Change (and continuity) in Domestic Space Design: a comparative study of nineteenth and early twentieth century houses in Britain and Recife, Brazil

501 Pages·1994·58.135 MB·English

by  Edja Trigueiro

Change (and continuity) in Domestic Space Design:
a comparative study of nineteenth and early twentieth century houses in Britain and
Recife, Brazil.
EDJA BEZERRA FARIA TRIGUEIRO
Thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Faculty of the Built Environment
THE BARTLETT SCHOOL OF GRADUATE STUDIES
UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON
1994
2
ABSTRACT
This thesis investigates the spatial configuration of late nineteenth and early twentieth century
houses in Britain and Recife, Brazil. Its underlying purpose is to verify whether the British
preeminence over the country’s economical and political life of that period, a fact thought to
have promoted alterations in socio-cultural modes of behaviour, has left any detectable traces
in the way houses are designed to enable the realisation of those modes in space.
The central assumption of the methodology — known as space syntax —applied to this
research is that cultural ideas are present in buildings as they are present in the minds of their
designers and inhabitants. It follows that a study of the spatial structures of houses in Britain
and Recife, a major focus of British presence in Brazil, could reveal the extent of the influence
of one culture over the other, as well as contribute to further the knowledge of the domestic
architecture in both countries.
House plans designed between 1840 and 1930 in Britain are analysed and results compared
with those drawn from the investigation of dwellings in Recife. These provide representative
examples of the housing panorama before and after the arrival of British residents in the city.
The work attempts to show that the spatial configuration of post-colonial houses built during
and immediately after the period in which the British presence in Recife was stronger defines a
theme of cultural continuity. This helps to refute the myth that these houses are testimonies of
a culturally debased architectural period. It also minimises the importance of the role that the
British presence in Recife might have had in reshaping cultural modes of behaviour.
3

To:
Mariana, Luiza and Gabriel
4
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Thanks are due to:
Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq) for
funding the PhD programme.
Prof. Bill Hillier, for his unfailing open-minded supervision. And for his
constant and much needed reassurance.
Beatriz Campos, Kayvan Karimi, Aso Jaff, Anne Pink, fellow students and
members of staff at the Bartlett School for practical aid and general support.
In particular to Luiz Amorin for his generous help.
Students and staff at the Departamento de Arquitetura, UFRN, for stimuli and
unrestricted collaboration.
Staff at the Divisão de Operações, COMPESA, Recife, specially to Mr. Elias
Higino.
Anita Compton and Josilda Carvalho for helping with textual and photographic
material.
Special thanks are given to my parents, husband and children for renouncing
attention and coping with my prolonged absence.
And, again, to Prof. Bill Hillier and to Dr. Julienne Hanson, for having invented
space syntax.
5
CONTENTS
ABSTRACT 2
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 4
CONTENTS 5
FIGURES AND TABLES 9
DISK CONTENTS 16
INTRODUCTION 17
CHAPTER 1 21
1.1. The problem 21
1.2. The method 30
1.2.1. On the built form and some paradigms 30
1.2.2. On some morphological approaches 41
1.2.3. On space syntax 46
1.2.4. On domestic space 53
1.3. The data 56
1.3.1. The British sample 57
1.3.2. The Brazilian sample 60
1.4. Analytical techniques 62
CHAPTER 2 66
2.1. Size as index of status 66
2.1.1. Counting spaces 67
2.1.2. Sorting out functions 69
2.2. Of size and functions 69
2.2.1. Labels as deceiving clues 70
2.2.2. On the availability of certain rooms 71
2.3. Of size and time 77
2.3.1. The ‘war effect’ 77
2.4. Of functions and labels 81
6
2.4.1. Labels as valuable clues 82
2.5. Of size, time, labels and social groups 92
CHAPTER 3 96
3.1. Walls, doorways and social nexus 96
3.1.1. Spatial configuration and the quest for privacy 97
3.2. Observations 100
3.2.1. Measurements 101
3.2.1.1. Of social groups and structuring 105
3.2.2. Of most integrated functions 112
3.2.2.1. Of functions and general configuration 117
3.2.2.2. Of functions and hierarchy 120
3.2.3. Searching for genotypes 122
3.2.3.1. Of genotypes and time 124
3.2.3.2. Of genotypes, time and social groups 126
3.2.3.3. Capturing genotypes 130
3.2.3.3.1. Nineteenth century 131
3.2.3.3.2. Turning the century 132
3.2.3.3.3. Wartime 134
3.2.3.3.4. Post-war 134
3.3. An overview of British homes 137
CHAPTER 4 142
4.1. The prewar sub-sample 142
4.2. Analytical procedures 144
4.3. A syntactic overview 145
4.4. A house by house perusal 147
4.4.1. E=R>C cases 147
4.4.2. E>R>C cases 157
4.4.3. C>E=R cases 163
4.4.4. E/C>R cases 168
4.4.5. E>C>R cases 171
4.5. Five genotypes, a central theme and some variations 173
4.6. A glimpse forward 179
7
4.6.1. E>C>R cases 181
4.6.2. Cooking centred complexes 185
4.7. A move backwards 189
CHAPTER 5 196
5.1. Earlier times 197
5.1.1. Impressions 200
5.2. The capital 214
5.2.1. Mutations 215
5.3. Remains 217
CHAPTER 6 221
6.1. The sample 221
6.2. Analytical procedures 221
6.3. As a prelude to investigation 222
6.3.1. From the repertoire: a house-by-house syntactic analysis 228
6.3.2. Trends 236
6.3.3. A little speculation 238
6.4. Exploring earlier remains 242
6.4.1. Sobrados 244
6.4.2. Casas térreas 251
6.5. Two space codes and a few variations 256
6.5.1 A summary of colonial space basics 262
CHAPTER 7 265
7.1. The sample 265
7.2. Analytical procedures 266
7.3. A comparative overview 266
7.4. A general approach 269
7.5. A case-by-case approach 270
7.5.1. E>R>C cases 270
7.5.2. Other genotypes 280
7.5.2.1. E=R>C and R>E>C cases 280
7.5.2.2. E>C>R cases 282
8
7.5.2.3. E>C=R types 285
7.6. A foot in the past another in the air 288
CHAPTER 8 292
8.1. Back to the British 292
8.2. Before the British 297
8.3. After the British 298
8.4. A comparative view 299
8.5. On myths and findings 306
AFTERWORD 311
REFERENCES 313
FIGURES AND TABLES 321
9
FIGURES AND TABLES
CHAPTER 1 322
Figure 1. Example of procedure applied to all plans 323
Table 1. British Sample. Basic General Data 324
CHAPTER 2 334
FIGURES
Figure 2. Correlation between the total number of interior spaces and the number of
main living rooms 335
Figure 2.1. Correlation between the total number of interior spaces and the number of
main living rooms across time 336
Figure 2.2. Correlation between the total number of interior spaces and the number of
main living at successive time periods 337
Figure 2.3. Correlation between the total number of interior spaces and the number of
main living at successive time periods 338
TABLES
Table 2. British plans. Basic data 339
Table 2.1. British plans. Availability of main function rooms across the sample 340
Table 2.2. British plans. Basic data across size clusters according to the number of
main function rooms 340
Table 2.3. British plans. Basic data across size clusters and type of ground
occupation 341
Table 2.4. British plans. Basic data across size clusters and time 342
Table 2.5. Frequency distribution of the availability of main day living rooms in
prewar houses 343
Table 2.6. Frequency distribution of the availability of main day living rooms in
postwar houses 344
Table 2.7. Frequency distribution of the availability of rooms for main day function 345
Table 2.8. Families of main living rooms 345
Table 2.9. Main label categories and size 346
Table 2.10. Labels of spaces mainly used for eating 346
10
Table 2.11. Frequency distribution of main families of living room across size
(restricted by the number of bedrooms) and time 347
Table 2.12. Requirements and restrictions for sorting out the sample according
to social status 349
CHAPTER 3 350
FIGURES
Figure 3. Example of procedure applied to all plans (minimal living complex) 351
Figure 3.1. Correlation between mean integration (mean RRA) and differentiation in
integration values (BDF) in the whole sample 352
Figure 3.2. Correlation between mean integration (mean RRA) and other variables 353
Figure 3.3. Correlation between the differentiation in integration values (BDF) and
other variables 354
Figure 3.4. Correlation between average integration (mean RRA) and differentiation
in integration (BDF) across social groups and time 355
Figure 3.5. Correlation between average integration (mean RRA) and differentiation
in integration (BDF) across social groups and time (regression) 356
Figure 3.6. Correlation between average integration (mean RRA) and differentiation
in integration (BDF) for ‘single-function-centred’ complexes across time 357
Figure 3.7. Variation in integration (RRA) for each function in ‘single-function-centred’
complexes across time. 358
Figure 3.8. Correlation between average integration (mean RRA) and differentiation
in integration (BDF) in genotypes across class (1843-1893) 359
Figure 3.9. Correlation between average integration (mean RRA) and differentiation
in integration BDF) in genotypes across class (1894-1914) 360
Figure 3.10. Correlation between average integration (mean RRA) and differentiation
in integration (BDF) in genotypes across class (1915-1922) 361
Figure 3.11. Correlation between average integration (mean RRA) and differentiation
in integration (BDF) in genotypes across class (1923-1930) 362
TABLES
Table 3. British plans. Basic syntactic data 363
Table 3.1. Basic general and syntactic data across class 370
Table 3.2. Basic general and syntactic data across class and time 370