camiño. Have you identify World Heritage somewhere? There was a sign at the hotel, on a green door At Porta do Camiño there was an informative plaque on the recognition of Santiago as World Heritage. Of course the Cathedral and City Council building and Hostal and some façades on Hortasstreet. Asking to a Pilgrim (he or she told that the first 10 pilgrims have breakfast for free), Asking in Parador (If there is times to visit the building, and if it’s a public building). As the answer in Parador is that the building is half hostel, half museum, they claim about the lack of information about this circumstance. The same about the works in the cathedral (while there is an advertisement in Trinidade; Suggestion: ‘Open for works’. Also they comment about the hard access for wheelchairs or handicap people. And there is a lack of information in San Fructuoso Church about the absence of an old Francoist symbol in the façade. No many obvious sign, but the whole town looks like a WH place. The city maybe assumes that the visitor already knows, or that it is really not that important for them. In the square we met with some people looking at the Cathedral – a man from the Netherlands who had walked some 3000 km, taking photos at two ladies from S. Korea who had walked 250 km and were marking the occasion by geo refine the very spot in front of the cathedral. A lady was showing her family the cathedral to her family who had not been before. So the space meant many things to many people. No, we couldn’t recognize that in our zone.

9. The architectonical contrasts. The symptoms of gentrification (empty areas, renewed buildings and urban furniture). What has interested you the most? Ánimas Church. Carallo 29. Moorish door in Rúadas Casas Reais. Cervantes. The stone over we are walking in “La piedra que pisas”. The place of the forbiddendoor. The whitewindows. The walls. The Urban structure. The “galerías” (windows). The architectural homogeneity, and the transformations it implies from the Middle Ages till today. We stopped at the “tree” that decides traditionally what students will study – I never got during what era but I picked mathematics, so it made me happy that today we chose professions + studies ourselves. Then we stopped next at the place where the old city gate Faxeira would have been – we thought about one could visualise it, and how often only one kind at heritage is marketed – when in reality there are many. The combination of heritage and everyday life. Use of urban spaces, large buildings next to small gardens.

10. The way of management, moving to a more participative model. What would you change? UNESCO plaque, as it contains very little information about Santiago as World Heritage. There is a complete lack of information about archaeological interventions, especially compared to information related to churches. ItwouldmakeUNESCO'sstamp more visible. Historical photos, informative text, about the building particularly mitigating the Cathedral being closed using technology. No orientation. No amenities for residents. No vitality. Limited accessibility for people with disabilities. Gentrifications. No mixed use. No informations about interventions over time. The excessive weight of the tourist-oriented shops and restaurants – back to the old bars! We then walked up to Alameda (the group name!) and we heard about the contrasting heritages this one park have – stones that are official and others that are not published or people are proud of. Regulations to keep the city alive. A better and more efficient way to inform people.

11. Understanding the urban planning through it own materiality. What archaeology contributes to? Reuses of material. It’s no easy to say. Nothing The two Marias statue was an example of this – before they became a symbol for female strength they have been more pop icons – we pondered whether this sudden interest in their story was related to the current debate on women’s rights in society – in the current Trump era – or whether the grassroots groups trying to highlight their history was the reason for this. Nothing that we could observe. Nothing Where are the layers before the medieval city? The diachronic history of the city.

12. Use another ways of managing the materiality and the spatiality. Engage the people and giving life to the city. Not only buildings and ruins (what moreover are an archive, not an alive entity) without any sort of information (like in the children park behind San Roque). What archaeology could contribute to? Some visitors perceived a “sad” feeling and a “conservative” atmosphere in Santiago. Not only because of the climatic condition of the moment but also because of a certain “preservationistic” or “museumification” excess. They said they had the feeling that Santiago was a “decoration” mainly runned by the church. We reflected on how conservatism in buildings, in materiality, in the urban scape could “affect” in some sense, to people living here. Could “conservatism” in buildings cause some “rigidity” or “lack of joviality” that some walkers observed in the local people from Santiago? Mark the layers and chronological development in time, keep old remains even if out of context, multitemporal perspective, multiuse convey uncertainty can bring time perspective, building a narrative that takes time into account. Narrative could centre on paths rather than buildings, embracing pilgrimage. Provide an “archaeological view” on the town and highlight the evolution in time of what we can see today.

13. Indirectly, archaeology contributes to preserving the site. It can also help to contrast the official historical discourse and approach the old material everyday. What archaeology could contribute to? The overall lessons we learned were that spaces and places mean many things for many people. Who has the power to write the narratives of these sites is only clear when the hidden or secret histories of a place are told. It’s also difficult to know how to present multiple views at once so some of us discussed new digital solutions can help to provide multiple narratives. Even through our group was meant to focus on Alameda we discussed many of these issues along the way – it’s the journey that matters, not the destination. Engage with different stakeholders. Education programmes.

14. WALKING THE THOUGHT Walking and Mapping in Santiago See the recapitulations on https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lY3YqSgN5sc&index=6&list=PLyw_F_vDeacxqaDF6JCOoRWcsQZ-TWU09

15. WALKING THE THOUGHT Walking and Mapping in Santiago Hosted by Santiago de Compostela City Council Managed by Incipit and Gestión del Patrimonio Cultural (Complutense University of Madrid)