|
home | franco frescura | architecture | urban issues | lectures | graphic work | postal history | historical archive
PROCESSES AND PRODUCT IN RURAL ARCHITECTURE - A Southern African Case StudyFranco Frescura INTRODUCTIONThe role played by social process in the production of a built environment is a factor seldom recognised in the modern practice of architecture. Since the sixteenth century, when architects began to sever their links to the guilds, the task of design has moved increasingly into the hands of a small group of specialists. While this shift relieved them, in many ways, of straight-jacketed tradition, it also decreased their accountability to the wider community. In time specialist designers developed a public image which portrayed them as idiosyncratic, artistically potent, patriarchal, Renaissance figures, having an intuitive grasp of all factors aesthetic and all matters practical. By implication this meant that they implemented a top-down approach to design which slowly marginalised the consumer group and effectively excluded all but the very rich, or the very poor, from the process of construction. This alienation was aggravated after the 1920s, when many of the world's regional architectures, traditionally endowed with a well-defined taxonomy of forms and textures, began to be eroded by a modernist and internationalist philosophy which eschews such idioms. The result has been the loss of not only many local and folk architectures, but also the traditions and social processes which gave rise to them. Unfortunately, whilst modernism sought to destroy the elements of the old order, it did little to create new symbols. The result was an architecture elitist in nature, and devoid of popular identity. The task of rectifying matters was left to historians, archaeologists and anthropologists whose work since the 1970s has done much to reverse the modernist trend. As a result, increasing emphasis has been laid, in recent times, upon understanding the built environment as the product of social processes. Today, we have begun to understand that the buildings of any given society cannot be studied in isolation of their socio-economic context. Designers are therefore having to learn new skills in order to service a clientele whose demands for greater accountability and a share in the decision-making process are aimed at overcoming the imbalance created by their exclusion from technical production. This has become most particularly relevant in the case of societies whose socio-political realities forefront issues of economic development and basic shelter over questions of fashion, style and aesthetics. It is in this context that the architecture of rural and traditionalist communities have many lessons to offer to the modern architect. Here the cooperative roles of consumer and producer in the creation of a built environment have remained relatively well defined, and many of the textures and forms which typify their buildings are seen to be the outcome of cooperation between kinship, gender and age groups. This paper focuses upon the social and material interactions of such communities in the production of shelter, and suggests that such lessons may find practical application for designers working in the contexts of both developing and developed economies. PROCESS AND PRODUCTThe word "process" describes the physical means employed to achieve a particular goal as well as the historical, social and economic circumstances surrounding such an event; "product" therefore becomes that ultimate goal. Thus, to pick the simple example of an artist's work, students of "process" would consider such factors as social background, economic standing, psychological make-up and the nature of the rendered subject matter; students of "product", on the other hand, might limit their studies to the artist's final output, the aesthetic and compositional properties of the pictorial rendition. It is wrong, however, for analysis to isolate process from product, favouring one ahead of the other, for the two must be seen as parts of an interacting and interdependent whole. The textures and texts derived during process are an integral part of the aesthetics of product, and the skilled builder, crafter or artist often is able to employ these deliberately to give their work added dimension. ARCHITECTURAL STEREOTYPESAn important element in the creation of an architecture is also the idea of "stereotype", particularly when this is applied to the buildings of a region or a culture. A stereotype, or a style as it might also be called, centers upon the forms, textures and decorative motifs of the built habitat. It is the gestalt image of all of these factors. It might, in some instances, also reflect a particular use of space, but this is usually cognitive to the resident and hidden to the casual visitor. Therefore any changes to the visual or aesthetic stereotype of a built environment are usually the manifestation of wider and deep-seated changes in the physical context, economic activities and technological culture of the builders themselves. The Basotho, of Lesotho and the northern OFS, are an interesting case in point. As a group they could not be said to boast of a collective national and thus cultural identity prior to 1835 (Lye and Murray 1980). The writings of Casalis (1833), Widdicombe (1895) and James Walton (1956) reveal that they underwent at least three major changes of domestic architectural stereotype less than 150 years. These, in their own time and in their own turn, were all described by outside observers as "baSotho dwellings" leading to the creation of a concurrent "Sotho style" or stereotype (illustration 1). Under these circumstances, the concept of such a group or "cultural" stereotype must be questioned, not only because in this particular case it may be proved that its form changed three times in the brief period of seven generations, but also because stylistic changes as the result of physical and material fluctuations often precede those made thorough conscious aesthetic and cultural choices. In the debate between function and aesthetics, process generally precedes product. By extension, then, the concept of a regional architecture based upon pragmatic considerations of materials available and prevailing physical environment precedes the development or emergence of an architectural stereotype linked to the idea of a regional or cultural identity. This is not to deny the possibility that architectural stereotypes may exist as part of a group's cultural awareness; it is merely to state that such stereotypes are not constants and that they too are subject to change or manipulation from one generation to the next. THE ARCHITECTURE OF PRAGMATISMThe provision of indigenous shelter in southern Africa has largely been a pragmatic and highly functional process. For a number of historical reasons, the region's rural economy never entered an industrial stage and although settlements of ten to twenty thousand persons were not uncommon (Holub 1881), these areas never achieved a high degree of urbanization as it is conventionally understood by western society. In fact mobility of domicile has always been a desirable quality of rural settlement for economic (Burchell 1822) and mystical (Schapera 1930), as well as political reasons (Peires 1981). Thus although certain sites are known to have been inhabited over a period of many centuries (Fouche 1937), the southern African rural dweller does not appear to have shared his European counterpart's preoccupation with permanence (illustration 2). In fact the formers’ whole concept of land ownership and tenure differed radically from the European example, being based upon a system of common ownership under the stewardship of a traditional tribal head (Davenport and Hunt 1974). Because of these factors, rural architecture has depended directly upon the availability of local building materials for its existence. It is true that at least one group, the Khoikhoi, are known to have made use of dismountable and highly portable dwellings (illustration 3) (Kolbe 1727). It is also true that certain Nguni groups are known to have transported their dwellings, ready-made, over relatively short distances (Kuper 1963). However the former are a distinct exception to the general rule for the region, while the latter are not reputed to have transplanted themselves in this manner with frequency or over any great distance. Thus the assumption that rural architecture derives its existence from the availability of found and natural materials in the immediate vicinity of a settlement must be held to be the rule, rather than the exception. The rural builder uses the natural environment as a ready quarry, obtaining the sticks, the stones, the clay and the grass required from the surrounding countryside. It is therefore a highly functional kind of architecture which uses materials according to their natural properties. This, to a large extent, also has the result of affecting not only the resolution of some details of construction, such as the treatment of the roof apex and the connection between wall and roof at the eaves, but also, by implication, the dwelling form itself, giving rise to the beginnings of an architectural style which, with time, may become incorporated into a larger concept of cultural stereotype. The cone on cylinder, for example, is a dwelling form found universally throughout southern Africa, and although its basic structure remains essentially the same, its details differ markedly from region to region. In the Transkei the eaves overhang is kept small; the apex is poorly resolved with clay packing; the finial has no symbolic or long-term structural significance; and outside functional spaces are loosely defined (illustration 4). In Venda, on the other hand, roof eaves are kept wide; the apex is well resolved in grass thatch; the finial enjoys structural and symbolic status; and outside living areas are tightly defined by a series of sculpted walls, steps, seats and textured floors (illustration 5). Field work conducted in southern Africa between 1976 and 1985 has shown that the images projected by stereotypes among rural people themselves, were based upon aesthetic factors in a dwelling form rather than upon the nature of its structure. This meant that the textures derived through the use of different building materials, or the use of the same material, such as grass, but according to different techniques, contributed as much to the regional identity of the dwelling as did its overall form. On the other hand it was also found that although rural communities generally had an awareness of technological processes involved in the construction of dwellings in neighbouring regions, these were not perceived to be differences so much as variations upon the same theme. The relationship existing between materials, environment and dwelling form is perhaps nowhere better illustrated than in the squatter camps located in the vicinity of some of southern Africa's major urban centres. During the course of a previous study, which included settlements in the western Cape, the Durban-Pietermaritzburg area, Thaba 'Nchu in the OFS and the Winterveld district near Pretoria (Frescura 1982), it was found that congested living conditions increased competition for basic building resources and gave rise to a uniform style of squatter architecture. Interestingly, it was noted that although the building technologies used were an adaptation of the region's rural know-how, in many cases the builders were not newly migrated rural workers but rather second and third generation urban residents who had not as yet been catered for in official housing programmes (Haarhoff 1982). This data has been supported by subsequent research in the eastern Cape (Frescura 1987). This has shown that an absence of natural building materials forced squatters of both local urban and immigrant rural origins to turn to the consumer society about them, using its cast-offs as a new form of found materials (illustration 6). Despite obvious differences in their socio-economic backgrounds, both groups had come to the same pragmatic conclusions regarding their habitat and shared in a common dwelling form built out of a common technology based upon local conditions. The degree of inventiveness shown by both communities in the taking of common objects out of their familiar context and adapting them to fulfill new functions successfully demonstrated a shared ability to grasp the fundamental nature and properties of materials when faced with the economic realities of their situation. THE ECOLOGY OF THE RURAL DWELLINGWhilst the aesthetics of rural architecture are undoubtedly part of its charms, they are also an outward manifestation of yet another important aspect of the rural habitat: the fact that the dwelling is part of a delicate environmental balance, both at the level of an individual unit and at the larger scale of regional settlement. In the past it was common for rural residents to build fires inside their dwellings for both heating and cooking functions. Quite often this was first done outside and it was only a small brazier of hot coals which was finally brought indoors. The smoke from these fires was allowed to rise and percolate through the thatch roof thus effectively fumigating it and discouraging vermin infestation. To a certain extent this process must also be assumed to have been effective where clay walls were concerned. However, higher settlement densities brought about increased competition for roof thatching resources leading many owners to change their roof covering and replace the grass with zinc sheeting (Frescura 1981). As a result it became impossible to build an effective fire within a dwelling without the assistance of a smoke flue. As in the majority of cases the flue has not found popular application in the region's architecture, most persons have ceased to build internal fires thus terminating the fumigation process of their dwellings. One probable result of this action has been the introduction of cement into rural construction in order to reduce or eliminate infestation. Once a family can afford to use cement in its walls, it is likely to cut down on its maintenance efforts by also using this material in the floor. However cement floors are hard and cold to sleep on and therefore European-style furniture will be bought to replace the traditional mats, thus also implying a transition from a local subsistence and craft-manufacturing economy to an externally based cash-using society. However modern furniture joinery is normally based upon a 90° geometry which makes a circular floor plan difficult to furnish. This therefore might bring about a change in the floor plan from the circular to the square, forcing amendments in the roof technology. This process of breakdown need not necessarily begin with fumigation. Often the purchase of furniture has proved sufficient stimulus to bring about changes in both the dwelling's floor plan and its building technology. In other recorded cases the cycle was broken when the family, tired of the constant maintenance required by a clay floor, replaced it with cement. THE ECOLOGY OF RURAL SETTLEMENTThe ecological balance achieved between the settlement of rural man and nature is somewhat more complex, being influenced by such factors as social custom, land ownership rights and traditional agrarian practices. This paper ignores most of these issues and concentrates only upon those elements which bear directly upon the development of infrastructural support to settlement. All settlement, be it rural or urban, tends to generate a certain amount of wastes, partly natural, partly manufactured, which are absorbed and processed during a natural cycle of birth, life and death. In rural areas the midden plays an important role in incorporating some of these wastes into the rural cycle of life with farm animals consuming food scraps and rolling in the spent hearth ashes as a means of controlling ticks. Others wastes are allowed to decompose organically and are simply absorbed into the soil. In more recent times we have seen the rise in southern Africa of large scale rural, semi-urban settlements in such places as Acornhoek, Bushbuckridge, Melelane, Thaba 'Nchu, Mabopane and Dennilton, to name but a few. These towns are endowed with few social amenities and virtually no supporting physical infrastructure. In such areas many of the historical concepts of "homestead" have fallen by the wayside and the control of land for agricultural purposes has been overtaken by the need for residential space. Also the competition for building resources has forced rural builders into using modified rural technologies in order to provide themselves with housing of an acceptable standard. Despite the lack of fresh water and waste removal facilities they have generally met with a remarkably high degree of success. However in some areas population densities have reached such concentrations that natural processes have not been able to keep up with the inflow of waste materials, resulting in pollution of water resources. The outbreaks of cholera experienced in the central and western Transvaal during the summer of 1981-1982 must be attributed directly to the overburdening of rural land by human settlements living in near-urban densities but under rural conditions (Frescura 1983). A COMMUNITY OF BUILDERSThe concept of a vernacular architecture must also be seen to be closely linked to the social processes of rural society. It was found, during the course of current field work, that the construction of a dwelling was considered to be something more than must the provision of shelter; in many ways it acted as an opportunity for the community to collaborate together on a project, turning what was outwardly a social occasion into a display of solidarity between the larger group and the individual family. Not only did this tend to reinforce rural man's sense of identity but, more importantly in architectural terms, it brought the construction and aesthetics of the individual dwelling into line with the community's norms. The symbolism of this act is important. In traditional rural society a great deal of emphasis was, and still is, placed upon role playing and task fulfillment. This creates a strong awareness in individuals of their role in society and their personal contribution to its survival as a production unit. Anti-social behaviour is quickly identified and corrected and peer group pressure plays an important role in suppressing deviancy from the group's norms. This contrasts sharply with modern western urban society where a sense of identity is often associated with deviancy from its norms and, in some instances, is promoted and even applauded. In a sense therefore southern African rural society may be seen as encouraging self-identity through participation in group activities (illustration 7) and, unlike western society where originality of style in domestic architecture is seen as a desirable statement of self, the former uses group participation as a means of ensuring norm conformance by its individual members. In this respect therefore, the differences between urban and rural inhabitants may be seen to centre upon the individual perceptions of their own basic economic and social units. The lowest common social denominator in western urban society is the nuclear monogamous family whose members may participate in the economic activities of the larger community, but generally need not exercise a direct control upon resources or the processes of production in order to ensure their economic survival. The southern African rural social unit, on the other hand, is the extended and potentially polygamous family which traditionally has depended upon its continued control of both natural resources and independent means of production in order to secure its own well-being. The first has currently developed a tendency to emphasise the residence of the individual family and has come to expect that its progeny will move off, often before marriage takes place, to establish core groups of their own. This process of fission therefore tends to stress the survival of an individual as a potentially independent economic unit able to exist apart from the larger family group. The southern African rural community, by contrast, stresses the habitat of the larger group as a whole within which individual members are given residence in commensuration with their age, sex and status (illustration 8). Fission within the group can and often does take place for social and economic reasons, but individuals are not expected to leave before marriage and, in many cases, are encouraged to remain with their spouses within their parent settlement after it has taken place. Where schisms do occur within the larger community, the split is seldom permanent, and symbolic, social and physical links are often maintained between the parts. The retention of such links should in itself be seen to be part of a mechanism for reinforcing the status of individuals (and their families) within the larger social structure, links which emphasise the place of persons within the group as well as the roles of economic collaboration and interdependence existing between the two. The participation of the group in the provision of shelter for the individual family also gives us a valuable insight into the attitudes and values of rural residents. By elevating building to the level of a group activity, the rural dweller places it alongside other communal functions such as harvesting and defence, thus, in a sense, recognizing its importance as an element of rural survival. Rural construction must also be seen in the context of the processes of interaction existing between male and female, young and old in rural society. All members of the community are considered to have a role to play in the building of a dwelling: in some groups the young may weave grass ropes under the guidance of their elders whilst listening to folk tales and singing memory-training songs in the evenings prior to the day of building; the women will be out collecting thatching grass and later will build and plaster the clay walls (illustration 9); the men will seek out the best building timbers, make the roof and thatch it. It must be stated that, although it was found during the course of current research that the division of labour between male and female must, at one time, have been strongly defined, more recently this distinction has tended to disappear, due largely to the prolonged absence of the men, away in the urban areas as migrant workers. This has, in many cases, forced the women into fulfilling some of the tasks of the men in the provision of shelter for their families. Moreover, it has been found that the traditional division of building tasks between men and women is not always constant from region to region. For example one group may assign the task of thatching to women while another may reserve the construction of the entire roof to the men. PRODUCER vs CONSUMERPerhaps one of the more relevant lessons which rural architecture can offer to modern man lies in the economics of its production. At a time when many countries in the developing world are beginning to look to self-help methods as a means of resolving their local housing problems, the architecture of rural man is offering the dynamics which may make such programmes viable. Among the first to point this out was Amos Rapoport who, writing in 1969 (Rapoport 1969), saw vernacular as the link existing between what he termed "primitive" and "high style" architectures. Rapoport's model uses socio-economic terms of reference to describe the processes of architecture at various levels of activity. By applying Rapoport's guidelines it becomes possible to divide the vernacular architecture of the region into five, not separate but interlinked, stages.
In Rapoport's terms it may be said that in all of the above stages building was, and in many cases still is, being conducted by the community as one of its everyday activities, much like hoeing the fields and cooking a meal (Krige and Krige 1943). Its performance involves the community as a whole, most of who have knowledge and personal experience of the processes involved. In all cases the building forms used are part of a larger vocabulary of architecture common to the community as a whole. However changes are noticeable in the final two stages which see the emergence of a class of specialist craftsmen who offer their services in exchange for a fee, usually paid in money. This takes place without necessarily precluding any of the other factors. The consumer remains knowledgeable in the building process and most often is active within it. For the first time, however, a degree of alienation emerges between consumers and producers. The former begin to employ craftsmen for either reasons of skill or of time; the latter have developed special skills which they are able to market profitably. The building form also changes. The historically preferred circular plan is supplanted by the square or the rectangle, a process which also involves a compromise in structure, and hence technology, in order to achieve a dwelling which conforms to the prevailing local architectural style. This process is reinforced by greater conglomerations of settlement which force the rural dweller to turn to new building materials and hence technologies and, in many cases, new dwelling forms. In a larger sense Rapoport's analysis is concerned with the relationship existing in the building process between producer and consumer. In a rural economy the two roles are generally incorporated in the same person. The client more often than not is also the builder, and has an intimate knowledge of the building process and is aware of the type, style and form of the structure which is being built. In advanced urban economies virtually all building activity is in the hands of specialist craftsmen, a factor enforced in some cases by legislation; clients have no hand in and usually no knowledge of the building process; and unless wealthy enough to be able to employ the services of a specialist designer, they will have only the most superficial of choices in the aesthetics of their dwellings. Often the structure will be purchased already completed, much like an appliance in a retail store. CONCLUSIONSRural architecture may, in many ways, be seen to short-cut the relationship established in modern urban society between consumer and producer. Because it uses locally available materials in a most economical way, incorporating them into a highly functional structure, and employs the cheapest labour possible, that of the client, it must be seen to offer the solutions to at least some of the problems which beset the current provision of housing in the developing world. Its value lies not so much in its ability to provide shelter so much as in the social processes that such habitat represents, processes which offer the community an element of choice and a degree of democratic participation in the provision of their own housing. The control of resources and of means of production is an important element in the political and economic empowerment of communities whose sole options often are not between a pretty house and an ugly house, but between having a house and having no house at all. POSTSCRIPTThis paper was published in Open House International. (FRESCURA, Franco. 1992. Process and Product in Rural Architecture: A Southern African Case Study. OPEN HOUSE INTERNATIONAL. CARDO, Newcastle University, Vol 17, Nos 3 and 4, 1992. 10-18) BIBLIOGRAPHYBURCHELL, William J. 1953. Travels in the Interior of Southern Africa. London: Batchworth Press. LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
Copyright @ francofrescura.co.za
|