"All men have the same organisms, the same functions. All men have the same needs. The social contract which has evolved through the ages fixes standardized classes, functions and needs producing standardized products. ... I propose one single building for all nations and all climates" (Le Corbusier, 1923). My thesis offers a critique of Le Corbusier's position and contrasts it with the theoretical ideas of home as presented by Kimberly Dovey and other theorists.
Hannes Meyer (1928) identified the following human needs as basis for design: sex life, sleeping habits, gardening, personal hygiene, protection against the weather, hygiene in the home, car maintenance, cooking, heating, insulation and service. Abraham Maslow's (1943) hierarchy of human needs is a theory that proposes five basic levels of human needs. They are: physiological (survival), safety and security, love and belonging, esteem and self-actualization. Manfred Max-Neef (1991) classified the primary human needs as: subsistence, protection, affection, understanding, participation, recreation, creation, identity, and freedom. According to Michael Benedikt (2008), people have six basic values that need to be met on the highest degree of satisfaction: survival, security, legitimacy, approval, confidence and freedom.
All men have similar basic/primal needs, but this is not enough and does not mean that Le Corbusier's proposal for one single building design will satisfy people's needs. This is because even though it is possible to recreate the experience of home in a new house, the form of the house depends on the behavior of the house's inhabitants that is linked to the sociocultural order proposed by Dovey. He states (1985, pp. 38) that "cultural beliefs and social practices represent the ordering system that selects from among these possibilities and shapes the broad range of formal manifestations of home within any sociocultural context. Thus, the particular patterns and rituals of environmental experience and behavior are largely sociocultural phenomena."
It is thus essential to consider a person's traditions and culture since they influence the design of dwellings. Therefore, human needs need to be met with respect to the dweller's cultural background. In the words of Amos Rapoport (1969):
"Culture is the total equipment of ideas and institutions and conventionalized activities of a people."
My home is in the Kingdom of Bahrain, a small island in the Middle East. When I travelled to the United Kingdom (UK) to study at the University of Newcastle, I straightaway noticed the differences between the two locations in terms of dwelling forms. Culture is the reason for this since every country has its own cultural identity which is influenced by many factors, such as the religion and beliefs of its inhabitants. Bahrain is an Islamic nation whose traditions and behavioral patterns of the people are influenced by Islamic laws, and as a result influencing the design of their homes. Therefore, there is a close relationship between the forms of houses and the culture in which they are embedded in (Rapoport, 1969, pp. 4).
The way of life for a Muslim family in Bahrain, such as mine, differs from that of a British family in the UK. On special occasions, my family and I would eat a meal while sitting on the floor, an activity also performed by people of different cultural backgrounds. Unlike those in the United Kingdom, most houses in Bahrain have their kitchens outside the house – thereby preventing the smell of food to enter the dwelling. The interior kitchen is used for the preparation of food as well as for dining at the kitchen table. This applies to my family home which has two kitchens; one outside, the other inside. On the other hand, some houses in the UK have breakfast rooms, whereas ones in Bahrain do not.
"Certain spatiotemporal categories, such as the Sunday dinner or the breakfast room, emerge within each culture. … Patterns of dining, talking, sleeping, studying, and watching television from the bulk of the assumptions that go without saying in housing design. These are patterns that orient us in space, in time, and in the sociocultural context."
- Kimberly Dovey (1985, pp. 38)
The Islamic religion asks there to be segregation between men and women in certain aspects of life. One such aspect is the need for women to cover up from strange men. As a result, proxemic zones (which concerns personal space and territoriality) in houses are influenced by cultural differences. Unlike UK houses that utilize one living area, most houses in Bahrain have two living quarters, known as a majlis, for men and women (depending on the financial status of the home owner). The male majlis is open for the reception of visitors (mostly with an external entrance if permitted) and the female one is left to the family. If a strange man were to violate the women's territory, the outcome can be increased tension. Entry depends on a verbal or appropriate nonverbal invitation. This satisfies the privacy factor needed by the women and the other inhabitants in the home.
Ways of defining territory to feel more secure differ in different cultures. My home, in addition to most homes in Bahrain, has walls surrounding it. Our cars are parked within the walls of our own sanctuary or in garages, unlike the typical UK house that has a front lawn, parking space and no concrete/steel perimeter wall. Rapoport (1969, pp. 80) describes the security of the threshold as "probably related to this constant need to define territory, but the specific manner in which it is define varies in different cultures and periods, and constitutes the element of change. Not only do devices for defining threshold vary, but the threshold itself occurs at different points in the total space."
Furthermore, religion plays a role in the location of rooms in housing design. For instance, the bathroom in a Muslim's home should not be placed in the east corner of the building, and should not be facing Qibla (direction of the sacred shrine of the Kaaba in Mecca, Saudi Arabia).
Conclusion:
All men do have the same needs; however, Le Corbusier was incomplete with his observation. He was incorrect in assuming that the way in which these needs are manifested and can be met is universal through the implementation of a singular standardized building. He comprehended neither the neither the full range of human needs nor the individual differences that exist among people within and across a wide range of nations and cultures throughout the world.
I believe that architects and designers need to be sensitive to and argue for built environments that fulfill not only the basic human needs (e.g., physiological, shelter, security, safety, etc), but also the specific needs of specific people within specific cultures. Therefore, architectural solutions have to be culture-specific, while also satisfying the unique needs of unique home dwellers. This should be a welcome challenge for architects and designers to push themselves to satisfy those human needs, as well as adapt their methods and processes to address the ever-changing cultural variables because cultures are always evolving.
References:
- Benedikt, M. (2006) Human Needs and How Architecture Addresses Them. Texas: University of Texas Press.
- Dovey, K. (1985) Home and Homelessness. New York: Plenum Press.
- Lang, J. (1994) Urban Design: The American Experience. Canada: John Wiley & Sons.
- Maslow, A. (1954) Motivation and Personality. New York: Harper.
- Max-Neef, M. (1991) Human Scale Development: Conception, Application and Further Reflections. New York: Apex.
- Oliver, P. (1987) Dwellings: The House Across the World. Oxford: Phaidon Press Ltd.
- Rapoport, A. (1969) House Form and Culture. Prentice-Hall.
