The Cultural Influence on House Form: Understanding the Relationship Between Housing and Culture

Amos Rapaport The form that housing takes is related to the culture in which that housing is built We focus on the monumental while much of the built environment is housing, and most of this is done without the benefit of architects. Primitive housing – produced by societies defined as primitive Vernacular housing – involvement of tradesmen . . .

Vernacular: • the owner is a participant • lack of theoretical or aesthetic pretensions • working with site and climate • respect for other people and their environment • variations within an idiom • Limited range of expression but open-ended within that. • a culturally accepted model • few building types

Tradition disappears: • complexity – more building types • loss of shared values • originality – a premium is placed on being original • Production of built form changes: • primitive – very few building types, model with few variations, built by all • preindustrial vernacular – greater number of building types, more individual variation, built by tradesmen • high-style/modern – many specialized building types, each an original creation, designed and built by teams of specialists.

Differentiation of space: Jung – the lack of sharp boundaries between man and animals in the primitive world Kabylie – man and animal in same room Switzerland – under same roof but separate spaces French farmhouse – separated but close Similarly In urban space living/working/workshop spaces. Then widely separated.

ALTERNATIVE THEORIES OF HOUSE FORM - a single cause for house form? PHYSICAL climate and the need for shelter materials and technology site SOCIAL economics defense religion

CLIMATE Climatic determinism “We build houses to keep in a consistent climate, and to keep out predators. We grow, gather and eat food to keep our metabolism on an even keel.” (p19) ‘the courtyard house is a southern form while the hearth belongs to the north’ but courtyard housing is found in the temperate climate of Beijing as well as the desert climate of north Africa. Many different forms of housing within limited number of climatic zones. Changing form based on economic activity – the Hidastsa in the Missouri valley (p20) Beijing courtyard housing The ‘hearth’ in Wright’s Robie House

Ceremonial & religious beliefs, prestige and status will often override climatic requirements Iquitos (p21) – solid walls instead of open (for ventilation) because of status and privacy Japan (p22) – traditional house varies little from Hokkaido in the north to Kyushu in the south. South Seas (p22) – European houses are seen as a mark of power and good fortune and so are used despite their inappropriateness for the climate.

MATERIALS, CONSTRUCTION, TECHNOLOGY – “For thousands of years wood and stone have determined the character of buildings.” The theory that forms develop as man learns to master more complex building techniques. However even within one culture housing may be primitive while ceremonial buildings are elaborate with sophisticated roof structures. Sometimes technology may be available but not used. “the Egyptians knew the vault [but] they rarely used it, and then only where it could not be seen, since it was at odds with their image or idea of the building.” (p24-5) Sometimes social values take precedence over technological advances. Piped water vs well water.(P25) Of course wood and stone can be used to create may different kinds of structures, the form of which will be determined more by the culture than the material.

SITE The theory that topography can be a form determinant. Eg the hill towns of Italy. Feng shui considers many aspects of geography in determining the orientation and shape of a building. However this has a cosmological basis. Siting can take on mystical importance which can lead to persistence of sites because of their traditional nature. The choice of a good site will depend on a cultural definition. Sometimes the form will not change even though the topography has – the Latin American courtyard house.

DEFENSE this has been cited to account for tight urban patterns more than to explain the form of dwellings themselves. “the compact towns in the Greek islands have been attributed to the needs of defense, lack of money (so that the houses themselves had to form the city wall), lack of arable land and the need to conserve it, and the need for shading for climatic reasons. All of these undoubtedly played a part, which means that no single cause could be possible. Defense is handled differently in the Cameroons (see pg 32)

ECONOMICS scarcity of resources as a determining factor in house form. However, even under conditions of scarcity there are examples of herders living among agricultural people and continuing to refuse to accept that way of life. Some will build beyond their means. (34). Even where collaboration is used it is often not used for strictly economic reasons but socio-cultural ones. There is an economic need to store, but even this will be done differently according to a number of variables. (p36) Even mobility, strongly motivated by economic conditions (scarcity of resources), does not result in similarity of house form.

RELIGION Some have taken the view that physical determinants are not nearly as important as symbolic and religious determinants. “the sacredness of the house”. The sacredness of the threshold and portal, and hence the separation of the sacred and profane realms, can be achieved through the use of numerous and varied forms. Is a stranger allowed in the house? Some places yes, others no. Shape of the house will vary according to understanding of the cosmos. North-south orientation, circular? (p41)

PHYSICAL DETERMINISM The physical environment provides possibilities, not imperatives. Mumford suggests that “man was a symbol-making animal before he was a tool-making animal.” (42). More than the physical environment, it is our symbols and rituals that give form to that environment.

SOCIO-CULTURAL FACTORS The house is an institution, not just a structure. In addition to physical influences on built form (which are considered to be more secondary or modifying), there is a whole range of socio-cultural factors – primary forces – a vision of the ideal life (p47). Religion Family Structure Criticality Culture- the total equipment of ideas and institutions and conventionalized activities of a people Ethos – the organized conception of the Ought. World View – the way people characteristically look out upon the world. National Character – the personality type of a people, the kind of human being which, generally occurs in this society (p48)

RELIGION The image of the cosmos in built form The Dogon (p50) – the whole landscape reflects the cosmic order. Villages are laid out in the way parts of the body lie with respect to each other. Balinese housing compounds have similar features. Solskifts in the Baltic (p51) reproduce the daily path of the sun in the layout of their villages. Feng Shui – as shown in the previous lecture Symbolic space inside the house

FAMILY STRUCTURE Monogamy – husband still separated from wife and children Polygamy – where the man has no real house and visits his wives, each of whom has her own house.

Family structure and the centre.

CRITICALITY There are many factors influencing the form of the house. The more forceful the physical constraints, and the more limited the technology and command of means, the less are nonmaterial aspects able to act. But they never cease to operate. There is a scale or set of scales that we could use here. A climatic scale ranging from very severe to very benign, an economic scale from bare subsistence to affluence, a technological scale from the barest to the most sophisticated, materials from a single local material to unlimited choice. Even where the constraints are the most severe, cultural factors are still operating. The degree of freedom in choice can be understood through the concept of criticality. Criticality – eg. in flight, a rocket has higher criticality than an airplane because it is more severely constrained by technical requirements. Slower airplanes have more freedom in design (lower criticality) than do jets. A pedestrian path has more freedom than an expressway. The degree of choice depends on the value system.

BASIC NEEDS • The concept of basic needs is brought into question since most basic needs involve value judgments and therefore choice. Those choices are based on people’s attitudes towards their environment. • There are a number of factors that affect built form: • Some basic needs • Family • Position of women • Privacy • Social intercourse

Some Basic Needs look at breathing as a basic need. This will have an effect on house form. The ‘need’ for fresh air or the acceptance of smells (such as cooking) will alter house form. The Eskimo accepts very high smell concentrations, and the smell of the toilet is accepted in the traditional Japanese house. In some cultures smoke is sacred and therefore encouraged in the house. Even the concept of comfort seems highly variable. The basic need of eating will vary in its rituals from culture to culture and necessarily affect house form. Sitting (a basic need?) will affect house form too depending on how one sits. On the floor, on a chair, a mat? If you sit on a chair, this will affect where and how you place openings.

FAMILY family structure will have a profound affect on house form. Extended family/nuclear family. The choice of communal living (eg the Iroquois longhouse) or separate living (the Western ‘mingles’ apt). Polygamy or monogamy, of course, will affect form.

POSITION OF WOMEN where women are cloistered in the house, the need for privacy will increase, thus changing the house form. In Egypt men and women are always separated, rich people having separate rooms and poor ones using different corners of their house.

Privacy – As stated above privacy is partly affected by the position of women. In some cultures privacy is achieved through social convention. The place of the individual in society may decide whether a communal house is left open and unsubdivided or is divided. This relates to the separation of domains. In India, Iran and Latin American buildings traditionally face inwards. In Anglo-American houses they face outwards.

Privacy (p66) – inward facing and little concern for what happens on the street (is this an example of the commons?). “In traditional settlements, however, the narrow, shady streets become full of life as they serve some social functions. Streets in the Punjab, for example, link the three elements of the village – house, temple, and bazaar. Widenings in the streets provide room for a small tree or a well, around which a storyteller or small market will set up shop and help the street serve a social function.

The transition between street and private domain of the house becomes very important in this case. (SEE JACOBS ON THIS) Western architects often think of privacy as a basic need, but it is a complex and varied phenomenon that defies easy solutions. (FIG 2)

SOCIAL INTERCOURSE the concern is where to meet – whether in the house, the cafe, the bath, the street, the well. All of these will affect the form of the house. In many cultures meeting in the house is not done. Socializing takes place elsewhere. This means that the house cannot be seen in isolation from the settlement. “Because the living pattern always extends beyond the house to some degree, the form of the house is affected by the extent to which one lives in it and the range of activities that take place in it.

RELATION OF HOUSE AND SETTLEMENT • Dispersed and concentrated settlements. • Two traditions of concentrated settlements: • the whole settlement has been considered as the setting for life. The dwelling is a more private enclosed part of that. E.g. the Latin, Mediterranean village, vernacular • The dwelling is the total setting for life and the settlement is the connective tissue and secondary in nature. E.g. the Anglo-American city, high style • “This distinction between types may be due partly to written or unwritten laws which limit the behavior patterns in the different domains – public or private – by prohibiting some and allowing others. This is an expression of world view and other attitudes, and is one way in which a culture is linked to the way people use space. In the same way the distinction may be due partly to the effect of religion on social attitudes and family, and hence on the separation of domains.” (p70) • How is the street viewed in different cultures? (Japan, p73)

SETTLEMENTS AND SITING • The initial choice of a site for settlements will be based on many factors. Among them are the physical factors – access to food or water, exposure to wind, defensive potential, land for agriculture, transportation potential, trade potential. Some of these are social factors which may also include family or clan structure and grouping. • How do we understand this relationship of man to his surroundings? • Religious and cosmological • Symbiotic • Exploitative (see page 75) • In the first two there is a personal relationship established – an I-Thou relationship. Nature is to be worked with. In the third there is an I-It relationship where nature is worked on. • In the first two man is in nature. There is no difference between the two. The whole landscape is sacred as is the house in it.

CONSTANCY AND CHANGE If we place too much importance on culturally linked aspects of form, form would become meaningless outside the culture. Yet we know this is not true. Some things will change with a change in culture, some things will remain constant. In physiology man has changed little. Biological responses to the environment are essentially unchanged. Are perception and behavior culturally linked or inborn (physiological) and unchanging? Both? The need for sensory stimulation and satisfaction – visual and social complexity in the environment – seems constant for both man and animals (79) The need for security may be constant but how that is expressed may vary greatly. (This notion takes on greater importance when we look at Defensible Space) Symbols vary but the need for communication is constant. The territorial instinct – the need for identity and place – is constant. How we define territory and the ideal environment will vary. What elements are changeable and which are constant will have a profound effect on the form of both the dwelling and the city.

Distinctions are made between different types of space: physical, economic, social, etc. Architects make a distinction between technological space (bathrooms, services spaces) and symbolic spaces (living areas). The former will change according to changes in equipment. The latter will tend to remain more constant (is this really true? Perhaps, but only in the sense that it is space defined by furnishings – which in themselves will change form culture to culture – rather than equipment specifications). It is through the latter spaces that we define ‘ethnic domains’. So, for example, the sanctity of the threshold remains constant from culture to culture but how that is identified and defined will vary considerably. (FIG 3.15, p.80)

The Cultural Influence on House Form: Understanding the Relationship Between Housing and Culture