House, culture and development

Abstract

Generally the word house is associated with a building, a material construction, providing or intended to provide shelter. A large part of anthropological and sociological literature on the house is linked to this meaning. An abundance of descriptions of particular houses and types of houses from all over the world can be found dealing with the lay-out of house and plot, construction materials and techniques, architecture, ornaments and furniture. These studies tend to give an impression of overwhelming variety, which is often strengthened by meticulous attention to detail (see for example Oliver 1971, 1975). The classification of this diversity of building structures is probably not feasible, although dimensions for classification have been suggested, such as permanent temporary, differentiated—homogeneous and communal—noncommunal (Altman and Chemers 1980: 157-161). The word house, however, is also used in other ways referring to a home (not necessarily related to a particular building), a family (especially a noble or illustrious one), a commercial establishment and a legislative body. From this angle the house is considered a focal sociocultural entity with a high degree of intimacy and vital economic and ideological (political, juridical, religious) functions. These functions, however, can also be exercised largely within more public physical and social conditions, for example in court or in the church, separated from the house as a focal and intimate socio-cultural entity.