Cathy Keys

Redefining architecture to accommodate cultural difference: designing for cultural sustainability

A theory of ‘cultural sustainability’ in architecture must be underpinned by a conceptualization of architecture that is sensitive to cross-cultural contexts and values and not overly dominated by Western concepts of what architecture is. A number of key areas are thus outlined for design consideration if cultural sustainability is to become more intimately aligned with architectural outcomes. These include the cross-cultural variation in where authority lies in building and design decisions, culturally specific forms of spatial behaviour and the meanings encoded into buildings and environments. The cultural properties of buildings need to be positioned as a subset of the cultural properties of places, and the dynamics of architectural traditions and their time properties need to be understood within varying scales of cultural change processes. Finally consideration is provided to cultural constructs of well-being and social design in the environment.

Interstitial Space and Everyday Housing Practices

Abstract This paper explores the role of interstitial space and everyday housing practices at the domestic scale. Interstitial space is often framed as “empty” or “in-between” space located in the shadows of conventional built form and everyday practices. In this paper, we focus on interstitial space as a site of often undervalued or taken-for-granted housing possibility. We begin the paper by outlining the contours of interstitial space as a theoretical concept before highlighting two cross-cultural examples of domestic housing storage practices within the Australian context: (1) “under the house” in the Queensland vernacular and (2) “close to the wind-break” in a remote Aboriginal community in the centre of Australia. We conclude by drawing attention to the importance of interstitial spatial practices for housing theory and practice and offer suggestions for further research.

Mobilising Indigenous Agency Through Cultural Sustainability in Architecture: Are We There Yet?

This chapter proposes that architectural projects, for, with and by Indigenous people, could have more leverage if the goals of cultural sustainability were adopted, thereby mobilising greater participation and agency more effectively. The sustainability agenda advances resource accountability to moderate economic growth providing socio-economic benefits for future generations. This concern was first raised about the overdeveloped Western world; however, drawing on the writings of Indigenous and other scholars, we found that socio-economic sustainability concepts derived from Western paradigms are not easily adapted to all circumstances and development practices, because Indigenous Australians have not benefited to anything like the same degree as their non-Indigenous counterparts, somewhat undermining cultural sustainability.

The emergence of an architectural anthropology in Aboriginal Australia: the work of the Aboriginal Environments Research Centre

Colonial ethnographers commenced compiling records on Australian indigenous shelters and camps from the 1870s and this work was extended into more complex settlement models by a small number of anthropologists and archaeologists in the mid-twentieth century. Building on this earlier work, a distinctive architectural anthropology has been developed and practised by researchers at the Aboriginal Environments Research Centre (AERC) based at the School of Architecture, University of Queensland, since the 1970s. The broad focus is on the nature of people–environment relationships of Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, but the resulting theories and methods may contribute to ongoing developments in the field internationally. This paper (with the aid of a case study) demonstrates how various research tools in the AERC theoretical frame have been incorporated into design processes, including the constructs of the “intercultural”, “recognition space”, “personhood”, and “cultural landscape”.

Valuing “Under the House”: Women’s Knowledge and the Architectural History of the Stumped Queensland House

Abstract This paper offers a gendered reading of the uses of “under the house” in the raised Queensland house – a house form which has been understood as an expression of vernacular architecture. Architectural writers have emphasised material and climatic narratives when seeking to understand the practice of elevating living areas up off the ground on timber stumps. By contrast, we highlight the value women placed on the everyday use of interstitial housing space under the Queensland house “between the stumps” and beneath the floorboards. In particular we emphasise the socio-cultural importance women placed on these informal housing spaces for domestic activities including washing and drying clothes. Drawing on Australian textual records including a 1944 survey of Queensland “housewives,” we re-consider women’s occupation and valuing of “under the house” and the implications of this as a rereading of Queensland’s “vernacular” architecture.

Designing hospitals for Australian conditions: The Australian Inland Mission's cottage hospital, Adelaide House, 1926

Whilst it is generally recognised that hospitals designed in major Australian centres have drawn heavily on British and American precedent since colonial settlement, little research has been undertaken on these connections in terms of remotely located, small-scale, cottage hospitals. This study of the Australian Inland Missions cottage hospital Adelaide House (1926) contributes to our understanding of strategies used to design hospital environments in the early twentieth century through critical analysis of historical documents and existing literature. Preliminary findings suggest that the adoption or adaptation of international design precedent to meet inland Australian conditions was informed by ideas about climate, gender and race, and, to some extent, the advice of field-experienced nursing sisters.

Preliminary Historical Notes on the Transfer of Aboriginal Architectural Expertise on Australia's Frontier

Aboriginal architecture has only recently been recognised within the architectural history of Australia. This inclusion is of significance because it has the potential to reveal new interpretations of the architectures of post-European settlement in Australia. There is however much to be done, for from the 1940s to the 1980s architectural histories in Australia remained largely silent on the existence of Aboriginal architectures. Later texts acknowledged use of Aboriginal building materials in early settlement architecture but rarely revealed how these materials or the expertise behind their utilisation was transferred. Focusing on the use of building materials, this paper examines case studies aimed at exploring the incorporation of Aboriginal architectural knowledge into European settler architectures at two sites on Australias moving frontier. The first case study explores Aboriginal and European demand for Yuggera-speaking Aboriginal peoples pre-fabricated bark sheets during the 1840s as the frontier reached what is now south-east Queensland. The second examines European incorporation of Aboriginal architectural knowledge associated with spinifex and leaf bough shades in the 1930s as the frontier began impacting on Warlpiri-speaking Aboriginal people in Central Australia. This concern with the fusion of Aboriginal and European architectural material knowledge contributes to an alternative perspective of existing histories of Australias post-colonial architectures and invites further investigation by others.