Architecture in the Fourth Dimension | Boston, Nov. 15 ...

Architecture in the Fourth Dimension | Nov. 15 – 17, 2011 | Boston, MA, USA

Where She Lived, Where He Lived: A Case of Family Homes Connected By “I Do’s” Sebake, TN1 and Sebake, MD2 1Council for Scientific and Industrial Research, Built Environment and 2Council for Geoscience ABSTRACT Human beings regularly engage with the built environment, which comprises of the house, the street outside the front door as well as the local neighbourhood. They may occasionally socialise and/or interact with each other in the local environment (i.e. village, city, or suburb). This regular social interaction provides a platform for the development of the trust and relationships which form the basis for the creation of partnerships and networks. Therefore, it is safe to posit that good-quality spaces (within the built environment) promote social inclusion, socially cohesive behaviour and citizenship; whilst poor quality of urban spaces may contribute to anti-social behaviour. In South Africa, the built environment was shaped by the separate development of the colonial and apartheid planning, and later on the post-apartheid attempts to create human settlements that are more inclusive. This paper explores the use of space in the authors’ respective family homes during the cultural practice of lobola post-apartheid. The paper highlights the impact of political, social and economic changes on spatial use and community interaction related to these homes. The intimacy, the authors have had with their family homes has positioned them perfectly to positively influence the improvement of their current environment and/or the design of more sustainable human settlements in line with Outcome 8 (Sustainable Human Settlements and improved quality of household life), one of government’s 12 Cabinet Lekgotla outcomes.

they change many times throughout their lifetime to suit changing social status, economic status and lifestyles (Osman and Hindes 2005). This dynamic perception of house is therefore relevant to all types of houses across the economic spectrum (Osman and Hindes 2005). Colonial and apartheid planning have left a negative legacy in South African settlements (DOH, 2004). Under the apartheid regime, urbanisation placed extreme pressure on the family structure, essentially destroying the support structures offered by the extended family. Traditional and customary legal structures were used to gain social control (Petty and Brown 1998). Spatially, the result has been the development of course, mono-functional patterns of South African cities characterised by low density, urban sprawl and fragmentation. In the post-apartheid era (i.e. after 1994), the concept of one family per plot continues to contribute towards the sprawling nature of South Africa cities. In addition, cheaper land in the outer parts of cities and beyond is attractive to developers; much of it being converted from agricultural use. This urban sprawling has resulted in an increase in the cost of provision for public infrastructure, higher costs for residential and non residential developments, reduction of transportation effectiveness and limited selection of transport modes, higher energy consumption, reduction in community interaction, greater stress, destruction of the environment and inner city deterioration (Yusuf and Allopi 2004). Indeed, after almost two decades of resolute post-apartheid urban development policy action we are confronted with the harrowing fact that South African cities may be as segregated, fragmented and unequal as they were at the dawn of political liberation (Pieterse 2004).

KEYWORDS: Lobola, cultural practices, integrations, settlements, developing countries.

Aims and questions This paper aims to investigate two aspects related to the authors’ family homes, including the spatial use of the built structure and the connections to neighbours and community within the local settlement, during lobola, an age old African marital custom, as experienced by the authors.

INTRODUCTION As people, we engage with the built environment on a daily basis. This environment comprises of their home, the street outside their front door and their local neighbourhood (Dempsey, 2008). We find it comfortable to socialise and interact in our local environment (i.e. village, city, or suburb), all the while building social networks among our neighbours (Castells, 1997 in Forrest and Kearns, 2000). Regular social interaction provides a platform for the development of the trust and relationships that provide a basis for the creation of partnerships and networks (Desjardins et al, 2002). The built environment is not static; the quality of changeability is an integral part of houses globally (Habraken 1998:7 in Osman and Hindes 2005) as

The research questions derived from this aim are therefore as follows: How are spaces been used during the lobola process? What level of social interaction took place within the neighbourhoods during the lobola process? How have political, social and economic change influenced the use of space and social interactions during such events? 424


should be noted that the primary elements of separation and dispossession had already been established in South African urban areas during colonial (pre-1910) and post-colonial (1910-1948) periods (Swanson 1968 in Napier 2007) by means of the native reserve system of the early colonial towns, the 1913 Land Act (which prohibited black people from owning land outside the Native Reserves of that time) and the Native (Urban Areas) Act of 1923 (Lemon 1991 in Napier 2007). The Group Areas Act of 1950, introduced by the apartheid government, expanded the concept to other parts of life and ensured that this was spatially entrenched. Firstly, in terms of modernism, South Africa’s city planning and management systems and policies were almost entirely imported from the United Kingdom, Europe and the United States. This is evidenced by the development of free standing houses on their own plots, the separation of major life activities (i.e. work, play, movement), and the development of settlements scale to accommodate the domination of the private car as the primary mode of travel (Dewar 2004). Secondly, the policy of apartheid had at its core the separation of racial groups (Dewar 2004) which dictated the development of the inherent current pattern of South African cities (Osman and Kausseit 2008). The planning strategies adopted during apartheid, disadvantaged black people by locating them to their respective underserviced ‘group areas’ and townships in peripheral locations (Adebayo 2010; Todes et al 2000) resulting in exclusion of large portions of the population from economic, social and environmental benefits (Landman 2002). Within three decades of forced removals from existing formal and informal settlements, more than a million black people in urban areas were affected (Lemon, 1991); thus, resulting in the destruction of many settlements in the process (Napier 2007). Between 1950 and 1991 more than 1 million hectares of urban land were racially zoned. This had ramifications in relation to huge proportions of the South African population having to be moved in order to fit the population to the plans, which had built-in disparities among groups in accessing the urban land (Christopher 1997). This separation made housing a key area of marginalization, which further perpetuated inequalities in the South African cities (Adebayo 2010). Although the Group Areas Act was repealed in 1991, there has been very little practical change in the manner that the settlements continue to be developed. Consequently, the South African cities still exhibit apartheid planning heritage, with an urban form that remains predominantly racially defined (Dewar 2004; Shoonraad 2000b; Christopher 1997). Since 1994, a new planning paradigm was adopted in South Africa. This aimed to dramatically change the structure of South African cities from the mono-functional forms to settlements that are sustainable, integrated, with higher densities and

Scope of the paper The authors have observed the spatial use and social connections within their family homes and it is these observations that the paper will present. It will not review the design, architecture, or process of delivering the selected family houses, nor does it seek to study the processes and debates about the custom of lobola.

Relevance of the paper The basic shelter of a family home is regarded as an extension of body image and clothing (Osman 2004) and is therefore closely linked to identity and culture (Ragab 2007). Spatially, the family home may be perceived as patterns of organised spaces – whose structure follows the same social principles – which affect the size, connections and configuration for rooms and the relation between inhabitants (Ragab 2007). This paper explores the use of space in the authors’ respective family homes during the cultural practice of lobola in the post-apartheid era; and offers a historical overview of how modernism, colonialism and apartheid shaped the form of South African settlements. The case studies presented in this paper provide the authors’ lobola experiences within the built environment in the post-apartheid period. According to Breed (2009), people form meaningful relationships with the spaces they occupy and the built form affects and may even hamper social interactions and activities. Globally, houses are dynamic (Habraken 1998 in Osman and Hindes 2005) changing numerous times throughout the peoples’ lifetime to suit their changing social status, economic status and lifestyles (Osman and Hindes 2005).

Structure of the paper The paper has been structured into the following sections: (i) Introduction – introduces the problem, identifies the aims and research questions, and defines the scope and relevance of the paper; (ii) A historical background of South African settlements – presents an outline of the development South African settlements; (iii) Approach – outlines the approach undertaken in the development of this paper; (iv) The case of family homes – presents and reviews the authors’ family homes; (v) Findings and discussion – presents the findings and discusses the family homes reviewed in light of how political changes have impacted on the use of spaces; (vi) Concluding remarks – presents the conclusions and final remarks of the paper; and References – lists all the references cited in the paper. A HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF SOUTH AFRICAN SETTLEMENTS The structure and form of South African urban environments has historically been shaped by two main ideologies; namely modernism and the policy of apartheid (Dewar 2004; Adebayo 2010). However, it

425


mixed in terms of income, use and tenure. Nevertheless, despite the development of policy documents to reflect this, it may be argued that fragmented unsustainable urban forms continue to be developed in South African cities (Schoonraad 2000a).

woman, he makes his intentions known to his family and the process of establishing a connection with the woman’s family commences. An old Age-African custom of lobola is adhered to. This may appear to be a complex and highly formal process, as the representatives of the two families negotiate and mutually agree on the bride price that the man has to pay in order to marry the woman. However, the relevance of the practice for the couple’s marriage is that the process brings the two families together (http://www.essortment.com/marriage-tra, ditionafrica-lobola-36599.html). For the purposes of this paper, the process of lobola as experienced by the authors and their families is briefly described. The family homes are approximately 500km (i.e. approximately 5-hour journey) apart and can only be accessed by means of a vehicle. There were three visits related to the lobola process, which are described in Table 1 below.

APPROACH In response to the aim and research questions, the lobola process is briefly described and the use of space analysed in terms of levels of privacy and location of activities during the events. Following this analysis the impact of the political, social and economic changes on the manner in which the spaces were used during the lobola process will be discussed.

CONNECTING TWO FAMILY HOMES Traditionally (across the majority of South Africa’s African traditions) when a man wishes to marry a

B Description of the visits during the authors’ lobola process

No. 1. 2.

Date (season)

March 2003 (Summer) July 2003 (Winter)

Activities taking place during visit

Duration of visit ±2 hours ±6 hours

Location

Negotiations of the bride price. Witbank Lobola paid, sheep is slaughtered*, gifts Witbank presented to groom’s family and a meal is shared with the groom’s family. 3. October 2003 (Spring) Sheep is slaughtered*, gifts presented to ±6 hours Kromhoek bride’s family, a meal is shared with the bride’s family and the bride’s family sleep over. * In both instances, slaughtering of the sheep represented the acceptance of the groom or bride by their future spouse’s family.

The family homes selected for this study have been selected because of their connections to the authors’ lobola process. These homes are described in more detail in the following sections.

with her family for about a year before commencing with her tertiary education. Her parents lived in this home from 1995 - 2009 before moving to a security complex in another Witbank suburb following a series of burglaries in 2009. The main house has the following accommodation; foyer, living room, dining room, kitchen and scullery, four bedrooms, passage, 2 bathrooms. The living room and three of the bedrooms are north-facing. The outbuilding includes a double garage with an attached bachelor flat with en-suite bathroom.

Where she lived: The bride’s home

Background on the settlement The bride’s family home is located in Witbank on the Highveld in the former Transvaal. Witbank was established in 1890 and coal mining began in 1894. It was proclaimed a town in 1903 and became a municipality in 1914. Witbank is the Afrikaans name for White Ridge, a white sandstone outcrop where wagon transport drivers rested. Witbank is in a coal mining area with more than 22 collieries in the municipal radius. There are numerous power stations, as well as a steel mill in close proximity, all requiring coal. There are four townships east of the city, which are home to blacks and coloureds. Indians reside in northwest of the city. In the post-apartheid period, Witbank is part of the Mpumalanga province. The bride’s family moved to Witbank in 1992. Prior to the move, they had been living in a coal mining village 30km from Witbank. The family moved to the bride’s family home in 1995. She lived here

Description of the family home The bride’s family home is a standalone house located in a sparsely populated suburb in Witbank, Mpumalanga. The site on which the bride’s home is positioned consists of a main building, a double garage with an attached servant’s quarters and a pool. The site is accessed via a vehicle or pedestrian gate north of the main building. It is bordered by a 1,8m high concrete wall on the southern side. The eastern and western boundaries cascade from the south to the north from 1,8m to 1,2m in the front yard. The northern boundary is made of brick and steel palisade allowing visual links to the street. There are four internal gates 426


within the yard, with the gates attached to the western and southern sides of the main house being most frequently used.

building consists of a garage, a living room and bedroom; the second, a kitchen, dining room and two bedrooms and the last building is a kitchen where the water is stored and the open-fire cooking takes place. A pit latrine is situated at the south-eastern corner of the site within the vegetable yard. The site is accessed via a pedestrian gate on the western boundary and is bordered by a wire fence, approximately 1,2m high, on all four sides of the site allowing 360 degree visual links to the neighbouring buildings. All the buildings have north-facing windows.

Where he lived: The groom’s home

Background on the settlement The groom’s family is located in the village of Kromhoek which was a product of the forced removals of the 1970s. It was incorporated in the Lebowa bantustan (established under the Bantustan system in 1954) in the former Transvaal. Although it was seen as home primarily for the Northern Sotho speaking tribes, other tribes such as the Northern Ndebeles, Batswana and VhaTsonga also lived in this bantustan. Lebowa was granted internal selfgovernment in 1972. In the post-apartheid period, it was reincorporated into South Africa and became part of the Limpopo province. The groom’s family moved to Kromhoek in the late 1970s and gained communal land tenure under the local chief. Until then, they had been part of the farming community that served a local farmer.

DISCUSSION OF THE FINDINGS Figure 1 below presents a schematic analysis of the activities common to both the bride’s and groom’s family home, which were during the second and third visits. This figure shows the levels of privacy (i.e. private, private/public and public) as well as the location (i.e. external or internal) for these activities within the family homes. For the purposes of this paper, the levels of privacy may be viewed as the number of people interacting within a given space as follows: private: 20 people (i.e. family, family friends and neighbours). In order to diagrammatically illustrate these levels, each have been given a score (i.e. private (1), private/public (2), public (3). Due to the nature of the lobola process, which includes family members and numerous guests and therefore does not require the performance of daily/mundane tasks (i.e. bathing, sleeping, relaxing, etc.), the locations for the lobola activities are limited to one or two internal spaces and all external spaces.

Description of the family home The groom’s family home is a homestead consisting of three buildings constructed around a courtyard. The buildings were built by the groom’s parents. The groom’s family lived in this house for close to three decades before the groom commenced with his tertiary education. The home is currently inhabited by three people, the groom’s mother, his sister and nephew. The site on which the groom’s house is positioned consists of three buildings. The first

Figure 1: Lobola activities within the bride’s and groom’s family homes

427


The uniting of two families through the lobola process is a joyful occasion for many black African families. This tradition generally takes place at the family homes of the betrothed couple and is widely celebrated by the community that the bride or groom has grown up in. The common lobola activities which took place at each family home are significant in bringing together not just the couple, but their respective families (Figure 1). The figure above illustrates the following: A majority of the activities within the bride’s home were private and private/public. Apart from the slaughtering of the sheep (which took place in the bride’s back yard), all activities took place indoors. It should be noted that at the time of the lobola procedures, the bride’s family had been residing in this home for eight years and none of the neighbours were invited or attended the first and second visits. At the time of the lobola process – the decade into the post-apartheid period – the black families, like the bride’s, had not been fully integrated into the (previously majority white) community they had lived in. What was evident during the first and second visits is that no neighbours were invited or attended; the slaughtering of the sheep was done in the backyard (hidden from public scrutiny) and the private nature of the gathering in welcoming the groom to the family. The integration by black families into previously white communities is still a challenge. This is because during apartheid, privileged white communities in both urban and suburban areas developed social order and local norms, resulting in the new residents remaking the norms of suburbs by avoiding the received cultural rules of the neighbourhood (Ballard 2010). In contrast to the bride’s home, a majority of the activities within the groom’s home were private/public and public. Apart from the sharing of the gifts (which took place in the lounge), all activities took place outdoors, with the welcoming of the bride taking place publicly in the street. Unlike with the bride’s family, the groom’s family had been living in their family home for nearly three decades and a majority of their neighbours were invited and attended the occasion during the third visit. With the groom’s family, a decade (at the time of the lobola process) post-apartheid his family had already been living in the village and had been fully integrated into the community they had lived in for approximately thirty years. In contrast to the bride’s family, the family’s neighbours were invited and attended the gathering, the slaughtering of the sheep was not hidden and the bride was publicly (i.e. in the street) welcomed into her new family. Unlike the white suburban communities, the challenge for underdeveloped areas like the groom’s village is the upgrading and integration of these areas into serviced urban areas (Landman 2002). As with the urban community, during apartheid the rural community developed their own shared identity and

values, which were reflected during the occasion by the order of the division of responsibilities and the organization of the large crowd present during the event. The order and organization exhibited during the event (and many such events in the village) is an indication that regular social interaction exists between neighbours. This regular social interaction provides a platform for the development of the trust and relationships that give a basis for the establishment of partnerships and networks (Desjardins et al. 2002).

CONCLUDING REMARKS The built environment is not static; the quality of changeability is an integral part of houses globally (Habraken 1998:7 in Osman and Hindes 2005) as they change many times throughout their lifetime to suit changing social status, economic status and lifestyles (Osman and Hindes 2005). This dynamic perception of house is therefore relevant to all types of houses across the economic spectrum (Osman and Hindes 2005). Post-apartheid, South Africa continues to confront numerous challenges with regard to addressing the legacy that apartheid has left on the country’s urban environments. The Presidency (2011) in the National Planning Commission: Diagnostic Overview acknowledges that apartheid’s spatial legacy primarily affects the poorest people who live in remote rural areas far from places of work and economic activity and that the reversal of this legacy on South Africa’s housing environments will be an ongoing challenge in decades ahead. There are many cultural traditions (i.e. births, weddings, burials) that take place within South Africa’s housing environments. These occur within the built environment, many within the homes. Given that people form meaningful relationships with the spaces they occupy and that the built form affects and may even hamper social interactions and activities; designers need to be aware of the social dynamics and symbolic connotations a community may have for the spaces created (Breed 2009). The paper suggests that there is a need for further research in order to adequately address the transformation of South Africa’s housing environments. The following suggestions are made: The study of cultural practices within different settlements and housing typologies within a city (i.e. townships, inner city, gated communities) needs to be conducted in order to refine and guide the development of housing and settlements; and Housing policies and standards should in part be shaped by the cultural experiences (which directly impacts on the built environment) of all affected communities in order to accommodate the changeability of the built environment.

428


http://www.npconline.co.za [Accessed June 20, 2011]. Napier, M. 2007. Making urban land markets work better in South African cities and towns: arguing the basis for access by the poor. Urban land markets: Improving land management for successful urbanization. Osman, A. & Hindes, C. 2005. Housing design, urban design and multi-layered environments. , p.11. Osman, A. & Karusseit, C. 2008. Practice and education: Housing and urban environments in South Africa. In Architects’ Third Scientific Conference on Urban Housing in Sudan. Architects’ Third Scientific Conference on Urban Housing in Sudan. Khartoum, Sudan. Pieterse, E. 2004.Untangling ‘Integration’ in Urban Development Policy Debates. Urban Forum, 15(1) 2004. Pretty, J. and Ward, H. 2001.World Social Capital and the Environment. Development (Feb 2001), Volume 29 (No 2), 209-227. Ragab, A.A.M., 2007. Impact of Social Rules on Creating a Liveable Space: The Case of El-Fawakhria Traditional Quarter - Al-Arish -Egypt. Open House, 32(3), 67 - 76. Schoonraad, M.D. 2000a. Some reasons why we build unsustainable cities in South Africa. In Strategies for a Sustainable Built Environment. Strategies for a Sustainable Built Environment. Pretoria. Schoonraad, M.D. 2000b. Cultural and Institutional Obstacles to Compact Cities in South Africa. In Compact Cities: Sustainable Urban Forms in Developing Countries. pp. 219–230. Swanson, M. W. 1968. 'Urban Origins of Separate Development' in RACE, No. 1, July 1968. Institute of Race Relations, Oxford University Press. Pages 31-40. The Presidency (South Africa). 2011. National Planning. Commission: Diagnostic Overview, Pretoria: South Africa. Available at: http://www.npconline.co.za. Todes, A., Dominik, T. & Hindson, D. 2000. From fragmentation to compaction? The case of Durban, South Africa. In Compact Cities: Sustainable Urban Forms in Developing Countries. pp. 231–244. Vladislavic, I., Hilton, J. & Judin, H. 1998. Blank: Architecture, Apartheid and After illustrated edition., NAI Publishers. Walmsley, R.D. & Botten, M.L. 1994. Cities and Sustainable Development: A report by a South African observer team following the Global Forum ’94 Conference: Cities and Development, Manchester. Van der Westhuizen, L. 2005. _infill. reconfiguring public space. Pretoria: University of Pretoria. Available at: http://upetd.up.ac.za/thesis/available/etd05182005-112331/ [Accessed July 27, 2010]. Yusuf, M.P. and Allopi, D. 2004. The impact of urban sprawl on the inhabitants of Ethekwini Municipality. http://www.essortment.com/marriage-tradition-africalobola-36599.html Date visited: 24 June 2010

REFERENCES Adebayo, P.W. 2010. Still No Room at the Inn: PostApartheid Housing Policy and the Challenge of Integrating the Poor in South African Cities. Ballard, R. 2010. “Slaughter in the suburbs”: livestock slaughter and race in post-apartheid cities. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 33(6), pp.1069-1087. Bjornstad, J. 2007. Re-programming public space. Pretoria: University of Pretoria. Available at: http://upetd.up.ac.za/thesis/available/etd03132007-180909/ [Accessed July 29, 2010]. Breed, I. 2009. Mindscape: exploring living space in the urban environment by means of photographic interviews. South African Journal of Art History, 24(1), pp.87–103. Castells, M. 1997. The Power of Identity, Oxford: Blackwell Christopher, A.J. 1997. Racial land zoning in urban South Africa. Land Use Policy, 14(4), pp.311-323. Dempsey, N. 2008. 'Quality of the Built Environment in Urban Neighbourhoods'. Planning Practice and Research. 23:2,249 — 264. Department of Housing. 2004. South Africa's Progress Report Human Settlements Desjardins, S., Halseth, G., Leblanc, P. and Ryser, L. 2002. Services, Social Cohesion, and Social Capital: A Literature Review. Dewar, D. 2004. The relevance of the compact city approach: the management of urban growth in South African Cities. In Compact Cities: Sustainable Urban Forms in Developing Countries. London and New York: Spon Press, pp. 209–218. Forrest, R. and Kearns, A. 2000. Social cohesion, social capital and the neighbourhood. ESRC Cities Programme Neighbourhoods Colloquium Liverpool, June 5-6th 2000 Habraken, J. 1998. The structure of the ordinary form and control in the built environment. Massachusetts: MIT Press. Jencks, M. & Burgess, R. eds., 2000. The relevance of the compact city approach: the management of urban growth in South African Cities. Compact Cities: Sustainable Urban Forms in Developing Countries, pp.209–218. Landman, K. 2002. Gated communities in South Africa: Building bridges or barriers. In International Conference on Private Urban Governance, Mainz, Germany. pp. 6–9. Lemanski, C. 2004. A new apartheid? The spatial implications of fear of crime in Cape Town, South Africa. Environment and Urbanization, 16(2), pp.101 -112. Lemon, A. (ed). 1991. Homes Apart: South Africa's Segregated Cities. Cape Town: David Philip Publishers. Lester, N. et al. (eds). 2009. Township transformation timeline, Pretoria: Department of Co-Operative Governance and Traditional Affairs in collaboration with the European Commission. Maluleke, R.X. 2005. Environmental management at Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality. MTech. Tshwane: Tshwane University of Technology. Manuel, T.A., 2011. Parliamentary speech to launch the Diagnostic Report. Available at: 429