sign in sign up
<<
Home , Chakri dynasty, Culture of Thailand, History of Bangkok, Mahidol Adulyadej, Traditional Thai house

Swinburne University of Technology | Faculty of Health, Art and Design

The changing and hybridising concept of home in the space and architecture of from the 19th century to the present

Dissertation by Teerapatt Prapapyuenyong

Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of

Doctor of Philosophy in Design (Architecture)

Swinburne University of Technology (Hawthorn), Melbourne, Australia

(Submitted May 2019)

1

2

3

4

Abstract

Bangkok today is the result of a complex and evolving modernisation process that began under King IV (r. 1851-1868) and continued in various forms during the peaks of his successors Rama V (r. 1868-1910) and Rama IX (r. 1946-2016) as well as during the short- lived reign of The People’s Party (1930-1946). Over this time, the dual relationship between land and water, and between sacred and profane morphed according to different approaches, different ideologies, and different relationships with notions of the West to form a unique Thai identity that hybridised local practices and Western influences to create the urban form of 21st-century Bangkok.

The thesis argues that this hybridised identity is manifest at both physical and phenomenological levels. Moreover, it has been shaped by profound social and economic change brought about by a combination of top down and bottom up processes such as royal buildings, urban transformation programs, the social and economic change brought about by Chinese immigration, and the rise of the Sino-Thai middle class. These were underpinned by a unique relationship with Western influences and Western economic powers (in particular that of the USA) to modernise on the country’s own terms. This research elaborates the theory of place/sense of home from the , drawing on the work of Edward Relph, Yi-Fu Tuan, and Doreen Massey. Crucially, it also engages with Christian Norberg-Schulz’s concept of dwelling of reading the ‘language of architecture’ from the four modes of dwelling (settlement, urban space, public building, and house) in the planning, streets, and buildings in a case study area of the eastern area of . This area has been central to the history of urban development in Bangkok during the four phases of modernisation under consideration.

The research analyses the evolution of the Thai concept of home from physical evidence such as photography and in-person observation of the eastern area of Rattanakosin Island, including parts of Sukhumvit Road, which contain streets and buildings that were built during the era of modernisation from the mid-19th to the 21st

5

centuries, thus representing the modernisation policy of three different Thai kings and The People’s Party.

I have introduced the idea of looking at the royal modernisation policies and processes as a key social mechanism involved in hybridising the Thai sense of home. In this context, royal modernisation policy is not just a historical movement; it is also a frame for my research analysis in discussing the evolution of the Thai concept of home.

6

Preface

Bangkok is the place Bangkokians call home – a place I have called home. Its built environment underwent dramatic urbanisation from the mid-19th century to the 21st century via the modernisation programs of Thai kings and The People’s Party. Their modernisation policies and processes made the city and architecture modern like the West while retaining Thai identity. At the phenomenological level Bangkok’s modern architecture preserved Bangkok’s original identity of place in a way that hybridised it with Western influences. In the 21st century, I have experienced the urban space and buildings of modern Bangkok becoming even more like those of the West. Complex infrastructure delivering water, electricity, road systems, highways, and public transport (BTS sky train and MRT subway) has been built to support a modern, Western-style way of life, along with modern buildings including offices, shopping malls, high-rise apartments, and mass-housing projects but the space of Bangkok has not become that of a wholly Western city. Traditional spaces such as the , the Royal Playground, Buddhist temples, and Hindu-Buddhist shrines coexist with modern spaces and architecture.

7

Figure A: The nearly completed phra meru of Rama IX in September 2017. (Source: Photographed by Urkarn Kajonrungsilp.)

Figure B: On the way to worship the body of Rama IX at the Grand Palace in May 2017. The green-roofed building in the middle distance is a traditional building in the Grand Palace that contains the royal coffin of Rama IX. (Source: Photographed by the author. Note that all photographs and diagrams in this thesis have been created by the author unless otherwise stated.)

8

When King (Rama IX, r. 1946–2016) died in October 2016 his death transformed the built environment of modern Bangkok into a space of worshipping and mourning. The Grand Palace and Royal Playground on Rattanakosin Island, which had served public purposes and as tourist destinations, were transformed into places for performing the ritual of the king’s . A year later, the body of the dead king was placed in the middle chamber of a phra meru,1 a pyramid-like structure with five peaks (figure A) imitating Mount Meru and burned. I attended Rama IX’s cremation in the Grand Palace, and experienced the change in Thai society after his passing away as we all wore black and expressed sincere grief by visiting the Grand Palace and Royal Playground (figure B).

Figure C: A portrait of Rama IX at Erawan Shopping Centre. This portrait was erected at one of the shopping centre’s entrances, facing Sukhumvit Road.

I saw the entire city change its daily activities in response to the king’s death. On one of the city’s most important roads, Sukhumvit, I saw giant portraits of the late king

1 Words in bold are defined in the glossary. 9

erected at notable shopping centres such as Paragon, CentralWorld, and Erawan (figure C) to show respect. In the domestic sphere, houses such as my family home and those of my cousins displayed portraits of Rama IX on the wall, and residents worshipped and prayed for the king going to heaven. During that trip, seeing the transformation of urban space, buildings, and houses to serve the purpose of mourning the late king showed me how Western influence and local culture coexisted in modern Bangkok, with modern space and architecture accommodating practices associated with traditional belief. It sparked my curiosity about how the modern space and architecture of Bangkok have contributed to change and hybridisation in the Thai identity and idea of home. In making sense of these phenomena, this study considers the royal modernisation policies and processes of the Thai kings and People’s Party in the light of the theory of place/sense of home to see how the Thai concept of home, specifically, has evolved through modern architecture. It sees that evolution as a response to the sociopolitical interactions of the modernisation efforts of Thai kings with Western influences from the mid-19th to 21st centuries. The resulting hybridisation of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model with different forms of modernisation has resulted in the juxtaposition of traditional (sacred) and modern (profane) spaces that I experienced during my trip to Bangkok that momentous July.

10

Acknowledgements

Researching the doctoral degree is a long and lonely journey. Researching architecture and urban planning of modern Bangkok at the phenomenological level is very different because there are many new things and challenges to go through. It requires a significant amount of time, patience, and support of many people. My biggest thank is given to my Principal Supervisor, Dr Flavia Marcello, she has strong knowledge in architectural theory and research method. Her expertise helped to build up my research objective and theoretical framework at the initial stage. Not only the academic skills she contributed to me also the passion and enthusiasm for design research were passed to me and my research. Marcello always kept pushing and strengthening my research and writing skills beyond my expectation. Importantly, I would not able to complete my research without my Associate Supervisor, Dr Quoc Phuong Dinh, his proficiency and experience in the study guided me to study changing Thai concept of home in Bangkok. Some of his books and papers inspired my dissertation’s structure, especially the idea of studying the changing sense of place of the city in . From the early stage of my research, Phuong Dinh gave me good directions in researching whether in building the main argument, structuring the contents, and developing the writing style. Without Dr Kirsten Day it would not be possible to begin the degree, Day wrote me a recommendation letter to support my PhD application and was part of the review panel. Special thanks also to Dr Carolyn Barnes and my review panel: Dr Nanette Carter (Chair), Dr Daniel Huppatz and Dr Mozammel Mridha. They gave me valuable feedback throughout. Thai scholars from University also gave constructive feedback, comments, and research samples. Dr Rachaporn Choochuey helped me to identify the research gap and suggested books which helped me to choose the appropriate method to use for my research argument. Dr Chomchon Fusinpaiboon introduced me to much Thai architectural research, and many of them gave my good research references. From my trip to the 13th ICTS (International Conference on Thai Studies) from 15–18 July 2017 in

11

Chiang Mai, I had a chance to meet and discuss with Dr Koompong Noobanjong. He advised me to know some Thai researchers who studied on phenomenology; it made me understand my research objective and gap better. Most significantly, I am in debt with my family in Melbourne, Australia and back to my home, Bangkok, Thailand. In Melbourne, my two sisters were with me during my study in Australia. In Bangkok, my parents and cousins provided me with spiritual and financial supports. Ben Hourigan edited the thesis for language, style, and clarity, and gave some advice about structure and consistency. Here, I show my sincere regards to all of those who supported me during my doctoral candidature.

12

Declaration

This dissertation contains no material which has been accepted for the award to the candidate of other degree or diploma, except where due reference is made in the text of the dissertation. To the best of my knowledge, this dissertation contains no material previously published or written by another person except where due reference is made in the text of the dissertation.

Teerapatt Prapapyuenyong

…………………………………………………

Signed Date: 29 May 2019

13

14

Table of Contents

Abstract…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….….5 Preface………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….7 Acknowledgements…………………………………………………………………………………………………..…11 Declaration…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….……13 Table of contents…………………………………………………………………………………………………………15 List of Illustrations……………………………………………………………………………………………………….23 Chronology of the Chakri ………………………………………………………………………………..27 Glossary……………………………………..……………………………………………………………………………….28 Thai terms……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………28 Philosophical and architectural terms………………………………………………………………………….31 Research terms…………………………..……………………………………………………………………………….37 1. Introduction…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….39 Structure………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..……....39 Differences between house, home, and the concept of home…………………..……………….……44 Existing Thai scholarship on the Thai concept of home………………..………………………………….45 Limits to applying the research method to study Thai concept of home via the theory of place/sense of home………….………………………………………………………………….45 Identifying gaps in research on the Thai concept of home………………………..………….46 Gaps in existing scholarship on the Thai concept of home……………………………………………….47 Contribution to knowledge………………………………………………………………………………………………51 2. A sense of place/home, space, and architecture: Literature review…………..……………..53 Challenges involved in studying the Thai concept of Home through the theory of place/sense of home……………………………………………………………………………………………………….54

15

Limits to studying the Thai concept of home in Thailand………………………………………54 Problems in studying the Thai concept of home through the theory of place/sense of home………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…...56 Identifying a new approach to studying the Thai concept of home…………….….…….63 Theory of place/sense of home………………………………….…………………………………………………...65 The essence of sense of place/home…………………………..……………...... 65 Sense of place/home as phenomenology in architecture………………………………………68 Sense of place/home as a site of social construction…………………………………………….71 Sense of place/home and space……………………………………………………………………………72 Understanding of sense of place/home in the 20th century………………………………….77 Understanding of sense of place/home in the 21st century………………………..………..80 Structure of concept of home (‘four modes of dwelling’) in architectural space………………85 Two aspects of concept of home as place identity in architecture……..…………………85 Settlement……………………………………………………………………………………………………………86 Urban space……………………………..………………………………………………………………………….89 Public building………………..………………………..……………………………………….…………………93 House………………………..…………………………………………………………………………………………95 Conclusion……………………………………..……………………………………………………………………………..101 3. The changing Thai concept of home in Bangkok: Methodology………………………………103 Analytical framework for studying the architecture of Bangkok at the phenomenological level...... 104 Interpretation of Thai concept of home through architectural space…………………………….105 ‘Language of architecture’ in existential space………………..…………………………………………….107 Reading the concept of home through the meaning of architecture…………..………107 Morphology…………………..…………………………………………………………………………………..109 Topology…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….111 Typology…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….113 Primary research……………………………………………………………………………………………………………115 Complexity of fieldwork…………………………..…………………………………………………………115

16

Understanding the space of Bangkok existentially…………………………..…………………115 Bangkok before modernisation…………………………………………………………………………..120 Bangkok after modernisation……………………………………..……………………………………..122 Secondary research………………………………………………………..……………………………………………..125 Existing literature: Western and Thai scholarships…………………….…………….…..…….125 Design methods………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…128 Conclusion…………………….…………………………………………………………………………….………………..131 4. Bangkok’s concept of home: A multilayered history……………….……...………………..……135 The origin of Thai culture……………………………………………………………………………………………….136 Changing nature and the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model……………..……………136 The traditional social system of sakdina……………………………………………………………..142 Chinese migration……………………………………………………………………………………………...146 Bangkok as sacred capital………………………………………………………………………………………………151 Founding Bangkok: The Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model layer…………………….151 Making the space of Bangkok hierarchical………………………..……………………………….159 Sanctifying Bangkok………………………………………..…………………………………………………163 Contradictory Bangkok: The geocultural aspect……………………………………..…….……168 The four stages of modernisation from the mid-19th to the end of the 20th century..….171 King (Rama IV, r. 1851–1868): The beginning of modernisation and the shifting of Thai identity………………………………………………………………………………………172 King Chulalongkorn (Rama V, r. 1868–1910): Mastering modernisation and hybridising the Thai identity……………………………………………………………………………….174 The People’s Party: Modernisation for the people and the weakening of Thai identity…………………………………………………………………..………………………………………….177 King Bhumibol (Rama IX, r. 1946–2016): American modernisation and the return of Thai identity…………………………………………………………..…………………………….…………….180 Conclusion……………………………………………………………..……………………………………………………..189 5. Bangkok before modernisation, 1783–1851……………………………………………………………191

17

Exploring the space and architecture of traditional Bangkok……………………..………………….191 Transforming the landscape of Bangkok from Ayutthaya………………………..…………193 Applying the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model to Bangkok……………………………195 The ‘four modes of dwelling’ in traditional Bangkok…………………………………………..196 Settlement: Assembling sacred and profane spaces……………………………………………………...200 Superimposing the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model on the aquatic town of Bangkok………………………………………………………………………………………………………..……202 The dualism of sacred and profane spaces………………………………………………………...204 The phenomenon of being inside the inside………………………………………………………..212 Urban space: Overlap and hybridity…………………………………..………………………………………….214 The overlap of sacred and profane spaces………………………………………………………….214 The structure of the urban interior……………………………………………………………………..216 The canal as an urban street connecting sacred and profane spaces………………….220 The hierarchical and flexible relationships between sacred and profane spaces…221 Public buildings: A complex understanding of public space……………………………………………223 Two kinds of public houses in Bangkok’s water and land settlements…………………223 Private dwellings: The hierarchical overlapping of public and private…………………..……….224 The public function of the …………………..…………………………..226 The private function of the traditional Thai house………………………………………………229 Complex space use in the traditional Thai house………………………………..………………235 Conclusion: Summarising the Thai concept of home as a typological meaning of architecture in Bangkok from 1783–1851……..……………………………………………………………...236 6. The beginnings of modernisation and the shift in Thai identity under King Mongkut (Rama IV, r. 1851–1868)…………..…………………………………………………………………..……………241 Settlement: Integrating sacred and profane spaces……………………………………………………….241 Transforming the organic settlement of Bangkok……………………………..……………….241 Changing the order of sacred and profane spaces………………………………………………243 Urban space: Introducing the space of modernity in a Thai way……………………………..…….244 New Road and Bamrung Road……………………………………………………………..244

18

Changing urban interior……………………………………………………………………………………..245 The new urban streetscape of modern roads……………………….…………..………………..247 Public buildings: Traditional buildings in modern space…………………………………………………250 Private dwellings: Adapting to modernity………………………………………………………………………251 Shophouses for the Sino-Thais: A new overlapping of public and private spaces…251 Bringing the lower class to live on land like the upper class………………………………..254 Conclusion: Summarising the Thai concept of home as a typological meaning of architecture in Bangkok from 1851–1868……….…………………………………………………………….255 7. Mastering modernisation to hybridise Thai identity under King Chulalongkorn (Rama V, r. 1868–1910)………………………………………….…………………………………………………………….259 Settlement: Bangkok, the capital of a modern monarchy………………………………………………259 Modern space as royal space……………………………………………………………………………..259 Introducing the formal public space on Rattanakosin Island……………………………...260 Urban space: Imposing royal space on the modern space……………………………..………………262 Repurposing the Royal Playground for the public……………………………………………….262 …………………………………………………………………………………….264 Reordering the urban interior……………………………………………..……………………………..266 The modern road as the path of the Thai king……………………………………..…………….268 Public buildings: Merging with modern architecture……………………………..………………………269 A new type of public space in Bangkok……………………………………………………………….269 The limited modernisation of sacred, land-based temple architecture…………..…..270 Private dwellings: Modern living in a Thai way for the ruling class…………………………………271 Vimanmek Mansion: Excising the public function from upper-class housing..…….272 The hybrid design of Chakri Maha Prasat Throne Hall: Rama V’s house as a symbol of incorporating the West in a Thai way………………………..………………………….……….274 Norasingh House: A house without a public function for the upper class…..……….276 Conclusion: Summarising the Thai concept of home as a typological meaning of architecture in Bangkok from 1868–1910…………………………………..………………………………...279

19

8. Transforming Bangkok into a people’s city and the weakening of Thai identity (1935– 1946) under The People’s Party…………………………………………..…………………………………….283 Settlement: Transforming Bangkok into the people’s city……………………………….…………….283 New order of sacred and profane spaces………………………………..………………………….284 Transforming Rattanakosin Island from Thai king’s place into people’s place….…284 Urban space: The people’s modern-sacred space…………………………..…………….….……………285 Urban interior of People’s Party………………………………………………………………….……..285 Modern road that serves for public……………………………………….……………….……..…..287 New Public buildings: Turning to be a space of people…………………………………………..……..288 Repurposing the Royal Playground for public use……………………..……..…….………….289 Repurposing the Ratchadamnoen Avenue for public use……………..…….…….……….290 The Supreme Court Building……………………………………………………………………………….292 The Chaloemthai Theatre…………………………..………………………………………………………294 The Department of Public Relations Headquarters……………………………………………..294 Converted public buildings from houses of the upper class…………………………………296 The changing public realm………………………………………………………………………………….298 Private dwellings: Modern living that serves for the working class…………………….………….298 Mass housing and the new hierarchy in the Sino-Thai…………………………..….………..299 The new order of the overlap of public and private spaces in the detached house of Sukhumvit Road……………..………………………………………………………………………………….302 Conclusion: Summarising the Thai concept of home as a typological meaning of architecture in Bangkok from 1935–1946………………..………………………………………………..….304 9. The American modernisation of Bangkok and the return of Thai identity under King Bhumibol (Rama IX, r. 1946–2016)………………………………………..…………………………………..307 Settlement: The modern landscape of ritual………………………………………………………..………..308

20

A new direction for modernising Bangkok under the influence of the United States………………………………………………………………………………………………………….……..308 Different degrees of integrating Western and Thai culture in the ‘flat’ settlement system…………………………………………………………………………………..…………………………..309 Rearranging sacred and profane spaces……………………………………………….……………311 Urban space: A space of inconsistency………………………………………………………..…………………314 From Bamrung Mueang Road on Rattanakosin Island to Sukhumvit Road: The site of reordering sacred and profane spaces………………………………….………………………..314 Urban interior of inner-contrast……………………………………………..………………………….318 Modern roads supporting the coexistence of sacred and profane spaces…………..321 Public buildings: The inner-contrast between sacred and communal spaces…………….…..325 CentralWorld shopping centre………………………………………………..………………………….326 Bangkok’s new parliament complex…………………………………………………….…………….329 The Mahanakhon Tower…………………………………………..………………………………………..331 The cremation of Rama IX: The island is sacred once more…………………………………334 Private dwellings: The coexistence of sacred and profane in different house types……….335 Different degrees of public and private spaces use in urban and suburban areas……………………………………………………………………………………….....…………………....335 High-density residential: Apartments……………………………………………………….………..338 Medium-density residential: Shophouses……………………………………….…………………..341 Low-density residential: Suburban houses…………………………………………………..……..343 Re-exploring the changing space, architecture, and identity of Bangkok as the result of royal modernisation policies and processes………………………………………..…………………………348 The evolution of Bangkok’s modernisation…………………………………………………………350 The ‘four modes of dwelling’ in modern Bangkok……………………………………………….352 Modern Hindu-Buddhist urbanism…………………………..…………………………………………354 Conclusion: Summarising the Thai concept of home as a typological meaning of architecture in Bangkok from 1946–2016………………………………..………………..………………….358 10. The hybridising Thai Concept of home………………………………………………………..……….361

21

The evolving Thai concept of home…………………………………………….…………………………………362 Reconstructing the dualism of sacred and profane spaces……………………………….……………366 Reading the ‘language of architecture’ to arrive at a hybrid sense of home……………….….367 The theory of place/sense of home and the hybridised concept of home in Bangkok……………………...... …………………...... 369 The hybridising Thai concept of home in Bangkok: The author’s experience…………………372 Before studying the evolution of the Thai concept of home……….……………….………372 After studying the evolution of the Thai concept of home…………………………..………372 Conclusion: The hybrid concept of home……………………………………………………………………….374

11. References……………………………………………………………………………………………………………377 Appendix: A timeline of the to Rama IX……………………………………………..391

22

List of illustrations

Figure A: The nearly completed phra meru of Rama IX in September 2017...... 8 Figure B: On the way to worship the body of Rama IX at the Grand Palace in May 2017. ………………………………8 Figure C: A portrait of Rama IX at Erawan Shopping Centre...... 9 Figure 1: A modern house in Bang Na, built with modern methods in a traditional style...... 48 Figure 2.1: The overall conception of place/home...... 65 Figure 2.2: The conception of place/home (topophilia) in the book Topophilia, by Tuan...... 66 Figure 2.3: The relationship between a sense of place/home and space...... 74 Figure 2.4: The conception of place/home in the 20th century...... 77 Figure 2.5: The conception of place/home in the 21st century...... 80 Figure 3.1: The area for a case study of Bangkok before modernisation...... 117 Figure 3.2: The area for a case study of Bangkok after urbanisation. …………………………………………………………118 Figure 3.3: Note-taking, ‘Historical Sequence’ of the history and , ‘Brainstorming’ on the philosophy of place and sense of home, and ‘Map Figure’ showing geographical differences. ………………….128 Figure 3.4: Sources on the ...... 129 Figure 3.5: The complexity of the philosophy of the concept of home...... 130 Figure 3.6: A more innovative use of the Brainstorming Webs method...... 130 Figure 4.1: The glaciers in Asia with the glaciated areas marked in light blue...... 137 Figure 4.2: Migrations of people and Thai culture around Bangkok in the Asian region, 100,000 BC to 1782 AD. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….138 Figure 4.3: The Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model...... 139 Figure 4.4: Town planning of Rattanakosin Island showing the sacred buildings of Bangkok...... 143 Figure 4.5: The structure and mechanism of sakdina society...... 145 Figure 4.6: The demographic transformation of Sino-Thais...... 149 Figure 4.7: A painting of informal aquatic life from Pho. ……………………………………………………………………153 Figure 4.8: A scale model of informal aquatic life from the Rattanakosin Museum...... 154 Figure 4.9: The Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model in plan. …………………………………………………………………….155 Figure 4.10: Land elevation of the Chao Phraya Basin in Bangkok...... 159 Figure 4.11: The city pillar of Bangkok, present day...... 164 Figure 4.12: A painting from , illustrating life in an aquatic settlement...... 167 Figure 4.13: The canal network of Bangkok...... 169 Figure 4.14: A scale model of traditional Thai life from the Rattanakosin Museum...... 169 Figure 4.15: The process of hybridising Thai culture with Western culture in modern society...... 186 Figure 5.1: Thailand in the 19th century, showing the rivers that form the ...... 192 Figure 5.2: Modifications of the Chao Phraya River from the Ayutthaya era...... 194 Figure 5.3: The architectural reflection of existential space (‘four modes of dwelling’) in old Bangkok...... 198 Figure 5.4: The kingdom of Siam, including Bangkok as the capital along with smaller cities...... 200 Figure 5.5: The strong relationship between old Bangkok and the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model. .... 201 Figure 5.6: The traditional settlement of Bangkok...... 203 Figure 5.7: The built environment of the Grand Palace...... 205 Figure 5.8: Looking from within the built environment of the Grand Palace...... 205 Figure 5.9: Penetration of canals and water settlement inside Rattanakosin Island...... 207 Figure 5.10: An illustration of sacred life on land on the walls of Wat Pho...... 208 Figure 5.11: A 3D conceptual model of the hierarchical-overlapping settlement of Bangkok...... 209 23

Figure 5.12: 3D conceptual modelling of a view from Rattanakosin island...... 210 Figure 5.13: A 3D conceptual model showing lower-class aquatic space...... 211 Figure 5.14: An aerial view of Bangkok...... 215 Figure 5.15: A 3D conceptual model showing the urban space of traditional Bangkok...... 216 Figure 5.16: Correspondence of the urban interior with the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model...... 217 Figure 5.17: Degrees of public and private spaces in types of traditional Thai house...... 225 Figure 5.18: The conceptually hierarchical floor of a traditional Thai house...... 226 Figure 5.19: Section of a traditional Thai house, illustrating the conceptually hierarchical floor...... 227 Figure 5.20: Comparing the section of a traditional Thai house with the cosmological model...... 231 Figure 5.21: The conceptually hierarchical floor of a traditional Thai house...... 232 Figure 5.22: The spatial relationship between sacred and profane spaces...... 239 Figure 6.1: A map of Bangkok in the reign of Rama IV...... 242 Figure 6.2: The reshaped spatial structure of profane and sacred spaces in the urban interior of Bangkok. 246 Figure 6.3: 3D modelling of the row-house system on New Road...... 248 Figure 6.4: Comparison of housing sections before and during the modernisation of Rama IV...... 251 Figure 6.5: Sacred and profane spaces in a relationship of partial merging...... 257 Figure 7.1: A map of Bangkok in the reign of Rama V...... 261 Figure 7.2: The Royal Playground during preparation for the phra meru of Rama IX...... 264 Figure 7.3: Rama V’s jubilee in 1908 on Ratchadamnoen Avenue...... 265 Figure 7.4: The urban interior of Bangkok with a flattened spatial structure of sacred and profane spaces. 266 Figure 7.5: A map of the buildings of , which served as a royal residence...... 272 Figure 7.6: The Vimanmek Mansion served as a residence for the from the reign of Rama V. . 273 Figure 7.7: The Chakri Maha Prasat Throne Hall is located in between the Dusit and Amarinda Vinichai Hall in the Grand Palace. ………………………………………………………………………………….………………………………………………… 275 Figure 7.8: Norasingh House, built by Rama VI for Chao Phraya Ramarakob...... 278 Figure 7.9: The plan of Norasingh House...... 278 Figure 7.10: Sacred and profane spaces in a relationship of inner-merging with the superimposing of sacred space...... 280 Figure 8.1: Bangkok in the reign of Rama VIII...... 285 Figure 8.2: The urban interior of Bangkok removed Mount Meru to transform the space for . . 286 Figure 8.3: A map of Bangkok in the reign of Rama VIII...... 289 Figure 8.4: The Royal Playground, on the right, was repurposed as a Sunday market...... 290 Figure 8.5: The on Ratchadamnoen Avenue...... 291 Figure 8.6: Location of the six columns inside the entrance of the Supreme Court Building...... 293 Figure 8.7: The entrance of the Supreme Court Building, built 1939–1943...... 293 Figure 8.8: The Chaloemthai Theatre opened in 1933 and was refurbished between 1949 and 1953. ………294 Figure 8.9: The Department of Public Relations Headquarters, built in 1963...... 295 Figure 8.10: “Don’t and Do in Thai Culture” poster issued by the Office of the Prime Minister in 1940...... 296 Figure 8.11: The Norasingh House, serving as Thailand’s Government House...... 297 Figure 8.12: Row houses on Dinsaw Road...... 200 Figure 8.13: House 34 on Nanatai laneway of Sukhumvit Road functioned mostly as a private space...... 300 Figure 8.14: Comparison of the development of Bangkok’s planning before (top) and after (below) urbanisation of the case study area before modernisation (for studying urban space and individual buildings) and Case study area after modernisation (for studying urban space and individual buildings) respectively.

24

The mid-brown area represents the urban area where chomchon were located; some developed into slums. The dark-brown area represents the suburban area where mubanjadsaan were located. ………………….…….301 Figure 8.15: The plan of house number 5 in Ruamrudee Laneway of Sukhumvit Road...... 302 Figure 8.16: Dualism with inner-imposing of profane space...... 306 Figure 9.1: The settlement system of Bangkok under the reign of Rama IX...... 309 Figure 9.2: The superblock morphology of Bangkok...... 310 Figure 9.3: The Royal Playground used for sacred and profane purposes...... 312 Figure 9.4: A giant black-and-white portrait of Rama IX erected on Sukhumvit Road to pay respects to the late king...... 312 Figure 9.5: The skyline of Bangkok in the 21st century. ……………………………………………………………………………..313 Figure 9.6: The case study area and important roads in Bangkok...... 315 Figure 9.7: The urban space of Bangkok in the 21st century...... 316 Figure 9.8: Two Thai shrines in modern Bangkok...... 317 Figure 9.9: A floating shrine in a shophouse. ……………………………………………………………………………………………..317 Figure 9.10: Inner-contrast of sacred and profane spaces in the urban interior of Bangkok...... 319 Figure 9.11: People worshipping at the Erawan Shrine on Sukhumvit Road...... 320 Figure 9.12: The complex layers of a Bangkok street: the modern road, skywalk, and BTS...... 323 Figure 9.13: A highway connecting urban and suburban areas...... 323 Figure 9.14: The built environment of an allocated village in Bang Na...... 324 Figure 9.15: Flexible space use in the ground-floor plan of CentralWorld...... 327 Figure 9.16: The Trimurti Shrine located in front of CentralWorld...... 328 Figure 9.17: The design of Thailand’s new parliament complex, Suppaya-sapha-satan...... 330 Figure 9.18: Section of Suppaya-sapha-satan...... 331 Figure 9.19: The MahaNakhon building, completed in 2016, represents disorder and modernity...... 332 Figure 9.20: The conceptual design of MahaNakhon, illustrating geometrical disorder and chaos...... 333 Figure 9.21: The floor plan of MahaNakhon...... 333 Figure 9.22: The royal coffin of Rama IX being burnt in the phra meru...... 334 Figure 9.23: Degrees of public and private spaces in different areas of Bangkok...... 336 Figure 9.24: Types of modern Thai housing prevalent in urban and suburban areas...... 337 Figure 9.25: Plan of a five-storey apartment in Bang Na, a suburb close to urban areas. …………………………..339 Figure 9.26: A Chinese shrine on the ground floor of an apartment...... 339 Figure 9.27: An apartment unit on the ground floor, serving as private space...... 340 Figure 9.28: An office space located on the ground floor of the apartment building...... 340 Figure 9.29: Comparison between the plans of a traditional Thai house and a modern shophouse. ………….342 Figure 9.30: Comparison between the sections of a traditional Thai house and a shophouse on Sukhumvit Road, close to the Thonglor BTS station...... 343 Figure 9.31: Comparing traditional and modern styles of detached house planning...... 344 Figure 9.32: Flexible and informal use of space in the living area of a house selected for study...... 344 Figure 9.33: The landscape of 21st-century Bangkok is characterised by modern transport...... 349 Figure 9.34: The Westernised built environment of Bangkok. ………….……………………………………………………….349 Figure 9.35: Degrees of urbanisation in Bangkok and surrounding provinces...... 350 Figure 9.36: Bangkok planning before and after modernisation...... 351 Figure 9.37: Architectural reflection of existential space (‘four modes of dwelling’) in modern Bangkok. .... 353 Figure 9.38: The influence of the traditional settlement system of canals on modern Bangkok...... 355 Figure 9.39: Praying at the Erawan Shrine...... 356

25

Figure 9.40: The spatial relationship of sacred and profane spaces in an order of inner-contrast...... 360 Figure 10.1: Key streets, public buildings, and houses used in the analysis...... 362 Figure 10.2: The evolution of the Thai concept of home from 1783 to the present...... 363 Figure 10.3: The changing boundaries of sacred and profane spaces. ……………………………………………………....370

26

Chronology of the Chakri dynasty

Rama I (Phra Phutthayotfa Chulalok), r. 1783–1809

Rama II (Phra Phutthaloetla Naphalai), r. 1809–1824

Rama III (Phra Nangklao), r. 1824–1851

Rama IV (Phra Chomklao, aka Mongkut), r. 1851–1868

Rama V (Phra Chulachomklao, aka Chulalongkorn), r. 1868–1910

Rama VI (Phra Mongkutklao, aka ), r. 1910–1925

Rama VII (Phra Pokklao, aka ), r. 1925–1935

Rama VIII (), r. 1935–1946

Rama IX (Bhumibol Adulyadej), r. 1946–2016

27

Glossary

Thai terms2

Chan baan An open space that Thais in Bangkok built as an extension from the house’s body to handle communal activities in the domestic sphere of the traditional Thai house.

Chomchon An urbanised area in Bangkok from the 1930s that lacked basic infrastructure. This was an area where the lower middle class lived.

Farang Western people of European origin.

Mount Meru According to the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model, Mount Meru is a sacred mountain with five peaks rising from the middle of the ocean, which is believed to be a connecting point to heaven.

Mubanjadsaan Allocated villages with proper basic infrastructure that appeared through the development of the housing industry in the 1930s, where private developers purchased land from chomchon and built it up with better infrastructure and houses to serve the upper middle class.

2 The Thai terms in the glossary are the author’s translation from Thai to English from the books: A , Bangkok: Place, Practice and Representation, The Study of Thai Culture and the Thai Way of Life, Houses in Bangkok: Characters and Changes during the Last 200 Years (1782 A.D.–1982 A.D.), and Fear and Domestic Architecture: A Cultural Phenomenon with Reference to Thai Domestic Architecture. 28

Phaendin In Thai culture, traditionally the term phaendin means all the lands in Bangkok and the kingdom belonging to the Thai kings. According to the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model, phaendin holds a sacred character, as it is a terrestrial space that culturally represents the concept of the sacred space of Mount Meru.

Phrai A lower class in the traditional social system of sakdina, but one where members, especially males, could use flexible social mechanisms of working in the court to transform themselves into members of the upper class. Female phrai, especially from wealthy families, could enter a higher class through marriage with higher-class males.

Phra meru A pyramid-like structure built after a Thai king has passed away. The vertical coffin containing the king’s body is placed on top. On the day of the cremation, Brahmins will pray for the king to send him to heaven, after which the body and then the phra meru are burned.

Phumibun A higher class in the traditional social system of sakdina. People have believed that being born a phumibun means that they have accumulated more Buddhist merit (bun) than phrai. In English, phumibun means ‘man of merit’. There are two types of phumibun: (1) the Thai king and his relations, and (2) phrai who have entered the upper class via the social mechanism of sakdina.

Rabeiyng baan A space extending from the internal chamber, linking to the chan baan, in the traditional Thai house. The rabeiyng baan is a transitional space between inside and outside, serving as both public and private space. 29

Rama (Phra Ram) In Hindu mythology, the seventh avatar of and the hero of the literary epic of the ( in Thai). Rama VI established the practice of using this title to name the kings of the Chakri dynasty, implying that these Thai kings are reincarnations of Vishnu.

Rathniyom A hybrid Western-Thai culture that The People’s Party created for the emerging middle class in Bangkok. The People’s Party wanted to show the middle class how to be modern like the West while preserving Thai identity. In this, they responded to the modernisation policies and processes of Thai kings, even though The People’s Party had overthrown them.

Sakdina A traditional Thai social system that classified the population into lower and higher classes. Sakdina, in Thai culture, created a social hierarchy but at the same time allowed some class mobility: people could climb or descend the hierarchy through different mechanisms. The sakdina regime was both hierarchical and flexible, which influenced the dual system of water- and land-based settlements in Bangkok, where sacred and profane spaces interacted in a hierarchical and flexible relationship.

Sino-Thais People in Bangkok who were the descendants of Chinese migrants who married locals.

Thanon The Thai word for modern, Western-style major roads.

30

That A lower class similar to phrai, with the difference that they could not enter the upper class because they had sold themselves to wealthy phrai to pay back debts. Often described as slaves, in some circumstances that were prisoners of war, captured from local conflicts such as the Burmese-Siamese wars.

Tidin A word for all the land in Bangkok and Thailand from the 1870s, when Rama V passed a law instituting title deeds, which allowed anybody in the country to buy and sell land or own it as property.

Tuk-thaew A row of shophouses arranged along a modern road in Bangkok, inspired by the British colony in Singapore. These were built to accommodate the growing population of the Sino-Thai middle class and Westerners from the mid-19th century.

Philosophical and architectural terms3

Abstract space Space conceived of as continuous, homogenous, finite, or infinite through a human’s free imagination, so that all the differences in our sense of experience in the physical senses are eliminated.

Architectural space The conceptual space derived from existential spatiality, used to study the topology of

3 The philosophical and architectural terms are taken from the books: The Concept of Dwelling: On the Way of Figurative Architecture, Non-Places: Introduction to an Anthropology of Supermodernity, Being and Time, Place: A Short Introduction, and Space and Place. 31

place or the sense of home. It is created from a deliberate attempt to create spaces through three manifestations: 1. interplay between volumes 2. hollowing out interior space 3. free flow between inside and outside, which creates a connected experience of ‘urban space’ between buildings, streets, and the whole city

Architecture, language of The architectural means (signal) that visualises the structure of human being-in-the-world, which is constituted of the totality of the four modes of dwelling (private dwelling, public space, urban space, and settlement). In these four modes, built form, organised space, and building type interpret the meaning of place or sense of home through the three independent constituents of the language of architecture: morphology (the format of architectural arrangement), topology (spatial order or existential spatiality) and typology (the expression of architectural meaning in relation to the four modes of dwelling).

Being-in-the-world A ‘meaningful relationship’ (of orientation and identification) between human settling and a given environment. Humans find themselves when they are settling.

Concept of Home Human beings’ orientation within the vertical and horizontal structures in a given environment to dwell, belong, and experience the place in an attempt to interpret who they are; character.

Dwell To belong to a place by human settling in relation to a landscape, by which people know

32

where they are (orientation) and who they are, coming to experience their place as being set into the world meaningfully (identification). The verb form of the term ‘dwelling’.

Dwelling Meeting with others under an agreement to experience life and be oneself, in the sense of living in a world of our own. Dwelling also has orientation (spatial order) and identification (meaning) in relation to the landscape. There are four modes of dwelling: private dwelling, public space, urban space, and settlement. This is where humans meet to ‘settle’ their position in the world and manipulate a place to become urban space, which is the stage on which collective ‘private’ and ‘public’ dwelling take place.

Existential A condition that appears conceptually from human existence and the expression of meaning in life and being-in-the-world. In architectural terms, the appearance of human existence is the relationship between architectural design and the landscape.

Existential space Conceptual space that is constituted through locating humans in the world between vertical and horizontal axes. Plays a constituent role in the language of architecture. See orientation.

Existential spatiality The spatial order of centre (vertical relationship) and path (horizontal relationship), which sets humans in the world through the arrangement of architectural design in existential space. See orientation.

33

Existential outsideness An inability to engage in the meanings of a place; an alienation from all places.

Geographical space Territory that brings humans close to the world by naming, which gives territories a sense of uniqueness and enables humans to dwell to express the character of their existence, which is the essence of ‘place’.

House; private dwelling Similar to ‘public space’ but more personal (belonging to the domestic domain), the quality of place or the sense of home is for each individual. This is where humans express the memories and moods making up their personal (inner) world and form of the house in relation to the overall environment, vertically and horizontally. These expressions are related, constituting the built environment based on shared values.

Human togetherness; togetherness The basic concern (interaction) of the dwelling mode of ‘urban space’ once humans accomplish their settling.

Identification; human identification

Humans’ settling the world to create an identity of place by having architectural design as an object. The relationship between the world and the man-made environment through the four modes of dwelling processes space, which constructs and interprets the character (existential meaning) of the place. Identification allows humans to experience into the world and dwell meaningfully in the place they call home, disclosing their existence through dwelling within their poetic world to experience the phenomenology of the place.

34

Institution; public space The public domain or an organisation that appears in urban space, where the quality of place or sense of home is active.

Morphology How the buildings are formatted as a ‘formal articulation’ to express their character, as well as the study of the structure (format) of existential spatiality.

Phenomenological (existential) analysis In relation to the theory of place/sense of home, reading the reflection (identification) of a place conceptually by looking at the spatial relationships of the landscape and human settling to understand the place’s identity and language. In the architectural field, the analysis of the language of architecture is a phenomenological analysis. Place-making The process of unconsciously (without a clear concept) or consciously (with a clear concept, e.g. for religious purposes) creating a sense of place or home to link humans to the world by structuring meaning within a place, thus reflecting the total physical, social, and cultural values of that place.

Take place The sense of possessing a place where the qualities are kept intact but are still interpreted, such as in public space.

Topology The study of spatial order or the existential spatiality of architectural space, which is driven by the sense of place or home (see architectural space), in an attempt to understand the quality of ‘being-in-the-world’ that humans impose on the built environment.

35

Typology Interpretations of a relationship with the four modes of dwelling (private dwelling, public space, urban space, and settlement), as the language of architecture comprises archetypes at all levels of the environment.

Orientation; spatial interrelationship An environmental image (interior) that relates to spatial organisation or order, which locates the direction (being-in-the-world) of humans in the world through the meaning of centre (vertical relationship, connection to the sky) and path (horizontal relationship, the boundary of inside defining outside) through the medium of architectural design. This constitutes identification in the existential space where experience (phenomenology) takes place.

Settlement A point of arrival where humans feel intimate (being inside) with the character of the landscape and its spatial structure (given names such as valley, basin, or plain) by taking care (orientation) of the place to dwell in the world.

Urban space Also Christian Norberg-Schulz referred to as ‘meeting takes place’. Urban space emerges when human settlement is established; it is the space (street, square, etc.) where diverse people come together (human togetherness). In addition, urban space has the purpose of revealing a place through the three modes of being-in-the-world, which are ‘hypotheses’ used to understand the place or sense of home: practical (physical activities), theoretical (spatial order that creates the environment), and poetic (the understood truth, or authenticity that is set into the world through an understanding of the practical and theoretical modes).

36

Research terms4

Inherent-contradiction Internal interaction between sacred and profane spaces in a spatial relationship of hierarchy inspired by the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model. When the hierarchical relationship between sacred and profane spaces was applied through the organic aquatic settlement system of Bangkok and the Chao Phraya Basin, it hybridised a new spatial relationship of flexibility into the hierarchical order of sacred and profane spaces, creating a new spatial relationship of inherent-contradiction between those types of space.

Inner-contrast A new order of internal juxtaposition between sacred and profane spaces that arose from the spatial relationship of inner-imposing of profane space developed in the era of The People’s Party and reshaped during the modernisation of Rama IX.

Inner-imposing of profane space Internal imposing of profane space over sacred space was created through The People’s Party taking over the political space from Rama VII in the 1932 revolution. This represented a spatial relationship between sacred and profane spaces characterised by the inner-imposing of profane space.

Inner-imposing of sacred space A progression from the internal merging of sacred and profane spaces in the era of Rama IV’s modernisations introducing formal public and private spaces in a way that gave greater importance to sacred space than profane space. At the same time, sacred and profane spaces merged and connected more flexibly, interacting in a spatial relationship characterised by inner-imposition of sacred space.

4 The research terms are created by the author to clarify the changing and hybridising Thai concept of home in relation to the dualism of sacred and profane spaces. 37

Modernisation In the context of Bangkok, modernisation has been a process of making the town planning and buildings of the city modern like the West while preserving local identity. This kind of modernisation was pioneered by Rama IV, making modernisation a process conceptually associated with its initiation and continuation by Thai kings. However, after The People’s Party overthrew Rama VII in 1932, its government continued the royal modernisation policies and processes with a new direction, aiming to make Bangkok a city of the people instead of a city of kings as it had been under Rama V. These efforts continued in the reign of Rama VIII, which coincided with government by The People’s Party.

Modern-sacred The hybrid character of living in modern Bangkok, where the traditional Thai way of life inspired by the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model hybridises with the Western way of life through modern urban planning and architecture. The dualistic system of sacred and profane spaces persists, but the spatial hierarchy of those spaces fades while the flexibility of their relationship increases.

Sacred-aquatic The character of the traditional Thai way of life in the Chao Phraya Basin, inspired by the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model, where Thais lived in the hierarchical and overlapping dual system of sacred and profane spaces. The sacred space of the land settlement is placed higher than the profane space of the water settlement, according to the spatial order of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model.

38

1. Introduction

This chapter introduces the thesis’s structure, reviews the understanding of Thai concept of home in Bangkok society, and identifies the research gap to point out the key questions and research objectives. The provided research background of this chapter outlines the thesis’s key question of changing and hybridising Thai idea of home elaborated with the theory of place/sense of home, which will be discussed in chapter 2.

Structure

Chapter 1 outlines the structure of the thesis’s ten chapters. It explains the purpose and detail of each chapter, then introduces existing Thai scholarship on the Thai concept of home and Thai identity as a context for the present research. It reviews the current understanding of the Thai sense of place/home in Bangkok society. It then looks at criticism of previous studies of Thai identity to explore gaps in the research. Next, it discusses the scope and significance of the present research to identify the key questions and research objectives. Discussion of the thesis’s significance explains how the research contributes to the theory of place/sense of home. Chapter 2 is the literature review. It examines the limits of existing Thai scholarship on the Thai concept of home, along with the theory of place/sense of home in relation to space and architecture. Then, it discusses and compares Western theories of place/sense of home in the 20th century to those of the 21st century. Next, it explores how concepts of home and space are created in a place at the phenomenological level. In the context of the theory of place/sense of home, architecture is discussed as living or architectural space that interprets the meaning of a place. A sense of place/home is one meaning of architecture, which is looked at the phenomenological level where the place’s identity and experience are disclosed.

39

Chapter 3 is devoted to the research method. It relates the concept of dwelling from Christian Norberg-Schulz5 to the theory of place/sense of home as an analytical framework to discuss the evolution of the Thai concept of home as disclosed through space and architecture at the phenomenological level. It discusses three elements of the ‘language of architecture’: morphology, topology, and typology, which can help reveal the idea of home in four modes of dwelling (settlement, urban space, public building [also see public space in the glossary], and house [also see private dwelling in the glossary]). It then looks at the space and architecture of Bangkok from an existential point of view, and selects the part of Bangkok that has experienced the most significant urban changes and developments for a case study. This is the eastern area of Rattanakosin Island, which is linked to Sukhumvit Road and the south-eastern suburbs of Bangkok. This case-study area of Bangkok is chosen to analyse the evolution of the Thai concept of home in relation to space and architecture at the phenomenological level, before and during the four stages of urban development associated with the royal modernisation policies and processes pursued by Thai kings and The People’s Party. The process of collecting data from the fieldwork, and secondary research such as photography and observation, is also discussed in chapter 3, to explain how the present study consolidates different types of research to examine the changing and hybridising Thai concept of home in Bangkok. The chapter also looks at royal modernisation policies and processes as the main social mechanisms that progressively changed and hybridised the Thai sense of home in Bangkok. It argues that the modernisations pursued by kings Rama IV (r. 1851–1868) to IX (r. 1946–2016) frame the analytical process of changing and hybridising the Thai concept of home. Chapter 4 explores the historical background of Thai culture, particularly how the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model influenced the creation of Bangkok’s settlement system and the character of the ‘sacred-aquatic’. It discusses how the geocultural aspect of South East Asia inspired the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model and hybridised it with

5 Norberg-Schulz C., The Concept of Dwelling: On the Way of Figurative Architecture (New York: Rizzoli International Publications, 1985). 40

Thai culture. It then examines the application of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model in Thai culture as part of a discussion on how the settlement system of Bangkok was created to reflect the hierarchy involved in that model and in the traditional class system, sakdina. Next, the chapter discusses royal modernisation policies and processes as the main social mechanism in modernising Bangkok to be like the West. This process began with King Mongkut (Rama IV, 1851–1868), who began the modernisation process to make Bangkok modern like the West as being a ‘modern-sacred’ capital. The chapter continues to explore how Thai kings’ modernisation policies and processes, from Rama IV through to King Bhumibol (Rama IX, 1946–2016), urbanised Bangkok in response to the West in different periods, from the mid-19th century to the 21st century. Chapter 5 applies the research method and historical background in an analysis of the existential space of Bangkok that aims to understand the Thai concept of home. It explores how the landscape of Bangkok was constructed through sociopolitical activities from the Ayutthaya period. Then, it explains how the Ayutthaya tradition of the Hindu- Buddhist cosmological model passed into Bangkok through the establishment of the Chakri dynasty by King Yodfa (, 1783–1809). The ‘four modes of dwelling’ (settlement, urban space, public building, and house) in the existential space of Bangkok are analysed through their morphology and topology. This reveals the spatial structure of the Thai concept of home in Bangkok as expressed through town planning and buildings. The spatial structure of the morphology and topology of Bangkok’s town planning and buildings discloses the Thai concept of home through the meaning of the architecture as being a dualism of sacred and profane spaces with inherent-contradiction. Chapter 6 continues to analyse the morphology and topology of Bangkok’s urban space as it changed through the royal modernisation policies and processes of Rama IV (r. 1851–1868). The chapter discusses how New Road and Bamrung Mueang Road, along with the shophouses on Rattanakosin Island, which were modelled on those in the British colony of Singapore, changed the spatial structure of Bangkok at a physical and phenomenological level. It analyses morphology and topology from the perspective of the ‘four modes of dwelling’, and explores how the morphology and topology of Bangkok

41

space changed in response to the presence of shophouses. Chapter 6 also discusses how the morphology and topology of Bangkok changed as a result of hybridisation initiated by Rama IV’s modernisation policies and processes. It looks at how the new Thai sense of home started to change and hybridise in the modern space of Bangkok to be one of dualism with partial merging. Chapter 7 explores how King Chulalongkorn (Rama V, 1868–1910) continued Rama IV’s royal modernisation program by hybridising the existential space of Bangkok through the principles and ideas of modernity. He gave royal spaces on Rattanakosin Island, such as the Royal Playground, a public function by turning them into communal spaces, and built Ratchadamnoen Avenue to emulate Western modernisation as he had observed it during his trip to Europe in the 1900s. In doing so, Rama V believed he was making Bangkok modern like the West, and at the phenomenological level the Thai sense of home hybridised with that of the West. In this chapter, the morphology and topology in the ‘four modes of dwelling’ of Bangkok will be analysed to reveal how Rama V’s modernisation policies and processes hybridised the Thai concept of home through modern planning and architecture. Then, the typology of modern space in Bangkok is analysed to examine how the modern Thai idea of home changed and hybridised to be dualism with inner-imposing of sacred space in response to Rama V’s modernisation policy. Chapter 8 covers the reigns of King Vajiravudh (Rama VI, 1910–1925) and King Prajadhipok (Rama VII, 1925–1935), spanning from 1910 to 1935. This period includes the overthrow of Rama VII by The People’s Party in 1932. Analysis of the morphology and topology of Bangkok’s existential space after the abdication of Rama VII shows how the spatial structure of Bangkok changed in the new direction of royal modernisation policies and processes. Under The People’s Party and King Ananda (Rama VIII, 1935–1946), Bangkok changed in response to the shift in social structure away from sakdina and towards the ideals of The People’s Party regime. This chapter looks at the changes in morphology and topology of the ‘four modes of dwelling’ in Bangkok in the absence of the hierarchy of class from sakdina. These changes were represented by the shifting public function of royal spaces such as the Royal Playground and Ratchadamnoen Avenue, and

42

the use of space in individual buildings in the land-based settlement. The chapter also analyses the typology to reveal how the new Thai concept of home changed and hybridised, without spatial hierarchy, in the modern Bangkok of People’s Party as being dualism with inner-imposing of profane space. Chapter 9 discusses how the return of royal modernisation policy in the reign of King Bhumibol (Rama IX, 1946–2016), supported by American political and economic influence in South East Asia, changed the spatial structure of Bangkok’s urban planning and architecture. This chapter examines Rama IX’s attempt to revive aspects of Thai tradition to restore sacred space to the existential space of Bangkok, but without the previous hierarchy. It analyses the restoration of sacred space in ‘four modes of dwelling’ through the changing morphology and topology of Bangkok. Then, it analyses the changing typology to disclose how the modern Thai concept of home changed and hybridised to be dualism with inner-contrast as a result of that restoration of sacred space. It also explores the existential space of Bangkok to see how the spatial structure adapted to Rama IX’s royal modernisation policies and processes, hybridising modern Hindu-Buddhist urbanism with the model of the American city.

Chapter 10 summarises the evolution of the Thai concept of home that has been discussed in chapters five through nine. It then discusses how the Thai sense of home was reconstructed through the royal modernisation programs of kings Rama IV through IX, whose reigns covered the period 1946–2016. This chapter analyses how the Thai idea of home has been changing and hybridising over time along with changes in sociopolitical activities occurring in the space of modern Bangkok since the advent of Western influence in the mid-19th century. Finally, it discusses the findings of this research, reflecting on and comparing them with the author’s personal experiences of the Thai sense of home in modern Bangkok.

43

Differences between house, home, and the concept of home

In this thesis, there is a differentiation between the terms house, home, and the concept/idea/sense of home, when discussing the changing and hybridising Thai concept of home based on the theory of place/sense of home. House means a physical structure or individual building that serves as a domicile. This research uses the term house to discuss the Thai concept of home at the house level as one of the ‘four modes of dwelling’ identified by Christian Norberg-Schulz. From chapters five to nine, the house is used to analyse how the architectural system and spatial arrangements interpret the ‘language of architecture’ of morphology (the spatial system) and topology (spatial orientation) at the level of the private dwelling, which reflects the overall settlement system in the house form as a microcosm. Home is an expression that this research uses to discuss a feeling of belonging to a place. The feeling of being home is referenced when the thesis discusses the author’s personal feelings about Bangkok in chapter 10, and the analysis of the hybridisation of the Thai concept of home is compared to the author’s personal understanding of the Thai idea of home. Also, the term home is used in the literature review of chapter 2 in a discussion of how the feeling of being home experienced by a person or group of people is interpreted through the meaning of architecture as a sense of place/home. In this sense, home is distinct from house; home does not simply mean a house one lives in, but represents something (a sense of place/home) people use to express their connection to a place at multiple scales, from the house to the urban level. The concept/idea/sense of home, in this research, means the same thing as a sense of place in the theory of place/sense of home. The term concept of home is the place’s identity as one meaning of architecture. The concept of home also does not simply refer to living in a house; it means the way people dwell in a place to interpret their identity through different scales of architecture, or through Norberg-Schulz’s ‘four modes of dwelling’. However, the distinction between home and the concept of home a matter of interpretation. According to the theory of place/sense of home discussed in chapter 2, the concept of home is reflected through space and architecture, while home is a personal 44

feeling associated with a place. The concept of home can be read and understood through the idea of ‘language of architecture’ as described by Norberg-Schulz, but home is expressed through a personal feeling. The concept of home is the interpretation of a collective and individual identity, while home represents the individual identity. Therefore, the concept of home represents a shared sense of the identity of a place, which helps to push the understanding of the Thai idea of home in the context of Thailand beyond the realm of individual interpretation.

Existing Thai scholarship on the Thai concept of home

Limits to applying the research method to study Thai concept of home via the theory of place/sense of home This research aims to resolve the obscurity and contradiction involved in the study of the Thai idea of home. In chapter 2, in the section “Challenges Involved in Studying the Thai Concept of Home through the Theory of Place/Sense of Home”, five potential areas of weaknesses in existing studies of this topic will be explained:

1. the scope of ‘sense of place/home’ 2. studying the Thai idea of home as a part of sociopolitical change 3. analysing the Thai concept of home as a changing phenomenon 4. historicising the study of the Thai sense of home to show how it originated and how it has changed 5. discussing the Thai concept of home as a collective identity expressed through architecture

The research analyses the Thai idea of home in Bangkok, seen as the cultural and political centre of Thailand. Moreover, analysing the Thai concept of home in Bangkok does not only focus on traditional architecture as a symbol of Thai identity. It also looks at modern architecture as another way of interpreting the Thai idea of home, and argues that hybridisation of the Thai concept of home has been influenced by modernisation

45

policies and processes pursued by Thai kings and The People’s Party. The various phases of the royal modernisation program are crucial to mapping the evolution of the Thai concept of home. Relating sociopolitical factors in Bangkok to the study of the Thai sense of home gives substantial evidence against which to judge theories of the origin of the Thai idea of home and its influence on collective identity. This evidence provides historical background on how urban space and architecture have been constructed and changed due to policies and processes of modernisation imported from the West. Analysing the way that the Thai concept of home has changed through the modernisation process initiated by Thai kings provides a structure for the thesis’s discussion of the evolution of the Thai concept of home.

Identifying gaps in research on the Thai concept of home Reviewing limitations of studying the Thai idea of home through the theory of place/sense of home, which will be done in chapter 2, indicates a structure for the research that involves two main analyses of the Thai concept of home. The first analysis is of the Thai sense of home before modernisation, discussing what the Thai concept of home was before Bangkok had been urbanised. The second analysis looks at the evolution of the Thai idea of home through different stages of modernisation, to examine how the multilayered modernisation pursued by Thai kings and The People’s Party from the mid- 19th century to the 21st century has contributed to progressive hybridisation of the Thai sense of home. The theory of place/sense of home discussed in chapter 2 is based on phenomenology. It aims to form a foundation from which to study the hybridisation of a sense of place/home through the sociopolitical interactions of people, culture, and place, including people and influences from both inside and outside that place. This research applies, to the context of Bangkok, the perspective that a sense of place/home, expressed as the meaning of architecture or the identity of a place, is a process of hybridisation. In doing so, it views the Thai concept of home as having flexibility, being able to change its shape through modernisation at the phenomenological level of the city and its buildings. It also sees the Thai sense of home as involving either 46

collective or individual identity, according to the concept of dwelling derived from Norberg-Schulz, in whose view both city planning and individual buildings are related at the phenomenological level, leading different scales from the urban to the individual house to interpret the place’s identity in the same or similar ways.6 A sense of place/home expresses the place’s identity as a shared sense of identity or personal experience related to a place. In this thesis, I focus on analysing the hybrid Thai concept of home in Bangkok in an area that underwent momentous urban development via modernisation. It is on the eastern side of Rattanakosin Island, running towards the south-east area of Bangkok. This area was chosen because it saw not only the founding of Bangkok’s traditional settlement on Rattanakosin Island, but also the application of modernisation policies and processes, which will be further discussed in chapter 3. This thesis will examine how the different phases of modernising city planning and building on the eastern side of Rattanakosin Island and in the south-eastern area of Bangkok have hybridised and evolved the Thai sense of home through the influence of Western and local culture on the modernisation policies and processes enacted by Thai kings and The People’s Party.

Gaps in existing scholarship on the Thai concept of home

Existing Thai scholarship on the Thai idea of home in Bangkok and Thailand has typically explained that Thai identity could not be changed.7 This is at least partly due to the way such previous studies have been based on analysing the place’s identity as it was represented in the researcher’s experience. Limitations in the understanding of the Thai idea of home can also be seen in house-building practices in Bangkok. As an example, (figure 1), a modern Thai house in the Bangkok suburb of Bang Na, which was built based on modern architectural principles but decorated in a traditional

6 Norberg-Schulz, The Concept of Dwelling, 13. 7 Suwatcharapinun S. and Fungfusakul A. “Phenomenology: Rethinking the Uses of ‘Root and Identity’ in Thai Contemporary Architectural Discourse” (paper presented at the Built Environment Research Associates Conference, BERAC III, Thammasat University in Pathum Thani, Thailand, 25 May 2012), 40. 47

Thai style. This reflects a Bangkokian understanding of Thai identity tied up with the traditional Thai house, in which the Thai sense of home is seen to be experienced through traditional architecture. It reflects a widespread view that Thai identity is unchangeable and cannot hybridise with Western culture.8

Figure 1: A modern house in Bang Na, built with modern methods in a traditional style.

This modern Thai house is a real-world example that shows how people understand the Thai concept of home as being associated with the physical appearance of a building. Thus, they see no Thai identity in modern architecture. Moreover, the example reveals that the owner, as an individual Bangkokian, reaches an understanding of Thai identity without reflecting on episodes in the history of the place such as the modernisation process initiated by Thai kings. This phenomenon is reflected through the

8 Suwatcharapinun and Fungfusakul, 47. 48

way the house’s owner designs the house. In informal talks with the house’s owner, he mentioned that on the ground floor is built with modern design principles and materials. However, the first floor is built with the traditional design like the pair of chambers with the gable rooftop. Although, the ground floor is built with the modern design and material, the first floor is built with the traditional technique and design; this indicates that the house owner may be superimposing the traditional design of Thai house upon the modern structure to create the Thai sense of place/home in the physical form of the house. The modern Thai house in Bang Na indicates that its owner may not have considered how the Thai concept of home or Thai identity of Bangkok has hybridised with modern architecture via the royal modernisation policies and processes at the phenomenological level. This phenomenon suggests that Thai people in Bangkok still strictly associate their understanding of Thai identity with physical form as shown in the use of traditional Thai architectural designs to represent Thai identity as an individual identity at the house level. This supports the point that assuming Thai identity as unchangeable came from both the Thai scholars and Thai non-scholars. A similar view that Thai identity is unchangeable is present in much existing Thai scholarship on the Thai sense of home. A brief review of this scholarship, along with consideration of examples presented earlier, reveal a research gap that needs to be addressed: how could the changing and hybridising Thai concept of home be unfolded? what method could be utilised to study the process of change and hybridisation of Thai idea of home in response to the Western influence and modernisation? Furthermore, this research will aim to discuss the changing Thai idea of home as a matter of both collective and individual identity. Thus, it will analyse the Thai concept of home through the shared interpretation of that identity by people in Bangkok through the medium of buildings. Doing this will help the present research avoid the shortcomings of interpreting a place’s identity from only an individual viewpoint, especially that of the researcher. This research will aim to explain how the understanding of the Thai idea of home has changed shape over the centuries of modernisation. Thus, it will need to adopt different research methods to discuss how Thai identity and the Thai concept of home are

49

changeable rather than fixed. This research applies the method of analysing the ‘language of architecture’ through the ‘four modes of dwelling’ in Bangkok, following the concept of dwelling expressed by Christian Norberg-Schulz. This will be discussed in chapter 3, which covers the research method. Doing this will allow the researcher to analyse the process of change and hybridisation in the Thai concept of home through analysis of architecture from different stages of Bangkok’s urbanisation. In addition, there are different lines of studying sacred spaces in Bangkok. Firstly, the different kinds of sacredness in the urban space of Bangkok, such as the emergence of Christianity and Islam through architecture and spatial usages have coexisted along with the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model. Secondly, the relationship between urban space and the commercialising the sacredness in Bangkok. And looking at Bangkok urban space through the ideas of post-colonial hybridity. While these lines of research can be related to the current thesis, they are not the main thesis focus.

As discussed in the section “Limits to applying the research method to study Thai concept of home via the theory of place/sense of home” there are five weaknesses in the study of Thai concept of home in Bangkok. Hence, this research will delimit the research boundary by identifying new approaches to those five weaknesses of studying Thai concept of home. In doing so, this research will apply the Western methods and theories with a new scope of studying Thai idea of home as a changing phenomenon linked to sociopolitical change as expressed in the urban planning and architecture of Bangkok. This will be further discussed in the section “Identifying a new approach to studying the Thai concept of home” of chapter 2.

Contribution to knowledge

This thesis aims to study Thai sense of home from a different angle and with a new approach to argue the previous Thai scholarship that Thai idea of home hybridised. It makes two main contributions to knowledge. Firstly, it will explain how, at the phenomenological level, Bangkok’s architecture expresses the evolution of the Thai

50

concept of home through different stages of modernisation. This will be done through a reading of the ‘language of architecture’. Secondly, this research will apply the theory of place/sense of home, discussed in the literature review of chapter 2, to study the process of change and hybridisation in the Thai idea of home, enriching the central theory by discussing how people in Bangkok adopted Western culture to preserve the place’s identity. The first contribution of research analyses the evolution of the Thai concept of home through four modes of dwelling (settlement, urban space, public building, and house) and shows how they shape and interpret a sense of place/home as part of a collective identity and an individual identity at the urban and individual building scale respectively. The research will analyse the change and hybridisation of the Thai concept of home to explain how Thai identity has always been changing, as demonstrated by the change in the space and architecture of Bangkok. The phenomenological analysis will look at the city and buildings of Bangkok with a new perspective and approach, applying the idea of reading the ‘language of architecture’ from the ‘four modes of dwelling’ of Christian Norberg-Schulz to disclose the Thai sense of home at the phenomenological level. The thesis will indicate that the Thai idea of home is a condition at the phenomenological level of architecture, which has changed and hybridised following changes in the spatial relationships of people, buildings, and urban forms in Bangkok. In chapters five to nine, this research will link the changing and hybridising Thai concept of home with the modernisation process to better explain how the evolution of the Thai idea of home has responded to the different stages of Bangkok’s urbanisation at all ‘four modes of dwelling’, as it moved from being a traditional town to a modern capital. The second contribution, chapter 10 is the discussion how people in Bangkok understand and hybridise their sense of home with reference to the theory of place/sense of home. This will include an analysis of sociopolitical differences between Bangkok and the West.

51

52

2. A sense of place/home, space, and architecture: Literature review

Introduction

This chapter outlines the pre-existing study of Thai scholarship in Thai concept of home and revisits the theory of place/ sense of home. It looks at a sense of home as an interdisciplinary subject of human geography, phenomenology, and architecture, and explains a sense of place/home as a phenomenological concept that embodies the identity of place. It discusses the concept of home as a reflection of a spirit of place (genius loci)9 through space and architecture. Also, this chapter looks at the idea of home in the Western context under the impact of urbanisation. It reviews how the Western scholars study changing ideas of home. The concept of home as a phenomenological concept is discussed as the production of sociopolitical interaction. The spaces of towns and buildings are understood as a structure of idea of home. It explains how different levels of town planning (settlement, urban space, public building, and house) embody a sense of home. In the context of Thailand, this thesis examines how the concept of home or place is manifested in the space of modern Bangkok, which has been hybridised in response to the royal modernisation policies and processes. It addresses the following three topics: 1. How the urban and architectural space of modern Bangkok reflects hybrid Thai idea of home at the phenomenological level. 2. How the concept of home in Bangkok has evolved in tandem with dynamic changes to the built environment from the mid-19th to 21st centuries. 3. How the changing and hybridising sense of home in Bangkok represents a new Thai identity. This chapter provides a theoretical background in response to these questions. The theory of place/sense of home supports my research examination of the evolution of the Thai sense of home from 1783 to the present as a meaning in the architecture of Bangkok.

9 Norberg-Schulz C., Genius Loci: Towards a Phenomenology of Architecture (New York: Rizzoli International Publications, 1980). 53

Thus, this chapter will explain how the urban space and architecture embody the concept of home.

Challenges involved in studying the Thai concept of home through the theory of place/sense of home

Limits to studying the Thai concept of home in Thailand Architectural research in Thai society (including in Bangkok) has mostly been concerned with the physical appearance of the city and its buildings. Many studies have focused on changes in architectural style and construction technology. They attempt to study how the built environment and architectural design of Bangkok changed through the process of urbanisation. This research on urban change in Bangkok misses investigating links to sociopolitical factors, because of deterministic thinking that considers the sense of place/home as being more related to geography than culture. Such studies do not examine how Western influence affected the policies of Thai kings and the urbanisation of Bangkok, or discuss how processes of modernisation influenced urban development, architectural design, and, consequently, the way people live. In the past ten years, some architectural PhD theses on Bangkok have been produced, such as “Power, Identity, and the Rise of Modern Architecture” by Koompong Noobanjong, which links changes in urban space and architecture with the royal urban renovation project.10 However, this study does not directly analyse the Thai concept of home or the meaning of changing urban and architectural designs in Bangkok. It cannot reveal what ‘Thai identity’ is and whether it changes or not. Another relevant thesis is “Modernisation of Building: The Transplantation of the Concept of Architecture from Europe to Thailand, 1930s–1950s”, by Chomchon Fusinpaiboon, who studied the process by which modern architecture manifested in Bangkok in the presence of sociopolitical pressures such as Western influence and the flexibility strategy of Thai elites such as the

10 Noobanjong K., “Power, Identity, and The Rise of Modern Architecture: From Siam to Thailand” (PhD diss., University of Colorado at Denver, 2003), https://books.google.com.au/books/about/Power_Identity_and_the_Rise_of_Modern_Ar.html?id=mzl-qnmCkqUC. 54

concept of making Bangkok modern like the West or the royal modernisation policies and processes. This thesis emphasises the adaptation of Thai ritual through modern buildings, though the study mainly focuses on case studies of how modern architecture was merged into Bangkok.11 Recently, some Thai scholars have studied the Thai sense of place/home in Bangkok. However, existing Thai scholarship is limited in studying the Thai concept of home because of the way it interprets Thai identity through the Thai idea of home in space and architecture12. The discipline of phenomenology has been applied to architecture to help understand how it can create a sense of place/home. Architectural theorist Christian Norberg-Schulz, who was a pioneer in this area, stated that applying phenomenology to architecture discloses the spirit (identity) of place by analysing the phenomenon of the dwelling of a group of humans in a physical structure or building.13 The phenomenology in architecture interprets ‘being-in-the-world’, or the knowledge of being-in-the-world, a concept developed by Martin Heidegger.14 In the context of Thai society, the understanding of the term phenomenology is unclear: sometimes it takes as its object behaviour, sometimes activity, and sometimes action. Furthermore, misunderstandings of the body of knowledge of phenomenology as a discipline have come from individual researchers, theoretical frameworks, and the results of studying the phenomenology of place.15 Sant Suwatcharapinun and Apinya Fungfusakul have criticised Tipsuda Phathumanon’s scholarship on the Thai concept of home in social context, including works such as From Epistemology to Methodology, Phenomenology in Architecture (1996), Architecture, Reverberation of the Silence (2000), The Psychology of Human Architecture (2004), and Architectural Psychology (2006), which framed Thai

11 Fusinpaiboon C., “Modernisation of Building: The Transplantation of the Concept of Architecture from Europe to Thailand, 1930s–1950s” (PhD diss., University of Sheffield, 2014). 12 Suwatcharapinun S. and Fungfusakul A. “Phenomenology: Rethinking the Uses of ‘Root and Identity’ in Thai Contemporary Architectural Discourse” (paper presented at the Built Environment Research Associates Conference, BERAC III, Thammasat University in Pathum Thani, Thailand, 25 May 2012), 44. 13 Norberg-Schulz, The Concept of Dwelling. 14 Heidegger M., Being and Time, trans. E. Robinson (New York: HarperCollins Publishers, 1962). 15 Suwatcharapinun and Fungfusakul, 35-48. 55

cultural roots as being mother-like and in harmony with nature (Thai culture compares nature with a mother who takes care of the people that live in a place), which creates an authentic Thai identity. Suwatcharapinun and Fungfusakul argued that the way Phathumanon defined the Thai identity from her point of view, analysing human feelings such as self-awareness, intentionality, and desire to be in a place, leads to a vague understanding of the Thai sense of place/home. Phathumanon’s study, in emphasising the importance of authenticity, limited the understanding in the Thai identity.16

Problems in studying the Thai concept of home through the theory of place/sense of home Certain problems complicate attempts to understand the changing Thai identity. First, the scope of the place involved in studying the Thai idea of home is unclear. When people discuss the Thai sense of home in Thai culture, they often think of the country of modern- day Thailand, but that does not allow for the fact that Thailand is a group of multiple states that were joined together in the late 19th century under Rama V (r. 1868–1910), who reformed the country’s system of government to create a single state under the Thai monarchy.17 Understanding Thai identity as involving a singular entity that spans the whole of Thailand is problematic, because the identity of place is distinguished by the local culture and natural environment.18 Thus, it is not correct to say that Thai identity is a reflection of the whole of Thailand. On the other hand, there are various peoples, cultures and locations in different parts of Thailand, which embody different versions of Thai identity based on the diversity of Thai people and outside of Bangkok. Hence, it is more appropriate to state that there is a diversity of Thai identities in different cities or areas of Thailand. In this sense, saying that the Thai identity of Bangkok is different from other Thai identities in different parts of Thailand is more correct. Also, determinism is often involved in the process of constructing the Thai concept of home. According to Norberg-Schulz, when humans gather somewhere, they settle there

16 Suwatcharapinun and Fungfusakul. 17 Baker C. and Phongpaichit P., A History of Thailand (: Cambridge University Press, 2005), 52–58. 18 Relph, Place and Placelessness, chapter 1. 56

under an agreement. The word ‘agreement’ means they have similar political and cultural preferences that create a collective identity of that place.19 Thereby, the process of creating the identity of place relates to the sociopolitical influence of a group of people. Then, reviewing previous Thai scholarship on the Thai concept of home reveals an understanding that Thai identity is unchangeable in response to modern architecture. This discourse is too narrow, because it does not respond to changing life conditions. It raises questions about the history of Thai identity, which influences the study of Thai tradition. Exploring the historical background of Thailand, both in the Western world and Thai society, uncovers a tension that enriches historical knowledge of Thai culture, which is one of many factors involved in changes in Thai identity. A movement that believes Thai identity is changeable conceptualises Thai identity as responding to the reality of Bangkok’s dynamic context. This presents its own problems in identifying the roots of Thai identity: if it is always changing, then when and how did it begin? From this point of view, looking at the changing Thai identity through a temporal dimension leads to a conception that is too wide and vague. Nevertheless, it better represents the dynamic condition of Thai society. Finally, as Suwatcharapinun and Fungfusakul have pointed out, the process of analysing Thai identity in Phathumanon’s research was based on Heidegger’s philosophy of being and time, along with the concept of reading the relationship between the sense of place/home and architecture (the spatial structure of architectural space) from Norberg-Schulz.20 Phathumanon stated that if the original Thai identity was real and personal, it should be brought back to make people live as Thais, but this creates a problem when considering the Thai identity as a result of architecture, which is created by the individual, because as Norberg-Schulz argues, architecture interprets both individual and collective identity. Individual identities can be similar when they share the same history, but every individual has a slightly different character. The identity of place should express the relationship of people to the landscape and architecture. A sense of

19 Norberg-Schulz, The Concept of Dwelling, 13. 20 Norberg-Schulz. 57

place/home should represent the result of the interactions of humans with a place as it changes, rather than proceeding from Phathumanon’s ‘root’ (rak ngea or Thai identity), which represents the life of individuals. Therefore, Suwatcharapinun and Fungfusakul concluded that Phathumanon’s phenomenological study of Phathumanon is based more on Heidegger’s thinking, and lacks an explicit method of analysing the Thai concept of home through architecture.21 In From Epistemology to Methodology, Suwatcharapinun mentioned that research methods are an obstacle to the study of Thai identity, due to the understanding of the relationship between the Thai idea of home and architecture being vague. There are no appropriate theoretical frameworks, research tools, and research methods with which to study it. Furthermore, there is no proper archiving process for studies of the Thai sense of home, making such research inconvenient. Although some Thai researchers study the Thai concept of home, they have problems understanding the relevant theory and applying it to analysing, resolving, and enriching research into the Thai idea of home in architecture.22 In chapter 4 of From Epistemology to Methodology, they criticised the understanding of the Thai concept of home as being trapped within a mainstream conception that Thai identity is unchangeable, because both the ‘unit of analysis’ and the ‘research tools’ needed to be more clearly defined. Suwatcharapinun has discussed how the ‘unit of analysis’ in Phathumanon’s works is too vague, and there is no link that shows how the Thai sense of home works in architecture at the phenomenological level. Suwatcharapinun mentioned that the interpretations of architecture as an object, situation, or space are channels that connect people to an experience of the sense of home or the identity of place. Research tools such as storytelling, poems, and the recollection of memories can also be used to interpret the relationship of a person to a place. The ‘unit of analysis’ mentioned in Phathumanon’s studies is the distance between humans and spaces, and the ‘research tool’ is the traditional Thai house. Suwatcharapinun

21 Suwatcharapinun and Fungfusakul, “Phenomenology: Rethinking the Uses,” 45. 22 Suwatcharapinun S., “From Epistemology to Methodology: Phenomenology in Architecture” (Research Project MRG5280036 from 16 March 2009 to 15 March 2011, Faculty of Architecture, University, 2011). 58

argued that the idea of using the distance between humans and spaces (seeing and experiencing), taken from The Hidden Dimension by Edward T. Hall, was not based on the theory of place/sense of home.23 Moreover, Suwatcharapinun debated whether the ‘unit of analysis’ in Phathumanon’s research actually focused on the physical appearance of buildings; the concept of looking at the distance between humans and spaces emphasises the visual rather than analysing the phenomenological level of place.24 Additionally, Suwatcharapinun mentioned that the process of researching the changing Thai concept of home in a Thai context, inspired by Hall, lacked a connection to Thai history. His view was that history explains the relationship between architecture and the temporal dimension, which reveals the changing sense of home. According to Heidegger’s thinking, to analyse the identity of place or the concept of home requires one to analyse and consider the origin of the changing world as being-in-the-world. Suwatcharapinun suggested an alternative ‘unit of analysis’ for the study of the Thai idea of home in architecture: collective memory. In The Architecture of the City, Aldo Rossi explained that the city is a big stage or site of human experience: not just an image, but the reality that collects human events and feelings into it. Suwatcharapinun developed a concept of collective memory to replace Rossi’s, in which memory represents the ‘relationship’ between humans and places that is created and developed through time. This ‘relationship’ or collective memory is expressed through the characteristics of architectural design. However, when this concept is applied to study the sense of home in an old street of Bangkok, as in The Study of Conservation and Revitalisation in the Area of Samphaeng by Vimorat Aisrathramnuy, it presents a problem. Her study of the area of Sampheng (the south area of Bangkok where the old Chinese communities settled) did not analyse a group of people, but shifted the focus to an individual. This focus led to an emphasis on individual buildings or shophouses, and on interviews. Consequently, Aisrathramnuy’s study did not explain how the collective memory of people in the area of Sampheng

23 Suwatcharapinun, 57–59. 24 Suwatcharapinun, 62–64. 59

created the identity of that place. Suwatcharapinun suspected that Aisrathramnuy was trying to insert a meaning of place for the area of Sampheng, rather than directly explaining what that place tries to disclose as its identity.25 Suwatcharapinun’s criticism of the works of Phathumanon and Aisrathramnuy showed that the study of changes in Thai identity lacks a clear and overarching ‘research tool’. In this research, the ‘language of architecture’ serves as such a tool. Phathumanon’s research gets stuck on the physical appearance of places such as the traditional Thai house. In her study, this limits how change in the Thai concept of home can be understood and defined through the medium of architecture. She analyses Thai identity by seeing to the place as an object, but not by understanding the place as an interpretation of identity of place or of a sense of place/home—which was the objective of this research. It could be said that Phathumanon’s research method cannot analyse how a place (e.g., a traditional Thai house) is meaningful. This is due to the ‘unit of analysis’ selected: Phathumanon focuses on the physical condition of space or place, while Aisrathramnuy looks deeper by analysing the collective memory of people in an area (Sampheng). Phatnumanon’s research, by contrast, gets lost in a focus on individual people and buildings and, as a result, cannot reveal the place’s identity in accordance with the concept of collective memory expressed by Rossi. It is possible that Aisrathramnuy’s study was influenced by Phathumanon, as both of them analysed the changing Thai concept of home in places at the house level. Fear in Domestic Architecture by Nuttinee Karnchanaporn is similar to The Study of Conservation and Revitalisation in the Area of Samphaeng in studying, through interviews, how people feel about and experience their house, to analyse the changing Thai identity. However, Karnchanaporn argued that Thai identity, which she referred to as the fear trait in Thai culture, adapted to modernity in the form of modern housing types. She looked at sacred spaces in modern Thai houses, such as worshipping spaces, floating shrines, and shrines, as the ‘unit of analysis’. However, the scope of Karnchanaporn’s study was influenced by Phathumanon’s work. She looked at individual houses, which inhibited

25 Suwatcharapinun, 69. 60

further discussion of the changing Thai identity on a larger scale, such as at the street level (urban space).26 This limited the understanding of Thai identity, though Karnchanaporn’s research objective was different from Phathumanon’s. Karnchanaporn’s objective related more to psychology; in her book, she discussed the Thai concept of home as relating to being fearful as the dominant trait of Thai people in Bangkok. She focuses more on how Bangkokians have persisted in practising old patterns of space usage and traditional housebuilding. On the other hand, chapter 5, “Phenomenology, Hermeneutics and Meaning”, of Suwatcharapinun’s report From Epistemology to Methodology, gives an example of how the hermeneutics of Hans-Georg Gadamer has been applied to the study of Thai concept of home, in A Tradition Rediscovered: Toward an Understanding of Experiential Characteristics and Meanings of the Traditional Thai House by Princess Piyalada Devakula. Devakula’s work suggested an alternative way to analyse the sense of place/home of the traditional Thai house through the experience of the researcher herself. Devakula used hermeneutics to analyse the meaning of space and the existence and change of Thai identity in the traditional Thai domestic house, as revealed in her personal understanding and self-understanding arrived at through the place.27 She compared her old and new experiences in the space of the traditional Thai house to discuss how Thai identity changed its meaning through time and history. Devakula applied hermeneutics to analyse the changing experience in the space of traditional Thai houses. Nevertheless, she expected that an unchanged Thai identity would be found there. Suwatcharapinun raised questions about applying hermeneutics to study the Thai concept of home, questioning the reliability of analysing the concept of home through the understanding and self-understanding of the researcher in relation to the place and its history, as Devakula had done. Devakula’s study was limited because the degree of involvement in the history of the place is different for every individual. Similarly

26 Karnchanaporn N., Fear and Domestic Architecture: A Cultural Phenomenon with Reference to Thai Domestic Architecture, (Saarbrücken: VDM Verlag, 2009). 27 Devakula P., “A Tradition Rediscovered: Toward an Understanding of Experiential Characteristics and Meanings of the Traditional Thai House,” (PhD diss., University of Michigan, 1999). 61

to Aisrathramnuy in The Study of Conservation and Revitalisation in the Area of Samphaeng, Suwatcharapinun concluded that analysing the changing Thai idea of home through architecture should explore others’ experience or understanding of that place, following the objective of studying a sense of home in architecture in a way that aims to disclose the spirit (concept of home) of the shared place, not of an individual.28 This would lead research to study the Thai idea of home in a collective sense, to disclose the Thai concept of home from the understanding of people other than the researcher. Consequently, this research applies the concept of dwelling from Norberg-Schulz with the theory of place/sense of home to analyse the ‘language of architecture’ in the space and architecture of modern Bangkok to explore how the Thai concept of home has been changing and hybridising from the mid-19th century to the present via royal modernisation policies and processes. On the other hand, these ‘misunderstandings’ or mistranslations from studies by Phathumanon, Aisrathramnuy, Karnchanaporn and Devakula also suggest the problem of trying to force Western methods and theories into Thai context without considering and incorporating the specific socio-political context of Bangkok. Thai scholars apply Western methods and theories to study Thai identity of Bangkok, but they do not analyse Thai identity with regard to how the dynamic condition of Thai society played a theoretical role in the making of the Thai concept of home in Bangkok. Thus, this research will analyse the changing and hybridising Thai concept of home regarding the socio-political changes in Thai society, and explore how the Thai identity has been changing and hybridising through the phenomenological analysis of Thai concept of home.

Identifying a new approach to studying the Thai concept of home According to Suwatcharapinun’s report From Epistemology to Methodology, the key to clarifying problems in the study of the Thai concept of home in Thai architecture is resolving the ‘relationship’ (the sense of home) between humans and the world through architecture. He suggests six key concepts relating to research methods that help to shed

28 V. Aisrathramnuy, The Study of Conservation and Revivalisation the Area of Samphaeng (Master’s diss., , 1999). 62

light on how the Thai idea of home in architecture can be revealed. The first key thing is knowing where the researcher stands when analysing the idea/concept of home via architecture. This means the researcher needs to acknowledge that experiencing the concept of home in a place means understanding the result (a sense of home) that connects humans to the world. The second is designating what is the ‘object’ (physical object, space, or place) and ‘thing’ (the interpretation of the idea of home of the ‘object’) involved when the researcher wants to analyse the relationship between things such as space and a sense of place/home. The third important thing is that the researcher needs to consider the historical background, because history explains how the concept of home in a place relates to sociopolitical changes that reflect the experience, memory, culture, and belief system of every individual, object, and space in that place. Fourth, the researcher should clarify the ‘unit of analysis’ being experienced, which should be based on the history of that place to reflect the ‘thing’ (a sense of home) of the ‘object’. Fifth is knowing how to read and analyse the concept of home. The researcher needs to understand the nature of a sense of place/home; its implication could be different from what the researcher sees in the physical world, or meaning could arise that is not directly expressed (in physical appearance) but hidden. Finally, the researcher needs to be open- minded to the results of analysing the concept of home in that place. After coming to know that idea of home, the researcher needs to build up their understanding of that idea as it is reflected through the ‘object’, by analysing the meaning or the spirit of place; this is the core concept of studying a sense of place/home using phenomenology as a basis.29 Responding to these six solutions that Suwatcharapinun presented, this research sets up a new method for studying the changing Thai concept of home. Firstly, the research sets its scope: it analyses the changing Thai concept of home in Bangkok, because of its unique history of urbanisation. Then, it reviews the theory of place/sense of home in a literature review of various sources to explain how the concept of home is translated from Heidegger’s ideas about being and time. Moreover, the research relates

29 Suwatcharapinun, “From Epistemology to Methodology,” 101–106. 63

the theory of place/sense of home to Thai culture to hypothesise what the Thai concept of home would be, given the relationship of people, culture, and place in Bangkok. Secondly, after reviewing the theory of place/sense of home, the research analyses the relationship between the ‘object’ and ‘thing’. In the context of this research, the object is space (the spatial design/structure reflected through the ‘language of architecture’ of architectural design; see chapter 3) and the thing is the sense of place/home. Thirdly, as has been mentioned, this research incorporates the historical background of Bangkok in an analysis of the changing Thai concept of home during the process of modernisation. Discussing the changing Thai sense of home then reflects change in Bangkok, which people experience, memorise, and adapt to as a part of their society and culture. Fourthly, since the research chooses to analyse the relationship between space and the idea of home, the ‘research tool’ is the ‘language of architecture’ in space and architecture, following the concept of dwelling elaborated by Christian Norberg-Schulz. This study looks at the ‘language of architecture’ because it discloses the story (truth) of how humans interpret their collective identity in relation to the world through the spatial arrangement of buildings (again, see chapter 3). Fifthly, because Norberg-Schulz’s ‘language of architecture’ brings forth the hidden meaning of architecture expressed in its spatial design, and focuses on the conceptual aspects of architecture and space, it provides a mode of analysis. Finally, I as a researcher keep my mind open to the results of this research. As a result, this study may build up a different understanding of the changing Thai concept of home based on analysis of the ‘language of architecture’ in the space and architecture of Bangkok.

64

Theory of place/sense of home

The essence of sense of place/home

Figure 2.1: The overall conception of place/home. The top grouping shows the conception of home (topophilia) as expressed in the book Topophilia, by Tuan. The middle shows the concept of home in the 20th century, based on the book Place and Placelessness, by Relph. The bottom grouping shows the concept of home in the 21st century, also as seen in Place and Placelessness.

65

Figure 2.2: The conception of place/home (topophilia) in the book Topophilia, by Tuan.

The theory of place/sense of home, as a phenomenological study of how human connected themselves to the Earth to create the identity of place, began as early as the 1st century AD by the Greek philosophers.30 They looked at how humans attached and structured their consciousness of being in relation to place to experience their existence. This phenomenon was called ‘topophilia’, which was a Greek word meaning ‘love of place’ (figure 2.2). This ‘bond’ tied the human feeling of belonging to a place where people disclosed their ontology – their knowledge of being. The study of idea of home is cross-disciplinary, spanning (1) human geography – the relationship and belonging of humans to the landscape, (2) phenomenology – the attachment of human consciousness to a space to create an experience with an object (a

30 T. Cresswell, Place: A Short Introduction (La Vergne, TN: Blackwell Publishing, 2004). 66

building), and (3) architecture – the arrangement of buildings to represent geocultural relationships. Human geographers in the West in the 20th century studied how humans related themselves to space (landscape) to transform it into a sense of home (architectural/living space). They presented the concept of home as a sense of being inside or insideness, explaining how human consciousness distinguishes what is ‘inside’ – fully understanding the authenticity (character) of place – and ‘outside’ – not engaging with and experiencing the place. These studies were developed from the phenomenological ideas of being and time by Heidegger, based on the claim: humans must respond to their own existence. Moreover, human geographers focused on the changing sense of home in a globalising world: how humans have changed the way they connect to the landscape, resulting in placelessness or non-sense of home. Human geographers of the 21st century, such as Massey, have developed the argument that a sense of non-place, created through connectivity and mobility, has evolved the understanding of idea of home. Their arguments have been supported by the study of highly connective spaces such as global metropolises, airports, and highways. Furthermore, architectural theorists have used the term ‘dwell’ to elucidate the idea of home; Norberg-Schulz has discussed the process of making a sense of home (also see place-making in the glossary) through his examination of how humans transform their existence into settlement systems, architectural plans, and spatial organisation. Norberg-Schulz has applied the idea of the ‘language of architecture’ to analyse the architectural structure of idea of home (an existential space). Western theories of place/sense of home illustrate the evolution from having a sense of place (a single and clear identity) to a sense of non-place (hybridising identity). In Western culture, the concept of home represents the identity of place, and changes due to urbanism. Looking back in the Bangkok context raises the question of how Bangkokians understood the concept of home and how it changed after urbanisation? How did Bangkokians interpret their place’s identity in the light of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model? How did the Bangkok sense of home change in the 21st century as part of the royal modernisation policies and processes? How was the process of change in the Thai

67

concept of home different from what happened in the West? These questions will be explained further from chapter 5, as we discuss the evolution of the Thai concept of home in response to modernisations of Thai kings and People’s Party.

Sense of place/home as phenomenology in architecture A sense of place/home is intangible, a conscious consequence of embodying the human knowledge of being-in-the-world in the form of architecture.31 It is a mental process of how humans use town planning and buildings to create, continue, and hybridise their concept of home in response to external forces.32 Furthermore, Tuan has suggested that the creation of idea of home is linked to sociopolitical tensions where someone powerful creates the concept of home to distinguish their place from that of others.33 It is an existential process of transforming a landscape to be ‘geocultural space’, and of creating the concept of home34 so that humans can dwell meaningfully.35 Heidegger wrote that “place [concept of home] places man in such a way that it reveals the external bonds of his existence and at the same time the depths of his freedom and reality.”36 He suggested that the sense of home reflects conceptual thinking about dwelling, by which the human process of possessing a landscape phenomenologically constructs the existential structure of idea of home.37 This process is called “developing a system of meaningful places”, which gives existential form and structure to our experience of being-in-the-world.38 The process by which humans make their concept of home through dwelling becomes evident through phenomenological study. The notion of phenomenology was developed by Brentano and Husserl from the early 20th century. It is a concept of ‘intentionality’, implying that humans only create their idea of home when they intend to

31 Cresswell, 15–16. 32 Wagner P. L., Environments and Peoples (Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1972). 33 Cresswell, Place, 26–27. 34 Harvey D., Justice, Nature and the Geography of Difference (Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, 1997). 35 Norberg-Schulz, The Concept of Dwelling, 20–24. 36 Heidegger M., The Question of Being (Woodbridge, CT: Twayne Publishers, 1958), 19. 37 Lyndon D., “Towards Making Places,” Landscape 12, no. 3 (1962), 33–34. 38 Norberg-Schulz C., Meaning in Architecture (London: The Cresset Press, 1969), 226. 68

be a part of a place.39 Heidegger applied the idea of intentionality to his study of being and time, explaining that humans attach ‘self’ (intentionality) to a place to say they exist and to be responsible for that existence.40 Casey supported Heidegger’s thesis, saying, “to live is to live locally, and know is, first of all, to know the place one is in”.41 Hence, a sense of home means a human is conscious in the first place before manifesting their existence in a physical place. Thus, the concept of home is a phenomenon, as Seamon explained:

Phenomenology … asks if from the variety of ways which men and women behave in and experience their everyday world there are particular patterns which transcend specific empirical contexts and point to the essential human condition – the irreducible crux of people’s life-situations which remains when all non-essentials – cultural context, historical era, personal idiosyncrasies – are stripped bare through phenomenological procedures.42

The phenomenological idea of home can be identified when a group of humans situate their lifestyle by modifying natural geography and settling their living place to reflect a sense of home so they can experience the uniqueness of the place. The concept of home consists of cultural and social constructions produced by the activities of humans in a place. Lukeman mentions that the concept of home as a phenomenon aligned with Heidegger’s ideas. He wrote that the idea of home is a process of localising a place through a specific belief to make it belong to the locals. Moreover, the sense of home changes and hybridises with the flow of people and culture in a place; the concept of home consists of complex integral structures of nature and culture.43 However, Lukeman did not distinguish between different scales of idea of home, such as location, region, area, and place. May divides the concept of home into three modes: 1. The entire surface of the earth

39 Seamon D., “Body-Subject, Time-Space Routines, and Place-Ballets,” in The Human Experience of Space and Place, ed. Buttimer A. and Seamon D. (London: Croom Helm, 1980), 149, 155. 40 Cresswell, Place, 33–35. 41 Casey E., The Fate of Place: A Philosophical History (Oakland, CA: University of California Press, 1997), 30. 42 Seamon D., A Geography of the Lifeworld: Movement, Rest, and Encounter (London: St. Martin’s Press, 1979). 43 Lukerman F., “Geography as a Formal Intellectual Discipline and the Way in Which It Contributes to Human Knowledge,” Canadian Geographer 8, no. 4 (1964), 164. 69

2. The unit of space: a country, province, or town 3. The particular part of space humans think of as their place for dwelling44 May clarifies that only a particular place reflects the concept of home. At this scale, a human can construct a sense of home in a place to experience their existence.45 For Agnew, the concept of home in a place is constructed from three aspects: location, daily activity, and meaning. The first aspect is a space in which activities and objects can be situated. The second aspect is locales or everyday-life activities that transform a place into a social space. The third aspect is the idea of home, which reflects the ‘poetic (metaphysical) dimension’ of that place. Thus, Agnew suggested that the concept of home is socially constructed by human activities in a location. The sense of home is an infinite process: it changes in response to external forces. Furthermore, the concept of home is a process, which means it is open and ready to hybridise.46 Thus, the idea of home as phenomenon is ephemeral in architecture, because it relies on the concept of the bodily movement from human consciousness through an object.47 If the sense of home is constructed through the human relationship to architecture, a human experiences their concept of home in either permanent or ephemeral buildings.48 This implies that the idea of home is an architectural representation, which means a certain type of settlement can be built temporally to express the idea of home at a certain time and on a certain occasion. Discussing a sense of home in the context of Bangkok raises the question of how Bangkokians adapted the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model (also see Mount Meru in the glossary) to the landscape of Bangkok. At the phenomenological level, what was the Thai concept of home after the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model was applied to the landscape of Bangkok? How did Bangkokians experience a unique identity of place in Bangkok? What was the geocultural space of Bangkok like when the Hindu-Buddhist

44 May J., “Globalization and the Politics of Place: Place and Identity in an Inner London Neighborhood,” Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers 21, no. 1 (1996), 214. 45 Relph E., Place and Placelessness (London: Pion, 1976), 4. 46 Agnew J. A., Place and Politics: The Geographical Mediation of State and Society (Scoresby: Allen & Unwin, 1976). 47 Tuan Y. F., “Language and the Making of Place: A Narrative-Descriptive Approach,” Annals of the Association of American Geographers 81, no. 4 (1991), 684–696. 48 Donat J., World Architecture (London: Studio Vista, 1967), 9. 70

cosmological model was adapted to its landscape? How did the Thai concept of home reflect the social system of sakdina through the settlement system of Bangkok? The concept of home in Bangkok has not just responded to the existence of Bangkokians, but also involved sociopolitical activities. The Thai idea of home reflected sociopolitical interactions that suggest the concept of home was ephemeral, and changed in response to changes in society and culture. These questions will be discussed in chapter 5 to reveal how the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model and sakdina created the Thai sense of home.

Sense of place/home as a site of social construction When humans intend to express an idea of home, they create a process of making ‘social space’, in which space and time are ‘socially constructed’ through physical modification of the given environment.49 Manipulating the landscape through human activities is a ‘socially constructed’ process that constitutes the structure (existential space) of the sense of home. Malpas has stated that the ‘experience of place’ or concept of home is a conscious process of humans’ purpose to exist; it is an existential reflection of their culture and belief. Pred, a humanistic geographer, said that human ‘intentionality’ culturally influences people to build and manipulate a physical structure in a place, town, or building to create an existential space to distinguish between being inside and outside.50 It reveals that humans want to orient themselves in a place to create a sense of home. Thus, from the ‘socially constructed’ point of view, the idea of home becomes a narrative. This can explain how the concept of home begins to be formed, along with the process of disclosing the changing human existential footprint.51 A sense of home as a process of ‘social construction’ shows how the concept of home changes over time. Thus, the idea of home makes the space, place, and landscape a space of time-space compression. It adds a temporal dimension to a place. When applying the concept of home as a temporal dimension of a place to the Bangkok context, we can

49 Harvey, Justice, Nature. 50 Malpas J. E., Place and Experience: A Philosophical Topography (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1999), 35–36. 51 Tuan Y. F., “Geography, Phenomenology and the Study of Human Nature,” Canadian Geographer 25 (1971), 181–192. 71

see how Bangkok has been a space of changing sense of home. Sociopolitical activities within Bangkok are the main mechanism that contributes to this changing idea of home. A discussion of the historical background of Bangkok allows the thesis to address such questions as: What kind of sociopolitical conditions have influenced the Bangkokian concept of home? How did sociopolitical activity change the Thai sense of home over time? How did the Thai concept of home respond to external influences such as Western influence in the mid-19th century and the USA’s domination in the 1970s? Looking at time-space compression from sociopolitical changes in Bangkok is a key to analysing the changing and hybridising Thai idea of home. These enquiries will take place in chapters six to nine, which discuss how the Thai concept of home has changed and hybridised as a result of the modernisation that took place during the reigns of kings Rama IV (r. 1851- 1868) to Rama IX (r. 1946–2016).

Sense of place/home and space When looking at an idea of home through the space of architecture according to Christian Norberg-Schulz’s concept of dwelling, the sense of home is an appearance of human action under the terms of an agreement in existential space. The term ‘existential’ is often applied to describe the metaphysical structure of sense of home, as in ‘existential space’. Existential space is a supposed or visualised space formed through vertical and horizontal relationships.52 A sense of place/home and space are inseparable terms, and used interchangeably.53 Lefebvre, in The Production of Space, described this relationship as dialectical. This means the concept of home concretises the existence of itself and its context, or existential space, by being situated in abstract space.54 Edward Relph understood the dialectical relationship of a sense of place/home and space as a way to engage humans in the poetic dimension to understand their idea of home as written:

52 Jager B., “Horizontality and Verticality,” Duquesne Studies in Phenomenological Psychology 1 (1971), 212–235. 53 Sack R. D., Homo Geographicus: A Framework for Action, Awareness, and Moral Concern (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1997), 58. 54 Lefebvre H., The Production of Space (Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 1991). 72

Space is amorphous and intangible and not an entity that can be directly described and analysed. Yet, however we feel or explain space, there is nearly always some associated sense or concept of place [home]. In general it seems that space provides the context for places [idea of home] but derives its meaning from particular places.55

Relph implied that, at the conceptual level, space is different from a sense of place/home. The attribution of space is more abstract than that of the idea of home, because space is more about the area and volume in which the sense of home is situated.56 It appears when a movement stops in space. This means space is infinite, and the sense of home is a process of distinguishing a certain area in space.57 Escobar said that space is undefined, absolute, and universal, so it needs a concept of home to determine its character from the sameness of space; the idea of home is therefore meaningful, particular, and limited.58 On the other hand, the humanistic geographers of the 1970s developed an idea that a sense of place/home is everywhere, the same as space. So, the concept of home is not identical to space. However, the nature of sense of home is more subjective; it is a representative of the human existence59.

55 Relph, Place and Placelessness, 8. 56 Agnew, Place and Politics. 57 Tuan Y. F., Space and Place (Minneapolis: The University of Minnesota Press, 1977). 58 Escobar A., “Cultural Sits in Places: Reflections on Globalism and Subaltern Strategies of Localization,” Political Geography 20, no. 2 (2001), 139–174. 59 Agnew, Place and Politics. 73

Figure 2.3: The relationship between a sense of place/home and space. This diagram shows the relationship between the idea of home and space by emphasising space as a structure of concept of home, as in the book Place and Placelessness, by Relph.

Relph further supported the idea that a sense of place/ home and space are the same things, with regard to the continuous sequence of transforming space into idea of home. In his book Place and Placelessness, he argued that the concept of home is the result of characterising an area of space (figure 2.3). Before human settlement, every space (place) on Earth is homogeneous, with equal values everywhere, and in all directions; this is called cognitive space.60 Once humans decide to meet somewhere under an agreement, they begin to give the cognitive space dual directions such as left/right, up/down, front/rear, close/distant, and inside/outside, by building architecture in

60 Relph, Place and Placelessness, 24–25. 74

response to the local geography and culture.61 This provides a pragmatic space for humans, giving them an order that guides them in how to dwell (take place).62 At this point, it creates an ambiguity between space and a sense of place/ home, because when humans try to manifest their concept of home in pragmatic space, it changes the space from being undefined to being characterised as the idea of home. This transforms pragmatic space into perceptual space, which enables life to be situated63 Then, human social interactions mediated through the vertical and horizontal relationships of architecture creates ‘existential spatiality’ – the structure of sense of home.64 This turns a place into an architectural or existential space, where humans connect to the poetic dimension of the place and represent their idea of home. In return, a sense of place/home defines the structure of existential space. It is a condition of ‘existential insideness’ – a feeling of belonging within the ‘rhythm of life’ (to poetically dwell or a feeling of experiencing the idea of home) in a place, which forms the third dimension (living/existential space) of a place, as described by Agnew. Thus, the human mentality forms the abstract structure of concept of home. Structuration theory65 suggests that humans’ actions are determined and given meaning by structures (existential space) above or beyond them, and that structures (existential space) depend on humans’ actions for their existence. The structure of sense of home is like the grammar in written language; the meaning depends on the grammar. If people wanted to change the meaning of writing, it would change the structure of grammar as well. Regarding the idea of home, existential space is like the grammar and the concept of home is the meaning. When humans understand the meaning of their idea of home differently than before, this also changes the way they construct existential space. Physically, the sense of home and existential space can be read through the ‘language of architecture’ of town planning and buildings. The ‘language of architecture’ is a mode of human expression through architecture that reflects existence through the

61 Norberg-Schulz, The Concept of Dwelling, 13. 62 Levi-Strauss C., Structural Anthropology (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1967). 63 Matore G., L’Espace humain. (Paris: La Columbe, 1962). 64 Schutz A., Collected Papers Volumes I and II (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1962). 65 Cresswell, Place. 75

existential structure of idea of home.66 Therefore, the ‘language of architecture’ is a key to reading and understanding how the concept of home and existential space are created from a certain culture. A sense of place/home and space seem to be identical: they need each other to exist.67 Once the dual relationship of the sense of place/home and space manifests through a meeting of humans in a place to settle in a town, community, or house, it enters the human’s way of thinking to produce the experience of a poetic realm of living. Human consciousness becomes part of the place, and the place reveals its uniqueness. A human can embody their dasein68 – a German word from Heidegger’s Being and Time, which Relph roughly translated as ‘dwelling’ – being rooted and processed in existential space. Relph called it ‘authentic existence’, meaning that human dwelling in a place characterises the sameness (homogeneity) of the empty space (place).69 A sense of place/home and space reflect each other: the relationship is dialectic. When a group of humans with a belief assemble in a place, they transform space into their idea of home. On the other hand, that group already has a concept of home in their mind. Therefore, to understand the idea of home, one needs to understand the spatial structure of place as well. The architecture in the place is the ‘language of architecture’ that expresses the spatial structure (space) of concept of home. Architecture is a means to represent the meaning of sense of home. To analyse the concept of home in Bangkok, there is a need to look at town planning and buildings to understand their spatial structure and then the ‘language of architecture’. This leads to questions like the following. What did the spatial structure of the Bangkok sense of home look like under the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model? What was the ‘language of architecture’ in Bangkok’s existential space? And how was the ‘language of architecture’ in Bangkok represented through its architecture? These

66 Heidegger M., , Language, Thought (New York: Harper & Row, 1975), 221. 67 Norberg-Schulz C., Roots of Modern Architecture (A.D.A. Edita, 1988). 68 Heidegger, Being and Time, 149. 69 Hallowell I., Culture and Experience (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, 1955). 76

questions about the existential structure of sense of home in Bangkok will be further discussed in chapter 5 through analysis of the ‘language of architecture’.

Understanding of sense of place/home in the 20th century

Figure 2.4: The conception of place/home in the 20th century Based on the book Place and Placelessness, by Relph.

In the 20th century, Canadian geographer Edward Relph studied a sense of place/home or place and non-sense of place/home or placelessness. He distinguished the concept of home as having a single identity called authenticity (figure 2.4). Relph described this as “fundamental expression of human’s involvement in the world”70, meaning that the idea of home needed to be expressed through humans’ experiential involvement in a place.

70 Relph, Place and Placelessness, 44. 77

This is similar to how Heidegger said that “everywhere, wherever and however we are related to being of every kind, identity makes its claim upon us”.71 This suggests that everything has its own identity, whether human, building, landscape, or nation. Heidegger further suggested that the sense of home appeared at the different scales in which humans existed: a region, a country, a town, a street, and a house.72 The idea of home differentiated a thing from others that were the same. Relph called it an ability of place that persisted in sameness.73 Relph applied the ideas of Erikson so that the identity of the place was a “persistent sharing of some characteristic with others”.74 Thus, ‘identity’ was created from ‘inter-subjectivity’, which meant that the concept of home could be created self-consciously and unselfconsciously through the interaction of humans and place.75 Also, the idea of home needed to be created by human reactions in the right place at appropriate times. As Wanger wrote, “place, person, time and act form an individual unity. To be oneself one has to be somewhere definite, do certain things at appropriate times”.76 Relph said that as a result, when humans embodied identity in a place at a certain time, they created ‘existential insideness’ – an ability to experience the meaning of a particular place. Moreover, Norberg-Schulz emphasised the importance of being inside, writing, “to be inside is the primary intention behind the place concept (the concept of home); that is to be somewhere, away from what is outside.”77 To create a sense of insideness, the ‘boundary’ between inside and outside needs to be manifested. The boundary is an important component in distinguishing inside from outside.78 It distinguishes a place from being-outside, which is based on the perception of what is inside/outside. However, Bachelard argued that there is no difference between the inside and outside. He warned that there is an intimacy and reversibility of inside/outside: “outside and inside form a dialectic of division, the obvious geometry of

71 Heidegger M., The Essence of Reasons, trans. T. Malick (Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press, 1969), 26. 72 Heidegger, Poetry, Language, Thought. 73 Relph, Place and Placelessness, 45. 74 Erikson E. H., Identity and the Life Cycle (New York: W.W. Norton, 1980), 102. 75 Nairn I., The American Landscape (New York: Random House, 1965), 78. 76 Wagner P. L., Environments and Peoples (Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1972), 22. 77 Norberg-Schulz C., Existence, Space & Architecture (New York: Praeger Publishers, 1971), 25. 78 Relph, Place and Placelessness, 64. 78

which blinds us … Outside and Inside are both intimate – they are always ready to be reversed, to exchange their hostility”.79 Thus, the relationship of inside/outside is dualism; they can exchange their existential properties. Relph and Tuan further suggested that the perception of inside/outside was based on the sociopolitical interaction in the landscape. For instance, if humans focused on somewhere as being in their concept of home, then anywhere beyond would be outside.80 Experiencing ‘existential insideness’ was a moment when a human entered a place and knew where they were.81 That person was able to recognise the identity of the place, and was aware of belonging to the place.82 Humans always wanted to distinguish things from sameness. Relph explained that a sense of home was phenomenon manifested by human actions, an endless process of making and continuing the experience of being inside.83 Furthermore, Cox described it as “the sense of continuity of place necessary to people’s sense of reality”,84 meaning that the process of continuing to identify a place as concept of home was important to keep distinguishing it. Relph explained that the idea of home was a process of maintaining an identity in the place. He divided the process of continuing the sense of home (historical continuity) into self-conscious and unselfconscious aspects, and focused more on the latter. This process reflected the physical, social, spiritual, and other needs of a culture, in which all those elements were ingredients in making the concept of home85 so that the place maintained an internal harmony to fit the overall context.86 This conception deeply embraced the human consciousness of place found in many primitive cultures that had a belief in superstition, as “unself-conscious translation into the physical form of a culture, its needs and values – as well as the desires, dreams, and passions of the people”.87 Creating the concept of home self-consciously was similar to doing it unselfconsciously, except that it was reserved for sacred purposes. This was a process of transforming a

79 Bachelard G., The Poetics of Space (Boston: Beacon Press, 1994), 211, 217–8. 80 Tuan, “Geography, Phenomenology.” 81 Lyndon, “Towards Making Places,” 31–41. 82 Nairn, The American Landscape, 6. 83 Relph, Place and Placelessness, 68–71. 84 Cox H., “The Restoration of a Sense of Place,” Ekistics 25 (1968), 422–424. 85 Alexander C., Notes on the Synthesis of Form (Cambridge, MA: Press, 1964). 86 Relph, Place and Placelessness, 67. 87 Rapoport A., House Form and Culture (Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall, 1969), 2, 5. 79

place into an ideal environment through religious architecture, directly connecting humans to the upper realm or sky.88 In Western culture in the 20th century, the sense of home understood that creating the idea of home depended on a physical boundary to create the sense of being inside. Inside, the place needed to continue its history to retain the concept of home. This Western understanding of idea of home is problematic in studying changing concepts of home. The conservative concept of home saw external factors as a problem, making the local sense of home disappear, and saw the idea of home as needing to persist in the face of changes from outside, retaining its historical continuity.

Understanding of sense of place/home in the 21st century

Figure 2.5: The conception of place/home in the 21st century. Based on the book Place and Placelessness, by Relph.

88 Relph, Place and Placelessness, 71–73. 80

‘Existential outsideness’ is a sense of being alienated from the concept of home in the 21st century (figure 2.5). Rilke called this phenomenon the rejection of an individual by a place, as his poem “Die große Nacht” [“The Vast Night”] described it:

The new city was still to me as though denied and the unresponsive landscape spread its darkness as though I were not there. The nearest things did not bother to reveal themselves to me. The alley climbed to the street light. I saw how alien it was.89

Rilke described how being-outside appeared when humans felt isolated from a place. That place at least became a context for human activities, but there was no longer human involvement in experiencing the place. Therefore, ‘existential outsideness’ represented non-sense of home or placelessness. That place expressed a meaningless identity; it failed to resist sameness. Relph blamed the mobility involved in globalisation for un-distinguishing places around the world.90 This unified all humans’ thoughts, making them the same, which he called the “constitution of human”.91 Different concepts of home around the globe were homogenised by geographical and cultural uniformity; Lyndon became concerned that “the richly varied places of the world … are rapidly being obliterated under a meaningless pattern of buildings, monotonous and chaotic”,92 echoing the idea of the vanishing senses of home found in Relph’s thesis about architecture. The concepts of standardisation, efficiency, and connectivity in modern architecture93 influenced humans to urbanise in the same pattern around the world, without considering the differences between local landscapes. Relph called this the inauthenticity of place. Relph related this to Heidegger’s concept of inauthenticity, which is a characteristic of ‘normal’ and ‘everyday’ life, where an individual does the same as others without criticising, as it is the ‘uncritically accepted’ way of doing things. Heidegger called this the “dictatorship of the ‘They’ (Das Mann). We take pleasure and enjoy ourselves as

89 Pappenheim F., The Alienation of Modern Man (New York: Monthly Review Press, 1959), 33. 90 De Tocqueville A., et al. Democracy in America: Volume II (New York: Washington Square Press, 1899), 240. 91 Relph, Place and Placelessness, 79. 92 Lyndon, “Towards Making Places,” 31–41. 93 Zevi B., The Modern Language of Architecture (New York: Da Capo Press, 1994). 81

‘they’ take pleasure; we read, see, and judge literature and art as ‘they’ see and judge.”94 He mentioned that humans who lived in a place without the identity of place were like ‘they’, being dictated to or directed by others. The dictatorship of the They neutralised the world’s diversity through space-time compression, making places a ‘homogeneous space’.95 On the other hand, non-sense of home could be viewed from a different angle. Auge, a French anthropologist, argued that the understanding of idea of home in a globalising world needed a ‘radical rethinking’. His view was that the concept of home in the post-modern world could not be understood through the old concept of ‘historical continuity’.96 The sense of home was unlike a ‘history’; it was temporary and kept changing all the time. In fact, the nature of the idea of home was constantly changing through social and cultural interactions with external forces. Massey has written that the theory of place/sense of home in the 20th century focused too much on the physical aspect of the place, especially the idea of the ‘boundary’ to distinguish between inside and outside.97 Furthermore, she argued that the concept of home should be looked at from the present, because the idea of home is an existential reflection of current human activities. This meant the sense of home was phenomenon that hybridised in response to sociopolitical impacts. Moreover, from Auge’s perspective, aspects of globalisation such as connectivity, consumption, and communication characterised places in a new way. Thus, non-sense of home for Auge meant something different to what it did for Relph. Auge emphasised that nowadays, non-sense of home was appearing around the world, which implied that the West understood the ideas of home differently from before. Lippard added that mobility within a place created hybridisation. When humans with different cultures moved within a place, they spontaneously added a new ingredient to it.98 The concept of home was hybridising with different identities. Thus, the idea of home

94 Heidegger, Being and Time, 168. 95 Olson R. G., An Introduction to Existentialism (New York: Dover Publications, 2012), 135–136. 96 Augé M., Non-Places: Introduction to an Anthropology of Supermodernity (London: Verso, 1995). 97 Massey D., “A Global Sense of Place,” in Space, Place, and Gender (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1994), 146–156. 98 Lippard L. R., The Lure of the Local: Senses of Place in a Multicentered Society (New York: New Press, 1997), 5–6. 82

never disappeared even though it was, according to Cronon, “diminished and often lost.” “It continues (continued)”, he writes, “as an absence – to define culture and identity. It also continues (continued) – as a presence – to change the way we live.”99. Since, for Cronon, the sense of home constantly changed because of the flow of humans, in turn it changed the way humans understood their concept of home. The idea of home became a dialectic process of deconstruction and reconstruction through hybridisation.100 The emergence of non-sense of home showed that the concept of home in the 21st century was a phenomenological condition arising from humans’ movements in a space that could be both physical and conceptual. The sense of home was progressive, lasting for a moment and then changing. Discussing the concept of home in the contemporary world, which revealed its temporal dimension, Massey called the idea of home in a globalising world ‘a global sense of place [home]’. She mentioned that incorporating ‘time’ with a place diversified the concept of home with different identities, making the idea of home more like a ‘social space’ – an open arena for cultural hybridisation that made it persist in spite of the onslaught of sameness.101 Thereby, the sense of home became openness, and Massey argued that it should be understood more at the conceptual level.102 Massey outlined how the concept of home in the contemporary world was created in three ways. First, the idea of home was constructed from the social relationships of humans. Second, the sense of home was infinite and limitless; it did not need a boundary because the idea of home was conceptual, appearing anywhere. Third, the concept of home had multiple identities, as the result of internal conflicts and social interactions of different people from various cultures.103 However, the advent of idea of home without a boundary created nostalgia, bringing fear and anxiety about time-space compression to a place. Massey was aware

99 Lippard, The Lure of the Local: Senses of Place in a Multicentered Society, 7, 20. 100 Cronon W., “Kennecott Journey: The Paths out of Town,” in Under an Open Sky, ed. W. Cronon, G. Miles, and J. Gitlin (New York: W.W. Norton, 1993), 37. 101 Massey, “A Global Sense of Place,” 153–154. 102 Massey, “A Global Sense of Place,” 154–155. 103 Massey, “A Global Sense of Place,” 155–156. 83

that having a boundary was still an important element. So she reconceptualised the understanding of a sense of home to involve four crucial factors. First, the idea of home was still a process of changing and hybridising. Second, the concept of home ignored the physical boundary, but people from outside defined the conceptual boundary. Third, the sense of home was a site or social space of multiple identities. Fourth, the concept of home was defined by internal interactions and conflicts.104 Therefore, the sense of home was processed through the interactions of people with different cultural backgrounds, coming from outside. The idea of home never eroded under globalisation, but was created from the hybridisation of different cultures caused by connectivity and mobility. The Western conception of home in the 21st century demonstrated a radical change in the understanding of a sense place/home after urbanisation. It reflected how urbanism had changed the conceptual structure of concept of home in the Western culture from being bounded to open. In relation to this thesis, the contemporary conception of home has seemed to better explain what the idea of home is in a changing world. In the context of Bangkok, it left open the question of what was the Bangkokian sense of home. How did it change in a globalising world and in response to the process of royal modernisation policies and processes? Did the unique urbanisation process of Bangkok change the understanding of Thai concept of home in Bangkok in a different way to what happened in the Western world? These questions will be answered in chapters five to nine, which discuss how the Thai sense of home hybridised during the modernisations by Thai kings and The People’s Party.

104 Cresswell, Place, 72–75. 84

Structure of concept of home (‘four modes of dwelling’) in architectural space

Two aspects of concept of home as place identity in architecture A sense place/home characterises space; this process constructs the structure (‘existential spatiality’) of concept of home. According to Norberg-Schulz, in Concept of Dwelling, it creates two aspects of idea of home as place identity in architecture: (1) identification and (2) orientation. Norberg-Schulz emphasised that together, identification and orientation embody a sense of home and existential space.105 He developed the term ‘identification’ from Heidegger’s concept of ‘thing’, basing it on the idea of how work interprets the thingness of thing – how the human-made thing expresses the ‘language of architecture’ (thingness) of morphology, topology, and typology to reveal their concept of home through space and architecture. Heidegger claimed that the thingness of things reveals how humans manifest their knowledge of being-in-the-world.106 Norberg-Schulz wrote that understanding identification explains the emergence of ‘existential spatiality’ through architectural arrangement and spatial organisation. In architecture, the identification of the ‘language of architecture’ tells us how humans establish their existence through the ‘four modes of dwelling’: settlement, urban space, public building, and houses.107 According to Heidegger, revealing the thingness of things is the process of disclosing the ‘work of art’, here meaning the sense of home. Heidegger referred to the term concept of home as the ‘work of architecture’.108 Norberg-Schulz called the word ‘work’ as ‘genius loci’ – the embodiment of ‘work’, ‘thingness’, or a sense of place/home109. The identification reflects ‘existential spatiality’, which Norberg-Schulz noted is the same as orientation. It gives humans a direction in a place, allowing them to create spatial organisation.110 Orientation is the conceptual axis in the existential space; it represents vertical and horizontal relationships. Vertical tension creates a hierarchy of higher and lower positions in space, which also creates a horizontal tension between

105 Norberg-Schulz, The Concept of Dwelling. 106 Merleau-Ponty M., Phenomenology of Perception (New York: Routledge, 2012). 107 Norberg-Schulz, The Concept of Dwelling, 117. 108 Heidegger M., “Poetically Man Dwells,” in Poetry, Language, Thought (New York: Harper & Row, 1975), 218. 109 Norberg-Schulz, Genius Loci. 110 Lynch K., The Image of the City (Cambridge, MA: Harvard-MIT Joint Centre for Urban Studies Series, 1960), 4–5. 85

centre and path,111 where the concept of home or inside creates a feeling of being close to the centre.112 These tensions help humans to find their ‘initial arrival point’ and form an ‘existential spatiality’ where human values – culture, lifestyle, and belief – are attached to a place.113 The ‘language of architecture’ (identification) reveals the structure (orientation) of existential space through ‘four modes of dwelling’. The orientation aspect of Bangkok’s existential space illustrates how Bangkokians imposed vertical and horizontal relationships on the landscape. How did the ‘four modes of dwelling’ in Bangkok’s existential space reflect the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model? How did Bangkokians use architecture conceptually to reflect vertical and horizontal relationships in Bangkok’s existential space? These questions will be further explained in chapter 4, as we analyse the ‘four modes of dwelling’ (settlement, urban space, public building, and house) in Bangkok.

Settlement Conceptually, the settlement mode of dwelling is where people stopped wandering and said, here, we have reached the point of arrival. Then, they distinguish their place as ‘inside’. Within that place, they use architectural design to reveal their sense of place/home. They set the point of ‘meeting there’ by manipulating the landscape in accordance with their culture and belief system.114 The settlement becomes a space of life; it invites people to gather and dwell. The name of the town tells how the place is related to the nature and culture of the people.115 The concept of the cosmological model allows people to take their place within it. People embrace the idea of the cosmological model through architecture to represent the concept of home as an existential space, where ‘existential spatiality’ constitutes the

111 Norberg-Schulz, Existence, Space & Architecture. 112 Eliade M., The Sacred and the Profane: The Nature of Religion (Orlando: Harcourt, Brace, 1959), 20. 113 Norberg-Schulz, The Concept of Dwelling, 23–25. 114 Norberg-Schulz, The Concept of Dwelling, 31. 115 Scully V., The Earth, the Temple, and the Gods: Greek Sacred Architecture (San Antonio: Trinity University Press, 2013). 86

‘language of architecture’, explaining how the place visualises the values of nature and culture.116 Morphologically, a settlement represents how architecture and natural surroundings such as rivers, mountains, land, and hills are assembled through sociopolitical interactions to embody the ideal image inspired by the cosmological model. The model directs the people in the place to orient themselves in a settlement system. It is illustrated through town planning and in the skyline.117 Space inside the town is made into divine space by sacred architecture. The settlement system is a process of making the idea of home that reflects a social mechanism. The settlement system influences the architectural system, and town planning and building reflect the settlement system. The settlement pattern in a place, which is illustrated by the architectural system, expresses the spatial structure of sense of home. It reveals its morphology at the settlement level and tells how the sociopolitical factors are at play in that place. In Bangkok, the landscape is characterised by aquatic elements such as rivers and canals. It will, then, be interesting to discuss how Bangkokians reached their point of arrival. How did Bangkokians manipulate the landscape to reflect the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model? How did the name of Bangkok in Thai, Krungthep Mahanakorn [the great capital of gods and angels], reflect the nature and culture of Bangkok? Furthermore, how did the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model influence the architectural system to visualise the ideal image of Bangkok? How was the settlement system of Bangkok created through the influence of Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model on architecture? Topologically, ‘human togetherness’ organises the settlement system, which is influenced by the culture and society. It is a process of creating spatial structure. This can be seen in the elevation of the town. At the settlement level, the arrangement of buildings on the skyline shows how the settlement system is created.118

116 Norberg-Schulz, Genius Loci. 117 Norberg-Schulz, The Concept of Dwelling, 33–35. 118 Norberg-Schulz, Existence, Space & Architecture. 87

There are three basic settlement patterns: enclosure, row, and cluster. Each of these corresponds to a specific architectural system and orientation.119 The enclosure format is reserved for sacred spaces and buildings: it gives a sense of protection. In contrast, the cluster format represents informality, and characterises profane space with a sense of openness. The row format is created for profane space, but is more formal than the cluster format, though without giving a sense of protection.120 Settlement topology explains the process of organising the architectural system of a place to create a hierarchy. The natural landscape of Bangkok was an aquatic environment, which was characterised by the informality of the organic aquatic network. It presented Bangkok with the challenge of how to apply the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model through architecture to organise the settlement system. For Bangkok, applying the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model to the water-based settlement raised the question of how the settlement system created ‘human togetherness’ to reflect the model. How did the hybrid settlement system of Bangkok create the town’s skyline? What kind of settlement patterns – enclosure, row, or cluster – did Bangkokians apply to the town planning? Did they adapt more than one settlement pattern? Typologically, the settlement pattern in the place interprets its ‘figural quality’. It discloses how people exist through the spatial organisation of architecture in relation to nature. It characterises the unique figure of the place: the ‘intangible bond’ between people, building, and landscape that embodies the concept of home.121 It gives the place the ability to conquer sameness. The typology of the settlement reflects the visualisation of the spatial structure inspired by the cosmological model.122 Moreover, the typology reveals how the spatial structure changes through sociopolitical interactions. It discloses how the idea of home constitutes and changes itself. The typology imparts meaning to place, which is interpreted through town planning and buildings. It demonstrates how the ‘intangible bond’ of sense of home

119 Piaget J., and Inhelder B., The Child’s Conception of Space (New York: Routledge, 1956), 449. 120 Norberg-Schulz, Existence, Space & Architecture, 41-42. 121 Norberg-Schulz, Genius Loci, 69. 122 Norberg-Schulz, The Concept of Dwelling, 44–48. 88

connects people, buildings, and landscape to express the place’s identity. How did the morphology and topology of Bangkok’s settlement system embody its ‘figural quality’? What was the ‘intangible bond’ (concept of home) that connected Bangkokians to the landscape and buildings? How did the typology of Bangkok represent how the spatial structure was created and changed through sociopolitical interactions such as the royal modernisation policies and processes and the superimposition of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model?

Urban space Once people gather in a settlement, they also ‘dwell’ in it, experiencing it in the poetic dimension. They constitute the activities of daily life in urban space, which forms a centre and expands through the path of the space. The centre of the settlement acts as a sacred point, giving a sense of being inside. Where urban life appears, it acts as a mirror, reflecting the shared image of human existence through architecture.123 It illustrates how the belief system embodies the ideal image that makes people belong to the place. It can be seen when an individual lives in a town. They may say, “I am a resident of this town.” Therefore, the purpose of urban space is to reveal the concept of home through the meeting of people influenced by the cosmological model.124 The urban space embodies the ideal image of the place, representing the essence of the place or the sense of home. Applying the concept of the urban space that represents poetic life in Bangkok context presents a challenge. Since the aquatic landscape of Bangkok was organic, it raises the question of how Bangkokians adapted to this condition to dwell in the poetic realm of the city? How did they organise the landscape to form the centre of the place where they superimposed the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model? At the scale of urban space, the Thai idea of home is the result of a process that involves three forms of understanding the sense of home: (1) practical, (2) theoretical, and (3) poetic. Norberg-Schulz called this ‘hypotheses of reality’. The first form of

123 Scully V. J., Louis I. Kahn, (New York: G. Braziller, 1962), 12. 124 Norberg-Schulz, The Concept of Dwelling, 51. 89

understanding the place, the practical, requires people to perform daily activities in the place to link people, architecture, and place together. The second form of understanding, the theoretical, emerges when people successfully transform an empty space into their concept of home, inspired by the cosmological model. The third form of understanding, the poetic, discloses the idea of home through the ‘language of architecture’.125 The streets of the settlement express the ‘language of architecture’, which is the ‘thingness of things’.126 In their urban space, how did Bangkokians apply the three forms of understanding the Thai idea of home to the landscape? How did they perform the activities of daily life in a way that represented the connection between people, architecture, and landscape? How did Bangkokians transform the landscape of Bangkok to be their ideal place in relation to the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model? What was the ‘language of architecture’ that the urban space of Bangkok interpreted through architecture? Morphologically, the architectural system at the street level determines the structure of urban space. It shows how people connect to the place through the arrangement of buildings. The morphology of urban space ‘visualises’ how the idea of home is created through social interactions. Thus, the space of the street becomes a meeting point at which social activities take place.127 The street illustrates how the interactions of people construct ‘existential spatiality’, forming spatial relationships and revealing how the vertical and horizontal axes of the space are formed from the cosmological model. The morphology of urban space is represented through the architectural components of wall, floor, and ceiling, which visualise the spatial structure of the urban interior. The urban wall represents a boundary of and in the living space. The urban floor represents the horizontal axis, providing a conceptual space/context that allows people to embody their concept of home through the architectural design. The urban ceiling or sky defines verticality, reflecting the spatial hierarchy. It represents the image of the upper

125 Norberg-Schulz, The Concept of Dwelling, 51. 126 Heidegger, Poetry, Language, Thought. 127 Lynch K., The Image of the City, (Cambridge, MA: Harvard-MIT Joint Centre for Urban Studies Series, 1960), 46. 90

realm, the reflection of the cosmological model.128 The street or path gives us the ‘starting’ and ‘ending’ points of the living space,129 while the street directs people to the centre, which is the goal or ‘arrival point’ that represents a space for meeting and signifies the idea of home. At the scale of urban space, the sense of home on the street is illustrated in the spatial arrangement of buildings.130 Urban morphology visualises how the idea of home is created through the architectural system. It explains how the meeting point interprets urban life. Architecture represents the urban morphology through the conceptual, architectural components of the urban space: walls (boundaries), floors (living space), and ceilings (upper space). Together, they create the urban space or street, which directs people to the goal (centre). Thus, the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model influenced the architectural system of Bangkok, which visualised the model in terms of an architectural system for urban space. But how did Bangkokians use their buildings to transform the aquatic landscape of Bangkok to be their ideal place, through the social and cultural interactions between people, building, and landscape? How did the urban space of Bangkok interpret the urban wall, floor, and ceiling in response to the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model? What did the streets of Bangkok look like? How did the streets of Bangkok lead people to experience the concept of home? Topologically, urban space expresses the ‘spatial quality’ comprised of continuity and proximity. These relate ‘spatial quality’ to ‘figural quality’, allowing people to connect to the urban space.131 According to Aristotle, urban space provided a sense of security (enclosure) that made people happy, through a “topologically organised urban space or geometrical layout”.132 Once urban planning occurs, it orients people in urban space, creating ‘togetherness’ through the collective buildings. Thus, urban space allows

128 Norberg-Schulz, The Concept of Dwelling, 56–59. 129 Zucker P., Town and Square (Textbook Publishers, 2003), 1. 130 Norberg-Schulz, The Concept of Dwelling, 60–61, 63. 131 Norberg-Schulz, The Concept of Dwelling, 63. 132 Sitte C., Der Stadtebau [The Urbanism] (Vienna 1909), 2. 91

‘togetherness’, in which people create and maintain a sense of home as a living space that provides an entry point to poetic ‘dwelling’.133 Urban topology reveals the ‘spatial quality’ that shows how people create continuity and proximity at the street level. This makes the ‘spatial quality’ represent the ‘figural quality’ by spatialising the urban space to constitute ‘togetherness’. How did Bangkokians create continuity and proximity through the urban space to embody ‘spatial quality’ and ‘figural quality’? How did the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model influence the process of spatialising the urban space of Bangkok? How did the urban space (street) inspired by the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model create ‘togetherness’? Typologically, the embodiment of the architectural systems in urban space reflects the idea of home. It visualises the image of place, which has three functions. First, it allows life to take place based on the ‘existential spatiality’ of the urban topology. Second, once people understand the spatial structure, they raise built forms to represent their architectural system. This demonstrates how they are connected between the landscape and the upper realm inspired by the cosmological model.134 Third, it forms a spatial organisation of buildings (considered collectively) that interprets the idea of home.135 The urban space is a living space in which urban typology constitutes and reflects the concept of home at the street level.136 Urban typology represents the idea of home of the architectural system in the urban space. It has three basic functions: (1) allowing life to take place, (2) telling how buildings are raised to represent existential space, and (3) reflecting the spatial organisation of the architectural system. Thus, at the urban-space level of Bangkok, the meaning of place is given by the meaning of architecture. But what was the sense of home, in the context of Bangkok’s urban space, that its urban life and buildings reflected? How did the architectural system at the level of urban space represent the structure of

133 Norberg-Schulz, The Concept of Dwelling, 63, 66. 134 King Lithai, Traibhumikatha: The Story of Three Planes of Existence (vol. 1a). (Bangkok: Thailand Amarin Printing Group, 1985). 135 Venturi R., and Scully V. J., Complexity and Contradiction in Architecture (New York: Museum of Modern Art, 1966), 88. 136 Norberg-Schulz, The Concept of Dwelling, 66, 69. 92

Thai concept of home in Bangkok? What kind of architectural system did Bangkokians apply to constitute the Thai idea of home?

Public building The public space or institution represents the collective image of urban space; it explains daily life by showing how society is gathered and organised based on the cosmological model. Public buildings bring individual identities from the private domain into an open place, and represent the sharing of identity. They visualise the unified concept of home through the process of social interactions.137 The structure and spatial plan of a public building should be self-explanatory, revealing the shared image that represents the idea of home as a more general identity.138 Morphologically, the public building provides two types of space: sacred and communal. Communal space represents everyday life, and while standing for the earthly realm, also reflects sacred space.139 Sacred space has the purpose of expressing the divine dimension of place. People create their sense of home in the sacred space of the public building by performing religious ceremonies in the specific space and at specific times.140 Sanctifying public space represents how people overcome sameness, which is the precondition of place before people create the concept of home.141 Performing religious ceremonies in public space is a process of organising ‘existential spatiality’ and explaining the idea of home in making public space.142 The individual building in the public realm represents the collective identity of urban space. The sense of home that emerges in public space reflects a unified identity. The sacred building influences the communal building in spatial planning, and the spatial planning of public buildings reflects how people create their idea of home through spatial arrangement. In Bangkok, we see a different concept of public buildings from that of the West; in Bangkok, the sacred building was for the upper class to live in, but also served as

137 Terrasse C., La cathédrale: miroir du monde [Cathedral: Mirror of the World] (Éditions Alpina, 1954). 138 Norberg-Schulz, The Concept of Dwelling, 71–72. 139 Norberg-Schulz, The Concept of Dwelling, 73. 140 Scully V. (2013), The Earth, the Temple, and the Gods. 141 Norberg-Schulz, The Concept of Dwelling, 72–75. 142 Norberg-Schulz, Genius Loci, 69. 93

a public space for the lower class. This made public space in Bangkok flexible. We may then ask, how did individual buildings in Bangkok present the coexistence of collective identity in their public function and individual identity in their private function? How did the public spaces of Bangkok reflect its unified identity? And what did the spatial planning of individual buildings in Bangkok communicate about ‘existential spatiality’, as the result of public and private functions coexisting? Topologically, public space clarifies the obscurity of the landscape, orienting people through architecture. In a similar way, public space constructs a representation of ‘existential spatiality’. The topological role of a public space explains the spatial structure of existential space. Organising the ‘existential spatiality’ in the public space is the process of ‘spatialisation’, which lights up the uncharacterised place. The cosmological model directs how the public space reflects such ‘spatialisation’, and explains the spatial relationships of verticality and horizontality.143 The architectural system of the public building conceptualises the concept of home in the public realm.144 The topology of the public building represents the process of spatialisation. The spatial organisation of the building explains how its verticality (hierarchy) and horizontality (boundary) relate to create its ‘existential spatiality’. The public space of Bangkok was not purely public, as it was in the West. In this sense, the topology of Bangkok’s public space had a different process of spatialisation. How did the spatial planning of public buildings in Bangkok demonstrate their spatialisation? How did the verticality of social hierarchy and the horizontality of boundaries interplay in this public space of Bangkok, which was not merely public? How did spatialisation in Bangkok, creating existential space from public space, reflect the relationships embedded in the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model and the local landscape? These questions will be discussed in chapter 5, and will continue to be analysed in chapters 6–9 to examine how the public mode of dwelling of Bangkok has changed through the modernisations of Thai kings and People’s Party.

143 Norberg-Schulz C., Baroque Architecture (New York: H. N. Abrams, 1972). 144 Norberg-Schulz, The Concept of Dwelling, 79, 81. 94

Typologically, public space gathers people together and interprets the total image of the built environment inspired by the cosmological model.145 It visualises social relationships; how people interact with a belief system to create their idea of home.146 The spatial organisation of public space reflects the concept of home in relation to the ‘existential spatiality’ of urban space. In the physical world, the typology of the public building is constituted through landmarks, which determine the size, structure, and complexity of the space and building. The remarkable architecture of public buildings reflects the idea of home more obviously through their stronger sense of ‘spatial order’.147 The typology of public space reflects the ‘existential spatiality’ inspired by the cosmological model. The space of public buildings tells the story of how people manifest their sense of home. This raises the question of how the public space of Bangkok demonstrated the Thai concept of home through the flexible functions of public and private spaces. How did the typology of public space in Bangkok reflect the hybrid Thai concept of home that came from superimposing the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model on the local landscape? Additionally, in the phenomenological sense of public building as discussed earlier there seem to be a clear distinction between public function and private function. This may not be the case in the sacred buildings, such as Buddhist temple or profane building like stilt/floating house Bangkok as public function is overlapping with the private function in different contexts for the purpose of serving hierarchising flexibly between the higher and lower classes and the sacred and profane spaces. It also demonstrates how did the individual building either the sacred and profane present the coexistence of collective identity as shown in the overlapping of public, individual and private spaces?

House When people enter their own house, they immediately become familiar with it as their sense of home. The house is a place where people’s daily life takes place. It conceptually

145 Schwarz R., Vom Bau der Kirche [From the Construction of the Church] (Heidelberg: L. Schneider, 1947), 46. 146 Guidoni E., La citta europea [The European City] (Milan, 1980). 147 Norberg-Schulz, The Concept of Dwelling, 83, 88. 95

reflects how people manifest the concept of home in private space.148 Phenomenologically, the individual building connects every person to disclose the idea of home. Spontaneously, people withdraw themselves into the house to restore their individual identity.149 Thus, the house visualises the world of ‘phenomena’, the plural form of phenomenon. It is an existence that attempts to explain the knowledge of being-in-the- world, the concept of home.150 As Heidegger wrote, “the mood had already disclosed, in every case, being-in-the-world as a whole, and makes it possible first of all to direct oneself towards something”.151 According to Heidegger, then, experiencing the space of the house reveals the sense of home. The domestic space explains the overall existential space, which reflects how the idea of home in the cosmological model manifests itself in the individual mind.152 Morphologically, the spatial system of the house represents a ‘microcosm’ of the cosmological model. It repeats the ‘existential spatiality’ of the urban space. The spatial relationship within the house represents the domestic morphology, and the domestic morphology is embodied in the house’s space by performing rites to imitate the cosmological model.153 People use the house-building process to spiritually superimpose the cosmological model on the physical structure of the house. This reflects Heidegger’s philosophy of bringing the landscape close to humans through architecture. Heidegger wrote that buildings should keep the inhabited landscape closely connected to humans. Thereby, performing a house-building rite that imitated the cosmological model through architecture was a phenomenological process that gathered the individual mind into the form of the house, which is the place that demonstrates how the existential space constructed an idea of home through the architectural system of the house.

148 Bachelard G., The Poetics of Space (Boston: Beacon Press, 1994). 149 Bollnow O. F., Vom Vesen der Stimmungen [The Nature of Moods] (Frankfurt, 1956), 33. 150 Binswanger L., Grundformen und Erkenntnis menschlichen Daseins [Basic Forms and Knowledge of Human Existence] (Munich: E. Reinhardt Verlag, 1964), 25. 151 Heidegger, Being and Time, 176. 152 Norberg-Schulz, The Concept of Dwelling, 89, 91. 153 Clay J., L’impressionisme [Impressionism] (Paris, 1971), 134. 96

The house’s space contains the image (morphology) of how the entire settlement system of the place is created. In turn, the house’s morphology is explained through a spatial organisation that explains a particular ‘mood’ or ‘state-of-mind’ according to Heidegger’s philosophy of being and time. At the domestic scale, it represents how the individual is conscious of the structure of sense of home. Experiencing the idea of home in the house is the most original form of this experience, in which the individual directs themselves to understand the concept of home. Thus, the morphological relationship of space in the house directs people towards an understanding of the knowledge of being-in- the-world. As Heidegger has written: “A state-of-mind always has its understanding” and “understanding always has its mood”.154 According to Heidegger, once people experience their sense of home in the house, it makes them understand the place’s identity. In architecture, people build the house and create the interior space to visualise the house’s morphology and create the idea of home. They use the physical structures of the house to make the concept of home accessible in the form of architecture. At this point, the house represents the relationship of things: nature, society, culture, and humans. The spatial arrangement of the house transforms an unknown world into the concept of home; it conceptually makes people familiar with the place, where they fully disclose their idea of home. The spatial system of the house is where the individual mind arrives to experience the quality of sense of home.155 The architecture of a house brings people to experience the concept of home, explaining how people apply the cosmological model to create the idea of home. The house’s morphology illustrates the ‘microcosm’ of the cosmological model to repeat the ‘existential spatiality’ of urban space. People imitate the cosmological model in the house through the house-building rite, just as people perform religious ceremonies to sanctify public space. The difference is that when people superimpose the cosmological model at the level of the house, it represents the place’s identity individually. We may then ask, how did Bangkokians build stilt/floating houses to represent the ‘microcosm’ of the Hindu-

154 Heidegger, Being and Time, 182. 155 Norberg-Schulz, The Concept of Dwelling, 91, 94, and 96. 97

Buddhist cosmological model? And how did the architectural system of the stilt/floating house repeat the ‘existential spatiality’ of the urban space of Bangkok? How did Bangkokians perform construction rites to imitate the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model? And what was the image of the settlement system in Bangkok at the house level? Topologically, the individual house includes all the varieties of life. It represents the path and centre in its spatial organisation, and as at the spatiality of house imitates ‘existential spatiality’, it reflects this in the path and centre that are part of the house’s interior space. The centre of the house is represented by the highest or most interior position, and the size, position, and material of architectural elements such as floors, walls, and ceiling. In the central space, these architectural elements are built using a different design or structure to distinguish the central space from subordinate spaces. For example, the floor of the central space is built to be higher than that in other kinds of space, the wall of the central space can be higher or built with better materials and more delicate design, and the ceiling of the central space is designed to be higher or more decorative than other spaces. The domestic topology is a product of the spatialisation and hierarchisation of the interior space of the house. The spatial organisation of the house demonstrates how the existential structure of the concept of home at the house level is constructed.156 However, the house has more ‘figural quality’, because the domestic space is more flexible. The house provides a space for domestic activities; somehow, it makes the centre and path overlap.157 The spatialisation of any house shows two fundamental principles of organisation: (1) a centralised plan and (2) the axial plan of the house’s interior.158 The sacredness and superiority indicated by the centre or a meeting point, such as a space for worship, represents the ‘togetherness’ of people and social interaction between the subordinate and central spaces. This suggests that the spatialisation of the house’s interior reveals the process of creating the structure of idea of home. The process of making the sense of

156 Moore C. W., Allen G., and Lyndon D., The Place of Houses (Oakland: University of California Press, 1974). 157 Norberg-Schulz, The Concept of Dwelling, 103. 158 Velltheim-Lottum L., Kleine Weltgeschichte des stadtischen Wohnhauses [A History of the Dwelling House] (Heidelberg: L. Schneider, 1952). 98

home can be seen as people occupy the spaces of the house. The pattern (daily activities) of occupation in different spaces of the house illustrates how people embody the structure of concept of home.159 Furthermore, the process of spatialisation of the interior space of the house can occur through its physical elements or conceptual space. Spatialising the house through its physical elements is done by dividing the space with walls and placing the floor on different levels, while spatialising it through conceptual space is done by setting rules for how to occupy the place at specific times. The house can be spatialised through conceptual space because it has more ‘figural quality’ (flexibility) than a public building does. Therefore, understanding the spatialisation of the central and axial spaces of the house discloses the domestic topology.160 Domestic morphology represents the spatial arrangement of the central and subordinate spaces, which shows how ‘existential spatiality’ is created. The house’s topology has more ‘figural quality’: the space usage of the house is more flexible, to serve domestic activities. It makes the central and subordinate spaces overlap. The relationship of central and subordinate spaces represents ‘togetherness’ – how people gather to create ‘existential spatiality’. This can be seen from the use of space in daily life, which is the key to understanding the existential space. The occupation of space in the house can be spatialised through the physical and conceptual spaces. Conceptual space appears more in the house because it has more ‘figural quality’. This raises the question of how, in a stilt/floating house, the relationship of the central and subordinate spaces in daily activities illustrates ‘existential spatiality’. How did it represent the spatial order of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model through the house’s physical structure? How did the ‘figural quality’ at the house level illustrate the spatial relationship between the central and subordinate spaces differently than other modes of the dwelling, such as public buildings? Typologically, the meaning of idea of home in the house, derived from its morphology and topology, is reflected in the spatial organisation of the interior space. The

159 Baillie-Scott M. H., Houses and Gardens (London: G. Newnes, 1906), 18. 160 Norberg-Schulz, The Concept of Dwelling, 99, 102. 99

typology of the house interprets the place’s identity in relation to the cosmological model through the architectural system and spatialisation of the house. It explains the entire existential space and how the structure of concept of home is created. The typology at the house level explains how the individual knows how ‘to dwell’ by imitating the cosmological model.161 The house typology is different from the public one. Interpreting the concept of home in relation to public space, we see that the public space has a ‘higher level of generalisation’162. The institution only expresses the collective identity; it demonstrates the ‘overall image’ of sense of home, while the concept of home at the level of the house is more specific. Every individual house represents an individual’s identity; it demonstrates how the idea of home in the individual’s mind manifests through the spatial organisation of the house. Thus, the typology of the house better explains the understanding of concept of home in people’s minds.163 The individual house is the arrival point. It is the end and the beginning of wandering. It reflects ‘existential spatiality’ at the house scale, where people demonstrate the structure of concept of home through architectural and spatial systems. The house explains the existential structure of idea of home, illustrating the relationships between the arrangements of figural architecture in the ‘four modes of dwelling’.164 The domestic typology interprets the concept of home through the architectural system of the house. The ‘language of architecture’ of the house’s spatial organisation tells us how the individual dwells in the poetic realm, which reflects the sense of home. Thus, the idea of home in a house is more specific than that in public space. The stilt/floating house in Bangkok functions as domestic space for the lower class, as does the public building for the upper class. However, the stilt/floating house did not have a function as public space. Still, the architectural system of the stilt/floating house should represent the coexistence of the public and private at the house level, as in the public building. How did the domestic typology in the stilt/floating house demonstrate the

161 Trier J., First. Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Gottingen [Society of Sciences at Gottingen] (1940), 117. 162 Norberg-Schulz, The Concept of Dwelling, 108 163 Norberg-Schulz, The Concept of Dwelling, 105–106, 108. 164 Donat J., World Architecture (London: Studio Vista, 1967), 9. 100

spatial relationship of the coexistence of public and private spaces? How did this interpret the idea of home through the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model? How did the ‘language of architecture’ in the stilt/floating house demonstrate how individual Bangkokians interpreted the idea of home at the house level in chapter 5?

Conclusion

This chapter has looked at the concept of home as the identity of place, seen through conceptual or existential space. It looked at the philosophy of place/ sense of home through architecture, and at buildings as artworks that interpret the meaning of concept of home. It builds up the context for studying the changing idea of home in Bangkok from 1783 to the present, by examining town planning, buildings, and sociopolitical activities. Applying the theory of place/sense of home to architecture reveals how buildings express the idea of home through their spatial organisation, and helps to analyse how changes in architecture and space reflect the changing sense of home. The concept of home and phenomenology explain how the people and culture in a place use architecture as a medium to illustrate knowledge of being-in-the-world. From the phenomenological viewpoint, a sense of home is a temporal condition that keeps changing due to the changes in town planning and buildings. Sociopolitical change is another factor in the change and hybridisation of the idea of home, which reflects the changing existences of people, culture, society, and nature, which interplay in the place. The study of idea of homes in the Western world from the 20th to 21st centuries demonstrates a dynamic change in the understanding of the concept of home. The understanding of sense of home in the 20th century is rigid, infused with the concept of authenticity and a clear single identity. The concept of home in the 20th century is viewed as the ability of a place to express a clear character. The physical structure of place should clearly show that the place has a clear boundary. Urbanisation in the 21st century is creating a new argument in relation to the understanding of sense of home in the West, and changing the way Western scholars understand the ideas of home. The concept of

101

home in the 21st century is studied more at the conceptual level, and makes the understanding of senses of home more hybridising than authentic. Looking at theories of place/sense of home in the West raises a question about the understanding of idea of home in the Bangkok context. As Bangkok has been modernised (made to be modern like the West) from the mid-19th century to the present by successive Thai kings, the process of change and hybridisation in the Bangkok sense of home potentially reveals a different story about how Bangkokians understand their idea of home in the 21st century. A sense of place/home in architecture shows a dialectic relationship to space; it is a living (existential) space that appears from the architectural arrangement. At the phenomenological level, the concept of home and space are interrelated. When the structure (‘four modes of dwelling’: settlement, urban space, public building, and house) in existential space changes, it changes the meaning of idea of home as well. Thus, understanding the structure (existential space) of concept of home provides the key to understanding how the idea of home changes and hybridises at the phenomenological level of town planning and building. The existential space is an architectural reflection of the physical structure in the place at within the ‘four modes of dwelling’, and each mode contains the ‘language of architecture’: morphology, topology, and typology. The ‘language of architecture’ is the physical expression of an architecture that explains the spatial structure of sense of home. Thus, analysis of the change in the ‘language of architecture’ through town planning and the building is a research tool to disclose how the Thai concept of home in Bangkok is changing and hybridising. The following chapter elaborates on the research method for studying change and hybridisation in the Bangkokian concept of home under the royal modernisation policies and processes of successive Thai kings of Rama IV (r. 1851–1868), Rama V (r. 1868–1910), People’s Party and Rama VIII (r. 1935–1946), and Rama IX (r. 1946–2016).

102

3. The changing Thai concept of home in Bangkok: Methodology

Introduction

This research is concerned with the question of how the concept of home in Bangkok evolved from 1783 to the present under the modernisation programs of Thai kings and People’s Party. The research question involves analysing the process of changing and hybridising the Thai sense of home through changes in town planning and building as a result of sociopolitical activities. Sub-questions are concerned with how the Bangkok’s idea of home has changed and hybridised to preserve Thai identity through architecture. How can we analyse the architecture of Bangkok to understand change and hybridisation in the Thai concept of home? What is the difference between the Thai sense of home before and during four stages of the royal modernisation policies and processes? The research reads the changing Thai sense of home in architecture. Changes in the city’s town planning and buildings tell us about changes in the Thai idea of home at the phenomenological level, and about why the royal modernisation policies and processes has played a crucial role as a social mechanism in changing the architecture of Bangkok at the physical level, and Thai identity at the conceptual level. In the last chapter, reviewing the theory of place/sense of home revealed the relationships between the spaces involved in town planning and building, from the urban scale down to the level of the individual building. We also demonstrated how to phenomenologically incorporate the concept of home into architecture. The study of the sense of home through architecture and place requires a mixture of methods to disclose the identity of place from the relationships between people, places, buildings, social interaction, and cultural change. In this case, the key research process was to focus on one case study in Bangkok before and during royal modernisation policies and processes, which involved field trips to the city as well as the selection of relevant sources that frame the research’s approach.

103

Analytical framework for studying the architecture of Bangkok at the phenomenological level

What is the Thai sense of home? And how has it created, changed, and hybridised at the phenomenological level in the architecture of Bangkok? These questions framed the research objective: to understand the evolution of the Thai concept of home from 1783 to the present through the urban development of Bangkok as part of the royal modernisation program of Thai kings and People’s Party. The research objective includes the desire to analyse the spiritual aspect of Bangkok’s architecture. The analytical framework is an analysis of the town planning and buildings of Bangkok in a way that discloses the Thai concept of home. My research looks at the buildings of Bangkok as artworks that express the ‘meaning’ of idea of home in the landscape, inspired by the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model. That ‘meaning’ is the ‘language of architecture’ interpreted through the spatial relationship in the architectural system. Analysing the ‘language of architecture’ is the research method used to understand the Thai idea of home in the architecture of Bangkok and how it has changed and hybridised through urban development. To analyse this change and hybridisation requires primary and secondary research on Bangkok. This provides the research with a context where place, people, and culture interact through history and sociopolitical activities. The primary research is fieldwork in Bangkok, observing a case study or street that has been involved with historical and urban changes of place and people. The case study should represent physical and cultural connections to the past to help the phenomenological analysis to see the change and hybridisation in the Thai sense of home. The secondary research is to review the relevant literature Thai and Western literature including books, articles, and documentaries, to explore how the theory of place/sense of home and architecture can be applied to the context of Bangkok. My research uses the literature review process to examine the theoretical framework around the ideas of home. It explores what the concept of home is and how it relates to 104

architecture. It also reviews sources about Thai history and culture to see what the Hindu- Buddhist cosmological model is. Secondary sources about Thai history are used as a reference to review sociopolitical activities in the selected case study in Bangkok, explaining how social change has changed the urban fabric and the Thai idea of home.

Interpretation of Thai concept of home through architectural space

Primarily, this research is a phenomenological study of Bangkok’s changing architecture before and during urbanisation of Thai kings and People’s Party. It studies the hybridising Thai sense of home through the ‘language of architecture’. To see, existentially, how the change of Bangkok’s urban morphology, caused by the integration of Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model with modernity, transformed the town’s topology, it looks at how urbanisation reoriented town planning and buildings in the existential space of Bangkok through the medium of modern architecture. Therefore, we architecturally analyse the change in Bangkok’s morphology and topology to disclose how the sense of home (typology) in the place adapted to modern urban design brought about by Thai kings from the reigns of Rama IV (r. 1851–1868), Rama V (r. 1868–1910, The People’s Party and Rama VIII (r. 1935-1946), and Rama IX (r. 1946–2016). The concept of dwelling expressed by Norberg-Schulz suggests that one of many ways to understand the human existential footprint (concept of home) in an architectural sense is by looking at the meaning of the spatial arrangement of buildings, which is the ‘language of architecture’. He also referred to the importance of the language in an existential sense through Heidegger’s statement that language contains the reality of everything – it is the “house of being”.165 In the context of architecture, Norberg-Schulz further stated that the connotation of the word ‘language’ in Heidegger’s writing could reflect the ‘state-of-mind’ or a sense of home; it is the mental representation of how humans created an architecture to express their concept of home as identity of place. As Norberg-Schulz implied, the ‘language of architecture’ discloses the idea of home; in the

165 Heidegger M., “Letter on Humanism,” in Basic Writings (California: Harper San Francisco, 1977). 105

words of Heidegger, “discourse (language) is existentially equiprimordial (existing together equally) with state-of-mind (concept of home) and understanding”.166 Norberg-Schulz also mentioned that the sense of home has a skeleton (‘existential spatiality’), which is phenomenologically and spontaneously constructed when humans settle in the landscape. The sense of home exists at various levels of its ‘existential spatiality’ called ‘four modes of dwelling’, which are involved in town planning: settlement, urban space, public buildings, and houses. People with different cultures and belief systems create their concept of home with different senses of ‘existential spatiality’. As a result, the existential structure of idea of home is different in various parts of the world. In relation to Bangkok, what was the Thai sense of home? And how did the architecture and ‘language of architecture’ of Bangkok represent the ‘existential spatiality’ of the Thai concept of home through the influence of Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model? The ‘language of architecture’, in an existential sense, is distinct from the language that we speak. The ‘language of architecture’ does not depend on a system of codes because that kind of language cannot disclose the ‘whole of reality of everything’ as the ‘house of being’.167 Thus, the language that expresses reality should say the word ‘truth’, which reveals the hidden essence.168 In an architectural sense, this is the word that demonstrates how humans live poetically in the world with their buildings. For Heidegger, architecture is one of the arts – the interpretation of human existence which in “essence is (are) poetry”; the poetry or the “art is the setting-into-work of truth (concept of home)”.169 Thus, architecture, for Heidegger, is the ‘poetic projection’. It “sets itself into work as figure”; “figure (existential space) is the structure in whose shape the rift composes and submits (expresses) itself”.170 The word ‘rift’ means the existential condition (concept of home) that occurs between the coexistence of ‘things’ – architecture (meaning of buildings’ arrangement) and the world. Once the ‘thing’ in the world is illuminated, the ‘rift’ or meaning of being-in-the-world is revealed. Thus, the ‘rift’

166 Heidegger, Being and Time, 203. 167 Broadbent G., Bunt R., and Jencks C., Signs, Symbols, and Architecture (Hoboken: Wiley, 1980). 168 Heidegger, “Letter on Humanism.” 169 Heidegger M., “The Origin of the Work of Art,” in Poetry, Language, Thought (New York: Harper & Row, 1975), 64. 170 Heidegger, “The Origin of the Work of Art,” 63. 106

is the interpretation of the existential structure (figure) of ‘things’. Phenomenologically, the ‘figure’ implies ‘concrete embodiment’, it takes place in the ‘thing’, which Heidegger understood as the existential space in the hidden world, or the spiritual dimension of architecture. This raises the following questions. What was the ‘language of architecture’ in Bangkok’s town planning and buildings? How did the ‘language of architecture’ in Bangkok interpret the knowledge of being-in-the-world embedded in Thai culture, through the poetic dwelling (concept of home) of Bangkokians before and during the royal modernisation policies and processes?

‘Language of architecture’ in existential space

Reading the concept of home through the meaning of architecture Following Heidegger’s existential understanding of architecture, we can see how the changing ‘language of architecture’ in modern Bangkok discloses how the hybrid Thai sense of existence has changed over time at the phenomenological level. The ‘language of architecture’ in Bangkok expresses how changing Thai architecture hybridises the sense of home in Bangkok; as Heidegger wrote, “it is language that first brings man about, brings him to existence”.171 The ‘language of architecture’ of Bangkokians’ buildings speaks their new being-in-the-world by embodying it in modern architecture, which reveals their new ‘way of dwelling in the world (Bangkok)’. This is the way of dwelling poetically; as Heidegger said, “poetry is what really lets us dwell”172 and “because of this bond (poetic dwelling) between what we think and what we told by language we choose, as something spoken purely, a poem which more readily than others can help us in our first steps to discover what is binding in that bond”.173 Hence, visualising the ‘language of architecture’ in modern Bangkok is an architectural reflection, which expresses the way Bangkokians have phenomenologically connected themselves to the world in a new way and changed

171 Heidegger, Poetry, Language, Thought, 192. 172 Heidegger, “Poetically Man Dwells,” 218. 173 Heidegger, Poetry, Language, Thought, 194. 107

their sense of home in response to urban development. It is the ‘image’ that lets the ‘invisible’ (concept of home) be seen. Moreover, Norberg-Schulz illustrated that the ‘language of architecture’ is a ‘sign’, which is how buildings are arranged in a particular way to ‘tell’ how humans dwell and connect themselves to the landscape.174 As Scott wrote, “he places stones in certain positions – cuts them in certain ways, and behold, they begin to speak with tongues – a language of their own, with meaning too deep for words”.175 The changing physical arrangement of Bangkok’s buildings in a certain way, as in modernisation, reflected how Thai sense of home was ‘set into work (existence)’. The urban transformation of Bangkok’s settlement patterns from traditional to modern, saw Bangkokians relocated and reconnected to modernity through existing Hindu-Buddhist town planning. Thus, the hybridisation of modern Hindu-Buddhist urbanisms in Bangkok’s existential space architecturally created the hybridising Thai idea of home. It was because, in the existential sense, it was not enough to ‘say’ – interpret – the Thai sense of home; Bangkokians had to keep embodying and adapting their sense of home to modernity in an ‘image’ (architectural design). Doing so, helped them see their changing built environment as an architectural reflection of their hybridised existential thought.176 Following Norberg-Schulz, the ‘language of architecture’ is embodied in the ‘three independent constituents’ of morphology, topology, and typology. These three forms of the ‘language of architecture’ occur at the ‘four modes of dwelling’ (settlement, urban space, public building and house) in Bangkok’s existential space, in the form of various physical embodiments: (1) urban design – canals, roads, BTS (Bangkok Sky Train), highways, Royal Playground, sacred architecture, amphibious houses, and land-based building designs; (2) buildings – royal palaces, Buddhist temples, stilt/floating houses, shophouses/commercial buildings, shopping centres, office buildings, condominiums,

174 Broadbent G., “A Plain Man’s Guide to the Theory of Signs in Architecture,” in Theorizing a New Agenda for Architecture: An Anthology of Architectural Theory 1965–1995 (New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 1996), 122–140. 175 Broadbent, Bunt, and Jencks, Signs, Symbols, and Architecture. 176 Norberg-Schulz, The Concept of Dwelling, 112. 108

apartments and allocated houses, and architectural elements; and (3) objects – floors, private porches, walls, roofs, furniture, and spirit houses.177

Morphology In architecture, ‘morphology’ is the manifestation of the system of building’s arrangements. In Bangkok, morphology represents the spatial order expressed in the cosmological model. It tells where and how buildings are to be arranged in the landscape. The morphology of buildings reflects how architecture reflects social hierarchy through spatial arrangement. Thus, the morphology of town planning and buildings illustrates how the “meaning of built form consists in its standing, rising and opening, that is, in its being between earth and sky”.178 The architectural system explains how the morphology and the settlement system are embodied to demonstrate the vertical and horizontal relationships in space. It phenomenologically reveals existential space, where the ‘composition’ of the architectural arrangement is articulated as a settlement system. The ‘composition’ reveals ‘existential spatiality’. It represents the rhythm of the settlement system, and represents social organisation through the way buildings are placed. The rhythm of the composition in systems of settlement and architecture systems discloses how the vertical and horizontal relationships in space create the character of concept of home. The architectural system possesses the cosmological model’s ‘structural basis’ in the settlement system. The ‘structural basis’ reflects the social system, which tells us how the buildings direct people to dwell. The process of organising people on a ‘structural basis’ reveals the ‘totality’179 of how the architectural system embodies the overall settlement system in existential space. It manifests people on the landscape through four processes. Firstly, the built form (architectural arrangement) is set in place by ‘clearly defined elements’ in the settlement system. The arrangement of buildings creates the spatial order to visualise the image of the cosmological model.

177 Heidegger, Poetry, Language, Thought, 189, 218. 178 Norberg-Schulz, The Concept of Dwelling, 117. 179 Norberg-Schulz, The Concept of Dwelling, 118–119. 109

Secondly, the architectural design has ‘free termination’ – the collective buildings connect to the landscape through ‘non-geometric features’, without standardisation (such as Westernisation) by others who had no understanding of the local culture and nature. This ‘free termination’ relates people to the landscape, applying the cosmological model to it through architecture to transform the landscape into a living space where people create their concept of home. Thirdly, once the collective buildings are connected to the landscape, urban morphology links people to the sky. The cosmological model influences the architectural system, which phenomenologically creates ‘existential spatiality’ to direct people to experience the sense of home. It visualises the image of heaven, making people dwell in the ideal world. It creates the spatial hierarchy that embodies the ‘existential spatiality’ where the idea of home is constituted. Fourthly, phenomenologically, architecture settles to the ground and ascends to the sky. Then, existential space arises; the existential structure of ‘four modes of dwelling’ (settlement, urban space, public buildings, and houses) forms in people’s minds. The existential space is a conceptual space in relation to architecture, where people practise their belief system regarding the cosmological model. This embodies being-in-the-world in the form of buildings’ arrangement, whereby the existential relationship of the built forms constitutes the people’s life or idea of home, allowing it to exist and flourish.180 These four phenomenological processes of visualising the morphology of place are one of three ways that the concept of home is manifested in a place. In the ‘language of architecture’, the embodiment of people’s existence is interpreted by topology: the orientation of the settlement system and architectural arrangement. When the morphology and topology of the place are disclosed, the typology – the architectural representation of idea of home – is also disclosed. The morphology of the ‘language of architecture’ in Bangkok demonstrates the settlement and architectural systems inspired by the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model. It shows what the spatial order of Bangkok looks like when interpreted through town

180 Norberg-Schulz, The Concept of Dwelling, 122. 110

planning and buildings. The spatial order explains how architecture creates the composition that discloses ‘existential spatiality’ or the structure of concept of home. It tells us how the vertical and horizontal relationships play together in the place to constitute the idea of home through architecture. In terms of morphology, ‘existential spatiality’ explains how town planning and buildings interpret the ‘structural basis’ (the spatial order or the ‘totality’) of the overall image of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model. This ‘existential spatiality’ sees Bangkok embrace people through another four processes: (1) the built forms are set in the place, (2) town planning and buildings help people connect to the landscape, (3) the architectural system allows people to dwell, and these people experience the place based on the cosmological model, and (4) the sense of home constituted by architecture lets people dwell. To analyse the ‘language of architecture’ of Bangkok through morphology, the spatial structure of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model needs to be understood, as it illustrates how the settlement and architectural systems of Bangkok function. At the phenomenological level, the cosmological model facilitates understanding of the spatial structure of Bangkok’s town planning and buildings, and the morphological relationship in architecture reveals the ‘composition’ and ‘existential spatiality’ of the Thai sense of home. The model gives us an overall image of how vertical and horizontal relationships (the ‘structural basis’) in Bangkok space construct the idea of home. When the ‘existential spatiality’ of the morphology in Bangkok’s town planning and buildings is understood, it reveals how the ‘existential spatiality’ embodied in morphology sees the city embraces Bangkokians through the four steps just mentioned.

Topology Once the collective buildings settle into the cosmological model, the model constitutes a settlement system. This spontaneously forms a ‘spatial organisation’ that represents the ‘composition of spatial elements’ to suggest spatial order in ‘existential spatiality’. This topological embodiment orients the ‘inside’ by creating an enclosure and boundary. The topology demonstrates orientation in the spatial system, reflecting people’s social 111

interactions. It reflects how the settlement system creates urban interiority, and explains the vertical and horizontal relationships in the space that influence the orientation of buildings.181 The topology creates a composition that can be seen from the plan and elevation or section of the town plan and buildings. The design of the town plan and buildings contains vertical and horizontal axes that run in several directions: the possibilities of composition are endless.182 It can be seen from the settlement system that the composition demonstrates the spatial system that creates the urban interior. Thus, the composition of the topology represents the structure of the existential space. The composition involves two processes: addition and division. Addition is a process of gathering and arranging built forms, which forms the spatial structure; building a hierarchy in the space initiates a process of division that constructs the spatial order.183 The addition and division processes ‘facilitate’ people’s self-orientation in the place.184 They also create a ‘distinct spatial figure’ that possesses ‘figure quality’ (human experience). The architectural organisation emerging from the addition and division processes embodies a sense of home in the existential space.185 The ‘language of architecture’ of topology explains the details in the architectural system through the morphology. The topology tells us how the spatial structure is organised in the ‘spatial organisation’ of the town plan and buildings. It discloses how the ‘composition of spatial elements’ is constructed, creating order in the ‘existential spatiality’. The topology illustrates how the settlement and architectural systems form the place’s interiority. This can be seen in the plan, section, and elevation of the town and buildings. The geometric form or shape of the town plan and buildings and represents the two processes of addition and division. These create the ‘composition’, where the ‘spatial figure’ constitutes existential space.

181 Arnheim R., Art and Visual Perception: A Psychology of the Creative Eye (Oakland, CA: University of California Press, 2004). 182 Norberg-Schulz C., Intentions in Architecture (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1968). 183 Frankl P., The Concepts of “Addition” and “Division” (Leipzig-Berlin, 1914). 184 Norberg-Schulz, Intentions in Architecture. 185 Norberg-Schulz, The Concept of Dwelling, 126. 112

In the case of Bangkok, understanding the morphology leads to understanding the topology. The topology explains in detail how the spatial structure of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model is organised on the landscape. The ‘spatial organisation’ of Bangkok following the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model reveals how interiority is created from the composition of settlement and architectural systems. It explains how vertical and horizontal relationships from the plan, section, and elevation of the town and buildings construct ‘existential spatiality’. It explains the processes of addition and division that define the ‘composition’ in the existential space of Bangkok. This constitutes the ‘spatial figure’ of Bangkok; it tells us how Bangkokians understood the concept of home through the city’s topology.

Typology When ‘spatial organisation’ is ‘set into work’ (to express the idea of home) through built forms, it embodies the identity of place that reflects knowledge of being-in-the-world. The settlement system of the place raises, expands, and encloses the landscape through its morphology and topology. It explains how the built environment connects people to the poetic realm. The settlement system as a gathering of buildings creates ‘figural architecture’ that consists of ‘typical’ elements (the interactions of humans, buildings, and landscape) to interpret the concept of home. People create the typology or interpretation of built forms that “appear at the right moment and in the right place, that is, as ‘something’ ”.186 The typology is an appearance of ‘figural architecture’ called the ‘archetype’, which remains and changes the meaning (identity) of a place. Thus, the process of ‘speaking out’ from ‘figural architecture’ interprets the level of ‘stability’ experienced at the idea of home. The process of stabilising the identity of place in architecture happens through articulating and orienting buildings as a collective. Norberg-Schulz said that typology expresses the true meaning of a place through its unique character. It brings people ‘to dwell’ in essence (concept of home) of place; it makes people fully understand the truth of

186 Norberg-Schulz, The Concept of Dwelling, 129. 113

their living space.187 Thus, the sense of home in architecture is the typological representation of truth in a place. It explains how the people in that place use architecture ‘to dwell’, to experience their sense of home. The typology is a reflection of place that discloses knowledge of being-in-the- world. The identity of place in the typology ‘speaks out’ the idea of home from the settlement and architectural systems. The typology is a representation of the ‘figural architecture’. Thus, when the ‘figural architecture’ changes, the sense of home changes accordingly. This is a process of stabilising the concept of home, which is expressed through morphology and topology. Thus, in the Bangkok context, people use architecture to interpret Thai idea of home in relation to the cosmological model. When the place’s morphology and topology are read, the resulting interpretation of the typology tells us about the sense of home. The Thai concept of home, or the truth of the place, is revealed, explaining how the settlement and architectural systems (‘figural architecture’) of Bangkok embrace Bangkokians into the landscape of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model. This leads us to the ultimate question of how the sense of home in Bangkok changed when town planning and buildings changed during modernisation. What did the royal modernisation policies and processes change in Bangkok’s ‘language of architecture’? How did the morphology and topology of Bangkok’s existential space respond to the royal modernisation policies and processes? And how was the typology interpreted differently throughout the four processes of modernisations by Thai kings and People’s Party in Bangkok? To sum up, the three independent constituents of morphology, topology, and typology are the architectural reflection or ‘identification’ of the architectural system and orientation. According to Norberg-Schulz, the ‘language of architecture’ constitutes the ‘four modes of dwelling’ in existential space, where the ‘language of architecture’ appears through the physical embodiment of buildings to tell how the structure of concept of home is created.

187 Norberg-Schulz, The Concept of Dwelling, 130, 133. 114

Primary research

Complexity of fieldwork The primary research for this thesis took the form of observation during group studies. In the past decade, the case study method became popular among designers and design researchers, who found it helped them to gain a better understanding of existing phenomena for comparison and discussion.188 In this case, the method helped in gathering more details about the physical condition of Bangkok. The case study involved observation through photography, sketching, and 3D modelling. When I was doing fieldwork in Bangkok, from November to December 2015, I also went to talk with Thai scholars at Chulalongkorn University as part of the field trip. Some of them were members of the royal family, which made the discussion about the royal modernisation policies and processes very sensitive. It was hard to talk deeply about the process and purpose of royal modernisation policies and processes even with scholars with no royal titles. The majority of them talked about Thai kings and the process of royal modernisation policies and processes from the viewpoint of Thai people. However, in my interview, the Thai scholars rarely talked about the Thai monarchy and its impact on Bangkok. Thus, meeting with these Thai scholars only revealed one side of the story about Thai kings and royal modernisation policies and processes. These meetings with Thai scholars made it necessary to review secondary sources from the West to enrich my literature review.

Understanding the space of Bangkok existentially Even though the research emphasises the spiritual aspect of Bangkok’s town planning and buildings, it needs a physical example in which to analyse the reflection of the ‘language of architecture’. It is essential for this chapter to search for one case study of Bangkok before modernisation. Also, analysing the ‘language of architecture’ in the same case study of Bangkok is a way to discuss the Thai concept of home.

188 Martin B. and Hanington B., Universal Methods of Design: 100 Ways to Research Complex Problems, Develop Innovative Ideas, and Design Effective Solutions (Beverly, MA: Quayside, 2012), 28. 115

The phenomenological research in this thesis looks at the spiritual aspect of architecture. Thus, it is necessary to apply the proper method to the selection and analysis of the subject for the case study. According to the theory of place/sense of home, the idea of home is manifested in the place that humans settle, dwell, and build. Many places have a sense of home, and the concept of home can manifest at different scales of a place. Therefore, selecting a case study for the existential research into the changing idea of home requires that we identify some necessary specifications. This, in turn, raises four questions in the process of selecting the subject for the case study. Firstly, in a broad picture, how did traditional Bangkok relate to its role at the national scale as a sacred capital? Secondly, what was the cultural meaning of Bangkok’s settlement system in the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model, both spiritually and historically? Thirdly, was there a place or area in Bangkok that represented the meaning of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model constituted at different scales (the ‘four modes of dwelling’)? Finally, how did that place or area demonstrate the changing and hybridising Thai sense of home after the royal modernisation policies and processes of Thai kings and People’s Party? This research studies the changing sense of home in Bangkok. That Bangkok was settled to be the sacred capital of the Kingdom of Siam created a hierarchy at the national scale, making a division between the capital and the smaller cities. Thus, when this researcher applied the theory of place/sense of home to look at Bangkok as a place, its role as sacred capital appeared to represent the idea of creating a hierarchy in the settlement system, following the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model. The theoretical framework relating to the sense of home suggested that the culture and belief system were a social mechanism in creating the built environment of Bangkok, in turn suggesting that selecting a case study would need to involve consideration of how that case or area related to history and sociopolitical change. Tiptus and Bongsadadt, in their book Houses in Bangkok, argued that evidence of how the built environment of traditional Bangkok was created could be found in the wall paintings of Buddhist temples. I took a field trip to Bangkok in December 2015, and went to one of the most notable Buddhist temples of Bangkok, popularly known as Wat Phra

116

Kaew [Moragot] (Temple of the ), on the grounds of the Grand Palace. The paintings in this temple show how the settlement system of Bangkok was formed and inspired by the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model, illustrating how traditional Bangkok was built from water and land settlements that overlapped but still took their places in a hierarchy.

Figure 3.1: The area for a case study of Bangkok before modernisation. Particularly, this shows the urban space and individual buildings of Bangkok before urbanisation. The map indicates the case study area in the white rectangle, which shows the concept of dual space (sacred in the orange area and profane in the blue area) inspired by the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model.

117

Figure 3.2: The area for a case study of Bangkok after urbanisation. Particularly, this shows the urban space and individual buildings after different stages of urbanisation by kings Rama IV (r. 1851–1868) through IX (r. 1946–2016), with major roads highlighted. The case study area is indicated by the white rectangle.

Wall paintings in this Buddhist temple indicated that the case study of Bangkok before modernisation, which represented the Thai concept of home, would reveal a settlement system that was overlapping but hierarchical. To more fully explore the meaning of this pattern, I considered selecting an area of old Bangkok that represented an overlapping and hierarchical settlement system. I would also need to pick an area that showed the relationship between water and land settlements, and which had a connection to Bangkok from different phases of modernisations. Hence, I considered the area around Sukhumvit Road that connected to the land settlement on the eastern side of Rattanakosin Island. This space, located on the eastern side of Rattanakosin Island, was where the water settlement linked to the land settlement, making for a visible and clear 118

distinction between water and land settlements was clear (figure 3.1). I chose this area because it was the first to be modernised by Rama IV (r. 1851–1868), who built modern roads such as New Road and Bamrung Mueang Road in the mid-19th century. Subsequently, Rama V (r. 1868–1910) transformed the eastern side of Rattanakosin Island into a space that spoke simultaneously of modernity and royalty. He urbanised the space but still kept its traditional function. He built Ratchadamnoen Avenue (the name meaning “royal promenade”) on the eastern side of Rattanakosin Island, slightly to the north, in the 1900s, and occupied the road for royal ceremonies while leaving it for the public to use when he did not. In 1932, the Thai monarch Rama VII (r. 1925–1935) was overthrown by The People’s Party, and Rama VIII (r. 1935–1946) was installed on the throne without power. The People’s Party further urbanised the eastern side of Rattanakosin Island. Bamrung Mueang Road was extended to and then Sukhumvit Road from the 1930s. Rama IX (r. 1946–2016) ascended the throne following the end of World War II, and reigned throughout the Cold War between the USA and USSR (present-day Russia). Rama IX became an ally of the USA, which contributed a large amount of money to Thailand. Sukhumvit Road was extended to the southeast of Bangkok to stimulate economic growth (figure 3.2). While Rama IX revived Thai traditions, traditional spaces such as Buddhist temples and worshipping spaces merged into modern spaces. I was born in Bangkok and have visited Sukhumvit Road and Rattanakosin Island throughout the past 20 years, experiencing dynamic changes at the street level from the 1990s. Even though I grew up in Bangkok, as a Bangkokian, I always felt the city and its ‘modern’ streets were not modern, because I saw sacred buildings and spaces everywhere. Sometimes, traditional spaces such as Buddhist temples and Hindu shrines became tourist destinations. Thus, I have felt the sense of home in Bangkok in the 21st century presented challenges that applying the theory of place/sense of home could illuminate. This theory has helped me to explain why and how the Thai concept of home has changed and hybridised to become what it is at present, and elucidated how the changing architecture of Bangkok has changed the spirit of the place.

119

Bangkok before modernisation The premodern condition of Bangkok has vanished as a result of urbanisation from the mid-19th century onwards. There have been attempts to reconstruct the traditional life of old Bangkok, such as the floating market at Amphawa to the city’s south-west, for the purposes of tourism, but these revivals of tradition have been superficial because the aquatic community was not built based on the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model. It did not contain the history of modernisation under Thai kings. Phenomenologically, Amphawa was a water-based settlement but had no relationship to Bangkok. On the other hand, modern Bangkok had more of a Thai sense of home. Even though its physical environment was modernised, it did not wipe out the traditional settlement system. One of the most reliable records of physical evidence of traditional life in Bangkok is the book Houses in Bangkok, by Tiptus and Bongsadadt. This is one of the few works to research changes in the living environment and domestic architecture of Bangkok. However, this book only studied physical aspects of Bangkok such as its architectural style, building structure, and construction technology and materials. Nevertheless, the beginning of the book gives a clue as to how to find evidence of Bangkok’s traditional life. Tiptus and Bongsadadt described how illustrations of old Bangkok could be found in the paintings on the wall of Buddhist temples in Bangkok such as , Wat Pho, and Wat Suthat.189 Thus, on the field trip to Bangkok in 2015, I went to Wat Phra Kaew and Wat Pho to search for wall paintings. However, there was a difficulty because the temple keepers prohibited me to take a photo. From personal experience, some temple keepers consider photographing the paintings in the Buddhist temple (wat) a taboo. After negotiating with the temple keepers for a while, they fortunately allowed me to take some photos of the wall paintings in specific spaces where photography would not interfere with the space’s sacredness.

189 Tiptus P. and Bongsadadt M., Houses in Bangkok: Characters and Changes during the Last 200 Years (1782 A.D.–1982 A.D.) (Bangkok: Chulalongkorn University Research Affairs Office, 1982), 31–38. 120

However, there was still an obstacle in finding the actual planning of Bangkok before modernisation because Houses in Bangkok did not provide sufficient detail of the physical planning of old Bangkok. In 2015, I found that the book Bangkok Place: Practice and Representation by Askew contained a map of Bangkok in the 19th century. This roughly showed the physical condition of traditional planning in Bangkok, illustrating how in 19th-century Bangkok the space of Rattanakosin Island was outlined by walls on the eastern side of the Chao Phraya River. A year later, in 2016, I made a second field trip to Bangkok, and found a book called พินิจพระนคร [Phinit Phranakorn] B.E. 2475–2545, analysing the town planning of Bangkok from 1932 to 2002. This book documented Bangkok’s town planning before and during the mid-20th-century urbanisation. The book compared high-quality aerial photos of Bangkok in 1932 and 2002 to show how urbanisation had changed Bangkok’s town planning and the layout of buildings. The map of old Bangkok (1932) in Phinit Phranakorn B.E. 2475–2545 documented the condition of the city after it underwent the urban renovation process under Rama V. This meant the map of Bangkok in 1932 did not purely show the built environment of Bangkok before modernisation. However, fortunately, the outer area of Rattanakosin Island was not urbanised.190 This map still showed the existing klong (canal) network and some aquatic communities. Therefore, in this research I was able to use it as a reference from which to study the traditional planning of Bangkok. The Study of Thai Culture and the Thai Way of Life by Phraya Anuman Rajadhon (1888–1969) was also a valuable resource. The author was born and lived in the 19th century while Rama V was modernising Bangkok. During his lifetime, he became one of the most remarkable Thai scholars of Thai culture. This study mainly focused on the life and culture of Bangkok. The Study of Thai Culture and the Thai Way of Life explained Bangkokians’ lifestyle through the belief system of phi, or animism, and how it integrated

190 Phinit Phranakorn B.E. 2475–2545 [Analysing the City Planning of Bangkok from 1932–2002] (Bangkok: Chulalongkorn University, 2006). 121

with the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model through the process of cultural hybridisation.191 There is almost no architectural evidence of traditional life in Bangkok because most of the traditional Thai architecture such as stilt/floating houses were built from woods, which made them too ephemeral to survive. However, fragments are available, in the paintings on the walls of Buddhist temples, aerial photos of Bangkok in 1932, and Phraya Anuman Rajadhon’s description of Bangkok’s traditional life at the turn of the 19th century. I was able to use these to reconstruct a virtual model. Architectural software such as Revit Architecture was a good option for doing this; using it, I could construct a model at various scales from the urban to building levels. It was necessary to visualise how Thai culture understands the concept of home. To analyse the ‘language of architecture’ regarding the concept of ‘four modes of dwelling’ from Norberg-Schulz, I needed a 3D model of Bangkok’s town planning in different scales: settlement, street space, public buildings, and individual houses. The level of detail was also important. For example, at the house level, the model needed to show sufficient architectural detail about the ‘language of architecture’ at that level. Revit Architecture can convert 3D models to 2D planning, including plan, section, and elevation. This would allow me to analyse the morphology and topology of one model.

Bangkok after modernisation Bangkok during urbanisation became more complicated, and the size of the city created traffic jams. Travel became an issue in looking for a case-study location. Despite difficulties with accessibility, travelling to the case study location selected could be done by the public transport such as the BTS and taxis. There were four main notable areas which public transport ran through: Phahon Yothin Road (to the north) and Sukhumvit Road (to the south); on the eastern side of Bangkok and the Silom/ area; and on the Western side of Bangkok. Physically, the planning of those roads was similar: there

191 Phraya Anuman Rajadhon, The Study of Thai Culture and the Thai Way of Life (Bangkok: Hospital Charoentham, 1972). 122

was a series of row houses, commercial buildings, and some Buddhist temples situated along both sides of the road. Of these, Sukhumvit Road has been studied more than the others because of its urban history and identity. Sukhumvit Road or Krungthep‐Samut Prakan Road was a commercial strip extended from Rama I Road in the 1930s.The first phase of Sukhumvit Road and an extension part of Bamrung Mueang Road (the modern road built in the 1860s by Rama IV [r. 1851–1868]). In the 1960s during the Cold War, when the Thai monarchy of Rama IX (r. 1946–2016) revived and continued the royal modernisation program. This made Sukhumvit Road a cultural site that represented the continuity of royal modernisation policies and processes to preserve the place’s identity. Over several decades from the 1960s, Sukhumvit Road extended to the south-eastern suburbs of Bangkok. Starting from Bamrung Mueang Road on the south-east of Rattanakosin Island, it then ran across to the south-eastern suburb of Bangkok, close to the nearby province of Samut Prakan, which is located in the south of Bangkok, close to the Gulf of Thailand. In contrast to the preceding era, Bangkok during modernisation presented Western–style everyday spaces. But looking at the general physical environment did not give sufficient grounds for selecting a case-study location. Specifically, the street chosen needed to represent Bangkok’s hybrid way of life. It needed to contribute to the historical importance of modern Bangkok or be a representation of political, cultural, and urban changes. This research ended up focusing on Sukhumvit Road because it had been researched by different scholars from Thailand and abroad, producing numerous sources about its history, urban design, culture, and politics. Bangkok: Place, Practice, and Representation by Askew studied how the function of Bangkok space had changed as it evolved from an aquatic town into a modern metropolis, by focusing on the people. The book explains how sociopolitical factors such as modernisation by the royal regime changed the spatial functions of Bangkok. Askew further discussed how important roads such as Sukhumvit Road played an important role in shaping the contemporary culture of the city. Bangkok: Place, Practice, and Representation, therefore, provides insightful historical background on how the coming of roads such as Sukhumvit had an impact on

123

the hybridity of the Bangkokian middle class lifestyle. It gave this research context in investigating how politics had changed Bangkok’s town planning and buildings. However, the urban study of Askew did not only deal with street life; he also emphasised urban scale and the relationship between urban and suburban areas. Askew’s study of Bangkok’s urban transformation also explained how its settlement pattern adapted to the royal modernisation policy.192 Reading Bangkok by King studied the transformation of Bangkok at a more conceptual level. King built up his research around the theme of internal colonisation by the Thai monarchy. He explained how Thai kings imposed the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model, urban reconstruction projects, and cultural interventions to preserve the Thai identity and their royal legitimacy. Interestingly, King focused on the idea of how the ruling regime used Bangkok’s urban planning as a theatre in which to interpret its political power and how they compromised with Western influence. Thus, this research elaborates King’s concept of internal colonisation with the analysis of the evolution of the Thai concept of home in modern Bangkok, to see how the Thai sense of home hybridised via the royal modernisation policies and processes of Thai kings and The People’s Party. Two chapters mention how the roads of Charoen Krung (New Road) and Sukhumvit were politically related to the royal modernisation and contributed to the hybrid character of Bangkok through its street life. In relation to this research, King’s study provided sociopolitical background on Sukhumvit Road, and helped to build up the context for the case study of Bangkok during modernisation.193 Additionally, the thesis Landscapes of Consumption and Hidden Heritage: Case Study of Sukhumvit Road by Prince Pumin Varavarn mainly studies the physical and cultural aspects of Sukhumvit Road. Varavarn provides a general historical context of Sukhumvit Road and how it transformed from a canal to a road in the mid-20th century, and starts to explain the development of the built environment from the 1950s to 2000s. He attempts to discuss the identity of Sukhumvit Road but does not focus on a specific

192 Askew M., Bangkok: Place, Practice and Representation (London: Routledge, 2002). 193 King R., Reading Bangkok (Singapore: Singapore University Press, 2012). 124

theory. In fact, Varavarn analyses Sukhumvit Road as a heritage site. His objective was to argue that Sukhumvit Road is a part of Bangkok’s living history,194 and so this research uses the research of Varavarn, incorporated with the theory of place/sense of home, to analyse the modern Thai idea of home through the space and architecture of Sukhumvit Road in chapter 9. Even though he describes the physical environment in making a study of Sukhumvit Road, Varavarn only represents the street level in Norberg-Schulz’s ‘four modes of dwelling’. Photography of the built environment of Sukhumvit Road and individual buildings such as shopping malls, commercial buildings, Buddhist temples, apartments, shophouses, and detached houses can show what the contemporary life of Bangkok looks like. However, at the conceptual level, it cannot illustrate the structure of Thai concept of home in the existential space of Bangkok. Thus, it was important in this research to use real-world images in combination with the digital model to analyse the changing ‘language of architecture’ at different scales.

Secondary research

Existing literature: Western and Thai scholarships Secondary research helps to direct the research position and (re)define the boundaries of the research. It aims to distil all the information available from sources, capture the main concepts of previous research, and summarise the main ideas in a synthetic way. There are many types of secondary sources, including books, articles, documentaries, and websites.195 The multidisciplinary nature of my research requires a review of Thai culture and history, the theory of place/sense of home, and architecture. In relation to the architectural discipline, the thesis focuses more on the theoretical aspects, looking at how Thai culture creates a concept of home through architecture. Also, this research explores

194 Varavarn P., “Landscapes of Consumption and Hidden Heritage: Case Study of Sukhumvit Road” (PhD diss., architecture and tourism, , 2007). 195 Martin and Hanington, Universal Methods of Design, 112, 154. 125

the theory of place/sense of home to provide a philosophical background from which to analyse the Thai idea of home. Thai culture and the theory of place/sense of home are reviewed together to explore how the Bangkokians in Thai society have understood the Thai idea of home. A History of Thailand by Baker and Phongpaichit gives a broad picture of Bangkok’s chronology, from its birth at the end of the 18th century to the beginning of the 21st century. The book focuses on the history of Bangkok by analysing internal sociopolitical factors, especially the Thai monarchy, and external factors such as the involvement of Europe and the USA. Following the discussion in A History of Thailand, this research contextualises how the establishment of the Thai monarchy and modernisation by the royal regime influenced the settlement system of Bangkok and urbanised it in response to the Western influence of South East Asia in the mid-19th century. Our review of Thai culture here is based on three books: (1) Naga: Cultural Origins in Siam and the West Pacific, by Jumsei; (2) Buddhist Cosmology: Philosophy and Origins, by Sadakata; and (3) The Living House: An Anthropology of Architecture in South-East Asia, by Waterson. These supply conceptual background and discussion of how architecture in Thailand relates to the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model. The books from Tiptus and Bongsadadt, Askew, and Phraya Anuman Rajadhon, in the “Case Study” sections above, provide more concrete evidence of how people in Thai culture lived by giving some examples from observation of the place. The philosophy of place/sense of home is related to other disciplines and schools of thought such as human geography, existentialism, and phenomenology. In relation to architecture, the concept of home is studied via the ‘language of architecture’ to understand the structure of idea of home called existential space (geocultural space). Thus, the theory of place/ sense of home is complex and multifaceted, and takes in a wide range of sources from different scholars. This research emphasises the architectural aspect, but reviews the background of the theory of place/ sense of home through the major sources from researchers on the sense of place/home and in related disciplines, including Being and Time, by Heidegger; Place and Placelessness, by Relph; Topophilia, by

126

Tuan; Place: A Short Introduction, by Cresswell; and The Concept of Dwelling by Norberg- Schulz. These works are reviewed to provide the theoretical framework of how the idea of home relates to architecture. In the field of architecture, we review the concept of existential space as discussed by Norberg-Schulz to analyse the structure of Thai concept of home through the ‘language of architecture’. Furthermore, we review material on the changing nature of home under globalisation, because this research argues that the Thai sense of home has changed and hybridised through urbanisation. So we also look at the chapter “A Global Sense of Place” from the book Space, Place and Gender, by Massey, and related sources from Place: A Short Introduction, as these have discussed how the idea of home in Western culture has responded to and changed as a result of urbanism.

127

Design methods

Figure 3.3: Note-taking, ‘Historical Sequence’ of the history and culture of Thailand, ‘Brainstorming’ on the philosophy of place and sense of home, and ‘Map Figure’ showing geographical differences.

As there are a variety of secondary sources, they need to be organised systematically to give a clearer picture and analysis of the changes to the concept of home in Bangkok. Figure 3.3 shows how this research employed three methods: (1) Brainstorm Graphic Organizer, an application created by Flow Diagrams, (2) Brainstorming, and (3) Map Figures. Note-taking was used to summarise the main points from books, and from that point all information from secondary sources was processed to the next stage.

128

Figure 3.4: Sources on the history of Bangkok. This flow diagram shows how all the sources about the history of Bangkok were organised into historical sequence through the use of text and graphics.

Brainstorm Graphic Organizer by Flow Diagrams (figure 3.4) was used to organise the history of Bangkok into historical sequence through the use of text and symbols. This method gives a general image of how historical events have affected the concept of home in Bangkok. Timelines are used to indicate changes in the idea of home as people moved from the water onto the land (see the appendix, “A Timeline of the Chakri Dynasty to Rama IX”).

129

Figure 3.5: The complexity of the philosophy of the concept of home. Here, the complexity of the philosophy of the sense of home is organised using the brainstorming method. Black indicates importance.

Figure 3.6: A more innovative use of the Brainstorming Webs method. Here, the main diagram is connected with its subsets to explain some ideas in more detail.

Brainstorming Webs (figure 3.5) were used to organise the philosophy of place/sense of home, the concept of home in Bangkok, and the Western concepts of home. One Brainstorming Web can be connected to others to give a clearer image of the overall concept (figure 3.6). This was very useful for the philosophical part of the

130

discussion, which was complex and multidisciplinary. Each Brainstorming Web contains one main concept in the middle. Black rectangles indicate nodes of particular importance. Page numbers are put into each cell to locate the information in its source. Some cells are linked to another Brainstorming Web that explains them in more detail.196 Map figures are used to explain journeys and changes in the Bangkokian concept of home conceptually, along with text. These are used to map all ideas from the local to global scales, and give a picture of how the concept of home in Bangkok has been formed. These also help readers more easily understand the geographical aspects of this research.

Conclusion

This research aims to analyse the changing and hybridising Thai concept of home by analysing the town planning and buildings of Bangkok. Thus, it is important to find out what is the ‘language of architecture’ in Bangkok, and how it is interpreted through architecture at the phenomenological level. The focus is not only on the expression of the sense of home through Bangkok’s architecture; the thesis also looks at the idea of home in architecture as a temporary condition of human existence in a globalising world, which interacts with sociopolitical change. This chapter has mentioned how my research objective involves looking at architecture at the spiritual level to understand the identity of place. It discusses how my research methods answer the research topic and integrate with the theoretical framework. Analysis of the ‘language of architecture’ has been introduced based on the concept of dwelling from Christian Norberg-Schulz. This idea of the ‘language of architecture’ has been reviewed because it is a way to look at architecture existentially, seeing that architecture is an artwork that people use to interpret the idea of home. The key concept of reading the ‘language of architecture’ is to look at the meaning of buildings expressed through the spatial arrangement, pattern, and relationship of architectural elements.

196 Martin and Hanington, Universal Methods of Design, 22. 131

Engagement with the idea of the ‘language of architecture’ requires the research to look at the space of Bangkok existentially. The built environment is viewed as an existential condition, where Bangkokians have superimposed the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model on the landscape to create the Thai concept of home. Furthermore, the space of Bangkok has been viewed as having spatial and temporal dimensions, since the analysis looks at how royal modernisation program has been a mechanism in driving change in the city’s urban fabric. Analysing the concept of home in the temporal dimension required the research to select a single case study of the eastern area of Bangkok in which to study the changing and hybridising idea of home from the mid-19th to the 21st centuries. The area selected for the case study is historically and culturally connected to the Thai kings Rama IV to IX, whose reigns were a contributing factor to the hybridisation of the Thai sense of home. The three main methods used to collect and document data for the case study were discussed: (1) fieldwork in Bangkok, taking photos of the paintings of Bangkok’s traditional life in Buddhist temples, and photographing the present condition of Sukhumvit Road in Bangkok; (2) reviewing relevant sources, such as books, to determine the urban condition of Bangkok before and during modernisation; and (3) constructing a virtual model of the case study area in Bangkok as it was before and after modernisation, to see how the urban fabric has changed. These methods have provided objects (photography, literature review, and 3D model) for analysis in discovering how the Thai sense of home has changed and hybridised. This will help the research to analyse the existential condition of Bangkok in two ways: firstly, it contributes a broad image of how the urban fabric of Bangkok has changed during modernisation. Secondly, it allows the research to see how relationships have changed in the space of Bangkok, be they those involving architecture, landscape, or people. The next chapter outlines the historical background of Thai culture, particularly how the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model came to Thailand and how it influenced the traditional social system of Bangkok. It explains how the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model has been applied to the landscape of Bangkok, and then gives an overview of how

132

the impact of Chinese migration and thev royal modernisation policy during the reigns of kings Rama IV to IX has changed the urban fabric of Bangkok from the mid-19th to 21st centuries.

133

134

4. Bangkok’s concept of home: A multilayered history

Introduction

This chapter outlines the historical background of Thai culture. It connects to research about how belief systems played a role in building Bangkok. Moreover, this chapter discusses how Bangkok has been modernised by making it ‘modern like the West’ through successive royal modernisation programs. An overview of sociopolitical change is given in relation to urban change in Bangkok. The chapter also contextualises how the Thai idea of home has changed and hybridised through urban development. The purpose of this chapter is to contextualise how nature and culture in South East Asia influenced the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model. It also mentions how the cultural hybridisation of people in Thailand adapted to that model, and how the Hindu- Buddhist cosmological model influenced sakdina. Furthermore, this chapter discusses how the social mechanism of sakdina worked to create hierarchical and flexible relationships between the ruling and lower classes, and how it affected the way people in Bangkok settled in a way that reflected the hybridisation of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model and animism through the social hierarchy and settlement system. In relation to the theory of place/sense of home discussed in chapter 2, I argue that the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model and sakdina influenced Bangkok, organising Bangkokians, the architectural system, and the landscape in a way that reflected the social hierarchy of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model and sakdina. Thus, this chapter discusses how the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model and sakdina constructed a spatial structure in the existential space, through architecture, that discloses the Thai concept of home. This chapter gives an overview of how Bangkok and the Thai kings Rama IV (r. 1851–1868) through Rama IX (r. 1946–2016) interplayed with Western powers from the mid-19th century to the 21st century on the one hand and the impact of Chinese migration on the other. It also discusses the process of royal modernisation policies and processes that Rama IV began in the mid-19th century. Rama IV imitated the process that 135

the West had pursued with other cities in Asia, such as Singapore, in a Thai way. This chapter reviews how later Thai kings continued the royal modernisation policy in response to the West in different contexts, such as Western influence in the mid-19th century, the introduction of nationalism from Europe, and the influence of the United States in the 1960s, during the Cold War. In relation to the research, the process of royal modernisation program is discussed as a main social mechanism. It is viewed as a sociopolitical force that changed Bangkok’s architectural system and, as a result, changed the Thai sense of home. As the thesis reviews the historical background of Bangkok and its sociopolitical reaction to the West, it gives the researcher a context for how Bangkok has developed in a globalising world. The discussion of this chapter contextualises how the chosen case study of Bangkok from chapter 3 represents the changing and hybridising Thai concept of home through urban development.

The origin of Thai culture

Changing nature and the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model Present-day Thailand is located on the mainland of South East Asia. Historically, it was the area between three significant civilisations: China in the north, Cambodia to the east, and to the West. Many rivers flow from the north to the south, which made it an ideal international port and a space of cultural and economic exchange. Hence, Thai culture was a production of hybridisation between local and foreign belief systems.197

197 Waterson R., The Living House: An Anthropology of Architecture in South-East Asia (Boston: Tuttle, 2010), 1, 3. 136

Figure 4.1: The glaciers in Asia with the glaciated areas marked in light blue.

Approximately 30,000 years ago, in the Ice Age, the area of South East Asia and the east of China was much larger than it is now. The mainland was connected with what is now the archipelago area in the south. This connected parts of South East Asia, by land, to areas as far as the south of Japan (figure 4.1). The ice sheet started to melt around 7,000– 10,000 years ago. The people from the archipelago migrated to the interior continent as far as China and India, travelling via the riverbanks. Hence, people at that time viewed the world as divided into water and sky. People drew maps because the image was the best solution for passing down complex information about the changing environment from generation to generation.198 Because the landmass in South East Asia decreased as the giant glacier melted, people experienced a dynamic change that forced them to be

198 Jumsei S., Naga: Cultural Origins in Siam and the West Pacific (New York: OUP South East Asia, 1988), 10. 137

adaptive by developing a culture of amphibious living. It influenced people in the region to develop an ephemeral settlement system.199 Once the geographical change in the region stabilised, the shorelines of the mainland became more stable, and the river systems acted regularly,200 more and more people migrated to the mainland. Then, very early cultures on the mainland started to form. Some recent archaeological discoveries in the north-east of Thailand () have revealed that plants had been domesticated before 9,700 BC, there was pottery by 6,800 BC, and there were bronze objects by 3,600 BC. Additionally, in the 4th to 8th centuries, the Dong Son Drum dynasty of Vietnam flourished, making amphibious architecture widespread.201

Figure 4.2: Migrations of people and Thai culture around Bangkok in the Asian region, 100,000 BC to 1782 AD.

199 Wilhelm G. S., North Thailand, and World Prehistory (Honolulu: University of Hawaiʻi Press, 1970). 200 Jumsei, Naga, 3–5. 201 Jumsei, 8–9 and 82. 138

Figure 4.3: The Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model.

Nuttinee Karnchanaporn, in her book Fear in Domestic Architecture, explained that the culture of living in the changing environment of Thailand brought the people to 139

develop the trait of ‘fear’. They feared natural forces: seasonal change, astronomical change, and natural disaster, which they considered to be the result of supernatural power or phi.202 The belief in phi, or animism, was one of the earliest religions in Asia; it involved the belief that the world and nature, including humans, were under the power of mysterious forces, in Thai called win-yaan (spirits).203 Thai culture both feared and respected spirits because they believed that if the spirits were happy, they would bring them good fortune. However, if the spirits were worshipped incorrectly, they could bring natural disasters, poverty, and sickness.204 Thereby, people in Thailand and Asia (including India) shared the belief in animism. This influenced many generations to develop the sacred dimension of their worldview, as they believed that the supernatural power came from another realm that was higher than them (figure 4.2). Sumet Jumsei, in the book Naga: Cultural Origins in Siam and the West Pacific, described the spiritual worldview that was shared in India and South East Asia as the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model (figure 4.3). This visualised the hierarchical world of sacred and profane realms, where the sacred mountain of Mount Meru, with five peaks, rose from the middle of the ocean, surrounded by seven rings of land and ocean.205 Above Mount Meru, there was a connection point to the multiple levels of heaven. Below the sacred mountain there were hot hells, and below those were cold hells. Beyond the rings of land and ocean, there were four giant continents to the north, west, east, and south, where different races lived with different characteristics and facial features. The northern continent was called Uttarakuru, where people with square faces lived. The eastern continent was called Videha, where people with circular faces lived. The western continent was called Godaniya, where people with crescent faces lived, and the southern continent, called Jambu, was home to people with various facial shapes. According to the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model, the Jambu continent represented the South East Asian region (figures 4.2 and 4.3). The diversity of facial characteristics of the people of

202 Eawsriwong N., “Phi” [“Ghosts”] and “Nam tuam, phi lae khaw tai” [“Flood, Ghost and Death”] in Yook samai cheua ya lap lu [The Era of ‘You May Not Believe But Should Never Offend’] (Bangkok: Amarin Printing, 1999), 20–32. 203 Errington S., “The Cosmic House of the Buginese,” Asia (January–February 1979), 8–14. 204 Wongkul P., Saiyasath krong muang [The Empowerment of Superstitious Belief] (Bangkok: Amarin Printing, 2000). 205 Fisher R. E., and Architecture (London: Thames & Hudson, 1993), 22. 140

the Jambu continent represented the hybridity of people from different races and cultures. People in the area of Thailand always settled in a southern direction or facing south, to reflect their geographical origin.206 This indicated that South East Asia was a space of multiple races, who integrated different beliefs such as the animism of the indigenous people and the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model from India. Furthermore, the arrival of traditional Indian beliefs via the Cambodian or Khmer civilisation in the 10th century became a political instrument. The Tai (Thai) rulers of Sukhothai (1238–1347 AD), from the 12th century, borrowed the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model to explain that there were the higher and lower classes which was determined by the Buddhist merit (bun); the concept of and believed that the more Buddhist merit accumulated by doing good karma of a person, it could make them reborn in a higher class.207 It made the local people accept the Tai rulers as phumibun (men of merit); the people believed that the man of merit was a sacred figure who held the supernatural power of Buddhist merit. The Thai rulers called themselves phra mahakasat – kings with the ‘ultimate merit of the king’ (phra thamma pitsarot) who ruled over the people with mercy (kwam mettha) and according to Buddhist morality (kunnataam jariyataam).208 Since the 12th century, this concept of Thai monarchy was deeply embedded into the society. The term culture (wattanatam) had a different connotation in Thai society. In The Study of Thai Culture and Thai Way of Life, Phraya Anuman Rajadhon stated that the root of ‘Thai tradition and culture’ (phrapaynee-wattanataaam thai) was adaptive to the world outside, though it should not lose it originality.209 The understanding of culture in Thai society was as a process of hybridisation with others while retaining distinctive elements. In relation to my research, this idea represented that the Thai culture was seen as something of a ‘passive society’ and was ready to integrate new cultural influences such as

206 Jumsei, Naga, 10–15. 207 Fisher, Buddhist Art and Architecture, 172. 208 Jory P., “The Vessantara Jataka, Barami, and the Boddhisatta-Kings: The Origin and Spread of a Thai Concept of Power,” Crossroads 16 (2002), 2. 209 Rajadhon, The Study of Thai Culture, 125–126. 141

the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model. This reflects a process of cultural invention, making Thai culture adaptive to others. In their book A History of Thailand, Baker and Phongpaichit drew on the anthropological study of Thai society by the American scholar Riggs to explain that Thai society was passive because it lacked structured organisation. The loose social structure was influenced by the way people in Thailand lived during the time the ice sheet was melting. This was why the Thai monarchy, influenced by the Khmer Empire in the 10th century, successfully established itself as the leading social institution.210 Furthermore, their analysis implied that the passivity in Thai society enabled the conception of the Thai monarchy to integrate with the local culture via the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model. As a result, the monarchy dominated Thai society through the sakdina regime. Spiritually, the emerging concept of the man of merit responded to the fear trait of the locals, because it placed responsibility for their life under the celestial power of the Thai king.

The traditional social system of sakdina Sakdina, in Thai society, was equivalent to the feudalism of the West; it was the traditional discipline of ruling the kingdom, passed through Thai culture via the domination of the Khmer Empire in the 10th century. It emphasised centralisation of political and economic power in the head of the state: the king. Thus, sakdina meant the leader had the absolute power to control everybody’s life.211 This was a regime in which one race of twenty-two in Thailand, those called Tai,212 claimed their right as the superior class. The Tai race distinguished themselves from the population by sanctifying themselves via the Hindu- Buddhist cosmological model. Thus, the race of Tai leaders (Thai kings) was constructed from the process of sanctification to present one person as a god-king. This social mechanism made the majority of the population in Thai society members of the inferior classes called phrai and that (local people, or anybody who lived in Thai society without royal lineage). In everyday life, the people in Thai society called the

210 Baker and Phongpaichit, A History of Thailand, 166–167. 211 Wanlikodom S., The Development of Thai Society and Culture (Bangkok: Muang Bowrang, 2011), 98. 212 Puaksom D., plaek na nanachat klong krung sayam [Siam's International Strangers] (Bangkok: Sinlapa Watthanatham, 2003). 142

rulers, such as the king, nobles, and royal officers, phu yai (big people) or phu dee (high class people) – the people who had a higher social status – while they called themselves phu noi (small people), along with anybody that had a lower social position.213 In Thai culture, it was believed that the small people must respect the big people because they had more merit, while the small people or phrai and that were considered to have less merit and more baap (sin).214

Figure 4.4: Town planning of Rattanakosin Island showing the sacred buildings of Bangkok.

Geographically, the sakdina regime applied the concept of establishing hierarchy among people via water and land from the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model. ‘Land’, the earth’s surface, in Thai called phaendin, in the traditional Thai belief system

213 Baker and Phongpaichit, A History of Thailand. See Glossary. 214 Thiphakorawong (Chao Phraya) and Yunesuko Higashi Ajia Bunka Kenkyu Senta, The Dynastic Chronicles, Bangkok Era, the First Reign: Text Volume 1 of The Dynastic Chronicles, Bangkok Era, the First Reign (Tokyo: Centre for East Asian Cultural Studies, 1978), 78–84. 143

symbolised the area connected to heaven. Thai culture believed that the land belonged to the king, because conceptually he was a god-king reborn in the human realm to claim the land as celestial space. The idea of sacred land reflected the thinking of the sakdina system, that the human realm overlaid the celestial world on the vertical axis. This implied that the human world was being directed to something above. Hence, the land was an ideal place for a physical god to exist and rule. In the context of Bangkok, the land on Rattanakosin Island was dedicated to sacred purposes such as building the Grand Palace for the king and royal family to live in, the Royal Playground for performing ceremonies, Buddhist temples for meeting and performing social and religious activities, and clerical accommodations (guti) for monks and nuns to live in (figure 4.4). Sometimes, Buddhist temples became a social space for phrai and that to use for practising religious ceremonies and taking part in social events. However, except for the king, high-ranked people were not allowed to own land. The king only decided to assign the land to them; if the king was dissatisfied with them, he could sequester the land. The land was the king’s property (ratcha sombut) or royal belonging (kong luang). Thus, the concept of the Thai king in Thai society was characterised by being ‘ultimately powerful both on Earth or heaven and over people, life, or objects’. Thai people called the king’s character: jao-fa jao-phaendin meaning the lord of heaven and Earth.

144

Figure 4.5: The structure and mechanism of sakdina society. 145

The land was preserved for the upper class because it was designated to be a part of heaven, meaning the lower class could not live there.215 In the sakdina regime (figure 4.5) the concept of phrai and that encompassed (inferior) humans who were not of the king’s relations. In Thai society, phrai were the ‘lower class’, which was the combination of Chinese or jek (a simple word for referring to Chinese-related people) and other races that lived in Thailand, such as Laotians, Cambodians, Burmese, Vietnamese, Malays, and Indonesians. Furthermore, phrai could be foreigners such as Westerners or farang. Thus, ‘Thai people’ in the context of Bangkok or the Westerners called Siamese referred to a group of multiple races that was under the rule of the Thai king. Moreover, the offspring of Chinese and Siamese were called Sino-Thai (chaao-thai-cheua-sai-jen or lukjin). They were considered to be the main population of Bangkok, because they quickly populated the city and drove its economic growth from the 19th to 20th centuries.

Chinese migration Chinese migration from the 19th to 20th centuries had a significant impact on the urbanisation of Bangkok. Throughout the history of Thailand, the Chinese have profoundly contributed to the development of the economy, culture, and politics. They started to be involved in Thai society during the Ayutthaya period (Ayutthaya, around 70km from modern-day Bangkok in the north, was a previous capital of what is now Thailand). Some Chinese people migrated to the area of Thailand around the 15th to 16th centuries because Ayutthaya had established itself as a new centre in South East Asia. Ayutthaya’s primary market was China, to which it exported exotic goods such as spices, pottery, handicrafts, and precious gems. This attracted the Chinese to Ayutthaya, where they did business as distributors.216 The same pattern of migration occurred in Bangkok when it was established in 1783, and Chinese migrated to Bangkok to escape war and poverty in China.

215 Duncan J., The City As Text. The Politics of Landscape Interpretation in the Kandyan Kingdom (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990). 216 Forest A., Les Missionnaires Francais au Tonkin et au Siam xviie–xviiie siècles. Livre I: Histoire du Siam [The French Missionaries in Tonkin and Siam from the 17th to 18th Centuries. Book I: History of Siam] (Paris: L’Harmattan, 1998), 115. 146

In the 19th century, Chinese migrants and their descendants in Bangkok accounted for over half of the total population. Some wealthy Chinese worked in commerce, including as merchants, while the poor entered the labour force. Later, when those Chinese labourers had enough money, many established businesses and became wealthy themselves. in Bangkok became highly associated with doing business.217 This was one reason that Thai kings encouraged more Chinese migrants to come to Bangkok: their great potential218 to develop the economy by paying taxes. The influx of Chinese migration changed the demographics of Bangkok. Some Chinese married local people and produced the Sino-Thai ethnicity, which soon made up the main population of Bangkok and integrated the culture of doing business with local practices of everyday life.219 This created tensions with the traditional social system and Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model, since doing business exposed Thai society to the world outside. The demographic transformation and cultural hybridisation of Bangkok was another factor influencing Rama IV to modernise Bangkok, as was the ‘’ that Siam signed with the British in the mid-19th century, granting extraterritorial rights for the British to do business in Bangkok.220 The external force of Western colonisation in South East Asia indirectly spread modern culture to Bangkok as Westerners did business with local people, mostly Chinese and Sino-Thais. This cultural process slowly integrated urban culture into the mentality of Sino-Thais, creating an internal force that influenced the concept of being modern like the West through the upper class, and aided Rama IV’s realisation of the power of cultures from abroad and the international economy. The culture of doing business was one of many factors that inspired Thai leaders to adapt to the beneficial part of globalisation. They found that the economic advantages added to their social status and stability.221 Rama IV realised that Bangkok needed to be

217 Baker C. and Phongpaichit P., A History of Thailand (China: Cambridge University Press, 2005), 33–36. 218 Crawfurd J., Journal of an Embassy from the Governor-General of India to the Courts of Siam and Cochin China, vols I and II (London: Henry Colbourn and Richard Bentley, 1830), 162–163. 219 Abhakorn R., Ratburi, an Inner Province: Local Government and Central Politics in Siam, 1862–1892 (PhD diss., Cornell University, 1984), 21. 220 Baker and Phongpaichit, A History of Thailand, 45. 221 Baker and Phongpaichit, A History of Thailand, 49–52. 147

modernised to reach a compromise with Western powers, and initiated the royal modernisation program by building roads, and rows of shophouses inspired by the British colony in Singapore.222 Rama IV’s ‘flexible strategy’ brought two advantages to Bangkok. Firstly, urbanisation: the urban fabric of Bangkok made the capital modern like the West. In the eyes of the West, the physical change in Bangkok temporarily demonstrated that the town was becoming Westernised. Secondly, the construction of roads and shophouses commercialised the land in Bangkok, which brought income in the form of land taxes.223 Furthermore, the presence of roads and shophouses created a private development industry dominated by the elite and wealthy families. It stimulated the growth of Bangkok’s economy, which further empowered and stabilised the capital’s political status as a new, emerging ‘modern-sacred’ centre for the country.224 These changes also responded to the growing urban culture among the Sino-Thai population and Western merchant communities. The roads and shophouses were a space for them to do businesses and adopt the Western culture within the Thai way of life. The urban reconstruction of Rama IV made Bangkok a space of cultural hybridisation between Thai, Chinese, and Western traditions.225

222 Sternstein L., Thailand. The Environment of Modernisation (Sydney: McGraw Hill, 1976), 107. 223 Kanchanakhaphan, Mua Wan Ni... Krung Thep Chetsip Pi Kon [Yesterday... Bangkok 70 Years Ago]. (Bangkok: Ruangsin Publishing House, 1977), 17–23. 224 Tomosugi T., Reminiscences of Old Bangkok: Memory and Identification of a Changing Society (Tokyo: The Institute of Oriental Culture, 1993). 225 Cohen E., “Thai Society in Comparative Perspective,” in Collected Essays (Bangkok: White Lotus, 1991), 47–55. 148

Figure 4.6: The demographic transformation of Sino-Thais.

The proportion of Sino-Thais sharply increased in the mid-19th century (figure 4.6) due massive migration from the south of China.226 In fact, before the modernisation era, only the king, his family, and aristocratic families called themselves Tai/Thai, which meant the elite race.227 The term Thai was applied to everybody who lived in Thailand in the 1930s–50s after The People’s Party overthrew the ‘absolute Thai monarchy’ of Rama V–VII in 1932. The Thai government of Phibun Songkhram decided to change the country’s name from the ‘Kingdom of Siam’ to ‘Thailand’, meaning the country of Thais, the country of freedom. This government required everybody in Thailand to register their nationality as Thai.228 In traditional Bangkok, geographically, the lower class only lived in the aquatic communities (bang) of stilt/floating houses that they settled in the Chao Phraya River and canals.229 They kept to the water because the sakdina regime considered the land to be the divine realm. The water was the lower realm, where the earthly life of phrai and that

226 Baker and Phongpaichit, A History of Thailand, 47. 227 Baker and Phongpaichit, 63. 228 Saichon, Chat thai, 135. 229 Baker and Phongpaichit, A History of Thailand, 33. 149

took place.230 However, in some circumstances (figure 4.5), the lower class became the elite through a different social mechanism, which made the social structure of phrai and that dynamic. Some phrai gained the status of aristocracy in two ways: (1) entitlement by the king for working in the royal court, (2) marrying the son of an aristocratic or royal family. Acquiring the status of aristocratic class through entitlement by the king as a kha ratchakan or khun nang member of the nobility was done when a person had achieved something significant for the kingdom – for example, won a war for it or protected it from losing its independence – or had worked in the royal court for many years. In some cases, entitlement was counted back many generations to when the ancestors started to serve the king in a role that helped the kingdom economically and politically. Joining the aristocratic class via this channel did not discriminate on the basis of race or gender.231 Female phrai, especially those from the wealthy Sino-Thai families, who had been elevated to the upper class via marriage with the son of an elite family, were referred to as mom. The marriage of a wealthy female phrai and a son of the elite was a way to gain social and economic power on both sides.232 Significantly, the culture of transforming from phrai and that to the superior class was a social mechanism that merged the Chinese culture of ‘doing business’ into the ruling class. That, later on, spread the idea of ‘commercialising Bangkok’ among the wealthy and high-ranked families, which they considered to be a way to gain political and economic benefit by doing business.233 One of the earliest examples of commercialising Bangkok, led by Rama IV (r. 1851–1868) in the mid-19th century was constructing thanon (roads) and commercial buildings such as tuk- thaew (shophouses): rentable row houses for the Sino-Thais to live and work in. The similarity of phrai and that was they had to serve the upper class by providing services to the kingdom, such as digging the canals in Bangkok and its surrounding areas,

230 Jumsei, Naga, 138–139. 231 Prasertkul S., “The Transformation of the Thai State and Economic Change (1855–1945),” (PhD diss., Cornell University, 1989), 43–44. 232 Rabibhadana A., The Organization of Thai Society in the Early Bangkok Period 1782–1873 (Ithaca, NY: Southeast Asia Programme, Cornell University, 1969). 233 Wilson C. M., State and Society in the Reign of Mongkut, 1851–1868: Thailand on the Eve of Modernization (New York: Cornell University, 1971), 478–482. 150

working in the court, and being servants for the ruling class.234 The policy of conscription was not applied to the female phrai, which gave them freedom in life. The women worked as merchants who were influenced by the Chinese culture of doing business. They sold food and agricultural products on the floating markets (floating houses) around the aquatic communities. The difference between phrai and that was their freedom in choosing to serve the kingdom. Phrai, especially the wealthy ones, or phrai mangmi, could refuse to be conscripted by paying the upper-class phrai (munnai) with money, while the poor ones, phrai yakcoon, could choose to become indebted to their munnai, who the phrai yakcoon would need to pay back. That, or slaves, were socially and economically inferior to phrai. That were war captives from other cities, states, or kingdoms that were defeated by the Thai king’s army. That could also be phrai who sold themselves to munnai when they could not afford to live independently. Thus, the social status of that was the lowest: they lacked freedom and were at an economic disadvantage compared to phrai. Economic advantage in Bangkok society was a crucial factor in determining the social status of subordinates. Affluent people were mostly the descendants of Chinese, and used their advantages to climb to the top of the society.

Bangkok as sacred capital

Founding Bangkok: The Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model layer Fear of the unpredictable natural world culturally influenced the indigenous people to be flexible and informal in the way they settled in the aquatic areas of Thailand such as rivers, lakes and the sea (figures 4.7 and 4.8). They maximised the space usage of stilt/floating houses in response to changing conditions. Tiptus and Bongsadadt, in Houses in Bangkok, explained that:

(stilt and floating) houses in early Bangkok did not only function for domestic purposes. They were also used for various and different activities. Thai people used them for daily life activities, welcoming foreign visitors, doing domestic business; on floating houses, working in domestic industry,

234 Tanabe S., “Historical Geography of the Canal System in the Chao Phraya River Delta,” Journal of the Siam Society 65, no. 2 (1977), 23–72. 151

administration as in an office, treating and healing people as in a hospital, teaching as in a school, printing books like a publisher, worshipping as in a prayer room, conducting a case as in the court, imprisoning suspects as in a jail, and performing entertainments as in a theatre, playing shows and instruments.235

According to Tiptus and Bongsadadt, the need for adaptability due to living in the changing environment influenced every room in the building/house, which could be used and manipulated for different purposes. It also affected the family structure in Thai culture as well. The flexibility of buildings meant that a single house for one family could be added to, becoming a group of houses. This influenced a culture where multiple generations of a family lived together, each family’s house being linked to the other by an external porch (chan baan), which kept them in contact with each other and maintained family relationships.236

235 Tiptus and Bongsadadt, Houses in Bangkok, 28. 236 Tiptus and Bongsadadt, 54–55. 152

Figure 4.7: A painting of informal aquatic life from Wat Pho.

153

Figure 4.8: A scale model of informal aquatic life from the Rattanakosin Museum.

The local lifestyle influenced the architectural system in the water to facilitate mobility. As Jumsei noted, “this kind of flexibility and mobility in both amphibious and aquatic-tidal houses presupposes a high degree of efficient but minimal planning. Whether actually afloat or raised on platforms or on land, nothing in the house was allowed to be permanent, rigid, heavy and redundant.”237 Jumsei explained that building a house in Thailand complied with the changeable natural environment (figures 4.7 and 4.8). The whole house was fully utilised and lightweight, making it easy to transport to handle different kinds of natural disaster, such as flooding.238 This idea influenced the people to develop ‘prefabricated’ construction; every architectural component, such as

237 Jumsei, Naga, 97. 238 Tiptus and Bongsadadt, Houses in Bangkok, 40. 154

columns, beams, floors, walls, and roofs could be transported easily via rivers to a new location.239 The flexibility in architecture was very distinctive. Turpin, a European wanderer who visited Ayutthaya in the 17th century, wrote that the architectural design of native people fascinated many Europeans by its simplicity. Indigenous knowledge and talent were capable of manipulating different parts and functions of buildings to deal with the changing environment.240 For practical purposes, living in water was more convenient than living on land. Jaijongruk, in his book The Traditional Thai House, claimed that the aquatic settlement was the most efficient way to do marine farming because the flow of water brought proper nutrition to the plants. It was also the right place for fishing, as the steady flow of nutritious rivers and canals was an ideal place for fish and other marine life to live and populate. Furthermore, living in water gave people instant access to water for drinking, bathing, and travelling by boat. The benefits, versatility, and efficiency of settling in water influenced the culture and architecture of aquatic life.241

Figure 4.9: The Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model in plan.

239 Jumsei, Naga, 85. 240 Turpin F. H., A History of the Kingdom of Siam (Bangkok: The American Pressby. Mission Press, The Committee of the Vajiranana, 1997), 70. 241 Chaichongrak R., The Traditional Thai House (Bangkok: Silpakorn University, 1979), 11. 155

After the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model hybridised with the local culture, there was a sense of hierarchy in the informal way of life. Waterson, in her book The Living House, explained that “not only humans but also houses, kingdom and the cosmos itself are thought of as having a ‘navel’”.242 The concept of the navel, or of an unseen force that resided within humans or buildings, made people believe there was ‘something’ (which Thai culture called spirit) controlling their life. In South East Asia, people symbolised the ‘vital force’ through the ‘cardinal point’, whereby four protective points surrounded a town and building at the periphery (see the plan of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model at figure 4.9), “thereby giving architecture and urban planning their needed cardinal points”.243 When the people in South East Asia settled, they conceptually created a hierarchy where the centre or the highest position of their place was a sacred space. In sanctifying the place, they believed that it would become where the spirit resided to receive homage; this ensured that the spirit would bring them good fortune.244 Furthermore, the idea of ‘cardinal points’ from the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model represented the sacred Mount Meru with five peaks. When people sanctified their place/house, it was as though they were conceptually imitating the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model. The sanctified space became like a ‘miniature universe’, with Mount Meru at its centre, reproducing the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model. People visualised their place as a universe (the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model) where they sanctified sacred space to summon a good spirit (a household ghost), which they believed would protect them, to the place/house.245 As Tuan suggested, the ritual was the way to find positive ‘powers’ that could not be engaged by human physical efforts. It helped people to acquire a sense of spiritual security, harmonising their changing life in an uncertain environment.246 Karnchanaporn also added that as “an obligation, in return for spiritual

242 Errington S., “Embodied Sumange in Luwu,” Journal of Asian Studies 42, no. 3 (1983), 545–570. 243 Jumsei, Naga, 13. 244 Eawsriwong, “Ghosts.” 245 Karnchanaporn N., Fear and Domestic Architecture: A Cultural Phenomenon with Reference to Thai Domestic Architecture (Saarbrücken: VDM Verlag, 2009), 55. 246 Eawsriwong, “Ghosts.” 156

protection and living in harmony, rituals must be carried out, spirits must be respected, and one must conduct oneself properly in everyday life”.247 She mentioned that performing a ritual in a place was a symbol of respecting the household spirit; in return, the spirit gave the people spiritual protection. Mystically, the influence of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model symbolised the aquatic environment of South East Asia in the form of naak. A naga is the male naak and nakee is the female naak – these are sacred snakes, the lords of reptiles, and one of the four protective gods of Mount Meru. Together, these four gods are: (1) giants and devils (yak and mar), (2) garuda (khruth) – a hybrid with the head of a bird and the body of a human, (3) gandharvas (khnthrrph) – male/female angels responsible for entertaining the higher angels, and (4) naak. People believed naak lived in water and created the line of a river by moving through the land. When there was an aquatic disaster such as flooding or drought, people believed they had done something wrong to naak and needed to worship them as they did the household ghosts. This was to ensure that the naak would be satisfied and not bring a natural disaster upon them. Hence, when building a stilt/floating house or settling in Thailand, people performed a ‘construction rite’ – a ceremony of sanctifying water to pour on the land and architectural components, which was conducted while building a house. This became a “defensive mechanism by mobilising supernatural powers for their protection”.248 Tuan further stated that performing a ritual during house construction was a process of transmitting supernatural power into the structure, which would increase a sense of stability in the uncertain environment.249 Thai culture called this process plook, prap, and prung (cultivating, manipulating and bringing to life), which turned the house into a religious structure. Like the concept of imitating the Hindu- Buddhist cosmological model in a place/house, sanctifying and ritualising a place or building was a process which symbolised the place was sacred, like heaven.250

247 Karnchanaporn, Fear and Domestic Architecture, 55. 248 Karnchanaporn, Fear and Domestic Architecture, 97. 249 Tuan Y. F., Landscapes of Fear (New York: Knopf Doubleday Publishing, 2013), 70. 250 Charernsupkul A. and Temiyabandha V., Northern Thai Domestic Architecture and Rituals in House-Building (Bangkok: Fine Arts Commission, Association of Siamese Architects under Royal Patronage, 1978). 157

The rite of using water also applied to people’s everyday life, and connected profane space to sacred space. On the land settlement, there was a traditional culture of ‘bathing rites’. For instance, King Chulalongkorn Rama V (r. 1868–1910) commanded that a large floating structure of Mount Meru be put in the Chao Phraya River to represent the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model. The king then performed a ceremony in which he descended into the river.251 This represented the king making sacred space overlap with profane space, in its turn representing a flexible relationship within the hierarchical settlement. In the water settlement, the population from around Bangkok brought sand to Buddhist temples, then shaped it into a mountain and decorated it with flags and flowers to imitate the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model.252 This water rite ended when people splashed water at each other. People believed the rite would gain them spiritual protection, and they also did it to celebrate: (1) the propitiation of rain or boat-chasing festival, to protect farmers from flooding; (2) the rain enticement, to call for more rain in the drought season; and (3) the traditional Thai new year, to celebrate the fertility of rain.253 This demonstrated how the phrai and that from the water settlement related to the land settlement. As the king performed a water rite in the water, people performed communal and sacred events in Buddhist temples. This represented how sacred and profane spaces interacted.254 All this sheds light on how Thai culture created the Thai concept of home; it was a process of hybridising the sacred and earthly life in imitation of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model.255 To live in the changing environment of Thai culture, a dual living system of informality developed, to handle the dynamism of nature and hierarchy, and to respond to the ‘respectful fear’ of the spirits. Bangkokians understood that they lived in heaven, which was the land settlement of the Thai king. In relation to town planning and buildings, this belief influenced the hierarchical settlement morphology.

251 Jumsei, Naga, 35. 252 Jumsei, Naga, 30–36. 253 Jumsei, Naga, 37–40. 254 Jumsei, Naga, 90–93. 255 Karnchanaporn, Fear and Domestic Architecture, 103–106. 158

Making the space of Bangkok hierarchical The discussion above has demonstrated how the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model and sakdina influenced the way people dwelled in Thailand. According to the theory of place/sense of home, sakdina embraced the thinking system of living in the hierarchical overlapping realms of the human and the celestial. It visualised an ideal place of hierarchical, binary settlements. It made the lower and upper classes meet in the Chao Phraya Basin under an agreement to phenomenologically construct Bangkok’s existential space. They sanctified Bangkok as a sacred capital of Thai kings who ruled over the population that lived in the sprawl of aquatic communities.

Figure 4.10: Land elevation of the Chao Phraya Basin in Bangkok. (Source: Created by the author, referring to “Bangkok Flood Elevation Map”.)256

256 “Bangkok Flood Elevation Map,” BKKBase Random Grumblings, 24 October 2011, https://bkkbaseface.wordpress.com/2011/10/24/bangkok-flood-elevation-map/ 159

Looking at a bigger image helps to explain the identity of place in Bangkok, settled on a wetland in the Chao Phraya Basin, which was lower than its surroundings (figure 4.10). The landscape of Bangkok was like a sinking land. The land around the Chao Phraya Basin was formed from the heaping of sediment. When the river flowed from , it brought the rock, earth, and sand from the mountain to concentrate at the area of the Chao Phraya Basin. This fact of Bangkok’s geography represented a contradiction to its sacred character. The basin geography of Bangkok was physically subordinate to its hinterland, which was the highlands of the south-west region (Isan) and mountains of the northern territory. From ancient times, the people on the mainland of South East Asia preferred to settle their cities not lower than the sea level, and not too high above the river.257 This helped to protect them from flooding and the shrinking of land as a result of constructing gigantic buildings such as palaces and Buddhist temples. In contrast, settlement decisions in Bangkok depended more on political pressure. Building traditional Bangkok was a continuous sequence of transforming space into a sense of home or of distinguishing an undefined space via the social mechanism of sakdina. It was a process of manifesting the ‘intentionality’ of Hinduism and Buddhism. Once King Yodfa (Rama I, 1783–1809 – the pioneer of the Chakri dynasty and Thai monarchy) and his people intended to construct the capital of Bangkok, they introduced the thinking system of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model to Rattanakosin Island. They were aware that the great capital of sacredness (krungthep mahanakorn) was supposed to be constructed as a new centre of the universe. Rama I and his people began to establish a Thai existential footprint to belong to the place, responding to their existence. These people phenomenologically created the identity of place, characterising the infinity of the ‘cognitive space’ of the Chao Phraya Basin by hierarchising the landscape. This created ‘pragmatic space’ by manipulating the natural geography of Bangkok into the sacred land settlement on Rattanakosin Island, and into a profane water settlement on the Chao Phraya River and canals. Rattanakosin Island, located on the eastern side of the

257 Baker and Phongpaichit, A History of Thailand, 2–5. 160

Chao Phraya River, was outlined by digging the town’s main klong (canal), called Bang Lamphu. Horizontally, this heavenly island was surrounded by the canal network, so it geographically emphasised the island as the sacred centre where the Thai king resided. The hierarchical settlement system of Bangkok created vertical tension between the higher and lower spaces, and guided people to cultivate their daily activities in two different settlements. The king and elite people lived in the Grand Palace, royal palaces, and Buddhist temples on the land. Rattanakosin Island, culturally, made phrai and that feel inferior to the Thai king because the sacred terrestrial settlement of the ruling class sanctified the land as a higher place. Living in the aquatic communities of stilt/floating houses held the opposite meaning, as this was a profane place or lower space where phrai and that lived. At this point, the knowledge of Thai being-in-the-world manifested, which made the ‘pragmatic space’ vague because space was being characterised. The two different geocultural characters of sacred land and profane water overlaid to embody the Thai sense of home. It made the space of the Chao Phraya Basin become a ‘perceptual space’ where the urban life of Bangkok took place. The Thai way of life formed as cultural and social interactions through the unique ‘existential spatiality’ of Bangkok. As a result, it turned the Chao Phraya Basin from a place into an architectural space or existential space: the social space of the cultural interactions between the lower and upper classes. The people of Bangkok, therefore, fully embraced the ‘poetic dwelling’ where they authentically experienced their Thai concept of home. The Thai idea of home reflected how the people created the ‘existential insideness’ or being inside Bangkok. There, Bangkokians experienced the rhythm of life in the Hindu- Buddhist cosmological model. This conceptually constituted a living space of Bangkok through the landscape’s modification and architectural arrangement. The Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model, in the mentality of Rama I and his people, determined the sense of home. The Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model, in the mind of Bangkokians, constructed the ‘existential spatiality’ of a Thai sense of home through ‘existential space’. It was like the ‘architectural grammar’ or the ‘language of architecture’ of living in Bangkok. The Thai

161

concept of home depended on the ‘language of architecture’ of the architectural system established in the town planning of Bangkok. The Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model influenced the existential space of Bangkok through ‘identification’ and ‘orientation’. Together they created a space for the Thai sense of home to exist, or in Heideggerian terms, for the ‘work of Thai architecture’. The term ‘work’ represents the ‘thingness’ of a ‘thing’, meaning that the ‘thing’ of Bangkok’s town planning and buildings reflected the ‘thingness’ of the ‘language of architecture’. The ‘language of architecture’ in Bangkok disclosed how Bangkokians manifested the Thai knowledge of being-in-the-world in the place. Also, the ‘thingness’ of the ‘language of architecture’ or identification explained the ‘existential spatiality’ (orientation) of Bangkok’s existential space, which consisted of ‘four modes of dwelling’: settlement, urban space, public buildings, and individual houses. These gave direction to Bangkokians in conquering the chaos of disorientation in the empty landscape of Bangkok. The orientation (‘existential spatiality’) of Bangkok formed hierarchical relationships by dividing the place into sacred and profane spaces. The geographical division of water and land created horizontal tension. Rattanakosin Island was situated in the middle of the sprawl of aquatic communities on the east of the Chao Phraya River. This spatial arrangement emphasised the sacred island as the ultimate centre for the surrounding water settlements. It stretched a path from the centre to connect the inside and outside of Bangkok. It set the ‘initial arrival point’ in relation to which Bangkokians would manifest their existential footprint. Together, the identification of the ‘language of architecture’ and the orientation of Bangkok ‘existential spatiality’ enabled the people of Bangkok to experience the poetic dwelling in Bangkok. To sum up, the knowledge of being-in-the-world in Thai culture represented the mental process of how the people created Bangkok from their existential thought. Their settlement represented the hybridisation of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model and animism. Bangkok, the home of the gods, became distinctive through its sacred identity in the informal aquatic environment. It placed the people of Bangkok into the vertically overlapping realms of earth and heaven. Bangkokians responded to their existence by

162

situating the Thai lifestyle through flexible and hierarchical interactions. They created their sense of home to transform the infinite space of Bangkok into the place of the sacred capital. The Thai concept of home allowed the people of Bangkok to experience their existential footprint of being Thai-self. The Thai idea of home showed the hybridisation of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model with the nature and animism of South East Asia via town planning and buildings. It integrated the ‘informality’ of the local into the ‘hierarchy’ of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model, whereby the Thai king, who carried the belief in the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model, elaborated the sacred dimension of the local culture in response to the trait of fear. The locals understood the Thai king as a sacred being who could protect them. Thereby, the social mechanism of hybridisation made the local people accept the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model of the Thai king for a spiritual purpose. In relation to the theory of place/sense of home, the process of creating the Thai concept of home in Bangkok represented how making the place’s identity required the hybridisation of local and external cultures. In the case of Bangkok, the Thai idea of home was the product of mixing different cultures and belief systems to create the spirit of place. Thus, the Thai concept of home was not pure and localised as in the traditional conception of place/sense of home mentioned in chapter 2. On the other hand, the process of making the Thai sense of home aligns with the contemporary conception of place/sense of home because the Thai concept of home in Bangkok was created through a process of hybridisation of the local culture of aquatic settlement with an external culture (the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model).

Sanctifying Bangkok Before the foundation of Bangkok, the landscape of the Chao Phraya Basin was a hinterland under the domination of the (1351–1767). Bangkok was a small trading port of the local and Chinese people, located on the western side of the Chao Phraya River. The locals called this area Bangkok. The word bang meant the aquatic community and the word kok or makok meant a wild olive. So Bangkok was an aquatic village with olive trees. It had been a small, water-based settlement for many centuries, 163

before the arrival of Rama I of the Chakri dynasty, who hybridised the settlement system of Bangkok, inspired by the Ayutthaya tradition.

Figure 4.11: The city pillar of Bangkok, present day. (Source: Cavanagh, “Bangkok City Pillar Shrine.”)258

To sanctify Bangkok, it needed to undergo a sanctification process. This was a crucial part of embodying sacredness in Bangkok. According to the book Wong Wannakhadi (Royal Literature), written by Prince Damrong in 1948, a capital needed to have a ‘sacred centre’ to ensure that the town was protected from bad luck. It was significant for the ruler (king) and Brahmans to build the ‘city pillar’. At the urban scale, the city pillar stands for the town shrine, in Thai called saan (figure 4.11). It

258 Roy Cavanagh, “Bangkok City Pillar Shrine,” Thaizer, 8 April 2013, https://www.thaizer.com/tourist- attractions/bangkok-city-pillar-and-shrine/ 164

was a sacred form of architecture that looked like a Buddhist temple, built to cover the real city pillar. Mostly, the town shrine was one of the earliest divine forms of architecture, constructed first before any other building could be built. Thai culture called this ritual lak mueang, meaning the core of the capital. Prince Damrong explained that the ritual of lak mueang was handed down from India a long time ago. In Sanskrit, the ancient language of Hinduism, lak mueang was inthkhil, meaning the pillar of Indra. Before the erection of the town shrine, the Brahmans consulted their astronomical calendar to find the most auspicious day for Rama I to review the construction and decide when to begin. The city pillar was different from the column of a house; on the top, there was a knob where the Brahmas inserted the capital’s horoscope. At that moment, the royal Brahmans provided Rama I with two different horoscopes. The first scenario showed Bangkok as full of prosperity and peace, but the capital was colonised. In the second scenario, Bangkok faced chaos forever, but the capital could also hold its independence forever. Rama I selected the second option, because he thought that preserving the Thai identity was the most important.259 During the period of Western influence in the mid- 19th century and the presence of the United States in the mid-20th century, Thai kings modernised the capital to make each horoscope true at the same time. The city pillar was changed during the reign of Rama IV (r. 1851–1868) because the previous one was rotten. Rama IV commanded a new city pillar be made from more durable wood, and at a larger size. At the top of the pillar, the knob still contained the second horoscope. There was also a secret that made the city pillar even more sacred. While the sacred pillar was being erected, the Brahmans commanded that four people with the specific names In, Jan, Mun, and Kong should be put into the pillar’s four bases. It was believed when the city pillar was erected on the four dead bodies, they would become the capital’s protectors, called phi ratsadon. Once the lak mueang ceremony was complete, the king gave rewards to the families of the four people.260

259 “Lak Muang, The Ceremony of Sacrificing the Living People for Summoning Their Spirits to Protect Bangkok,” TNEWS, 21 August 2017, www.tnews.co.th/contents/349898 260 Song Sai, “The Tale of the City (Bangkok) Pillar,” Story of Siam, accessed 17 August 2018, storyofsiam.blogspot.com.au/p/blog-page_7896.html 165

This transformed the eastern side of the Chao Phraya River into a celestial capital. It also required the sanctification of humans to spiritually make Bangkok an eternal capital according to the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model. The lak mueang ritual superimposed sacred space on the existing aquatic communities, showing how Rama I applied the Ayutthaya tradition to Bangkok. The informal aquatic-village settlement hybridised with the hierarchical settlement system of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model. According to the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model, Bangkok’s town planning should be built in a geometric order like that of Hindu temples such as Angkor Wat. However, Bangkok had to compromise with the existing informal aquatic settlement. The existing geographical condition of Bangkok was a wetland, where there were annual floods because the land was slightly lower than its surrounding area. From ancient times, people in the Chao Phraya Basin had always settled informally, because it gave them more versatility: they could move the village or house in the case of flooding. The settlement pattern of Bangkok was physically dominated by the disorder of a water-based settlement and the changing nature of the Chao Phraya Basin. The Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model made the architectural system of early Bangkok into a kind of hybrid between flexibility and hierarchy. Physically, the amphibious and sacred buildings were laid in a cluster format following the existing canal system. Even though Bangkok was based on an organic settlement, it fully restored the spirit of Ayutthaya, a capital built on solid ground. Bangkok had the appearance of a celestial capital superimposed on the aquatic settlement. Its alternative name, krungthep phra mahanakorn, meant ‘the sacred and great capital’. The idea of establishing Bangkok as a second Ayutthaya was inspired by a sacred capital from the Thai epic, Ramakien, called Ayodhya. This was the original name of Ayutthaya; it was believed to be a capital built by Indra, in which Vishnu reincarnated as Phra Ram to rule and fight evil261. In Thai culture, people identified Phra Ram with the Thai kings; they believed that Thai kings were

261 King Yodfa Rama I, The Script of Ramakien, the Royal Literary Work of Rama I Phrabath Somdet Phra Phutthayotfa Chulalok Maharach (Bangkok, Ran Nakornsas, 2014), 5–10. 166

incarnations of Vishnu destined to rule Bangkok. Thus, the Thai kings were given the name Rama.

Figure 4.12: A painting from Wat Pho, illustrating life in an aquatic settlement.

The settlement system of Bangkok was hierarchical; it was a sacred capital within a human settlement, representing the urban space of Bangkok as the overlap of the spaces of the humans and gods (figure 4.12). When looking at the town’s elevation (skyline), we can see Bangkok was built on a flat surface. The only variation was the height of land- based architecture, where the Grand Palace, royal palaces, and Buddhist temples were slightly higher than the stilt/floating houses. This became more obvious when looking at the town plan, which showed two types of settlements. The land-based settlement of Rattanakosin Island was located in the centre, surrounded by the sprawl of aquatic

167

communities. The water-based settlement enclosed Rattanakosin Island, indicating the sacred interiority of Bangkok. The invisible boundary that distinguished between the inside and outside of the aquatic settlement was the limit of the canal network. The overlapping settlement system demonstrated that the urban space of Bangkok had two enclosures, and there were two degrees of interiority: inside the inside (Rattanakosin Island) and inside the outside (aquatic communities).

Contradictory Bangkok: The geocultural aspect The town planning of Bangkok represented dualism. Bangkok was supposed to represent the sacred dimension of Rattanakosin Island. However, the settlement system demonstrated the uniqueness of Bangkok. For instance, urban space was a shared space between sacred and profane spaces of land and water respectively. The streets of Bangkok were like Venice’s canals in that the function of the waterway was to enable travelling by boat. This gave a different image to sacred Bangkok, because the town was built under the inspiration of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model, but the space of life occurred in the human (water) space. This created a contradiction: was Bangkok a place of humans or celestial beings? The sacred land architecture, such as Grand Palace, royal palaces, and Buddhist temples, belonged to the aquatic settlement; people in the water used them as a public space, while for the royal family these were residential places. The versatility in Bangkok represented how the Ayutthaya tradition had hybridised with the local character. The settlement system of Bangkok had both informality and formality, with informality happening along the blurred boundary between the worlds of humans and gods. Sometimes, sacred and profane spaces seemed to be the same, but they were hierarchised. Bangkok, conceived of as a second Ayutthaya, was in fact a hybrid Ayutthaya that was a symbol of Rama I’s royal legitimacy. Making Bangkok sacred like Ayutthaya stabilised the king’s political power.

168

Figure 4.13: The canal network of Bangkok. The course of the river looks like the body of a snake.

Figure 4.14: A scale model of traditional Thai life from the Rattanakosin Museum.

Although the water-based space of Bangkok hybridised with the sacred land settlement of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model, the Chao Phraya River and the 169

canals culturally dominated Bangkok life. Physically, the waterways in Bangkok were an urban element that divided sacred and profane spaces. However, phenomenologically, this arrangement merged the water and land settlements, which created the hybrid appearance of the ‘sacred-aquatic’. Water in Thai culture was believed to be part of a naak, a mystical creature (the lord of snakes) in Hindu-Buddhist mythology. This was due to the physical appearance of rivers and canals being similar to the body of a naak, moving through the earth’s surface to create the course of the river (figure 4.13). They suspected that aquatic phenomena such as flooding were a consequence of naak’s actions. The nature of and beliefs associated with water influenced the humans’ architectural system to be amphibious, to handle the unstable nature of water. This made the settlement system in the water favour a cluster format. A group of stilt/floating houses were located along the waterway, leaving a space in the middle for boats to travel through. Most of the houses in the water-based settlement in Bangkok were built in an open space called chan baan, which faced the river and canal as a transitional space that connected the house to urban space. This made the waterway a space of urban life that brought people to meet under an agreement (figure 4.14). Traditionally, the water was considered to be human (profane); the entity of water was a low space in comparison to the divine (sacred) land. The elongated waterways of river and canal provided urban space: they were aquatic streets that drove everyday-life activities. They also were the path that outlined Rattanakosin Island, making the island a sacred centre. In this sense, waterways combined sacred and profane spaces into a hierarchical settlement. The geographical relationship of water and land represented contradictions. Although the local communities of Bangkok had the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model superimposed on them, the aquatic nature of the Chao Phraya Basin, geographically, made the hierarchical settlement adapt to the local urban morphology. Bangkok integrated the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model into the aquatic landscape through the dualism of sacred and profane spaces.

170

The four stages of modernisation from the mid-19th to the end of the 20th century

Modernisation policies and processes were a legacy of Thai kings from Rama IV (r. 1851– 1868), who initiated them in response to the presence of Western powers in South East Asia in the mid-19th century and continued by Rama V (r. 1868–1910). During the reigns of Rama VI (r. 1910–1925) and VII (r. 1925–1935), the Thai monarchy weakened due to economic hardship. In 1932, The People’s Party overthrew Rama VII. The People’s Party continued the tradition of having the king on the throne, but Rama VIII (r. 1935–1946) had little power. Under Rama VIII, therefore, the royal modernisation was continued with a different direction of People’s Party in making Bangkok to be the city of people not Thai kings like Rama V had done. However, when Rama IX (r. 1946–2016) came to the throne, he slowly grew the Thai monarchy’s influence with the help of the USA.262 Modernisation was a nearly continuous process from kings Rama IV to IX, intertwined with sociopolitical and architectural changes. Rama IV initiated modernisation in a bid to make Bangkok modern ‘like the West’ by following Western models while preserving the Thai identity and this continued through to the reign of Rama IX. They commanded that modern buildings be erected, while hybridising traditional spaces such as Rattanakosin Island and Buddhist temples. They merged the old with the new effectively hybridising Thai identity. As a result, Bangkok and its relationship to the country as a whole. Urbanisation by Thai kings made Bangkok more like the West, a ‘modern-sacred’ city that exemplified how Bangkok had adapted to Western influence in a globalising world. The Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model of Bangkok adapted to modernity, showing the idea of Hindu-Buddhist urbanism, where sacredness met modernity. Bangkok demonstrated the hybridisation of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model with modernity. It represented how Western influence was an ingredient that hybridised the Thai sense of home through the social mechanism of royal modernisation policies and processes. The royal modernisation program of Thai kings reflected how

262 Baker and Phongpaichit, A History of Thailand, 175-177. 171

Western culture had merged with Bangkok society through the royal institution, which made the urbanisation in Bangkok different from other Asian cities.263

King Mongkut (Rama IV, r. 1851–1868): The beginning of modernisation and the shifting of Thai identity In the mid-19th century, during a time of transition in the architectural history of Bangkok, Rama IV physically exemplified the royal modernisation policies and processes through the construction of roads (thanon) and modern buildings like shophouses (tuk-thaew) on Rattanakosin Island. Rama IV ordered the building of Bangkok’s first modern road to demonstrate that the city was modern like the West. Westerners called this New Road, and Thais called it Thanon Charoen Krung (). Rama IV also wanted to improve the hygiene of the capital, because there were many complaints from Western residents such as English and American merchants, who said that the lack of a proper, dry road made travelling on land unsafe from contamination of wet path.264 They further mentioned the benefit of roads, which stimulated commercial activity and brought prosperity to Bangkok in the form of land taxes.265 The idea of building roads and shophouses was inspired by the tour of a nobleman named Somdet Chao Phraya to the British colony of Singapore in 1861. He saw how Singapore had been urbanised by the building of modern roads and rows of Chinese shophouses where Singaporean Chinese lived and worked. Somdet Chao Phraya introduced this idea to Rama IV (r. 1851–1868).266 The lifestyle of modern Chinese in Singapore was told of in Thai society, which inspired the Sino-Thais to live and work in shophouses, which they thought demonstrated that they were modern like the West, referring to the British colony in Singapore.

263 Askew, Bangkok: Place, Practice and Representation, 30–31, 33. 264 Thiphakhorawong, The Dynastic Chronicles. Bangkok Era. The Fourth Reign (AD 1851–1868), trans. Chadin (Kanjanavanit) Flood, with the assistance of E. Thadeus Flood (Tokyo: Centre for East Asia Cultural Studies, 1966), 260– 262. 265 Smith M., A Physician at the Court of Siam (Kuala Lumpur: Oxford University Press, 1982), 109. 266 Khumsupha M., “Changes in Urban Bangkok 1855–1909: The Impact of the Settlement of the British and their Subjects” (PhD diss., Chulalongkorn University, 2011). 172

Thereby, the first modern road, New Road, was built with modern construction technology from 1860–1862 on the south-east area of Rattanakosin Island, extending to the south. Rows of shophouses were built along both sides of New Road to handle the growing middle class culture among Sino-Thais and Westerners. This demonstrated the concept of mass housing and multipurpose building. Each shophouse was of two storeys, with an approximate width of four metres and an approximate depth of fifteen metres. The function of shophouses was highly versatile. The ground floor was for commercial uses – shops, offices, and warehouses, for instance – and the first floor was for domestic activities. However, most shophouses lacked basic sanitation facilities such as toilets, fire escapes, and ventilation.267 The modern building of roads and shophouses changed the spatial order of traditional Bangkok. It transformed the main transport routes among the lower class in Bangkok, who had previously travelled mainly by boat, from water to land. Some Sino-Thais provided a rickshaw service, also inspired by the British colony in Singapore. Modern city planning and land transport were superimposed on the traditional settlement of Bangkok. The construction of New Road with its rows of shophouses diminished the geographical hierarchy of water and land. Slowly, a Western way of life from the British colony of Singapore was integrated into the space of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model in Bangkok. The coming of a modern road in the form of New Road, and of the shophouses there, was Rama IV’s flexible strategy for integrating modernisation, borrowed from the way the British had colonised Singapore, into the urban space of Bangkok. He adapted tradition to modernity in the space of hybridity in Bangkok. The emerging modern architecture in Bangkok reflected changes in the class structure. Modern architecture and Western culture were among many ways that the idea of the middle class was introduced to the Sino-Thais, who understood that they did not live in the hierarchical society and settlement system of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model. However, the built environment of Bangkok was hierarchised by the settlement system of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model. Thus, the urban culture of Sino-Thais was one of many factors that

267 O'Neil M., Bangkok: A Cultural and Literary History (Oxford: Signal Books Limited, 2008), 50–51. 173

hybridised the space of Bangkok to be modern like the West. Indirectly influencing Rama IV’s response to the changing social class of the Sino-Thais was that building the road and shophouses generated more money for the city through land tax. Because the Bowring Treaty between Siam and Britain removed the royal monopoly on trade, Rama IV had to find alternative source of revenue.268 As a result, Rama IV built more roads and shophouses, such as Bamrung Mueang Road (whose name means ‘prospering the city’) on the northern side of New Road, several years after the construction of New Road. Bamrung Mueang Road also played an important role in hybridising Bangkok’s identity throughout the 20th century; it became more important when it was extended into Sukhumvit Road in the 1930s. However, Rama IV could not complete the legacy of royal modernisation policies and processes during his reign; he passed away in 1868 and one of his sons, the crown prince Chulalongkorn, ascended to the throne as Rama V.

King Chulalongkorn (Rama V, r. 1868–1910): Mastering modernisation and hybridising the Thai identity Rama V (r.1868–1910) continued his father’s legacy to make Bangkok a modern city throughout his 40-year reign applying modernisation policy influenced by the strategy of centralising his power and the national economy.269 Rama V further modernised Bangkok to be modern like the West, while strengthening the status of Bangkok as a ‘modern- sacred’ capital and a home of the Thai monarchy. In doing so, Rama V continued the construction of roads and shophouses around Rattanakosin Island and the surrounding area, which required financial resources. He began social reform in an attempt to gather the taxes needed to support his modernisation program.270 In his first step towards modernising Bangkokian society, Rama V abolished the inferior class of phrai and that (slave) in sakdina in 1874 because he aimed to promote the appearance of class equality in the eyes of the West. He also foresaw this would enable

268 Baker and Phongpaichit, A History of Thailand, 45. 269 Baker and Phongpaichit, A History of Thailand, 52–58. 270 Narumit S., Old Bridges of Bangkok (Bangkok: Siam Society, 1977), 41–68. 174

him to reduce the political influence of nobles by collecting taxes and commanding the lower class to work in their own families. Rama V intended to release the inferior class from the domination of the ruling families. Thus, phrai, that, and Sino-Thais, could work on their own and directly pay more taxes to the king.271 This also led to land reform. Rama V rejected the traditional system of land ownership, which designated all the land in Siam as belonging only to the king. He introduced title deeds, which allowed people to buy and sell land. Rama V’s land policy commercialised the land of Bangkok, making property ownership possible for a broader range of classes.272 Rama V’s reform changed the cultural meaning of land, or phaendin, from being a celestial realm to being human space, called tidin. In English, both phaendin and tidin meant land. However, phaendin had the sacred meaning that all land belonged to the king. Tidin meant land for ordinary people, and this term was widely used after the land reform. Significantly, the introduction of title deeds commercialised the land, decreasing its sacredness but increasing its value. This strengthened Bangkok’s financial status and the economic strength of Rama V. His land policy also gave birth to private property development, an activity established, for the most part, by elite and wealthy Sino-Thai families. Their economic advantage contributed to the urban expansion of Bangkok throughout the second half of the 19th century and at the beginning of the 20th century.273 The massive urbanisation plans of Rama V and private developers required significant financial resources. Rama V adopted an administration policy that made the whole kingdom of Siam into the modern country with Bangkok as the only centre. The king hired Western consultants from the United States and Britain, who lived in Bangkok and worked in the court. He compared these Western officials to well-finished books that were ready to use.274 Rama V and his government learned about modern systems of government from Western officials and applied this knowledge to reform plans that consolidated all political

271 Baker and Phongpaichit, A History of Thailand, 52–53. 272 Askew, Bangkok, 31, 33. 273 Baker and Phongpaichit, A History of Thailand, 99–100. 274 Numnonda T., “The First American Advisers in Thai History,” Journal of the Siam Society 62, no. 2, 122. 175

and economic power from around the country into Bangkok. Rama V’s modernisation policy transformed the country’s structure from the multiple states of Siam (a federation) to the single state of Thailand (a unitary state). In 1897, Rama V established a new political system of to change the state’s structure from multiple states to a single state, following the modernisation strategy formed from his tour to the British colonies in South East Asia and the advice of Prince Damrong, Rama V’s half-brother. Each monthon was subordinate to Bangkok and composed of a province, cities, amphoe (districts), tambon (local government units), and muban (villages) in descending order of size and importance. Rama V set Bangkok as the political centre, the head city of modern Siam. He conscripted troops and sent them to claim other kingdoms and cities in the area of present Thailand from the local and transformed them to be Bangkok’s monthon. Then, he sent his intendants to rule the monthon and collect taxes to be remitted to Bangkok.275 This enabled Rama V to maximise Bangkok’s economic efficiency, supporting the expanding urbanisation at the end of the 19th century. However, in terms of the sense of home in Bangkok, Rama V still preserved the traditional character of Bangkok, incorporating modern city planning into the hierarchical settlement of the city. He continued to build the network of roads, and modern architecture, superimposing these upon the traditional space of Rattanakosin Island. Some sprawling aquatic communities around Rattanakosin Island transformed into land-based settlements for commercial purposes. More rows of shophouses and public transportation such as the tram network were built around Bangkok to stimulate commercial activity from 1894 to 1968.276 Western firms established their offices, further spreading urban culture and the idea of the middle class to the Sino-Thais. The Sino-Thais set up their businesses in shophouses to sell and distribute goods. Commercialisation in Bangkok generated more taxes and economically supported the urbanisation program until the end of Rama V’s reign,277 while Rattanakosin Island remained important. Traditional architecture, such as the Grand Palace, royal palaces, and Buddhist temples on the sacred

275 Baker and Phongpaichit, A History of Thailand, 53, 56. 276 King R., Reading Bangkok, 62. 277 Baker and Phongpaichit, 99–104. 176

island still functioned for religious and royal purposes such as coronations, the of members of the royal family, and the king’s birthday celebrations. Rama V preserved Rattanakosin Island as a higher space, building modern palaces for the royal family on and around it. When he passed away in 1910, the Royal Playground on Rattanakosin Island was transformed into a sacred space for his .278 Therefore, the royal modernisation of Rama V integrated modernity into the traditional settlement of Bangkok. It represented the able response of Rama IV and Rama V to Western influence. Although Thailand lost some of its territory to Britain and France at the beginning of the 20th century,279 Rama IV and V balanced the external forces of the West and the internal force of the emerging Sino-Thai middle class. However, this did not change Bangkok to be modern like the West. It Westernised some parts of Bangkok while the heart of the Thai monarchy (Rattanakosin Island) coexisted with the Western space of Bangkok. The Thai identity in the space of Bangkok hybridised with modernity as a result of the royal modernisation of kings Rama IV and V.280

The People’s Party: Modernisation for the people and the weakening of Thai identity By the early 20th century, Bangkok had become one of the most developed cities in South East Asia. Rama V spent a significant amount of money in developing Bangkok to be modern like the West and building palaces to handle the expanding royal family. He also supported royal family members and some royal officials (Sino-Thais who served the court) to study in Europe. Rama V wanted them to bring the knowledge and ideas of modernity back to Bangkok to modernise it according to his modernisation policy.281 However, after Rama V passed away in 1910, a changing global economy affected Bangkok’s export sector. The successor of Rama V, his son Vajiravudh, became Rama VI (r. 1910–1925). During his reign, Bangkok’s assets of Rama V started to deteriorate as a consequence of his massive urbanisation at the turn of the 20th century. The cost of living increased, making people, including the Sino-Thai middle class in Bangkok, dissatisfied

278 Saichon, Somdet kromphraya damrong, 149. 279 Baker and Phongpaichit, A History of Thailand, 58–59. 280 Wyatt D. K., Thailand: A Short History (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2003), 238–239. 281 Baker and Phongpaichit, A History of Thailand, 74–76. 177

with the king. They criticised the government under the royal regime for failing to handle the economic hardship.282 Rama VI continued his father’s legacy, building the city’s first university, Chulalongkorn University, to honour him. This suggested that public buildings familiar in Western culture were adapted to the context of Bangkok to serve the ruling class. Rama VI planned to construct necessary infrastructure such as roads throughout the country, to expand the connection between Bangkok and the provinces.283 Rama VI rejected a push to transform from a royal absolutist regime to be more democratic. However, the influence of nationalism, brought by Thai modernists who studied in Europe, increased as demonstrated in public dissatisfaction with Rama VI.284 Unfortunately, in 1925, Rama VI became severely ill and died. His youngest brother, Prince Prajadhipok, ascended to the throne as Rama VII (r. 1925–1935), and tried to continue Rama V’s project of making the country modern like the West.285 However, under the reign of Rama VII, Bangkok underwent an economic and political crisis, worsening the situation and the royal regime of Rama VII (r. 1925–1935).286 In the late 1920s, a group of seven men established The People’s Party (khana ratsadon), and overthrew Rama VII on 24 June 1932, bringing the government of The People’s Party to rule the country.287 They turned Rama VII into a constitutional monarch – a king under democracy. Consequently, Rama VII quickly lost his power and his health, and finally abdicated in 1935.288 The presence of The People’s Party changed the project’s direction of royal modernisation policies and processes and replaced the royal regime with a democratic one. However, The People’s Party wanted to keep the Chakri dynasty in a constitutional monarchy similar to England, because they wanted to preserve the Thai king as a symbol

282 Rajchagool C., The Rise and Fall of the Thai Absolute Monarchy: Foundations of the Modern Thai State from Feudalism to Peripheral Capitalism (Bang Lamung District: White Lotus, 1994), 156. 283 Seidenfaden E., Guide to Bangkok with Notes on Siam (Bangkok: Royal State Railways of Siam, 1928), 90. 284 Vella W. F. and Vella D. B., Chaiyo!: King Vajiravudh and the Development of Thai Nationalism (Honolulu: University Press of Hawaiʻi, 1978), 66. 285 Batson B. A., The End of the Absolute Monarchy in Siam (Singapore: Oxford University Press, 1984), 30. 286 Batson, The End of the Absolute Monarchy, 88. 287 Baker and Phongpaichit, A History of Thailand, 116–119. 288 Na Pombhejara V., Pridi Banomyong and the Masking of Thailand’s Modern History (Bangkok, 1979), 78. 178

of the nation. Under the democratic regime, the status of the Thai king decreased so that he was just a symbol of the Thai nation. The king had no power to make any political decisions. Even though the royal regime had ended, the Chakri dynasty continued under the control of The People’s Party government. In 1935, the government agreed to choose ten- year-old Prince Ananda, a son of Prince and grandson of Rama V, to be Rama VIII (r. 1935–1946). During his reign, Rama VIII, because of his young age and Rama VII’s abdication, had no power. During Rama VIII’s reign there were two regents, first the regency council (1935–1944) and then Pridi Banomyong (1944–1945). The regents prevented Rama VIII from reaching the political space, and the royal modernisation program of Thai kings seemed to stop altogether and shifted to the hand of People’s Party government. Under the rule of the Thai government in 1939, the kingdom of Siam officially changed its name to Thailand, reflecting that it was the nation of the Thai people. Thailand in the 20th century was projected to be a democratic state and belonged to the Thai people. In the 1940s, the government passed a law to fill all the canals in the city, as it intended to urbanise the capital to be entirely like the West. Road-building and modern architectural construction, such as of the Defense of the Constitution Monument completed in 1939, continued without the involvement of Thai kings. Many modern buildings of the 1940s did not reflect the influence of the Thai monarchy, as could be seen from their names, and functions that served only the working class. It has been suggested that public took over the space of Bangkok.289 Under The People’s Party government, modernity invaded the heart of the Thai monarchy. Conceptually, the royal modernisation program continued by The People’s Party from the 1930s-50s had continued flattening the space of modern Bangkok. The hierarchy of water and land was utterly gone; all the land in Bangkok had become a place for a humans to live.

289 Baker and Phongpaichit, A History of Thailand, 121–126. 179

King Bhumibol (Rama IX, r. 1946–2016): American modernisation and the return of Thai identity During the Second World War, the United States came to the Far East and South East Asia to fight against the Axis powers.290 During the critical moment at the end of the Second World War, the Thai government was under pressure from the Allies and the Axis powers in the West and Japan in the Far East. When the war began, the Thai government had aligned itself with Japan to protect the country from being invaded and destroyed like others in the region.291 Then, when the allies of United States dominated the battle, the Thai government shifted to support them before the Second World War ended in 1945, to avoid paying war indemnities.292 Significantly, this political switch from the Thai government brought two advantages to Bangkok. Firstly, the United States became interested in investing in Bangkok. This indirectly brought more financial resources, advanced technology, and modern architecture to the city, especially in the private sector, in fields such as real-estate development.293 Secondly, it opened an opportunity for Rama IX to restore the Thai monarchy as he allied with the United States during the Cold War,294 which brought the United States to Asia as it attempted to stop the political growth of communism through South East Asia via China. During the Cold War period (1947–1991), most of the countries in the region were largely influenced by communist regimes, but Thailand was not.295 This was due to the flexible strategy of the government and Rama IX, who also indirectly revived the royal modernisation program while adapting the United States’ economic and political influences with the growth of the Sino-Thai middle class.296 King Bhumibol Adulyadej (Rama IX, r. 1946–2016), the younger brother of Rama VIII, ascended to the throne in 1946 at the age of nineteen following the mysterious death of Rama VIII.297 Also a young king, he initially had little power. During the early years of his

290 Baker and Phongpaichit, 144. 291 Haseman J. B., The Thai Resistance Movement during World War II (Chiang Mai: Silkworm Books, 2002), 49. 292 Baker and Phongpaichit, A History of Thailand, 137. 293 Thak. Thailand, 229. 294 Baker and Phongpaichit, 175–180. 295 Fineman D., A Special Relationship: the United States and Military Government in Thailand, 1947–1958 (Honolulu: University of Hawaiʻi Press, 1997), 173. 296 Baker and Phongpaichit, A History of Thailand, 150–155. 297 Baker and Phongpaichit, 142. 180

reign, he had almost no influence on the political space under the influence of The People’s Party government.298 However, after the Second World War ended and the Cold War started in 1947 as the conflict between the two global powers of American democracy and Soviet communism, the Thai government agreed to join the United States and declared Thailand a democratic country, with Rama IX (the developer king) as a symbol of the democratic monarchy.299 The government, under the leadership of Field Marshal Sarit Thanarat, allowed the US army to place air-force bases in Thailand to fight against the communist movements in other countries throughout South East Asia.300 Furthermore, in the mid- 20th century, Sino-Thai businesspeople and the rise of modern China301 put political and racial pressures on the government and Rama IX’s alliance with the United States. The modern China was also an emerging global power, and in the past Bangkok had been deeply associated with China, through phenomena such as the Chinese migration to Bangkok in the 19th century. In fact, the ruling dynasty and the majority of Bangkok’s population had some Chinese heritage.302 Rama IX and the government had to reach a compromise between the Western and Eastern powers. On the one hand, they compromised with the Sino-Thai middle class even though they were culturally and politically related to China. On the other hand, they allied with the United States to gain financial resources and advanced technology to develop Bangkok into a global metropolis. Sino-Thais’ economic and demographic dominance made them a power to balance with that of Rama IX and the United States in the political and social spaces of modern Bangkok.303 Although, there was a racial pressure between the Chinese heritage of the Thai dynasty and Bangkok’s population and the domination of the USA in the early years of Rama IX’s reign in the 1960s, Rama IX instead put forward the idea of reviving the aspect

298 Baker and Phongpaichit, 144–149. 299 Baker and Phongpaichit, 178. 300 Baker and Phongpaichit, 148–149. 301 Thanawat, Tamnan chiwit jao sua: 55 trakun phak 2 [Legendary Lives of the Jao Sua: 55 Families, Part 2], (Bangkok: Nation, 2001). 302 King R., Reading Bangkok, 5. 303 Baker and Phongpaichit, A History of Thailand, 207–208. 181

of Thai identity such as and loyalty to Rama IX to make the racial mix of the Sino-Thais as primarily Thai. It also distinguished being Chinese in Thailand as being more democratic Thai even though some local Chinese communities in Bangkok supported communism. 304 In 1949 the Phibun government (1948-1957), under Rama IX’s influence, restricted those Chinese who supported communism by limiting the enrolment to Chinese schools in favour of allying with the USA and supported Rama IX’s modernisation project.305 Rama IX’s deliberated solution reduced the racial pressure from the co-presence of the democratic USA and communism, so it allowed Bangkok to gain more financial resources and development from the USA to stop the spread of communism into Thailand. When Thailand’s neighbouring countries: Vietnam and Laos were taken over by communism regimes, the USA army built Thailand as the airforce base in 1969 and sent their army to attack North Vietnam and Laos from 1965-1968 in order to stop the spread of communism in Southeast Asia.306 As a reward for being an ally, the United States contributed a significant amount to the Thai economy.307 It also attracted some American and international firms to establish operations there, contributing advanced technology and modern architecture to local businesses in Bangkok. In the 1950s, the Thai government established the office of The National Economic and Social Development Plan, and in the 1960s it wrote the first national development plan to respond to urban expansion and rapid population growth in Bangkok.308 The government hired American consultants Litchfield, Whiting, Bowne and Associates in 1960 to draft Bangkok’s plan to improve the city’s infrastructure. The firm redrafted Bangkok’s plan to make it like a modern (automobile-dominated) city in the United States. The highway system was designed to decentralise the urban area and reduce its density, incorporating suburban areas following the existing canal system.309 It

304 Baker and Phongpaichit, A History of Thailand, 154-155. 305 Baker and Phongpaichit, 145. 306 Baker and Phongpaichit, 148–149. 307 Baker and Phongpaichit, 144–149. 308 Thailand. National Economic Development Board, Evaluation of The First Six-Year Plan 1961–1966 (Bangkok: The National Economic Development Board Office of the Prime Minister, 1967), 1–50. 309 Annual Report 1996 (Bangkok: Bangkok Bank, 1996). 182

also added more space and accessibility for the local private development industry to expand its mass-housing projects (allocated villages or mubanjadsaan) to the north, east, and south-east suburbs of Bangkok.310 The American plan reshaped the space of mid- 20th-century Bangkok to be like an American city. It transformed Bangkok into an automobile metropolis with a complicated road system like many modern cities in the West. There were many broad roads with up to six lanes, such as Ratchada Road in the north, Sukhumvit Road in the south-east, and Bang Na Road, which extended from Sukhumvit Road to the port in the south. These bigger roads were built in Bangkok to handle more complex modern buildings, rapid economic growth, and suburban expansion.311 The presence of American firms such as banks, hotels, department stores, advertising agencies, and fast-food franchises brought the Western culture of consumerism and nightlife to the society of Bangkok.312 In a short time, a large number of skyscrapers, apartments, and offices were built in the urban area of Bangkok. This accelerated economic growth, and increased urban population and urban expansion throughout the end of the 20th century. In the meantime, the urban development of Bangkok in the 1970s and 80s attracted more and more people from the hinterlands of Thailand to the capital.313 Construction booms in Bangkok required a significant number of builders, stimulating the migration of rural populations (khon baan-nok) to Bangkok, worsening the city’s traffic situation because it lacked proper infrastructure management.314 This demographic movement from outside Bangkok increased the resolve of the government to solve the traffic-congestion problem. In the 1970s, it established the Bangkok Metropolitan Administration (BMA) to formulate and implement policies to manage the urban environment of Bangkok, covering functions

310 PADCO, Bangkok Land Management Study, vol. 2 (Bangkok: National Housing Authority of Thailand and Asian Development Bank, 1987). 311 Durand-Lasserve A., “Speculation on Urban Land, Land Development and Housing Development in Bangkok: Historical Process and Social Function 1950–1980,” (paper presented at the Thai-European Seminar on Social Change in Contemporary Thailand, Amsterdam, 28–30 May 1980). 312 Ouyyanont P. and Yoshihiro T., “Aspects of the Place and Role of the Chinese in Late Nineteenth Century Bangkok,” Southeast Asia Studies 39, no. 3, 384–397. 313 Baker and Phongpaichit, A History of Thailand, 212–213. 314 Preyawanit N., “Controlling a Fast-Growing Urban Region: A Case Study in the Bangkok Metropolitan Region,” Na Jua 23 (2009), 219–243. 183

such as transportation, urban planning, waste management, housing, roads, and safety. Later on, at the turn of the 20th century, the BMA authorised construction of the Bangkok Mass Transit System (BTS), a sky-train line across the heart of Bangkok, where the traffic problem was concentrated. In the 1990s, the BTS was planned to be built in the urban area of Bangkok, running from the north to the south (the Sukhumvit Line) and from the centre to the west (the Silom Line).315 The presence of the United States and massive urbanisation in the second half of the 20th century turned Bangkok into a tourist destination. This was due to the exotic built environment of Bangkok, which still retained a sense of the past. The coexistence of new and old buildings characterised mid-20th-century Bangkok as a hybrid space of modernity and tradition.316 It suggested that although Thai kings were not involved in the modernisation program during the post-World War II era, the urban renovation of the royal modernisation program had permanently integrated modernity into the traditional settlement, as could be seen on Rattanakosin Island and in the modern urban planning of Bangkok. It implied that Bangkok was still a space of hybridisation between Sino-Thai and Western culture, and Thai tradition.317 Physically, town planning based on the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model had hybridised with urbanism in a way that preserved traditional settlement. It did not Westernise Bangkok’s space to be like other modern cities in Asia. This suggested that Bangkok was influenced by globalisation but able to manipulate the old settlement system to be compatible with urbanisation. On the other hand, involvement with the United States empowered Rama IX as a democratic (developer) king.318 The king openly supported the idea of democratic regime while emphasising the importance of Thai tradition (Hinduism and Buddhism) in dealing with political instability.319 These notions were spread through mass media and the educational system, creating a social norm

315 King, Reading Bangkok, 128–130. 316 Lewis G., “Capital of Desire: Bangkok as a Regional Media Metropolis,” Social Semiotics 8, no. 2 & 3, 239–254. 317 Reynold C. J., “Globalization and Cultural Nationalism in Modern Thailand,” in Southeast Asia Identities: Culture and the Politics of Representation in , , Singapore and Thailand, ed. J.S. Kahn (Singapore: ISEAS, 1998), 120–124. 318 Baker and Phongpaichit, A History of Thailand, 180. 319 Thak, Thailand, 156. 184

based in a Thai revivalist movement that conceptualised Thai people as needing to preserve the Thai identity while adapting to the modern world.320 Furthermore, this social phenomenon of Bangkok in the postmodern world produced Thai traditionalist scholars that claimed to study modern Thai culture or Thainess (kwanphenthai). This group of Thai traditionalists defined ‘new Thai culture’ as being like the West from the 19th century while deliberately retaining some parts of Thai culture.321 Contradictorily, the Thai traditionalists criticised Western culture, particularly ‘pop-culture’, as being inappropriate to 20th-century Thai culture,322 while barely accepting Thai culture before the advent of royal modernisation as being truly local.323 This reflected the depth of cultural hybridisation in Thai society. Rama IX became the cultural leader of a democratic-traditional ideal, making Thai kings stronger and more stable in the eyes of Thai society and the world. The royal modernisation program under the reign of Rama IX, was quite different from when it began in the reign of Rama IV (r. 1851–1868) because Rama IX did not directly involve himself in urbanising Bangkok. Instead, the king took the benefit of American influence in South East Asia, grasping the opportunity to restore the Thai monarchy in the cultural space of Bangkok. In doing so, he applied the concept of cultural hybridisation from royal modernisation policies and processes through to social intervention via modern media. Rama IX embraced the concept of cultural hybridisation through the mind of the people by reminding Sino-Thais that the Thai-self remained within Thai people’s minds. While Bangkok physically transformed to be more Westernised than ever before, Rama IX influenced the spiritual space in the mind of the people.324 This is reflected in the juxtaposition of traditional and modern buildings in modern Bangkok. The royal modernisation policies and processes of Rama IX was far more

320 Connors, Democracy and National Identity, 136. 321 Kahn J. S., ed. Southeast Asia Identities. Culture and the Politics of Representation in Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore and Thailand (Singapore: Institution of Southeast Asia Studies, 1998), 130–131. 322 Connors, Democracy and National Identity, 140. 323 Karnchanaporn, Fear and Domestic Architecture, 22–24. 324 King, Reading Bangkok, 186-187. 185

sophisticated. The end of the royal regime in 1932 significantly suppressed Thai kings’ control over the political and physical spaces of 20th-century Bangkok. However, under the ‘flexible strategy’ of Rama IX, the government and Sino-Thais restored the constitutional-democratic Thai kings in the cultural space of Bangkok. This constituted a process of mental hybridisation in the mind of Sino-Thais. Thus, the royal modernisation program creates complexity in understanding the Thai identity at the end of the 20th century, represented in the city and architecture of Bangkok.325 The city planning and buildings of Bangkok seemed to become modern like the West, but the culture of living among Bangkokians sometimes reflected Thai identity. This is demonstrated by physical and mental hybridisation in the form of Bangkok’s modern architecture. Royal modernisation hybridised the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model in Bangkok with urbanism from the West. It created a modern Hindu-Buddhist urbanism that represented the coexistence of Western culture and Thai identity. Royal modernisation policies and processes represented cultural hybridisation influenced by Thai kings, Sino-Thais and Western powers (Europe in the 19th century and the United States in the mid-20th century). It demonstrated how Western culture indirectly penetrated through a combination of a bottom-up process (the rise of the Sino- Thai middle class) and a top-down process (the modernisation process of Thai kings), through which Thai society adapted globalisation.326 The process of hybridising Western culture into Bangkok was done in two ways: (1) cultural integration of the lower class (Sino-Thai) through doing businesses with the Westerners and (2) political pressure on Thai kings from the Western powers. The hybridisation of Thai and Western culture was interpreted through city planning and the buildings of modern Bangkok. Sino-Thais adapted Western culture such as modern architecture and urban living through cultural exchange. They integrated their understanding of Thai culture to the Western thinking system. Thus, Western powers brought modernity to Bangkok through cultural channels. Western culture hybridised into Thai society indirectly, presenting another form of

325 Baker and Phongpaichit, A History of Thailand, 224-227. 326 Askew, Bangkok: Place, Practice and Representation, 48-53. 186

Western influence in the context of Bangkok. However, during the era of Western influence, Sino-Thais could not interpret their hybrid culture in the physical space of Bangkok. Instead, the space of Bangkok was influenced by the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model, suggesting that Thai kings were the most powerful people in Bangkok in the 19th century (figure 4.15).

Figure 4.15: The process of hybridising Thai culture with Western culture in modern society.

The process of hybridisation of Thai culture through modern city planning and building in Bangkok came from ‘bottom-up’ and ‘top-down’ processes. The merging of Western culture into the minds of Sino-Thais created demand for the modern housing industry in Bangkok, while the aggressive growth of Western influence in South East Asia pushed Thai kings to implement physical change.327 The presence of colonial powers in the

327 Askew, Bangkok: Place, Practice and Representation, 27-29. 187

mid-19th century had initiated the movement of modern culture into Thai society. However, it had not Westernised the way Thai people lived. The presence of Thai kings hybridised Thai culture with that of the West by integrating modern architecture into traditional Bangkok. This created a multilayered understanding of living incorporating Thai and Western notions.328 The decline of the absolute Thai monarchy at the beginning of the 20th century, and the 1932 revolution of The People’s Party, redirected the royal modernisation program of Thai kings. However, during the 1960s, Rama IX restored royal modernisation policies and processes to the cultural space of Thai society. The physical condition of Bangkok was fully urbanised between the 1950s and 1990s, without the same kind of influence of the Thai monarchy that had been experienced in the mid-19th century. However, the alliance between Thailand and the United States presented a chance to indirectly prevent Bangkok from the influence of communism during the Cold War, which presented a chance to revive the royal regime as a hybrid between Thai and Western traditions of government. To the world outside, Rama IX represented Thailand as a modern country, while within Thai society, royal modernisation policies and processes cultivated the concept of adapting Thai tradition to modernity.329 The modernisation of Rama IX was not directly implemented in the physical space of Bangkok but was performed through cultural hybridisation facilitated by modern media.330 This cultural phenomenon embraced the intention of royal modernisation policy, now modernising Thai identity to be like the West in the mind of Sino-Thais. This was demonstrated through the hybrid character of modern Bangkok.

Conclusion

This chapter has provided historical background giving context to the thesis, covering the origin of Thai culture, making Bangkok sacred, the modernisation programs of the Thai kings and the impact of Chinese migration. These discussions provide the context for

328 Askew, Bangkok: Place, Practice and Representation, 291-294. 329 Baker and Phongpaichit, A History of Thailand, 230-232. 330 Baker and Phongpaichit, A History of Thailand, 226. 188

analysing the changing and hybridising Thai sense of home. The chapter discusses hybridisation in Thai society as the main mechanism in creating Thai identity. Thai kings are related to cultural hybridisation, as they implemented the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model as a model for ruling society and reframing the way Thai people understood their way of life. This chapter has also discussed in detail how people and culture in Bangkok hybridised Hinduism and Buddhism with the local culture of animism. Firstly, it looked at how Thai kings played a role in hybridising Thai culture with the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model and sakdina. Secondly, it discussed how the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model and sakdina were incorporated into the settlement system of Bangkok. It discussed how the landscape of Bangkok was settled to reflect the concept of coexistence and hierarchy between the human and celestial realms. Thirdly, it explained how Thai kings made Bangkok a sacred city based on the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model. And finally, it further discussed the contradiction of Bangkok’s being both a modern and sacred city. The process of cultural hybridisation related to the royal modernisation policy of Thai kings from Rama IV (r. 1851–1868) to Rama IX (r. 1946–2016) as the main mechanism in hybridising the Thai sense of home. Western influence in the mid-19th century indirectly influenced Rama IV in beginning the royal modernisation program. Rama V (r. 1868–1910) continued his father’s legacy by adapting the way the West had colonised many cities in Asia to his reform plan. He restructured the way Thai kings administered Bangkok and the country to centralise all resources in the capital. In doing so, he supported the royal modernisation program throughout his reign. The reforms of Rama V weakened the royal regime, leaving Rama VI (r. 1910–1925) and Rama VII (r. 1925–1935) barely able to continue the royal modernisation policies and processes. When Rama VII was overthrown by The People’s Party in 1932, The People’s Party government selected Rama VIII (r. 1935–1946) as a national symbol. During his reign, Rama VIII had little power, and the concepts of old Bangkok and the royal modernisation policy by Thai kings were not followed. Under the rule of The People’s Party, the space and architecture of Bangkok

189

were built to serve the middle class Sino-Thais. Finally, the Cold War, continuing through the 1960s, and the presence of the United States in Thailand during the reign of Rama IX (r. 1946–2016), helped revive the royal modernisation program of Thai kings.

The next chapter continues from the first half of the discussion in this chapter, analysing the Thai concept of home in the existential space of Bangkok as manifested through town planning and buildings following the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model. It analyses the space and architecture of old Bangkok at the phenomenological level, according to the theoretical framework from chapter 2 and the ‘language of architecture’ from chapter 3. The second half of the discussion in this present chapter, dealing with royal modernisation policies and processes, is applied to later chapters. These analyse the process of the changing and hybridising Thai idea of home during the royal modernisation program of kings Rama IV through Rama IX, as expressed in changing city planning and building activity in Bangkok.

190

5. Bangkok before modernisation, 1783–1851

Introduction

This chapter analyses the Thai sense of home in the architecture of old Bangkok through the idea of the ‘language of architecture’. It discusses how the Thai idea of home was created through the cultural hybridisation of local animist beliefs and the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model, via the mediums of town planning, building, and space. It incorporates theories of place and the sense of home from Western scholars, and in particular the concept of reading the ‘language of architecture’ to disclose a sense of home taken from the work of Christian Norberg-Schulz, to explore how Thai people create their idea of home in the geographical and cultural contexts of Bangkok. This chapter applies the theory of place/sense of home discussed in chapter 2, and the research method involving the ‘language of architecture’ discussed in chapter 3, in the light of the historical background of Thai culture from chapter 4, to analyse the existential space of traditional Bangkok. It explores how the space of Bangkok was created from the natural landscape, through the hybridisation of local culture and the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model, at the phenomenological level. The chapter analyses the ‘language of architecture’ of old Bangkok through its ‘four modes of dwelling’ to explore the city’s spatial structure and how its spaces were created by Thai people and processed through Thai culture, reflecting the spirit of place in Bangkok before modernisation through architecture. The chapter then discusses how the Thai concept of home interpreted the spatial and architectural systems of old Bangkok to reflect Thai identity produced by cultural hybridisation, building Bangkok into the sacred capital of Thailand.

Exploring the space and architecture of traditional Bangkok

The waterscape of the Chao Phraya Basin was characterised by the flow of rivers from the interior of the Asian continent to the Gulf of Thailand. In what is now Thailand, the northern mountain region was the origin of four main rivers, the Ping, Wang, Yom, and 191

Nan. These northern rivers flowed from the highlands to the lower wetlands of the Chao Phraya Basin, where they combined into the Chao Phraya River, Mae nam Chao Phraya (figure 5.1).

Figure 5.1: Thailand in the 19th century, showing the rivers that form the Chao Phraya River.

The word mae nam, in Thai culture, had a deeper meaning than merely the flow of water. In Thai, mae meant ‘mother’ and nam meant ‘water’, so mae nam was the ‘mother of water’. It was the origin of life, like a mother giving birth to a child. The flow of the river from north to south brought nutritious earth and aquatic life downstream, and over thousands of years formed a fertile basin around the Chao Phraya River at its mouth on the Gulf of Thailand that proved a desirable area for habitation. From ancient times, the river was the most convenient and fastest way to travel, connecting aquatic settlements on mainland South East Asia. Each town constructed 192

canals surrounding the river, forming a network of paths connecting their town to the region via the waterway.331 At the same time, the clusters of canals created a sense of being inside an aquatic space. The water-based settlement system intensified urban activity and religious ceremonies centred on the water, cultivating a corresponding culture and lifestyle. The rivers and canals were spaces involved in creating the concept of home in these areas, and the people embraced the water in almost every aspect of their lifestyle, growing and harvesting food there, building aquatic settlements and amphibious architecture, and worshipping naak (naga in Sanskrit; a snake-like water deity in Hinduism and Buddhism).332 Thai culture was deeply associated with water, and regarded being in the water as having an ‘interior quality’333. Throughout the history of the country, most settlements were built around rivers and canals, whether the capital or subordinate towns.

Transforming the landscape of Bangkok from Ayutthaya From the 16th century, the rise of the Ayutthaya kingdom came to modify the physical appearance of the Chao Phraya River. Figure 5.2 shows how the natural flow of the Chao Phraya River, interrupted by the lines which in present called klong bangkok noi and klong bangkok yai, was altered by the creation of canals by four Ayutthayan kings who reigned in the period from 1533 to 1733. The first phase of modifying the waterscape of the Chao Phraya Basin began in the reign of King Chairacha (r. 1533–1546), in response to Ayutthaya’s trade with Western merchants. King Chairacha commanded the creation of a first canal to enclose the area which was to become klong bangkok yai in the present. Later, King Chakkraphat (r. 1549–1568) commanded the creation of a second canal to enclose the area that is klong bangkok noi in the present. King Pasat Thong (r. 1629–1633) ordered the creation of a third canal to enclose the area of klong bangkok noi for the second time, losing the utility of the second klong. Finally, King Tai Sa (r. 1709–1733) completed modification of the river in the area of present-day Koh Kret (Kret Island). This

331 Jumsei, Naga, 169. 332 Tiptus and Bongsadadt, Houses in Bangkok, 27–28. 333 Jumsei S., “Water Towns,” in Naga: Cultural Origins in Siam and the West Pacific (New York: OUP South East Asia, 1988), 138-172. 193

was done for transport and military purposes in Nonthaburi (a province of present-day Thailand, north of Bangkok). By this time, natural erosion and flooding had widened the first canals, making the Chao Phraya River straighter and more accessible. By the 18th century, the Chao Phraya Basin had become a good place for a trading port.334

Figure 5.2: Modifications of the Chao Phraya River from the Ayutthaya era.

The Ayutthaya kingdom transformed the waterscape of the Chao Phraya Basin into a space under its domination, making the aquatic space of the river one of its main arteries. This geographical domination demonstrated one of many ways in which Bangkok was influenced by Ayutthaya. Although the river and canals symbolised the movement of sacred creatures (naak), the traditional beliefs of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model construed

334 King, Reading Bangkok, 2–3. 194

aquatic space as inferior to land. The model classified aquatic space as subordinate, and in Thailand, the concept of celestial beings from the land dominating over humans in the water reflected the hierarchy of sakdina, the class system of Thai feudalism. Thus, the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model made the land the space of a higher realm, conceptualising it as a part of Mount Meru, the sacred mountain at the centre of the universe. The change in the function of land inspired by the concept of creating a hierarchy within geography turned the Chao Phraya Basin into a space where humans and gods met. It represented a hybridisation of the sakdina regime associated with the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model with the local culture, through the construction of the geocultural space of Bangkok. Sakdina made the land a sacred space off-limits to humans, and the water a profane space where humans lived.

Applying the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model to Bangkok The local people in the area of present-day Bangkok had an aquatic culture, and lived in harmony with the environment of the Chao Phraya Basin. Their life was centred on aquatic space: their world was in the water. The Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model conceptualised the land as a point of connection with heaven, where celestial beings resided and controlled the world – or the water. The sacred land had power over the water. The Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model empowered the land-based settlement with authority over the water-based settlement, and we can see how from the Ayutthaya period, the land-based settlement of the celestial rulers exercised its power through the modification of the Chao Phraya River. Ayutthaya’s influence on the Chao Phraya Basin inspired King Yodfa (Rama I, r. 1783–1809) to carry the tradition of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model into the construction of a second Ayutthaya on the Chao Phraya River.335 The name Bangkok honoured a local settlement, an aquatic village (bang) of olive oil (makok or kok). In 1782, after Rama I overthrew King of the Thonburi kingdom, he chose the eastern side of

335 Baker and Phongpaichit, A History of Thailand, 32. 195

the Chao Phraya River as the site of his capital. He then ordered the ritual of lak mueang (see the section “Sanctifying Bangkok” in chapter 4) to be performed to restore the spirit of Ayutthaya in Bangkok. The 18th century, when Bangkok was established, was a chaotic time in Thai history following the fall of Ayutthaya. Rice exports and trade with China by sea were part of the strategy of the Thai kings to restore the country’s economy. Waves of Chinese migration from southern China came to the capital, and their culture of doing business, along with the influence of Western culture in the 19th century, stimulated social change. As a result, a large number of canals were created around Bangkok as infrastructure to handle the increasing population of Chinese migrants and Sino-Thais, along with the growing economy of the city. Before the construction of roads, Bangkok was one of the most abundant rice- production centres in South East Asia. The growth of rice production and trading among the Sino-Thais and Westerners in the city mostly took place in and around the Chao Phraya River and the canal network. Parts of the Chinese and Sino-Thai population worked as distributors, importing technology from the Western world and exporting rice to China and other parts of South East Asia, while Western merchants started to establish businesses such as banks, hotels, and factories along the Chao Phraya River. While aiming to be a second Ayutthaya, Bangkok had a different character as an international port, but the overlay of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model on its urban space added a sacred dimension to the identity of the rivers and canals by placing them in a relationship with the heavenly space of adjacent land. Hence, the new Ayutthaya constructed by the Chakri dynasty was a capital of hybridity and hybrid Thai sense of home between the local culture and Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model.

The ‘four modes of dwelling’ in traditional Bangkok Phenomenologically, Bangkok at the end of the 18th century moved the sense of divinity from Ayutthaya to hybridise with the local culture on the eastern side of the Chao Phraya River. Rattanakosin Island, in the middle of Bangkok, was at the centre of the new cosmic order in the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model, being the sacred counterpart to the 196

existing water-based settlement. By occupying this position, it created verticality in Bangkok’s geocultural space, as local identities associated with aquatic dwelling hybridised with the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model to create a dualism of sacred and profane spaces. This dualism within Bangkok presented two characteristics in the existential space, of flexibility and hierarchy, creating a spatial structure in which sacred-terrestrial and profane-aquatic spaces overlapped (figure 5.3).

197

Figure 5.3: The architectural reflection of existential space (‘four modes of dwelling’) in old Bangkok. 198

On the one hand, the existential space of Bangkok used the geographical difference between water and land to create or embody hierarchy in Bangkok society, separating the lower and upper classes. The distinction divided Bangkok into two spaces – the sacred and profane. However, these spaces remained inseparable and overlapping because physically they were in the same town. This distinction was related to the public and private functions of buildings in Bangkok, which worked differently in different contexts. On land, temples were a semi- domestic space for the ruling class, while in the water, the temple was a formal public building. Elements of public space also presented in individual houses of the aquatic settlement. This versatility in the hierarchical settlement of Bangkok reflected how the new Ayutthaya was different; its settlement system was not rigidly hierarchical like the old Ayutthaya where the land and water settlements were clearly separated. This represented the overlap between the two kinds of spaces in the dualistic Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model. Bangkok was intended to be the new centre of the kingdom of Siam in the 18th century, and the way its hierarchy hybridised with the informality of the local culture distinguished it from the former capital Ayutthaya, whose sacredness it strove to imitate. The existential space of Bangkok saw cultural hybridisation between locals, Chinese migrants, and the Thai monarchy, at the same time as dualism and overlap were visible in the ‘four modes of dwelling’. Bangkokians lived in dual spaces of profaneness and sacredness, and the Thai sense of home was created through a process of hybridisation, as was the spirit of place in Bangkok.

199

Settlement: Assembling sacred and profane spaces

Figure 5.4: The kingdom of Siam, including Bangkok as the capital along with smaller cities.

Following the establishment of the Chakri dynasty by Rama I in 1783, a new capital on the eastern side of Chao Phraya River rose to symbolise political stability under the new king. To transform Bangkok into a great centre of the kingdom, Rama I sent out his army and diplomats to gather artisans and labourers from the kingdom’s north-eastern (present-day

200

Laos) and eastern territory (present-day Cambodia) (figure 5.4). The king asked them to build the Grand Palace, other palaces for the royal family, and Buddhist temples, using their best knowledge and materials such as gold, mosaics, and high-quality timbers like teak. Through this construction effort, he intended to imbue Bangkok with the magnificence of Ayutthaya, as did the construction projects of later Thai kings.336

Figure 5.5: The strong relationship between old Bangkok and the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model.

Moreover, Rama I made Bangkok the symbolic centre of the kingdom by moving the Emerald Buddha there from Thonburi. This signified that the area of Rattanakosin Island was identified with the legendary city of Ayodhya (the sacred area of Mount Meru in the Hinduism), the setting of the Ramayana (Ramakien in Thai) and the birthplace of Rama (Phra Ram in Thai), after whom the later Rama VI named himself and his

336 Thiphakorawong and Yunesuko, The Dynastic Chronicles, 281. 201

predecessors in the Chakri dynasty. In this identification, Bangkok occupied the position of heaven in the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model (figure 5.5). The Emerald Buddha symbolised that Indra, the king of the gods, lived on Rattanakosin Island. The presence of the Emerald Buddha in the Grand Palace represented that Bangkok was built by Indra for Phra Ram (Rama), and that Rama I and the later Chakri kings were the avatars of Vishnu in the form of god-kings: the protectors of the dynasty, the kingdom, and the Thai identity (sense of home) that Thai kings preserved via royal modernisation policies and processes.

Superimposing the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model on the aquatic town of Bangkok The emergence of Bangkok as the new capital of Siam in 1782 transformed the wetlands on the eastern side of the Chao Phraya River into sacred land. This hybridised the local water-based settlement by superimposing the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model on the existing aquatic town. The flowing, elliptical line of the Chao Phraya River drew in the western edge of Rattanakosin Island, while Rama I commanded his workforce to create the Bang Lamphu canal from the north and the Ong Ang canal from the south on the eastern edge of Rattanakosin Island, symbolically outlining the sacred area of Mount Meru in the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model.

202

Figure 5.6: The traditional settlement of Bangkok. Rattanakosin Island is the orange area, and the blue marks represent the aquatic settlement.

According to the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model, Mount Meru was a perfect circle. However, the shape of Rattanakosin Island was more like an oval or an egg, following the organic morphology of the canal network (figure 5.6). This imperfection made Bangkok a different kind of sacred capital. The organic settlement system around the Chao Phraya River made Bangkok’s town planning create a space of overlap between hierarchy and informality, and between sacred and profane spaces of the Hindu-Buddhist dualism. The geographical influence of the Chao Phraya River and the random creation of canals made the divine centre of Bangkok, Rattanakosin Island, ignore notions of geometric design and lack the symmetry of old Ayutthaya and Mount Meru (figure 4.9). The asymmetrical design of Rattanakosin Island meant Bangkok had no clear urban centre. In fact, there was a conceptual centre: Rattanakosin Island itself. There, an open

203

space with a rectangular shape, whose long edge was oriented north and south to use the space between the and the Grand Palace, took on special importance. Locally, people called it (the Royal Playground). On the death of kings in the Chakri dynasty, the court would direct the building of a pyramid-like structure with five peaks on top, called phra meru, Mount Meru, symbolising the king’s ascent to heaven to be reborn as a god (Vishnu) again.337 Once, the royal funeral was completed, the phra meru was burned to signify that the king had already ascended. The urban centre, in the context of Bangkok, was ephemeral because while the king was alive, he was the living centre in the mind of Bangkokians. In this sense, the centre of Bangkok was a process that transformed from human to architectural embodiment following the king’s passing. This temporary architectural system of a sacred land building showed the high degree of informality within the hierarchical settlement.

The dualism of sacred and profane spaces The Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model incorporated the hierarchy of sacred architecture from the palaces and Buddhist temples with the informal aquatic settlement. However, the influence of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model was challenged by the informal planning of the local people. This made Bangkok a hybrid space where the gods (Thai kings) and humans (Sino-Thais) met. The sacred Bangkok, under the influence of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model, expressed a Thai idea of home involving the internal contradiction between flexibility and hierarchy. The people of Bangkok were gathered to dwell in a hybrid way, and were organised to live in a hierarchical settlement where sacred and profane spaces overlapped.

337 Jumsei, Naga, 168. 204

Figure 5.7: The built environment of the Grand Palace. Walking in the internal area of the Grand Palace, where the naga ornaments were used to decorate the and chedi and there was a yak status standing on the right of the photography.

Figure 5.8: Looking from within the built environment of the Grand Palace.

The royal and sacred buildings on Rattanakosin Island formed the central point of Hindu-Buddhist Bangkok. The divine architecture signified that the land was the centre of 205

the heavenly realm, and the land-based architectural system inspired by the cosmological model transformed the walled space of the island into a new version of the sacred city of Ayutthaya (figures 5.7 and 5.8). Walls with defensive towers built around Rattanakosin Island created the feeling that Bangkok would never be defeated. And at the level of ritual, Rama I ordered Brahmins to perform the lak mueang ceremony at the north-east of the Grand Palace, and had the town shrine built close by, spiritually ensuring that Bangkok would be protected from ill fortune. These structures on Rattanakosin Island created a sacred verticality across the Chao Phraya Basin. The image of heaven on earth was visualised on the horizon of the water-based settlement via the divine terrestrial architecture of places such as the Grand Palace, Front Palace, Royal Playground, the town shrine, the royal palaces of the king’s relations, and Buddhist temples. The superimposing of sacred buildings on the wetlands of Bangkok created a new visualisation of earthly heaven, which was different from the old Ayutthaya. Bangkok, as the ‘capital of gods and angels’, seemed to be floating on the water. This new version of the celestial capital of Ayodhya was a sinking heaven, a reality that contradicted Rama I’s concept of restoring Ayutthaya. In the aquatic space of Bangkok, the existing settlement morphology of flexibility was influenced by the superimposition of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model. The water-based settlement gained a hierarchical horizontal axis (a complex boundary) as a result of hybridising the conceptual vertical axis implied by the presence of Rattanakosin Island. The river, canals, and walls that enclosed the sacred island created an inner boundary within Bangkok. Natural and human-made urban elements physically emphasised how the heart of Bangkok was a divine inside space within the urban space as a whole. It created a hierarchy in the urban interior of Bangkok, which now had multiple levels of being inside, strongly reflecting the class concept of sakdina through divisions within the settlement. Thus, in Bangkok divinity became associated with interiority: more inside meant more sacred, while being more peripheral signified less sacredness.

206

Figure 5.9: Penetration of canals and water settlement inside Rattanakosin Island. Canals are represented by thick blue lines.

The profane space of rivers and canals that surrounded the island was peripheral and had a weaker interior quality. However, the plan of Rattanakosin Island shows that lower-class settlements were not always peripheral to the sacred space. The internal network of canals and the sprawl of aquatic communities inside Rattanakosin Island demonstrated a contradiction (figure 5.9). Conceptually, the sacred space of the island seemed to represent Bangkok’s hierarchy and superiority as a celestial capital. However, in return, it was influenced by the informal aquatic settlements that intruded into the island. This overlapping morphology shows flexibility in combination with hierarchy.

207

Figure 5.10: An illustration of sacred life on land on the walls of Wat Pho. This image shows how the informal settlement of the local influenced the organic arrangement of the sacred land-based buildings.

The construction of Rattanakosin Island and the sacred architecture projects of Rama I caused hybridisation to the aquatic space of the Chao Phraya River by applying an imported hierarchical concept that sanctified the land-based settlement as a superior space while making the aquatic settlement founded on local traditions subordinate (figure 5.10).

208

Figure 5.11: A 3D conceptual model of the hierarchical-overlapping settlement of Bangkok. This image created in Revit shows the hierarchical-overlapping settlement of Bangkok, looking towards Rattanakosin Island from its east (part of the case study area) in the 1800s to 1850s, before the modernisation of Rama IV (r. 1851– 1868). Rama IV commanded the building of modern roads and buildings, which extended to the eastern side of Rattanakosin. From the 1930s to the 21st century, further developments included Sukhumvit Road and more advanced modern buildings such as offices, shopping malls, and apartments. Orange objects in the render signify sacred land- based architecture such as royal palaces and Buddhist temples. (Source: Based on Phinit Phranakorn.)

The hybridity of the hierarchical-overlapping morphology of Bangkok’s settlement constructed a new Thai sense of home. The vertical overlap of water and land settlements situated the existential space of the city between the lower and upper realms, while the physical boundary of city walls delimited the space of celestial beings on Rattanakosin Island. However, connectivity via waterways also saw sacred-terrestrial buildings sprawl outside the walled area of Rattanakosin Island, demonstrating how, at some point, the informality of the water-based settlement influenced the hierarchy of the divine, land- 209

based settlement (figure 5.11). The extension of sacred architecture into the water-based settlement showed that the overlapping-hierarchical morphology of Bangkok had brought the heavenly realm close to earth. It hybridised Bangkok’s urban space by infusing it with sacredness and hierarchy, which exposed the aquatic space to the sky, making Bangkok a ‘sacred-aquatic’ place.

Figure 5.12: 3D conceptual modelling of a view from Rattanakosin island. This image illustrates the view that Thai kings would have had when looking towards the aquatic settlement to the east of Rattanakosin Island. It is based on the same model as figure 5.11. Rattanakosin Island is the orange shaded area. (Source: Based on Phinit Phranakorn.)

Integrating the hierarchy implied by divine land architecture into the local settlement of Bangkok created multiple layouts for urban space. The hierarchical- overlapping settlement provided two types of urban experience. Standing in the sacred buildings of Rattanakosin Island, such as the Grand Palace, and looking towards the sprawl of aquatic communities on the Chao Phraya River and the canal network (figure 5.12) gave a sense of being superior. Taking a higher, central position within the walled area gave the

210

experience of being a god looking out on the human world. This made the viewers (Thai kings) feel they had the ultimate power to rule the kingdom.

Figure 5.13: A 3D conceptual model showing lower-class aquatic space. This image, based on the same model as figure 5.11, shows how the lower class lived in the aquatic space of the eastern side of Ratanakosin Island. The view is towards Rattanakosin Island, looking westward across the communities of the water settlement. The people of these settlements were considered to be inferior to the Thai kings, who lived on the land. Rattanakosin Island is the orange shaded area. (Source: Based on Phinit Phranakorn.)

Looking towards Rattanakosin Island from the aquatic communities, on the other hand, gave a sense of being inferior to the land-dwellers (figure 5.13). This provided the experience of being a human looking up to the higher realm and wondering at the superiority of land, whose denizens had the power to influence earthly life. This kind of experience reflected the social dimension of spatial hierarchy, giving the land-based

211

settlement a higher status than the aquatic settlement. This set up a vertical division between sacred and profane space that would later be ‘flattened’ by modernisation. This did not only happen in relation to Rattanakosin Island, and the process of sanctification was not restricted to the land. It also appeared in the ‘lower’ spaces. People from the lower settlement deliberately made their houses sacred, like sacred land architecture, through the construction rite. This house-building rite reflected the hybridisation of sacred and profane spaces through the versatility of the water settlement within Bangkok’s hierarchical framework. It demonstrated an inherent-contradiction in the way water and land settlements, architecture, and inferior and superior classes interacted with each other. Bangkok could be presented as mainly a sacred centre; however, when looking deep into the settlement system, it could be seen that Bangkok was a capital that brought together multiple realms and centres.

The phenomenon of being inside the inside The way that the overlapping morphology of Bangkok combined hierarchy with informality demonstrated how the sakdina regime organised the settlement system of Bangkok. Sakdina created a ‘centre within the centre’ (Rattanakosin Island within Bangkok, the capital) by expressing the social division of the higher class (the Thai aristocracy) from the lower class (Sino-Thais) in the urban form. Within the ultimate centre of Rattanakosin Island, the void of the Royal Playground between the Front Palace and Grand Palace openly represented its emptiness as a centre of Bangkok. Conceptually, the space of the Royal Playground presaged the appearance of Mount Meru during ceremonies such as the royal cremation. It gave Bangkok invisible cardinal points and sanctified its surrounding sacred architecture in the terrestrial space. Thus, when people entered the land settlement or accessed the space of Rattanakosin Island called phra nakorn, meaning the area of celestial space, the area of Mount Meru, according to the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model, the presence of the Royal Playground gave them an experience of sacredness. It acted as a connection point to heaven, opening the land- based settlement of Bangkok to the sky. The magnificent sacred architecture that surrounded the Royal Playground created a divine moment of being in the middle of the 212

celestial capital of Ayodhya. Thus, being inside Rattanakosin Island was like walking in the realm of the gods. In this sense, Rattanakosin illustrated the phenomenon of a ‘centre within the centre’, a result of hybridising the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model with the aquatic environment to create an overlapping, hierarchical settlement system that put sacred space in the middle of profane space. Moreover, the hierarchical settlement system created a social norm of kala-thesa (knowing the time and place). This meant that when occupying a sacred space such as Rattanakosin Island or a Buddhist temple (inside or outside the island), a person had to be polite and respect the place, which was believed to have a sacred character. This social phenomenon could be seen in the higher physical position of sacred architecture such as palaces and temples, and the lower position of the profane architecture of stilt/floating houses, which could be seen in the skyline of Bangkok. Looking at Bangkok’s elevation, the height and size of sacred buildings showed their superiority to those of the lower aquatic communities. The land-based settlement was enclosed by either a natural or physical boundary: Rattanakosin Island was outlined by the river and canals, and the palaces and temples were walled. The enclosure of the settlement represented an architectural system of being protected, and symbolised that there was a sacredness inside these places and buildings. The terrestrial settlement and buildings needed this boundary to their sacredness, while the water-based settlement was often settled in organic clusters. Aquatic communities across Bangkok were disorganised, and could be created anywhere on a waterway. This settlement system had the opposite character to that associated with land; it demonstrated informality where land settlement demonstrated formality. This formality of land was coded as superior to the informality of water. Consequently, this geographical hierarchy created an idea of ‘lower and higher’ to represent how the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model and sakdina influenced the hierarchical-overlapping settlement system of traditional Bangkok. The imposition of hierarchy on Bangkok’s urban space created order, but remained flexible due to the

213

overlapping of the water and land settlements. There were two spatial relationships in sacred and profane spaces, of formality and informality, showing that the settlement topology of Bangkok – the overlapping settlement system of land and water – was organised hierarchically to establish Bangkok as a sacred capital and to compromise with the informal aquatic town. This topology was only semi-hierarchical, as it expressed a flexible dualism of sacred and profane spaces.

Urban space: Overlap and hybridity

The overlap of sacred and profane spaces According to the ideas of Norberg-Schulz, the waterscape of Chao Phraya River and the canal network could be seen as Bangkok’s urban interior338. The aquatic space was where Bangkokians arranged collective buildings and performed the activities of their daily life. They cultivated this life in Bangkok’s urban space, interpreting the local culture that hybridised local animism and the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model through a hierarchical-overlapping spatial structure of sacred and profane spaces. These spaces overlapped in the vertical and horizontal axes, across the verticality of the ‘centre within the centre’ of Rattanakosin Island and the complex boundary (horizon) between the central interiority of the walled island and the peripheral interiority within the limits of the canal network. The hierarchical-overlapping morphology of sacred and profane space made Rattanakosin Island a sacred capital within the water-based centre. Thus, the urban space of traditional Bangkok was constructed from the flexible duality of sacred and profane spaces. The spatial relationship between these spaces represented an inherent- contradiction between the hierarchical and the flexible, where sacred space was classified as higher than profane space, but was overlaid on that profane space. This dualism and inherent-contradiction were the basic elements of Bangkok’s architectural system. Together, sacred and profane spaces interacted to embody a hybrid

338 Norberg-Schulz, The Concept of Dwelling, 13. 214

‘sacred-aquatic’ life (figures 5.14 and 5.15). At the canal (street) level, the canal network which ran thoroughly in the aquatic space gathered people together and allowed them to experience the poetic dimension of Bangkok. The Thai concept of home was made concrete through the hierarchical overlapping and interaction of the water and land settlements on the river and canals. These aquatic streets formed around Rattanakosin Island, then sprawled outward from the centre to the periphery, creating connective paths of water. The spread of the river and canals combined the informality of the water-based settlement with the hierarchy of the land-based settlement.

Figure 5.14: An aerial view of Bangkok. We can see the plan of Bangkok in 1932 through contemporary aerial photography, which shows the former klong network transformed into a combination of roads. (Source: Phinit Phranakorn).

215

Figure 5.15: A 3D conceptual model showing the urban space of traditional Bangkok. This encompasses the whole model used for figures 5.11 to 5.13, which shows the shaded area in figure 5.14 as it may have looked in the 1800s to 1850s. (Source: Based on Phinit Phranakorn.)

The geographical distinction between water- and land-based settlements divided Bangkok’s urban reality into two realms. This allowed the sacred-terrestrial architecture on the land to preserve its formality within an urban totality characterised by informality. Even though the settlement system of Bangkok had no geometrical pattern distinguishing the land-based settlement from the more organic aquatic settlement, the land settlement was concentrated in the enclosed space of Rattanakosin Island to imitate the centre of divine space depicted by the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model. The presence of this sacred space made the space in the water settlement profane by contrast, disclosing the overlapping hierarchy.

The structure of the urban interior The urban morphology of overlapping centres made the capital lack a single clear centre, and a clear distinction between centre and periphery. This suggested that Bangkok lacked a coherent way of demonstrating the identity of sacred space within the flexibility of its settlement system. This urban phenomenon reflected how Bangkokians expressed themselves in the hierarchical-overlapping built environment. The urban phenomenon of 216

having multiple, overlapping centres saw Bangkok characterised by flexibility and hierarchy, illustrating how Bangkokians lived in overlapping sacred and profane spaces, and demonstrating a contradictory element to life in the city. The people of Bangkok met in this space of dualism and contradiction, where the informality of the local town hybridised with the hierarchy of the imported Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model. The inherent-contradiction of Bangkok emerged from the contradictory relationship of its dual (sacred and profane) spaces.

Figure 5.16: Correspondence of the urban interior with the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model.

The hybridisation of water-based and land-based architecture and settlements in the urban space of Bangkok revealed the structure of hierarchical-overlapping spatiality (figure 5.16). The urban wall of the city involved two types of boundary. The first was the interior urban wall, which created a hierarchy and division that vertically split divine space

217

from the profane space of the aquatic settlement. The geographical character of permanent land in the divine space gave a feeling of stability that contrasted with the instability of the changing nature of water. Although the land and water settlements overlapped, there was an internal hierarchy that conceptually divided Bangkok’s interiority into two parts: higher and lower interiors. Physically, the division between these spaces was represented in the walls of Rattanakosin Island or around most sacred-terrestrial architecture, such as Buddhist temples. The wall in Bangkok was a symbol that indicated the distinction between aquatic and terrestrial life. It conceptually divided the sacred interiority of the land settlement from the profane interiority of the water settlement. It created a hierarchy in Bangkok’s interiority by indicating higher and lower positions, reflecting how being more inside, on the horizontal axis, was equivalent to a higher position. The internal wall of Bangkok’s urban space served to classify areas in response to the social hierarchy of sakdina, while the external boundary of Bangkok created another hierarchy that suggested the area of Bangkok was the space of a sacred capital, as distinct from other cities, towns, or regions. It made the place ‘sacred-aquatic’: the sprawl of aquatic communities as a whole had a sacred character, though to a weaker degree than the land settlements within Bangkok. The external urban wall within Bangkok further illustrated that there was a hierarchy of urban interiority, showing that there were two kinds of life in Bangkok depending on where they took place. In the water, the lifestyle was mobile and flexible, and people moved around in the urban space following the flow of water. Waterways connected people to the whole town via the canal network, which was crucial to people’s daily activities and aquatic life in Bangkok. Living in the water was convenient but unstable because of the changing environment. On land, the experience of Bangkok’s urban space was sacred: the collective divine architecture there visualised divine life in heaven. Life on land was stable, and there was less exposure to natural disasters like flooding. Buildings could be built on a stable base, which gave a sense of permanence and safety.

218

The contrast of aquatic and terrestrial life in Bangkok also signified a hierarchy of interior walls. The internal urban wall created higher and lower positions on the horizontal plane of Bangkok’s urban space, in turn creating hierarchical-overlapping urban floors where the ‘sacred-aquatic’ life of Bangkok took place. Like the urban wall, the urban floor created hierarchy in Bangkok’s urban space. Two different lifestyles, of the sacred land and profane water, coexisted in a hierarchical and flexible relationship, representing how Thai culture characterised its sense of place. The people lived on hierarchical urban floors, where flexibility allowed for aspects of the water and land settlements to overlap. The vertical superimposition of the sacred space of the land over the profane space of aquatic communities made the lower and sacred spaces look like they belonged to a single urban space together. The hierarchical overlapping of sacred and profane spaces made the interactions between the realms of gods and humans flexible via the overlapping morphology, but geographical hierarchy existed between water and land. For instance, Buddhist temples belonged to the land settlement of the upper class, but functioned as public space for the people of the aquatic settlement. This flexible function of Buddhist temples showed how the hierarchy of Bangkok’s urban space divided water and land, but integrated them as part of the same city through flexible use patterns. In the context of Bangkok, building temples for Hinduism and Buddhism portrayed the sacred dimension as Bangkok was the capital of celestial being as per the intention of Rama I who made Bangkok as the sacred capital, and applied the geographical difference of water and land to create the hierarchically flexible relationship between the sacred and profane spaces to hybridise with the local settlement system. The hierarchy and flexibility of sacred and profane spaces on the overlapping urban floor of Bangkok suggested an inherent-contradiction in the Thai idea of home. When looked at superficially, Bangkok seems to have emphasised hierarchy, but on looking closer into the patterns of urban life, we can see a degree of flexibility in the overlapping of the water settlement with the land settlement and the spread of Buddhist temples into the aquatic-organic settlement. These features show how the spirit of place in Bangkok was defined by dualism and contradiction between flexibility and hierarchy.

219

Hierarchical overlapping also occurred in the urban ceiling of Bangkok, as the division of water and land created verticality corresponding to the social system of sakdina. However, further verticality was overlaid on the primary verticality, in a similar way to the emergence of the urban phenomenon of a ‘centre within the centre’. The double urban ceiling of Bangkok served the sociopolitical purpose of embodying the hierarchy between the lower and upper classes. It connected Bangkok to the divine realm in two different layers. The first urban ceiling was the geocultural sky, or sacred-terrestrial space like Rattanakosin Island. It acted like a celestial (primary) ceiling, representing the ruling class, for the aquatic settlement. In doing so, it promoted the impression among the people that the land settlement was a heaven on earth. This presence of Rattanakosin Island was a physical reflection of the idea of heaven in the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model. There was also a heavenly (secondary) ceiling, a conceptual ceiling that was believed to be in the sky, following the Hindu-Buddhist model. This was why sometimes a religious ceremony or ritual was performed on land, because it was a mirror of heaven. Performing a ceremony sanctified the sacred space on land to make it like heaven, which strengthened the way that Thai kings were seen as god-kings, creating a feeling that the gods were close to the human world, sharing their divine presence with the people.

The canal as an urban street connecting sacred and profane spaces The typical paths (canals) of traditional Bangkok were unlike Western streets because their function was versatile: they could be both paths and centres. The centre of the canal was similar to, and yet slightly different from, the land. It was an informal centre: though people in stilt/floating houses performed religious ceremonies to sanctify their houses and mark them as a centre, these dwellings were still coded as profane (communal) space. Although the water settlement was an urban space, it lacked a formal centre, instead sharing Buddhist temples on land as that formal centre. In relation to the land, the canal became an aquatic path that connected a formal centre from the land-based settlement to the people in the water. Thus, the canal in the hierarchical-overlapping urban space of Bangkok acted differently in different contexts. This reflected the contradiction in Bangkok’s urban morphology, where informality and 220

hierarchy coexisted in many ways. Furthermore, the structure of canals in Bangkok’s urban space was different from the streets of the West: the canals lacked a geometrical system. Rather, the canal network ran endlessly throughout the water-based settlement and sometimes through Rattanakosin Island. It formed an organic network of waterways with no beginning or ending points. It could be argued that the urban morphology of this canal network made Bangkok lack a sense of directionality. However, the presence of the land-based settlement of Rattanakosin Island gave Bangkok verticality, directing people to the sky. The existence of the sacred island in the middle of the canal network, and of the Buddhist temples in the aquatic communities, gave Bangkok goals or arrival points, which were the sacred places in the midst of the profane space of the water settlement.

The hierarchical and flexible relationships between sacred and profane spaces The hierarchical-overlapping morphology of Bangkok’s urban space reflected the city’s dualistic spatial structure. Again, this suggested that the urban topology of Bangkok was constructed from the hierarchical overlapping of the upper and lower classes (through sakdina) and sacred and profane spaces. Bangkok’s urban space was not based on a geometric layout, because the capital had been settled by superimposing on the informal aquatic town. Thus, the sense of enclosure (spatial quality) in Bangkok had double layers of interiority (for both the water and land settlements) that represented two different figural qualities. The Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model classified these spaces into two types: superior and inferior. Conceptually, that model’s hierarchy was applied to limit the bodily movement of people from the water onto the land. However, the informal town planning of Bangkok embodied the relationship of spatial and figural qualities in a different way when the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model and local traditions were hybridised. In earlier discussion, we have seen how the urban phenomenon of multiple centres, the flexible function of Buddhist temples, the settlement’s hierarchical overlapping of water and land communities, and the versatile function of its canals, suggested that Bangkok was both hierarchical and flexible. Sacred and profane spaces of the land and water settlements interacted flexibly in many ways within the framework of 221

a hierarchical urban structure. This made the topology of Bangkok’s urban space contradictory. The overlapping of sacred and profane spaces added to the versatility of the hierarchical settlement system of Bangkok. Bangkok could not manipulate the physical world of the existing aquatic-informal nature to meet perfectly with the ideal of the hierarchical settlement expressed in the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model. In fact, the natural landscape of Bangkok physically influenced the topology of Bangkok in a way that made this impossible. However, the presence of Rattanakosin Island allowed the mentality of Bangkok’s people to culturally embrace this hierarchy. When people stood in the sacred space of the terrestrial settlement, they could experience a feeling of respectful fear (born of a perception of sacredness) towards the place. The lower class of Bangkokians understood they lived spiritually within the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model, while their physical bodies lived in the hierarchical-overlapping settlement. This reflected how the mental and physical appearances of Bangkok exhibited inherent-contradiction. Thai culture constructed the urban topology of sacred and profane spaces within spatial relationships of hierarchy and informality. They used canals as spaces of overlap between sacred and profane spaces to embody ‘togetherness’. This blended the hierarchy of sacred and profane spaces within the aquatic-informal settlement system of the Chao Phraya Basin. The space of the canals, and the water itself, provided a context in which the Thai sense of home existed and evolved. These aquatic spaces entered Bangkokians into the dualism of sacred and profane spaces with inherent-contradiction. The discussion above shows how the urban topology of Bangkok was semi- hierarchical, with some urban spaces situated between the sacred land and profane water settlements. The people of Bangkok were oriented within the hierarchical-overlapping spatial structure, but did not necessarily realise that they lived in the hierarchical- overlapping realms of humans and gods. They understood that the water and land settlements were on the same horizontal plane, because they overlapped, and the informality of the aquatic settlement influenced the land settlement, making Bangkok’s urban space as a whole perceivable as a single, water-based settlement. This suggests that

222

Thai culture de-distinguished the inherent-contradiction of the hierarchy and flexibility between sacred and profane spaces in the hierarchical-overlapping urban space. The ‘language of architecture’ of Bangkok represented dualism and inherent-contradiction derived from the way Thai culture hybridised with the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model, and made the place identity of Bangkok exhibit hybridity like that of the hierarchical-overlapping settlement system.

Public buildings: A complex understanding of public space

Two kinds of public houses in Bangkok’s water and land settlements Due to the hierarchical-overlapping settlement system of Bangkok, it appeared that there were two kinds of domestic space – in water and on land. When looking at Bangkok as two independent spaces, the terrestrial settlement was characterised by the presence of sacred architecture such as the dwellings of Thai kings (phumibun – men of merit) and places for religious ceremonies. The aquatic settlement had amphibious buildings like stilt/floating houses, along with everyday spaces for people. Looking at the two main aspects of Bangkok’s hierarchical-overlapping settlement separately, there appear to be no exclusively public buildings, but when we see how sacred and profane spaces interacted via the social system of sakdina, we can see how some spaces that served domestic functions for people of the land settlement (the aristocracy and Buddhist monks) also served as public space for people of the water settlement. The hierarchy that supposed the land was higher than the water changed the topological relationship of buildings in the water and land settlements. In contrast, the hierarchical overlapping of water and land made aquatic communities and their ordinary aquatic architecture (stilt and floating houses) inferior to the land-based settlement. It changed the topology of the water settlement, making it peripheral to the land. This decreased the degree to which public and central space appeared in the aquatic space, and made stilt/floating houses primarily a kind of domestic space. In doing so, the space with less public use in the house of the water settlement made the domestic space, which could be transformed into the public space. When we 223

look at Bangkok’s urban space as a whole, we can see how the sharing of terrestrial and aquatic spaces clarified the role of divine land architecture as public space for the aquatic community. Meanwhile, the people of the water-based settlement adapted to the changing topology of their amphibious buildings. Although the land-based settlement introduced the people of the aquatic settlement to formal public buildings, the informality and versatility of the aquatic settlement still influenced a spatial system of public and private spaces in water-based architecture. Bangkokians customised their houses for various public and private functions, incorporating sacred and communal spaces. Through the construction rite drawn from Hindu-Buddhist traditions, they spiritually transformed houses in the water settlement to have a religious aspect. People invited the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model into the structure of their houses; this was inspired by local belief in animism where Thai people believed that there was a spirit residing in objects, structures, and buildings. During the house construction, they applied the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model into their house to make their house has a spirit. The influence of the model on Bangkok’s urban space could see individual houses transformed into temporary semi- public buildings, which made Bangkok a capital of multiple sacred centres on the land and in the water. This reflected how, at the individual building level, Bangkok was influenced by the hierarchical-overlapping nature of the urban space. It also disclosed how even though Bangkok had proper public spaces, like sacred buildings, people customised the public and private spaces in their houses for sacred and profane functions; there was versatility in the hierarchy.

Private dwellings: The hierarchical overlapping of public and private

There was complexity in the way that the spatial arrangement of public and private spaces was organised at the level of individual buildings like stilt/floating houses (figure 5.17). Similar to the central and peripheral interiorities of Bangkok, the sense of public and private was understood as a matter of degree. Within individual buildings such as Buddhist temples and stilt/floating houses, different spaces had different degrees of

224

publicity and privacy. While every temple and house had some public and private aspects, they differed in that some had more public space while others had more private space. There was a high level of versatility, where the degree of public and private spaces could be manipulated to fit with different circumstances. There was also a hierarchy in the organisation of public and private spaces. The morphology of individual buildings was like that of urban space, with public and private spaces overlaid but organised by a hierarchy of conceptually hierarchical floor.

Figure 5.17: Degrees of public and private spaces in types of traditional Thai house. These 3D models show different kinds of traditional Thai house with different degrees of overlap between water and land, and different proportions of public and private spaces.

225

The public function of the traditional Thai house Institutional and public space expressed a certain mood that showed how Bangkokians dwelled in the landscape. Our discussion of urban space in the previous section has illustrated how Bangkokians understood they lived in the hierarchical-overlapping spaces of humans and gods. This present section hypothesises that the public sphere also had elements of dualism and inherent-contradiction, as a microcosm of the urban space. Public space was also supposed to have sacred and profane (public and domestic) spaces overlapping within a hierarchy, like the settlement system of Bangkok. As mentioned, public buildings and houses both also exhibited a hierarchical overlapping of public and private spaces. Thus, these public and private buildings had elements of similarity that united, for example, Buddhist temples and stilt/floating houses.

Figure 5.18: The conceptually hierarchical floor of a traditional Thai house. This house was reconstructed in Bangkok in the 1990s.

226

Figure 5.19: Section of a traditional Thai house, illustrating the conceptually hierarchical floor. This model applies to both stilt and floating houses.

Thus, the morphology of individual buildings such as stilt/floating houses also incorporated the hierarchical overlapping of public space (figures 5.18 and 5.19). Spaces could be classified by their degree of interiority: the more interior, the more sacred (e.g. in the enclosed chamber of a house, level 3 in figure 5.19), but the less interior, the more profane (e.g., in open space, or in level 1 or 2 in figure 5.19). Spaces situated in the most inside areas of a house became sacred space, while spaces more towards the exterior became communal space. Even then, sacred and communal public spaces were placed in a hierarchy according to their degree of interiority. Both of them related to each other in the semi-hierarchical topology of the traditional Thai house. The enclosure morphology of sacred space, which was located in the most interior space of the house (floor level 3) could not disclose its sacred character in public. This was

227

due to the enclosure of the house chamber’s morphology. However, the disclosure morphology of communal space that appeared in the more open space of the house (floor level 2 or 3) made it function as a transitional space, interpreting both sacred and profane dimensions of the house or individual building. The horizontal continuity of the house’s conceptually hierarchical floor was an architectural element that connected the inside of the house to the outside world. It had a high level of flexibility because it provided a context in which different everyday activities could happen on the horizontal axis. Thus, although, the sacred space was enclosed, the continuity and versatility of the floor connected people to a sense of divinity present inside the house. The function of public space on the conceptually hierarchical floor reflected the semi-hierarchical topology of the building as a whole. It was an architectural element that served the hierarchisation of the sacred and communal public spaces. On the other hand, sacred and profane spaces overlapped on the horizontal plane of the floor. Therefore, the semi-hierarchical topology of the flooring system of Thai houses shows how the hierarchical-overlapping spatial structures of Bangkok were reproduced in the spatial arrangement of individual buildings. The conceptually hierarchical floor structured the public space of the individual building, but the flat appearance of the floor belied the overlaying of sacred and communal spaces within a hierarchy. The hierarchisation and connectivity of the floor in a traditional Thai house demonstrated how the Thai concept of home embodied the hierarchical and flexible spatial relationship between sacred and profane spaces. Moreover, although public space at the level of individual buildings like houses was informal and not sacred like public space on land, it was still conceptually situated in a higher position than the private space. Nevertheless, as shown in earlier analysis public space at the house level, through its flexibility and hierarchy, could make a house become both a sacred and communal space. The public space was created through the transformation of private space: domestic space, in Thai culture, was understood as a primary space which existed in the first place, while public space was a second stage of development of the private space. The domestic space could be made into public space in some situations, and then turned

228

back into private space. This suggested that at the level of the individual building, public space was an informal space. Furthermore, stilt/floating houses could be transformed into something like the sacred land architecture of royal palaces and Buddhist temples. This would happen when the house’s owner donated their house to a temple as accommodation for monks, thus achieving an exclusive social status within sakdina that could be as sacred as that of the ruler even though they came from the lower class. When the stilt or floating house was translated to land, it became guti, or monastic accommodation. Contradictorily, the monks’ accommodation was a sacred building like a Buddhist temple, but functioned only as private space. This demonstrated the contradiction of moving the stilt or floating house onto land. Its public function was eliminated because the temple was already a public space.

The private function of the traditional Thai house Private space, in the aquatic context, was strongly associated with hierarchy through the ‘construction rite’ enacted to imitate the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model. This was a phenomenological process that brought the world of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model closer to Bangkokians’ experience at the individual building level. The construction rite superimposed sacred space on the communal and living spaces, transforming some of the private spaces in individual buildings, which were peripheral to the divine centre of the Thai house, into transitional or communal spaces, as discussed in relation to the hierarchy of public spaces on the conceptually hierarchical floor of the Thai house. In doing so, it reflected the sacred dimension of the land in the individual buildings of the water settlement. Applying hierarchy to private space sanctified the house to have a sacred dimension. This showed how the people in the water settlement tried to make their profane space like the sacred space on the land. At this point, living in the water became conceptually similar to living on land. Once again, this reflected the understanding that public and private and sacred and profane spaces in Thai culture were not mutually

229

exclusive. The discussion above has revealed that Bangkokians understood public and private spaces as being hierarchical and overlapping like the land and water settlements. The discussion above revealed how the architectural system of stilt/floating houses reflected Thai culture’s embodiment of the idea of home at the level of the individual building. The private space of these buildings was where Bangkokians infused architecture with their collective identity to restore individual identity. It was where the Thai sense of home imitated the microcosm of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model represented at the levels of urban space and settlement. Therefore, the domestic morphology of the Thai house was a ‘microcosm’ of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model. The hierarchical overlapping of public and private spaces represented the settlement system of Bangkok; reflection of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model influenced the spatial organisation of the traditional Thai house. According to the concept of dwelling of Christian Norberg-Schulz, the private space of individual buildings revealed the ‘state-of-mind’ of the Thai concept of home. It showed how the individual Bangkokian was conscious of the ‘original form’ of Thai identity or being Thai-self, which the private space directed them to experience339. Individual buildings such as stilt/floating houses were built to visualise the hierarchical-overlapping spatiality of Bangkok’s urban space. The physical structure and spatial arrangement of the Thai house enabled the individual Bangkokian to access and experience the city’s spirit of place in the form of an individual building. It reflected the totality of Thai nature, society, culture, and people. Therefore, the private space in individual buildings such as stilt/floating houses invited the individual Bangkokian’s mind to arrive at home by experiencing the quality of hierarchical-overlapping interiority.

339 Norberg-Schulz, The Concept of Dwelling, 89, 91. 230

Figure 5.20: Comparing the section of a traditional Thai house with the cosmological model.

The domestic morphology of the stilt/floating house was created through a spiritual process. On the one hand, it provided a space for people to live in. On the other hand, it made the house a place for unseen things (phi reun – household ghosts) to reside in. In this way, the house was like a temple: it was a place for humans and the unseen to live in together. This was possible due to the construction process’s incorporating sacred space into the house’s spatial arrangement. This made the house sacred like a temple, overlaying the divine realm on human living space. Thus, the construction rite made the stilt or floating house a space of hierarchical overlapping between the realms of human and celestial beings. In figure 5.20, we see how the house’s body was raised higher than the ground or water, symbolising that humans lived closer to the heavenly realm, while the space below the house represented a lower realm for animals. The roof signified the upper realm; this was symbolised physically in the design of the roof. The peak point of the gable signified that the space of the roof was directed towards the sky.

231

Figure 5.21: The conceptually hierarchical floor of a traditional Thai house.

This architectural representation reflected how the morphology of Thai house emphasised hierarchical spatiality. Although the conceptually hierarchical floor had a flat morphology, applying different degrees of interiority horizontally created hierarchy on the floor (figure 5.21). It gave the floor horizontal order, putting the space under the roof on floor level 3, for example, in a ‘higher’ position that made it a sacred space. The presence

232

of the roof space in the chamber on floor level 3 added a sacred dimension (sacred public space) to the domestic and communal spaces via the spatial hierarchy. Furthermore, divine space in the stilt or floating house was symbolised by placing sacred objects such as Buddha statues, shrines to ancestors, or magical objects within it. The space in the house’s chamber on level 3 of the hierarchical floor was dedicated to supernatural things rather than humans. People often worshipped and paid homage to the altar or shrine in this chamber, acting as though the highest and most inside space of their house was inhabited by unseen beings or forces such as household ghosts. Sometimes, people used this chamber of the house for sleeping only. Thai culture believed the head was the most sacred part of the body, while the foot was the most inferior.340 When sleeping, then, the head should be positioned so it would not be on the same level as the feet. Even in this apparently contradictory use of the sacred space for purely domestic purposes, then, there was a concern to preserve some element of sacredness. In figure 5.21, we can see how the private porch space (rabeiyng baan in Thai or house’s porch) functioned flexibly because its morphology was semi-hierarchical; it was located between sacred and communal spaces. Everyday activities could take place in this private porch space: its function was versatile and it could be used for many things, such as eating, playing, performing, meeting, and so on, depending on the situation. We can also see in figure 5.21 how the function of the chan baan space had a more public element than the private porch because it was more open and connected to the outside. However, there was a contradiction here, because it served a public function in hosting activities with a central aspect. At the house level, the order of public and private spaces was flexible. The most sacred space was located in the most inside part of the house, while the semi-domestic (private porch) space was still close to the house’s sacred space. Communal public space was placed lower (in the hierarchy of the floor) than the semi-domestic space. The public

340 Tambiah S. J. (1973), “Classification of Animals in Thailand,” in Rules and Meaning, ed. M. Douglas (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1973), 127–166. 233

and private spaces could be adjusted and combined in response to the needs of daily life. This flexible arrangement demonstrated the house’s hierarchical-overlapping morphology, and showed how Bangkokians experienced the Thai idea of home as involving the dualism of sacred and profane spaces and the contradiction of spatial flexibility and hierarchy. The domestic topology of stilt/floating houses accommodated the variety of life practices through the overlapping of public and private spaces. It formed both a path (private space) and centre (public [communal and sacred] space). This was due to the house’s imitation, in its morphology, of the existential structure (Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model) of Bangkok’s urban space through the enaction of the construction rite. This made the conceptually hierarchical floor part of the house’s topology, while the use made of domestic spaces showed that topology’s flexibility. Public and private spaces were oriented to each other within a hierarchy, but versatility remained. As with the settlement system of Bangkok, the flexibility of the individual house affected the hierarchy of the public and private spaces. This versatility reshaped the spatial order of public and private spaces, as public and private functions could be swapped. As we have seen, private space could be combined with sacred (public) space in a house’s interior chambers. Similarly, private and (public) communal space could be combined in the private porch space. Though the domestic topology showed a combination of hierarchy and flexibility that was similar to that found in sacred buildings such as temples, in the traditional house, this semi-hierarchical topology held a more figural quality, because spatial flexibility allowed more interactions of public and private spaces at the individual building level. Therefore, the semi-hierarchical spatial organisation in the domestic topology brought Bangkokians to experience Bangkok’s character of dualism with inherent-contradiction. The semi-hierarchical topology of the Thai house was supposed to have one centralised plan and axial plans that formed the spatial arrangement of the house’s interior. This created the phenomenon of multiple centres, as seen at the level of Bangkok’s urban space. At the same time, the hierarchy of public spaces: sacred in the house’s chamber, communal on the chan baan, and semi-domestic on the house’s porch,

234

did not follow the same order as the urban space, where sacred space was both more interior and more central. The semi-domestic public space was more interior, but the more public space of the chan baan was both more exterior and more central. The semi-domestic public space was conceptually higher than the communal public space, suggesting that although hierarchy was created in the Thai house by spatial centralisation, flexibility reshaped the order of public and private spaces. However, the flexible arrangement of public and private spaces was applied to place inhabitants, guests, and strangers in a hierarchy, by tying their activity to levels 3, 2, and 1 of the conceptually hierarchical floor respectively (figure 5.21). At levels 3 and 2, the house’s chamber and private porch space were reserved for the house’s owner and members of his family. The interiority of domestic activities also placed them within a hierarchy. For example, sleeping was restricted to the interior chamber at floor level 3 due to the belief in the sacredness of the head. Other daily activities, such as meeting, eating, and entertaining took place on the private porch space of floor level 2. However, this space could also be used for social activities, which flowed from and to the chan baan space. This latter space could be used for welcoming visitors, doing commerce, and hosting social gatherings. The chan baan, by facing outside, became open and subordinate to other spaces because it had less interiority.

Complex space use in the traditional Thai house The overlapping of public and private spaces in the traditional Thai house imitated the functioning of divine terrestrial architecture such as temples. As mentioned at the beginning of this section, sacred buildings such as royal palaces and Buddhist temples had both public and private functions. As public and private spaces in the house overlapped, Bangkokians transformed parts of the house to serve some of the same functions as sacred buildings. However, at the house level, space was more flexible, and public and private spaces were in fact understood as the same space. Bangkokians thus lived in a sacred house that represented the hierarchical-overlapping settlement system of Bangkok.

235

There was a contradiction in the way that the spatial flexibility of the traditional house presented sacred and profane space as the same space. The overlapping of these spaces reflected how the culture of fear influenced Thai society. Bangkokians hybridised sacred space into their houses because they believed it gave them spiritual protection from the unpredictable threats posed by nature. However, this brought a new risk with it – they were afraid that if they did not worship the sacred space, the household ghost would bring them bad luck. Thus, having a sacred space in the house represented Bangkokians’ fear of the unseen both outside and inside the dwelling. This reveals a new perspective to explain how public space was used for sacred purposes in the context of Thai culture, from the perspective of Western sensibilities. In Bangkok, public space was not different from the private space: it was a space for both sacred and communal purposes. Fear is one reason that explained the presence of sacred space in the house; Thai people believed they lived alongside the supernatural, which caused instability they sought to mitigate by worshipping or paying homage to it. This brought a sacred purpose to the private space of the house’s interior chamber. At the same time, communal public space hybridised with that private space, which could turn into communal space at some times and then back to private space at others. The function of public space for both communal and sacred purposes in Thai culture was inseparable from that of private space. Thus, the relationship between public and private spaces represented the versatility of the house’s hybrid function. The public function of the house accommodated private space where the human and supernatural could live together as in the hierarchical-overlapping settlement of Bangkok.

Conclusion: Summarising the Thai concept of home as a typological meaning of architecture in Bangkok from 1783–1851

Analysing the morphology and topology of the ‘four modes of dwelling’ in Bangkok has revealed how the settlement system, urban space, and individual buildings represented the hierarchy and flexibility of sacred and profane spaces. The town planning and buildings of the city exhibited a dualism of sacred and profane spaces, which were created

236

to represent the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model. The relationship between sacred and profane spaces showed a hierarchical relationship between the land and water settlements. However, the cultural hybridisation of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model with the local aquatic settlement made the relationship between sacred and profane spaces flexible. Thus, the spatial relationship of sacred and profane spaces in Bangkok became one of hierarchical overlapping. At the settlement level, morphology and topology disclosed this hierarchical overlapping, showing how Bangkokians dwelled via the city’s architectural system. The hierarchical overlapping of sacred and profane spaces created a ‘bond’ that represented how Bangkokians created their sense of home. It explained how the architectural system, in the landscape of Bangkok, created the identity of place through the cultural hybridisation of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model and local animism. The meaning or typology of architecture in the settlement of Bangkok was revealed through the dualism of sacred and profane spaces and the way they interacted hierarchically and flexibly. This reflected how the hybridity in Thai culture influenced Thai kings and Bangkokians to create their concept of home The morphology and topology of the urban space visualised the image of Bangkok as one of hierarchical overlapping. This explains three functions of Bangkok’s urban space. Firstly, the urban space of Bangkok expressed the spatial structure of hierarchical overlapping of water and land settlements, showing how Bangkokians created their urban space through the hybridisation of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model. Secondly, when Bangkokians understood the spatial structure of Bangkok in their minds, the built forms they created in the land and water settlements illustrated existential space, which in Bangkok had a hierarchical-overlapping structure formed of sacred and profane spaces. Finally, buildings and spatial organisation in the existential space of Bangkok interpreted the way Bangkokians dwelled. The typological role of Bangkok’s urban space revealed the Thai idea of home through the arrangement and orientation of the buildings in the water and land settlements.

237

Public and private buildings in Bangkok were similar in that their public and private functions always overlapped, as such functions did in the settlement system of Bangkok. The individual buildings of Bangkok interpreted both the collective and individual identity. The two types of individual building – (1) palaces and Buddhist temples on land and (2) stilt/floating houses in the water – both had public and private functions. However, sacred buildings were used as formal public buildings because they were located on land, which was considered to be a higher space. The typology of sacred buildings represented the hierarchical-overlapping character of both public and private spaces. On land, sacred buildings functioned as both public and private spaces for the upper class, and also as formal public space for the lower classes who dwelled in the water. The morphology and topology of the space usage of sacred buildings showed that the spatial order of sacred and profane spaces in Bangkok was constructed in a way that was at once flexible and hierarchical. Stilt/floating houses were different from sacred buildings because they were more flexible and individual. This represented how the individual Bangkokian understood the Thai concept of home through the spatial planning of the house. The structure and spatial planning of the stilt or floating house explains the structure of existential space in Bangkok. Bangkokians imitated the hierarchical overlapping of sacred and profane spaces in the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model through the architectural system of the house. The morphology and topology of the Thai house showed how individual Bangkokians understood the Thai idea of home as being characterised by dualism with inherent- contradiction.

238

Figure 5.22: The spatial relationship between sacred and profane spaces. Dualism of sacred and profane spaces existed in hierarchical overlapping with inherent-contradiction of hierarchical and flexible relationship between sacred and profane spaces.

The typology of the settlement, urban space, and individual buildings of Bangkok disclosed that the Thai sense of home was defined by dualism with inherent-contradiction. It represented the process of cultural hybridisation of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model with the native belief in animism. The hierarchy of sacred and profane spaces was created to imitate the dualism of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model, but sacred and profane spaces overlapped because the model hybridised with the flexibility of the local aquatic settlement system. Therefore, the spirit of place in Bangkok was created as a combination of the dualism of sacred and profane with the contradictory relationship of hierarchical overlapping (figure 5.22).

239

240

6. The beginnings of modernisation and the shift in Thai Identity under King Mongkut (Rama IV, r. 1851–1868)

Introduction

This chapter continues analysing the ‘language of architecture’ of Bangkok, this time in the reign of King Mongkut (Rama IV, r. 1851–1868). It discusses how the modernisation program of Rama IV changed and hybridised the Thai sense of home through the arrival of city planning and modern buildings inspired by the British colony in Singapore. The chapter also discusses how the ‘language of architecture’, such as the morphology and topology of the ‘four modes of dwelling’ (settlement, urban space, public building, and house) of Bangkok began to change in response to the construction of modern roads and shophouses on the eastern side of Rattanakosin Island. At the phenomenological level, it explores how the spatial structure of the Thai concept of home, in the architectural space of modern Bangkok, hybridised through the influence of Rama IV’s modernisation policies and processes. Below, the chapter begins with an analysis of the new typology arising from the morphological and topological changes in the architectural system of modern Bangkok, examining how the new Thai concept of home reflects the hybrid Thai identity that emerged from Rama IV’s efforts to urbanise Bangkok to be modern like the West.

Settlement: Integrating sacred and profane spaces

Transforming the organic settlement of Bangkok The arrival of Western influences to South East Asia in the mid-19th century spurred Rama IV to promote the adaptation of Thai identity to Western culture. The first phase of changing the settlement system of traditional Bangkok along these lines was to build modern roads and shophouses on the eastern side of Rattanakosin Island. From the mid- 19th century, these new developments represented how modernity was emerging within

241

the sacred space of the urban centre, creating a new, modern image of space under the ruling regime.

Figure 6.1: A map of Bangkok in the reign of Rama IV. The map of Bangkok in Rama IV shows how New Road and Bamrung Mueang Road were laid on the eastern side of Rattanakosin Island.

New (Charoen Krung) Road, the first modern road, and Bamrung Mueang Road were among the earliest modern roads in Bangkok (figure 6.1). They were constructed on the eastern side of Rattanakosin Island, representing how modern space was being introduced into Bangkok’s sacred space. At the phenomenological level, the modern road flattened the existing hierarchy of Bangkok’s settlement system. This new urban morphology saw the lower classes, especially Sino-Thais, move from water to land, thus coming to live closer to the celestial beings. This made the profane space in the river and canal start to disappear, as it was transformed into land coexisting with sacred space. 242

However, the organic network of the river and canals dominated the way modern roads were built. In Bangkok, urban planning failed to integrate geometrical design into the settlement system, despite following Singapore as a model.

Changing the order of sacred and profane spaces The transformation of the Sino-Thai way of life from aquatic to terrestrial living, through the building of modern roads and shophouses, weakened the verticality of the spatial structure of Bangkok as sacred and profane spaces began to integrate into the modern space. This did not change the dual settlement system of sacred and profane spaces. Rather, the modern road flattened the hierarchical relationship between these kinds of space. The integration of sacred and profane spaces in the modern space in Rattanakosin Island caused the boundary that divided the water and land settlements to fade. The wall around Rattanakosin Island, which had been used to distinguish the sacred space on the island from the profane space of the aquatic settlement, no longer divided the upper and lower classes. The wall did not secure the hierarchy between sacred and profane space as before. This changed the interior quality of modern Bangkok. The distinction between stronger and weaker interior qualities also started to fade, causing profane space to seem on the same level as sacred space within a modern space. The coexistence of sacred and profane spaces in the modern space created a new kind of interior quality in Bangkok that was defined by this coexistence. In coexistence, sacred and profane spaces presented a weaker sense of hierarchy which removed the distinction between lower and upper realms evident in pre-modern Bangkok. Profane space was now on the same level as the sacred space, but its importance was unequal. Sacred buildings such as palaces and Buddhist temples still served sacred purposes, while modern space served primarily secular communal purposes, and there was still some sense of hierarchy between these sacred and profane communal spaces. Traditional buildings and spaces such as those of Rattanakosin Island still existed to demonstrate the presence of sacred space as it merged with profane space in a hierarchical relationship within modern space. The changing relationship between the 243

dual sacred and profane spaces added a merging aspect to the urban morphology. This reflected the changing spatial relationship of partial merging in the Thai concept of home. The urban phenomenon of Rattanakosin being ‘a centre within the centre’ began to fade as the distinction between sacred and profane spaces faded, making modern Bangkok a single centre as the country’s capital, with a ‘flattened’ settlement system. The settlement’s elevation now showed that traditional and modern buildings were built on the same level. The semi-merging morphology de-distinguished sacred and profane buildings in the urban hierarchy. Shophouses were built on the same level as sacred spaces such as palaces and Buddhist temples. This demonstrated how the spatial relationship of sacred and profane spaces was hybridising with the single settlement system of modern planning. The relationship between sacred and profane spaces became less hierarchical and more flexible, and the weaker hierarchy changed the settlement system of Bangkok through a process of merging and ‘flattening’ of the spatial hierarchy. This changed the way the lower classes, especially Sino-Thais, were organised in relation to the upper classes and changed the sense of ‘human togetherness’. The dual spaces and classes were transformed by being placed in the single settlement system. The hierarchical spatial structure and architectural system of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model was ‘flattened’.

Urban space: Introducing the space of modernity in a Thai way

New Road and Bamrung Mueang Road The building of New Road and Bamrung Mueang Road on the eastern side of Rattanakosin Island shifted the focus of urban life from water to land, causing traditional life and identity to hybridise with those of modernity. At the phenomenological level, modern roads and shophouses caused the profane space of the Sino-Thais to emerge in the sacred space of the land settlement on Rattanakosin Island. The Sino-Thais now lived in the same space as the ruling class.

244

This class transformation for the Sino-Thais reshaped the spatial structure of the city as the spatial hierarchy between sacred and profane spaces faded, affecting Bangkok’s vertical axis of ‘a centre within the centre’. The ‘inner interiority’ of Rattanakosin Island merged with the ‘outer interiority’ of the profane space of the water settlement. The changing relationship between sacred and profane spaces showed how the urban morphology changed from and overlapping hierarchy to an integrating one that in turn started to reshape the urban interior.

Changing urban interior An urban morphology characterised by merging illustrated how the spatial structure of the ‘urban interior’ in Bangkok had been reshaped through the modernisation policies and processes of Rama IV (figure 6.2). The urban wall, floor, and ceiling adapted to modern space by building the modern roads and shophouses of profane space on the sacred space of the eastern side of Rattanakosin Island. The integration of sacred and profane spaces in modern urban space blurred the urban wall that divided sacred space from the profane and destroyed the geographical difference between land and water. The physical wall that divided Rattanakosin Island from the water settlement also lost its function in creating hierarchy. Conceptually, the wall was no longer a symbol dividing higher and lower spaces, as the relationship between sacred and profane spaces had changed on the horizontal axis. The complex boundary of Bangkok began to lose its quality of hierarchical overlapping inner and outer walls. As the importance of the inner wall faded, it flattened the spatial structure of Bangkok’s urban space. This decreased the sacredness of the land settlement because the profane space integrated with sacred space; though the duality between the two remained, their hierarchy began to dissolve.

245

Figure 6.2: The reshaped spatial structure of profane and sacred spaces in the urban interior of Bangkok.

The fading of the hierarchical urban wall also changed the spatial system of the urban floor. The integration of sacred and profane spaces flattened the distinction between higher and lower spaces. This changed the way people interpreted the Thai concept of home. Aquatic and terrestrial lifestyles transformed and merged in modern space, bringing the lower class of Sino-Thais to live closer to the celestial realm around spaces such as the modern roads, which were still associated with Rattanakosin Island and the ruling class. The emergence of this space of the modern roads developed the flexibility of sacred and profane spaces, contributing to their merging. However, it did not change the overlapping of public and private spaces. Roads changed the hierarchy and relationship between public and private spaces to be the same in both land and water settlements. Public space was not sacred like before, which put it on the same level as private space. For instance, Buddhist temples,

246

which functioned as public space at the urban scale, were now on the same horizontal plane as shophouses. This made the public space of the Buddhist temple an everyday space like the private space of the shophouse. However, religious events were still performed in the Buddhist temple: the public space was still sacred, but its position was reshaped due to its loss of a superior position in the spatial hierarchy. The fading of the hierarchy could also be seen in changes to the dual urban ceiling of Bangkok. The disappearance of distinct water and land settlements changed the spatial structure of the urban ceiling of the land, making the land no longer a sacred space according to the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model. The land, in modern space, served as profane space, not sacred space. Thus, the urban ceiling of the land disappeared from the ‘urban interior’ of Bangkok. However, the heavenly ceiling that represented the heaven in the sky according to the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model still existed. This could be seen in the performance of religious ceremonies in the Buddhist temples. Although the space of Bangkok was now more modern, people still believed in the upper realm, and that the land was a mirror image of heaven.

The new urban streetscape of modern roads The paths of modern Bangkok changed in response to the disappearance of the water and land settlements. The key paths were no longer waterways such as canals and rivers, but modern roads. These were streets like those of the West, or specifically as Western models of urban settlement interpreted via the British colony of Singapore (figure 6.3). This change showed how modern roads transformed the focus of urban life from water to land, and how the traditional way of life was hybridising with modernity. Modern roads caused the spatial hierarchy between sacred and profane spaces, and between the upper class and the lower class of Sino-Thais, to fade. Modern roads integrated the upper and lower spaces, developing flexibility in the relationship between sacred and profane spaces. Thus, modern space came to represent the hybridisation of modernity and tradition. The building of New Road and Bamrung Mueang Road on Rattanakosin Island set the precedent that modern space was introduced through sacred space. The modern road 247

was the path that extended from the centre throughout the urban space. Unlike the waterways, modern roads functioned as paths that led to the centre of Rattanakosin Island, and that centre represented how the urban space of Bangkok had become like that of the West. One key difference in the meaning of Western and Thai modern spaces was that in Thailand, modern spaces and street paths were infused with a sense of sacredness by having been introduced by the Thai kings, since Rama IV had commanded the building of the modern roads and shophouses on Rattanakosin Island. This gave a sense that the modern space of Bangkok was not merely for humans to live in, but was also for celestial beings. As paths, the modern roads functioned more like connecting spaces that contributed to the merging of sacred and profane spaces.

Figure 6.3: 3D modelling of the row-house system on New Road. This view shows the row-house system on New Road in the 1860s, which would inspire the urban planning of Bangkok in the future.

The integrating morphology of the ‘urban interior’, and the way the street as path changed the relationship of sacred and profane spaces, reflected how the spatial structure

248

of Bangkok retained the concept of dualism. However, the relationship between sacred and profane spaces hybridised with modernity, becoming more flexible as they integrated into one modern space while the hierarchical order of upper and lower spaces faded. This reflected a significant change in the social structure of Bangkok. However, the dualism of sacred and profane spaces would continue into the 21st century, managing to remain by hybridising with modernity as the relationship between sacred and profane spaces ‘flattened’ to align with modern space, changing the way the upper and lower classes interacted in the urban space of modern Bangkok. The bodily movements of Sino- Thais from the lower space brought them more into connection with the higher space. These bodies of the inferior class now existed on the same level as those of the superior class, in the modern space. However, the coexistence of the subordinate and ruling classes did not mean there was no distinction between them. The presence of traditional buildings such as the Grand Palace and Buddhist temples reinforced that the duality of sacred and profane spaces still existed, albeit with more flexibility. The urban topology changed through the interaction of sacred and profane spaces where sacred space was overlaid on the profane space but without the old degree of hierarchy, causing the two spaces to merge. Urban planning also changed the spatial relationship between sacred and profane spaces, and the sense of ‘togetherness’ in the urban space of Bangkok. The space in which the Thai sense of home was made shifted from water to land, and the topology of modern Bangkok became non-hierarchical. The spatial structure of sacred and profane spaces in the city was now organised without reference to the social hierarchy. This new urban topology made humans live on the same horizontal plane as the celestial. And yet, as the spatial hierarchy was eradicated in modern space, the dualism of sacred and profane spaces remained. The change in the ‘language of architecture’ in the urban space reflected the emergence of dualism with partial merging as the result of hybridising traditional space with modernity.

249

Public buildings: Traditional buildings in modern space

It is problematic to define what public space was in modern Bangkok, because the city had lost its characteristic hierarchy of sacred and profane and public and private spaces. Public and private spaces had become integrated and organised in a new way by the presence of modern roads and shophouses. While Buddhist temples still functioned as housing for the upper class (Buddhist monks), they were located in modern space and served as public space for social events and religious activities. Public and private spaces were still overlaid as before, but now co-existed without spatial hierarchy. However, the sacred function of buildings such as the Grand Palace and Buddhist temples still existed in modern space, due to the way Rama IV’s modernisation program had merged modern space into Bangkok through sacred space. Sacred buildings and spaces managed to remain in the modern space by merging into the profane space of modern roads and shophouses. Yet sacred buildings were still the major landmarks of modern Bangkok, demonstrating the process of hybridising traditional architecture with modernity. This hybridisation responded to the modernisation policies and processes of Rama IV, which were intended to modernise Bangkok to be like the West while preserving Thai identity. Moreover, the presence of traditional buildings in modern space demonstrated how the old settlement system of hierarchical overlapping adapted to urban development. The dualism of sacred and profane spaces remained, but now without the old hierarchy. This explains how the ‘existential spatiality’ of the Thai concept of home was still based on the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model while it was becoming hybridised with modernity. People in Bangkok did not have access to public spaces like those of Western cities as it became under Rama IV. Public and private spaces were organised flexibly within a fading hierarchy, but sacred architecture still defined public space. Therefore, it is somewhat difficult to discuss public space in Bangkok during the reign of Rama IV using concepts developed in relation to the Western world.

250

Private dwellings: Adapting to modernity

Shophouses for the Sino-Thais: A new overlapping of public and private spaces When Rama IV commanded the building of rows of shophouses on New Road and Bamrung Mueang Road, inspired by his noble’s trip to the British colony in Singapore in the mid-19th century, he introduced a modern house typology into Bangkok’s urban space for the first time. The architectural system of shophouses was built based on the row- house system, and placed along modern roads. The modern architecture of shophouses maximised the efficiency of space usage, providing the growing Sino-Thai population with a space for urban living in the style of the British colony in Singapore. In the mid-19th century, Sino-Thais accounted for over half of Bangkok’s total population. They were one of the first groups of people to live in shophouses, along with European merchants. Thus, the shophouse represented a hybridisation of Western, Thai, and Chinese cultures.

Figure 6.4: Comparison of housing sections before and during the modernisation of Rama IV. These sections illustrate the change in spatial design at the level of the individual house.

251

Even though the shophouse was a modern house adapted from a Western colony, in the context of Bangkok, Sino-Thais adopted the associated architectural system to the way they had used the stilt/floating houses. This was like the change in the spatial structure of urban space. The way Sino-Thais used shophouses still saw an overlap of public and private spaces, within a fading hierarchy. Traditionally, in Bangkok public space was considered more sacred than private space, but in the shophouse, sacred space was not represented, as we can see in the section presented by figure 6.4. Public space, which in traditional architecture would be sacred and thus higher in the hierarchy, was located on the ground floor, lower than the private space, which would traditionally have put it lower in the hierarchy. We see here how modernisation had disrupted the traditional spatial hierarchy associated with public space. At the same time, the sleeping space, which was considered equivalent to sacred space, was still located on the first floor,341 demonstrating that some hierarchy remained even in the section of a shophouse. Another reason why public space was located on the ground floor was because the space of the modern road, which connected to the ground floor, was an everyday space. This influenced the Sino-Thais in their understanding that the ground floor had a more public quality. Furthermore, although public and private spaces were organised vertically, similar to the way they were in stilt/floating houses, the Sino-Thais used public and private spaces flexibly in many ways. Sometimes, public space on the ground floor served domestic purposes such as eating, playing, and socialising, alongside commercial activities such as selling goods. This demonstrated how the spatial order of the shophouse became more versatile than that of traditional dwellings. It also caused the Sino-Thais to not make a hard distinction between the public and private functions of the shophouse. They understood that both public and private activities they engaged in were in the domestic domain.

341 This research uses the term ground floor to refer to the lowest floor (above the basement), and first floor to refer to the first one above the ground. 252

The way the Sino-Thais adopted the architectural system of the shophouse to their traditional way of occupying public and private spaces changed the way they manifested the modern Thai sense of home in existential space. The stilt or floating house represented a microcosm of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model, and the shophouses of the Sino-Thais demonstrated a change in this model’s application. The architectural system of the shophouse did not adopt the strict spatial hierarchy of the stilt/floating house: the conceptually hierarchical floor of the traditional houses disappeared. This increased the flexibility of the way public and private spaces could be organised: they could now be arranged without the traditional hierarchy of the cosmological model, but rather in whatever way suited their desired purpose. The domestic morphology of the shophouse was characterised by this flexibility. Increased flexibility was also reflected in urban space, which became more versatile. That sleeping spaces within the shophouse were still considered to be sacred, and still positioned higher than communal spaces, indicated that a level of spatial hierarchy remained, but the framework of flexibility in which this was the case demonstrated how the duality of sacred and profane spaces was being hybridised with modern architecture. Modern roads flattened the spatial structure of Bangkok’s urban space at the phenomenological level. However, physically, the architectural system of the shophouse brought Sino-Thais to live within the vertical structure of a two-storey building. In the context of Bangkok, this kind of spatial organisation saw Sino-Thais living on the same level as, or even at higher levels than, the upper class who lived in the Grand Palace and Buddhist temples, which were built with only one storey. Thus, the domestic topology of the shophouse exhibited a less-defined hierarchy of public and private spaces that were used with greater flexibility. The reshaping in the spatial arrangement of public and private spaces in the shophouse, relative to traditional patterns, changed the central and axial plans at the house level. As in urban space, the central (sacred) space of the house integrated into communal spaces. The hierarchy in the spatial arrangement of public and private spaces in

253

the shophouse was weakened in comparison to the traditional house. Sino-Thais decentralised the house’s plan by swapping and mixing public and private spaces within the two-storey structure of the shophouse, making it have no dedicated sacred space.

Bringing the lower class to live on land like the upper class

At the house level, the changed morphology and topology of the shophouse reflected how the emerging middle-class of Sino-Thais (a lower class in the sakdina system) hybridised the ‘existential spatiality’ from the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model with modern architecture. This showed how the urban modernisation policy of Rama IV, together with the adaptations made by Sino-Thais in the shophouses, had changed the Thai concept of home at the domestic level. Moreover, the change in the spatial arrangement of the shophouse showed that the commercialisation of land and real estate was more influential than the adoption of modern architecture in the transformation of class structure. However, some spatial hierarchy between the sacred (sleeping) and communal spaces in the shophouse remained unchanged, and this reflected how the dualistic concept of sacred and profane spaces remained in the way that Sino-Thais used their domestic space despite Bangkok’s urban space and building becoming more Westernised. This demonstrated one of the ways in which Thai identity had hybridised with modernity. Furthermore, the modern construction techniques of row houses used in building shophouses ignored the construction rite, which was a traditional process that integrated the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model into the house’s structure. This was another reason why the hierarchy weakened in the structure of shophouses and the conceptually hierarchical floor disappeared. The diminished importance of the construction rite also reflected the disappearance of the distinct water and land settlements from the urban space, demonstrating how the spatial arrangement of the shophouse reflected the changing settlement system. The building of shophouses in the modern space of Rattanakosin Island aimed to introduce houses and private space in the Western sense to Bangkok. However, cultural hybridisation saw the traditional Thai way of life adapted to modernity, and one hallmark of this was that the definition of public and private spaces was still flexible, as it had been 254

before urbanisation. Sino-Thais understood domestic architecture as a coexistence of public and private spaces. Therefore, the meaning of the house or domestic space in Bangkok during the modernisation program of Rama IV was different from that in the West. Sino-Thais’ understanding that the domestic space was a combination of public and private spaces (figure 6.4), as in the past, remained distinctively Thai, although it had changed as these spaces became even more flexible than before.

Conclusion: Summarising the Thai concept of home as a typological meaning of architecture in Bangkok from 1851–1868

The changing morphology and topology in the space of Bangkok under the modernisation policies and processes of Rama IV revealed that the settlement system, urban space, and individual buildings involved a hybridisation that introduced more flexibility to the relationship between sacred and profane spaces. The duality of these spaces still existed in the city planning and buildings of Bangkok, but the hierarchical nature of their relationship faded. This represented that though the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model still dominated the urban space of Bangkok, it was hybridised with modernity as the water and land settlements started to disappear. Thus, both cultural hybridisation and royal modernisation policies and processes changed the spatial relationship between sacred and profane spaces from one of inherent-contradiction to partial merging, where the vertical hierarchy between the sacred and profane spaces began to be partially flattened. At the settlement level, the changing morphology and topology showed how the spatial structure of Bangkok had lost some of its hierarchy, causing sacred and profane spaces to become integrated. As a result, reshaping of the city’s ‘existential spatiality’ hybridised the new Thai concept of home as the settlement system adapted the Hindu- Buddhist cosmological model to modernity. This changed the typology in the space of Bangkok – the ‘bond’ that brought the Bangkokians, especially Sino-Thais, to dwell in the modern landscape of Bangkok – and changed the way people met and interacted. The upper class and Sino-Thais still existed in an urban landscape of sacred and profane spaces but interacted with them in more flexible ways in the modern urban space.

255

The morphological and topological changes in the urban space manifested the image of modern Bangkok as one involving the integration of sacred and profane spaces in modern space. This illustrated that the ‘urban interior’ had changed with regard to the relationship between dual sacred and profane spaces. The land and water settlements started to fade from the urban space, flattening the hierarchical relationship between these sacred and profane spaces. This changed the way Sino-Thais dwelled in the reshaped existential space. Lower and upper classes came to live on the same horizontal plane, changing the typological role of Bangkok’s urban space. The urban character of modern Bangkok changed to be one characterised by partial merging as sacred and profane spaces integrated around modern roads. Although the shophouse was introduced to Bangkok’s urban space as a modern housing typology, Sino-Thais hybridised their understanding of overlapping public and private spaces to its structure in a Thai way. The Sino-Thais understood that the house, in the context of modern Bangkok, had both public and private spaces. The absence of distinct water and land settlements meant that sacred architecture such as the Grand Palace and Buddhist temples no longer functioned as public buildings for the profane space at the scale of urban space, but still fulfilled religious purposes such as worship. These sacred buildings also remained the homes of the upper class. As with the urban space, the changing domestic morphology and topology in the shophouse showed how the duality of sacred and profane spaces remained, albeit with less spatial hierarchy in the arrangement of public and private spaces. The house level, then, also represented the flattening of the spatial structure, as was occurring in the urban space. This reflected how the spatial arrangement of shophouses demonstrated the hybridisation of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model with modernity. It also disclosed how individual Bangkokians changed the way they understood the ‘existential spatiality’ of the modern Thai concept of home, which came to be characterised by dualism with partial merging.

256

Figure 6.5: Sacred and profane spaces in a relationship of partial merging.

The typology of the settlement, urban space, and individual buildings of modern Bangkok all revealed how the ‘existential spatiality’ of the new Thai concept of home was one of dualism with partial merging (figure 6.5). This demonstrated how Thai culture hybridised the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model with modernity, diminishing the hierarchy in the way sacred and profane spaces interacted while integrating them with more flexibility. Hence, the spirit of place in Bangkok’s architecture remained one of a duality of sacred and profane spaces, but now partially merged. Within this, a greatly lessened sense of hierarchy was maintained because the integration between sacred and profane spaces was effected by the superimposition of sacred space on profane spaces, modern space being introduced from within sacred space as a result of the royal modernisation policies and processes initiated by Rama IV.

257

258

7. Mastering modernisation to hybridise Thai identity under King Chulalongkorn (Rama V, r. 1868–1910)

Introduction

This chapter further discusses the changing ‘language of architecture’ of Bangkok under the modernisation program of King Chulalongkorn (Rama V, r. 1868–1910). It analyses how Rama V’s urbanisation efforts, continuing from those of Rama IV, hybridised the Thai idea of home by introducing Western-style public functions to royal spaces. The chapter analyses the morphology and topology of Bangkok, especially at the urban space and public building scales, and explores how hybridising public space with traditional space at the Royal Playground and on Ratchadamnoen Avenue contributed to hybridising the urban space of modern Bangkok during the reign of Rama V. It analyses how the king’s modernisation policies and processes hybridised the architectural system in the space of Bangkok, changing and hybridising the Thai sense of home at the phenomenological level. It then continues the analysis of the morphology and topology of the urban space and public buildings of Bangkok into a discussion of the changing typology, considering how the typological meaning of Bangkok’s urban and public space interpreted the hybridising Thai concept of home as it was influenced by Rama V’s modernisation policies.

Settlement: Bangkok, the capital of a modern monarchy

Modern space as royal space Like Rama IV (r. 1851–1868) before him, Rama V intended to modernise Bangkok to be like the West while adapting the Thai identity to modern planning, which Rama V observed during his two tours to Europe in 1897 and 1907. The settlement system of Bangkok during his reign was largely as it had been in the reign of Rama IV, with the addition of formal public spaces. The merging morphology of sacred and profane spaces was adapted to that new kind of public space. He exemplified this by building further

259

modern roads and occupying them for royal purposes. Although the spatial hierarchy of sacred and profane spaces continued to become less obvious and was, in a sense, further ‘flattened’, Rama V was nevertheless able to superimpose sacred space on the profane space through the royal occupation of public spaces introducing the new Thai concept of home influenced by Rama V’s modernisation.

Introducing the formal public space on Rattanakosin Island In superimposing sacred space on the profane space in this way, Rama V reminded the emerging Sino-Thai middle class, who lived in shophouses around the modern roads in the area of Rattanakosin Island, that Bangkok’s modern space belonged to the king. Modern space was introduced in the context of Bangkok in a way that made the Thai kings a presence in that space. At the same time, modernisation demonstrated how Bangkok was adapting Western styles of urban living through its changing spatial structure. This reflected how the concept behind royal modernisation policies and programs was the transformation of sacred space into a modern settlement system while preserving the concept of superimposing higher space on lower space. This preserved the influence of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model along with the non-hierarchical spatial relationship established between sacred and profane spaces during the modernisation of Rama IV. The geographical difference between land and water no longer corresponded to a distinction between sacred and profane spaces, but sacred space dominated the profane space by being superimposed on it. This would see more flexibility shown in the way that Rama V incorporated the duality of sacred and profane spaces into a ‘flattened’ settlement system.

260

Figure 7.1: A map of Bangkok in the reign of Rama V. Ratchadamnoen Avenue and the Royal Playground are shown on Rattanakosin Island in the orange area.

In the settlement of Bangkok, Rama V introduced formal public space in a Thai way through the Royal Playground and Ratchadamnoen Avenue. Rama V was inspired to create Western-style public spaces during his first tour to Paris in 1897. The king adapted Western ways of using the street and public space, like those he had seen along the Champs-Elysées in Paris, in the context of Bangkok. He had the Royal Playground modified, and built Ratchadamnoen Avenue, to create theatres in which to demonstrate his Thai adaptation of Western public space (figures 7.1 and 7.3). At the settlement level, modern spaces built by the Thai kings served both sacred and profane purposes. However, in the reign of Rama IV, it had not been clear how sacred and profane spaces would relate to each other in modern space. In part, this was not clearly established as Rama IV’s reign was relatively short at only seventeen years. The changes in the spatial structure of

261

Bangkok under Rama IV also represented only the beginning of the modernisation process. Thus, it could be said that the reign of Rama IV was an age of transition for Bangkok’s urban space. Rama V built on his father’s legacy and made it clearer that the ‘existential spatiality’ of the new Thai concept of home would paradoxically retain the duality of sacred and profane spaces by ‘flattening’ their hierarchy and superimposing sacred space upon the profane space. We will see how this occurred as we discuss changes in the spatial structure of the changing Thai sense of home at the urban level using the examples of Rama V’s use of the Royal Playground and Ratchadamnoen Avenue.

Urban space: Imposing royal space on the modern space

At the phenomenological level, the modification of the Royal Playground and the construction of Ratchadamnoen Avenue continued the process of merging modern royal sacred space into the traditional settlement system. Throughout the reign of Rama V, the spatial structure of Bangkok flattened but the duality of sacred and profane spaces remained. Urban development during Rama V’s reign was characterised by the introduction of public space through the use of the Royal Playground and Ratchadamnoen Avenue. This demonstrated how sacred space was superimposed on the profane space within the flattening settlement system of Bangkok. On returning from his first tour to Europe in 1897, he commanded that the Royal Playground be transformed into part of the public sphere, where traditionally it had represented the sacred area of Mount Meru from the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model.

Repurposing the Royal Playground for the public The Royal Playground was an empty space between the Grand Palace to the south and the Front Palace at the north of Rattanakosin Island. It functioned as a site for royal cremations342 and had been called Thung Phra Meru (the field of the royal pyre)

342 Royal Thai Survey Department, Maps of Bangkok A.D. 1888–1931 (Bangkok: Royal Thai Survey Department, 1999). 262

(figure 7.2). However, Rama V considered the name Thung Phra Meru inauspicious,343 so he changed its name to Sanam Luang, meaning ‘Royal Playground’. Rama V had the Royal Playground redesigned and rebuilt as an intergral element of his modernisation program:344 a workforce was hired to modify its shape from trapezoid to oval, and to plant double rows of tamarind trees. In this process, the Royal Playground was enlarged from roughly 45,000m² to 120,000m². When the Royal Playground was not in royal use, Rama V allowed the people to use it for selling goods and holding social events. Many public celebrations were organised there to serve communal purposes. However, when the king required it, communal activities could be suspended and the ground could be prepared for royal uses such as a royal cremation.345 This demonstrated how Rama V had adapted sacred space into the public space at the urban scale, hybridising its traditional function with public space like that of the West but prioritising its use for the royal purposes. The relationship between sacred and profane spaces on the Royal Playground was flexible, based around its modification for use in different activities: royalty could prepare it as sacred space for important occasions such as a royal cremation, while it could be returned to public and profane purposes such as markets and celebrations when not in royal use. In modern royal space, where sacred space overlaid the profane space within the modern royal space, the concept of dual space from the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model was presented within a flatter settlement system than before.

343 King Mongkut (Rama IV), Prachum Prakard Ratchakarn Tee See [A Collection of Proclamations in the Reign of King Rama IV] (Bangkok: The Teachers Council of Thailand, 2005). 344 Damrongrajanuphab, Prachum Pongsawadan Pak Tee 13 Rueng Tumnan Wang Na [A Collection of Chronicles, Volume 13 A History of Wang Na] (Bangkok: Sophonphiphatthanakorn, 1933). 345 Navapan N., “Absolute Monarchy and the Development of Bangkok’s Urban Spaces,” Planning Perspectives 29, no. 11 (2014), 3–6. 263

Figure 7.2: The Royal Playground during preparation for the phra meru of Rama IX. Before its preparation for the phra meru of Rama IX, the Royal Playground was commonly used as the space for a Sunday market where cheap and second-hand goods are sold.

Ratchadamnoen Avenue Rama V also demonstrated the use of public space in a Thai way on Ratchadamnoen Avenue. In particular, the celebration of the king’s jubilee in 1908 showed how the process of superimposing sacred space on profane space in public space had progressed on Ratchadamnoen. The avenue was built from 1899 to 1903 to connect Rattanakosin Island to Rama V’s new royal palace (Dusit Palace) to the north, and the name Ratchadamnoen meant royal promenade or royal progress,346 representing how Thai kings had brought modernity to Bangkok. Rama V commanded the avenue be built as a public street to be used for royal celebrations and to serve as a communal space like the Royal Playground. In 1903, he organised the first parades for anniversaries of his birth and reign on Ratchadamnoen Avenue; parades were organised there again in 1907 for the 40th

346 Ministry of Municipal Government. R5 N18.1s/1, Land Purchases for the Construction of Ratchadamnoen Avenue (1899–1906) (National Archives of Thailand). 264

anniversary of his reign, following his second trip to Europe in the same year. For royal use, Ratchadamnoen Avenue was decorated with ten triumphal arches embellished with royal and sacred symbols of Thai kings, such as the white elephant (figure 7.3). Further royal celebrations took place on Ratchadamnoen for the 40th anniversary of Rama V’s reign, which was regarded as his jubilee. Events for the royal celebration included a motor-car parade and float procession.347 While Rama V was riding a car through the ten triumphal arches on Ratchadamnoen Avenue, people lined up on the footpaths on both sides to watch the king go by; the motor-car parade celebrating his jubilee as a modern monarch followed. When the royal celebration on Ratchadamnoen Avenue finished, the street was open for public use most of the time. In fact, public use of Ratchadamnoen Avenue served both the king and the public, representing how it integrated sacred and profane spaces through its flexibility and multiple functions.

Figure 7.3: Rama V’s jubilee in 1908 on Ratchadamnoen Avenue. (Source: “Scenes from King Chulalongkorn’s Jubilee of 1908”.)348

347 Navapan, “Absolute Monarchy,” 10. 348 HuangLao, “Scenes from King Chulalongkorn’s Jubilee of 1908”, Teakdoor.com Siam, Thailand & Bangkok Old Photo Thread, 7 January 2018, http://teakdoor.com/famous-threads/39970-siam-thailand-bangkok-old-photo-thread-241- print.html 265

Reordering the urban interior Transformations of the royal space of Rama V showed how uses of public space adopted from the West, such as the jubilee parade celebrated by European monarchies in the 19th century,349 were adapted in the Bangkok context. Recreation of these public functions in a Thai way on the Royal Playground and Ratchadamnoen Avenue represented the integrating morphology of sacred and profane spaces through the superimposing of sacred space.

Figure 7.4: The urban interior of Bangkok with a flattened spatial structure of sacred and profane spaces. The top and middle layer of the urban floor extends to the outer conceptual wall continuing from the urban interior under Rama IV’s modernisation policies and processes.

349 Peleggi M., Lords of Things: The Fashioning of the Siamese Monarchy’s Modern Image, (Honolulu: University of Hawaiʻi Press, 2002), 26. 266

The integrating morphology of the ‘urban interior’ of Bangkok continued to develop during the reign of Rama V. Modern space eliminated the spatial hierarchy between sacred and profane spaces by superimposing sacred space on the profane space, making these spaces merge so that sacred space was on top of the profane space (figure 7.4). This dissolved the distinctions established in urban space by the double urban wall. However, the sacred area of Rattanakosin Island and the space of Mount Meru still existed in the flattened settlement system. This saw sacred and profane spaces merge, and the urban activities of the upper and lower classes come to take place in the same space, as sacred space was overlaid on the profane space. This gave the modern space of Bangkok more flexibility. Although the hierarchy of the urban activities between sacred and profane spaces was less distinct, the use of modern space for royal purposes was still given priority, as demonstrated by the king’s ability to commandeer the Royal Playground and Ratchadamnoen Avenue when desired. The double floor of the traditional urban space disappeared from sacred space that was superimposed on profane space via modern space. This effectively ‘flattened’ the spatial hierarchy of sacred and profane spaces and integrated the life of the upper and lower classes on the same horizontal plane. Nevertheless, Rama V’s use of the urban spaces of the Royal Playground and Ratchadamnoen Avenue represented how sacred space used for royal purposes had the highest priority in the public realm. Rama V made it clearer that the non-hierarchical spatial relationship between sacred and profane spaces on the flat settlement system was the result of temporarily superimposing sacred space on the profane space. This foregrounding of a temporal dimension to the relationship between sacred and profane space was a feature of modern Bangkok’s hybridisation of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model with modernity. Under Rama V, the urban ceiling of Rattanakosin Island (Mount Meru) was less evident as a result of the disappearance of separate water and land settlements. However, the ceiling in the sky still existed at the conceptual level due to Rama V’s emphasis of the traditional function of modern space.

267

The modern road as the path of the Thai king Bangkok roads under Rama V resembled Western streets, but hybridised the duality of sacred and profane spaces into the Western form of the modern road in places such as Ratchadamnoen Avenue. This made the relationship between sacred and profane spaces flexible while the importance of sacred space was emphasised. On the other hand, this represented that sacred space was the vector by which modern space was introduced to Bangkok. Rama V had thus preserved Thai identity by introducing public space in a unique way that accorded with the city’s traditions. Rama V hybridised the idea of dual of sacred and profane spaces with modernity by integrating the morphology of Bangkok’s urban space. This integrating morphology changed the sense of ‘togetherness’ and the ‘figural quality’ of the way the lower and upper classes moved and reacted to each other in modern space. When the hierarchical settlement system of land and water faded from Bangkok, urban activities from previous sacred and profane spaces merged. The upper and lower classes could spontaneously shift spaces from being sacred to profane and vice versa, as Rama V did at the Royal Playground and on Ratchadamnoen Avenue. The presence of modern space made the upper and lower classes physically closer, and the hard division between sacred and profane public spaces disappeared except when royal celebrations such as Rama V’s jubilee parade marked them as definitively sacred by superimposing sacred space on the profane space. Emphasis of the traditional functions of modern space raised the public status of Thai kings as Rama V used time and place to assert the superiority of sacred space in the modern space of the city, representing how the new Thai idea of home developed based on the hybrid concept of retaining the dualism of sacred and profane spaces by superimposing sacred space on the profane space in the flat settlement system of modern Bangkok.

268

Public buildings: Merging with modern architecture

A new type of public space in Bangkok Public space in Bangkok expressed a certain quality or mood that showed how people had changed their way of life in urban space during the royal modernisation policies and processes overseen by Rama V. The royal public space of his era showed a loss of hierarchy in the spatial structure as communal and royal functions manifested on the same space and street. However, public space did not serve communal and royal uses at the same time. Normally, public space served communal activities such as markets, social events, and public celebrations; only on special occasions related to the royal family did the public space turn to sacred purposes such as , and celebrations of the king’s reign. The versatile function of royal public space from Rama V onwards created a new image of the city, which reintegrated the duality of sacred and profane spaces in a compromise with the flat settlement system. The king integrated sacred and profane in the same space by having sacred space superimposed over the profane space at particular times. This illustrated the importance of Thai kings inviting their notion of modernity into urban space. The hybridisation of dual sacred and profane spaces with Western-style public space expressed a new morphology of coexistence in the public realm. The integration of communal and royal functions in public space represented the changing spatial structure of urban space, adapting the spatial dualism to the now-flat settlement system. Sacred and profane spaces could now be seen integrated into a single space in the public realm. However, modern space was introduced primarily through the sacred space of the land settlement. The change in the spatial order of sacred and profane spaces through a decreased hierarchy illustrated a corresponding change in the horizontal and vertical relationships of the modern Thai concept of home at the urban-space level. The use of the modern spaces of the Royal Playground and Ratchadamnoen Avenue as public space showed the changing horizontal relationship between sacred and profane spaces: as the boundary 269

dividing sacred and profane spaces by associating them with land and water disappeared, modern space merged them. This also changed the hierarchical relationship between sacred and profane spaces. When modernisation took place in urban space, it caused the spatial hierarchy of sacred and profane spaces to fade as they integrated. The people and Thai kings turned the public function of modern space to both communal and royal purposes, reflecting the versatility of the new topology of modern Bangkok. The new morphology and topology expressed in royal public space by Rama V gave modern Bangkok formal public spaces for the first time. This disclosed the identity of Bangkok as a city unified by royal modernisation policies and processes. The city’s collective identity in public space was visibly created through the urbanisation efforts of Thai kings, which made modern Bangkok a space where kings and the people lived together. Public space now illustrated how the modern class system which hybridised with sakdina in Bangkok connected with the belief that Thai kings were the most important agents in transforming Bangkok to be modern like the West. Doing this through the public space of modern Bangkok established the royal presence in modern urban space by superimposing sacred space on the profane space at particular times. This explained how Thai kings’ presence persisted in the modern environment of Bangkok even when there was eventually a change from the premodern social system of sakdina to a class system more like that of a Westernised industrial society. Thus, the birth of Thai public space in Bangkok with spaces like the Royal Ground and Ratchadamnoen Avenue allowed Rama V to show his people and the West that Bangkok was capable of being modern like a Western city without being modernised by the West. The presence of royal public space reflected how the Thai traditions and the Thai sense of home had been adapted to the Western way of life without losing local identity.

The limited modernisation of sacred, land-based temple architecture In modern Bangkok, temples did not only function as a sacred public space, but also as domestic space for Buddhist monks. As a sacred class, they still lived in the sacred space of the temples and their grounds. Monks did not fit into modern society because of this sacred status. Looking at temple and monastic architecture, then, gives us another way to 270

see how sacred space existed in the modern space of Bangkok, this time at the level of the private dwelling. The unique experience of monks, who lived on the temple grounds, showed how in at least one context, sacred space had been retained in domestic space even though it had been excluded from the modern house. This reflected an overlapping of (sacred) public and private spaces. In modern Bangkok, the temple was considered to have a higher status than some other spaces because it was a place for monks. The temple was more sacred than the modern house, as people worshipped the monks in the temple, and it was also a place for performing sacred ceremonies. The temple as a sacred house, then, reflected how sacred space was superimposed on profane space in the modern space of Bangkok.

Private dwellings: Modern living in a Thai way for the ruling class

Private dwellings in the reign of Rama V were similar to those in the reign of Rama IV. The spatial structure of shophouses remained one of flexible morphology and ‘flattened’ (or less hierarchical) topology. The difference was that the royal modernisation policies and processes of Rama V introduced further house types like those the king had seen on his tours to Europe in 1897 and 1907. Detached houses began to appear in Bangkok’s urban space, and construction of stilt/floating houses lessened as more modern roads were built. Detached houses in Bangkok had a two-storey structure like the shophouse but functioned purely as domestic space with no public function, influenced by the way Rama V used his new palace. This style of house often appeared as the dwelling of wealthy people, while domestic space with hybrid public and private functions appeared more in the houses of the Sino-Thai middle class. Housing with a purely private function indicated that the affluence of the upper class freed them to an extent from the need to work intensively from their home environment as Thai people did.

271

Vimanmek Mansion: Excising the public function from upper-class housing Royal public space introduced Bangkokians to a Western-style understanding of the function of public space. In the domestic realm, however, the overlap of public and private spaces had not necessarily changed. This overlap still existed in the way the Sino-Thai middle class used the interior space of the shophouse. Sino-Thais understood that in the private realm, public and private spaces were undistinguished, interacting flexibly in many ways. However, a clearer distinction between public and private spaces still existed around sacred buildings such as the Grand Palace and Buddhist temples. Along with the appearance of Western-style public space in Bangkok, Rama V had a new palace be built for himself and his family outside Rattanakosin Island between 1897 and 1901.350 This was one of the reasons he ordered the building of Ratchadamnoen Avenue, which linked Rattanakosin Island to the new Suan Dusit Palace to the north of the island (the palace of celestial gardens, or celestial palace) (figure 7.5).

Figure 7.5: A map of the buildings of Dusit Palace, which served as a royal residence. (Source: Patrick Lepetit.)351

350 Baker and Phongpaichit, A History of Thailand, 100–101. 351 Patrick Lepetit, 17 June 2018, http://patricklepetit.jalbum.net/BANGKOK/01- INFO/ATTRACTIONS/Vimanmek%20Palace.html

272

Figure 7.6: The Vimanmek Mansion served as a residence for the royal family from the reign of Rama V. (Source: Tibek, “The Vimanmek Mansion”.)352

There were a number of residential structures inside the Dusit Palace complex, one of which was the Vimanmek Mansion (figure 7.6). Rama V got the idea of building a palace dedicated solely to private life from his tour to Europe in 1897, where he saw how castles in Europe were built outside towns to serve as domestic space.353 Dusit Palace demonstrated that the presence of royal public space in urban space also influenced the upper class, who came to live in residential buildings as the Sino-Thais had in the reign of Rama IV, except with no overlap of (communal) public and private spaces. Furthermore, the sacred function disappeared from both the shophouse and Dusit Palace. In the case of

352 Tibek, “The Vimanmek Mansion,” 17 June 2018, http://www.thailandwanderer.com/wp- content/uploads/2012/10/The-Vimanmek-Mansion-photo-by-tibek.jpg. 353 Baker and Phongpaichit, A History of Thailand, 68–69.

273

the new palace, the royal public spaces of the Royal Playground and Ratchadamnoen Avenue already functioned for sacred purposes such as royal cremations and royal celebrations. Sacred functions were already catered for by the Grand Palace and Buddhist temples. Thus, when Rama V built Dusit Palace, it was possible to understand the Grand Palace as sacred public space and the new palace as a private space for domestic activities.

The hybrid design of Chakri Maha Prasat Throne Hall: Rama V’s house as a symbol of incorporating the West in a Thai way Rama V’s house of Chakri Maha Prasat Throne Hall was the first truly Western-style building designed and constructed in Bangkok between 1876 and 1882 in the Grand Palace by the English Architects, John Clunich and his assistant John Clunich Rose under the supervision of Chao Phraya Panuwongmahakosatobodi (Tuam Bunnag). Royal family’s houses designed by Western architects like Chakri Maha Prasat Throne Hall, made the Western architecture in Bangkok at the end of 19th century recognised as the ‘Royal Preferred style’.354

354 K. Noobanjong, “Power, Identity, and The Rise of Modern Architecture: From Siam to Thailand”, 152. 274

Figure 7.7: The Chakri Maha Prasat Throne Hall is located in between the Dusit and Amarinda Vinichai Hall in the Grand Palace. The building was designed to imitate a Renaissance Palazzo. The roof was built with the triple Thai-style spires to preserve the traditional look of a Thai palace. (Source: yourthaiguide, “The Chakri Group (Phra Thinang Chakri Maha Prasat)”)355

Similar to the Vimanmek Mansion in the Dusit Palace complex, the Chakri Maha Prasat Throne Hall purely served as a residence. Furthermore, Chakri Maha Prasat Throne Hall was also where many royal events for the king were held; although the private function of Chakri Maha Prasat Throne Hall was abandoned from the reign of Rama VI. In 1982 Rama IX commanded a major renovation to take place in the Chakri Maha Prasat Throne Hall transforming it into public spaces of throne halls, royal shrines, galleries, and museums serving for people356 like Royal Playground, Ratchadamnoen Avenue, and Norasingh House. These changes were under the modernisation plan by People’s Party

355 Your Thai Guide Co,. Ltd., “The Chakri Group (Phra Thinang Chakri Maha Prasat),” 12 April 2019, https://yourthaiguide.com/the-chakri-group-phra-thinang-chakri-maha-prasat/ 356 K. Noobanjong, 153. 275

from the 1930s to 1950s, see the section “New Public buildings: Turning to be a space of people.”

Furthermore, the design of Chakri Maha Prasat Throne Hall represents the new dualism order of sacred and profane spaces with the superimposing of sacred space as showed in the way Rama V superimposed the royal (sacred) space on the modern (profane) space like those Royal Playground, Ratchadamnoen Avenue, and the Vimanmek Mansion. From the book: Power, Identity, and the Rise of Modern Architecture: From Siam to Thailand, Noobanjong noted that In Chakri Maha Prasat Throne Hall, the use of triple Thai-style spires on the top of the Western design of Neo-classical building conveyed a political message by Rama V: “the Siamese resistance to Western colonial expansion and opposition”.357 On the other hand, having the triple Thai-style spires on the top of Western-style building show that Rama V embraced the Western architecture and modernity into his modernisation policies and processes. The king still preserved the traditional look of a royal palace reflecting the hybridisation in Thai concept of home. Where the dualism of sacred and profane spaces remained with the superimposing of sacred space via adding the triple Thai-style spires on the top of Western-style building of Chakri Maha Prasat Throne Hall.

Norasingh House: A house without a public function for the upper class Although the spatial hierarchy of Bangkok’s urban space had been weakened by city planning and modern architecture, members of the upper class (i.e. the king, the royal family, and the aristocracy) still used their residences to demonstrate higher status. Size and a level of European-style decoration were common ways of establishing distinction, as seen in Norasingh House, which Rama VI (r. 1910–1925) had built to the north of Rattanakosin Island in 1917, inspired by the influence of Rama V’s idea of modernisation, for the general Chao Phraya Ramarakob, to demonstrate his higher social status (figures 7.8 and 7.9).

357 Noobanjong K., “Chakri Maha Prasat Throne Hall” in Power, Identity, and The Rise of Modern Architecture: From Siam to Thailand (PhD diss., University of Colorado at Denver, 2003), 161. 276

Buildings like this represented that even though the hierarchy of the water and land settlements disappeared, the ruling class hybridised the social hierarchy of sakdina with modern architecture through the size, decoration, and function of the house. This demonstrated how the hierarchy was interpreted at the house level to maintain a structure of lower and upper classes. Differences of the function and physical appearance between the shophouses of the working class and the detached houses of the ruling class reflected the superimposition of higher space on lower space, and on a more permanent basis than in the public realm. The modern house types and space usage in Bangkok under the influence of royal modernisation policies and processes showed how the traditional way of life and Thai concept of home at the house level had adapted to aspirations of living like Westerners as Rama V envisioned, hybridising modernity with Thai tradition and retaining the superiority of the ruling class while adapting to the Western culture. The way of life in modern Bangkok exhibited complexity and hierarchy in the way the working and ruling classes lived in their modern houses, representing an adaptation of the sakdina system, as it had been expressed in separate water and land settlements, to the modern settlement system at the house level.

277

Figure 7.8: Norasingh House, built by Rama VI for Chao Phraya Ramarakob.

(Source: ThaiPublica.)358

Figure 7.9: The plan of Norasingh House. (Source: Tiptus and Bongsadadt, Houses in Bangkok, 252.)

358 ThaiPublica, 15 July 2014, https://thaipublica.org/2014/07/baan-norashing/ 278

Conclusion: Summarising the Thai concept of home as a typological meaning of architecture in Bangkok from 1868–1910

The morphology and topology of Bangkok under Rama V was not greatly different from the what it had been in reign of Rama IV, with the main exception being that the new king introduced royal public space into the city’s urban space. Public space still retained a ‘merged duality’ of sacred and profane spaces. Communal and royal functions were overlaid in public space as they were at the urban scale. However, Rama V prioritised the royal function by superimposing sacred space on profane space. In this period, houses with a purely residential purpose were introduced into Bangkok via the Dusit Palace of Rama V and Rama VI’s Norasingh House, inspired by the modernisation ideas of his predecessor. The purely residential houses of the upper class represented higher social status in their built form, relative to shophouses intended for both living and working in. The emergence of royal public space and houses solely for living in expressed how the non-hierarchical relationship of sacred and profane spaces had a typology (hybrid Thai idea of home) characterised by flexible connections between sacred and profane spaces. The settlement system of Bangkok in the reign of Rama V continued a similar level of urbanisation as in the reign of Rama IV. However, Rama V’s introduction of royal public space integrated sacred space into modern space in a non-hierarchical way. Working and upper classes still met in the modern space, but sacred space dominated the profane space of the flat settlement system. At the level of urban space, Rama V’s public space was a new, consciously Western element. However, Rama V’s use of the Royal Playground and Ratchadamnoen Avenue for royal purposes moved sacred space into the foreground at specific times and places. The ‘urban interior’, through the modernisation efforts of Rama V, presented modern space as being introduced through sacred space, and continued transforming the water settlement into a modern, land-based settlement. These efforts brought the lower and upper classes to live on the same horizontal plane, though the priority given to royal public space continued to express the social hierarchy. 279

Western-style public space emerged in Bangkok through the efforts of Rama V, albeit in a distinctively Thai way characterised by the coexistence of sacred and profane spaces in a flexible relationship. Public space served both communal and royal purposes, representing a morphology of coexistence through the spatial arrangement of public space. The versatility of sacred and profane spaces made the topology somewhat flattened in the absence of a spatial hierarchy. Establishing public space gave the upper classes the option of building houses dedicated to purely domestic purposes. The Dusit Palace of Rama V, and Norasingh House, built in the reign of Rama VI, were among many buildings built to such ends, and inspired many modern houses in Bangkok to exclude the public function. However, the emergence of detached houses for upper-class life created a visible hierarchy that placed them above shophouses, which were for the lower and middle classes to live and work. These two different types of modern house reflected the adaptation of the Thai social hierarchy of the day to modern space at the level of the individual house.

Figure 7.10: Sacred and profane spaces in a relationship of inner-merging with the superimposing of sacred space.

280

The emergence of royal public space and purely residential upper-class houses retained a distinctively Thai, non-hierarchical ‘existential spatiality’ of sacred and profane spaces, although these had been brought closer together than ever before (figure 7.10). The major change during the reign of Rama V was that it was now plainly visible how sacred space could be superimposed on the profane space at particular times, representing how the royal institution dominated the spatial structure of modern Bangkok through its modernisation efforts. Sacred and profane spaces were highly versatile and flexible, but sacred space was dominant and emphasised whenever necessary. Topologically, the meaning of and relationship between sacred and profane spaces was characterised by the inner-imposing of sacred space. This spatial relationship, emerging through modern space and architecture, shifted the Thai idea of home towards being characterised by dualism with the inner-imposing of sacred space.

281

282

8. Transforming Bangkok into a people’s city and the weakening of Thai identity (1935–1946) under The People’s Party

Introduction

This chapter analyses how the ‘language of architecture’ developed in Banagkok during the change from sakdina to democracy, which was a result of the weakening of the Thai monarchy from the reign of Rama VI (r. 1910–1925) to that of Rama VII (r. 1925–1935). It explores how the Thai sense of home changed and hybridised under Rama VIII (r. 1935– 1946) after The People’s Party overthrew Rama VII, through changes in the function of public spaces and houses. This chapter looks at how the morphology and topology of Bangkok changed in response to The People’s Party’s new direction of modernisation policies and processes in its urban space in the public and domestic realms. It analyses how the ‘language of architecture’ at the public-building and house levels of Bangkok’s existential space changed in response to the process of turning the space on Ratachadamnoen Avenue and at the Royal Playground and modern upper-class houses on and around Rattanakosin Island to be for public (figure 8.1). This chapter discusses the changing typology through an analysis of the morphological and topological changes. It analyses how urbanisation directed by The People’s Party changed and hybridised the Thai sense of home without the domination of the royal regime.

Settlement: Transforming Bangkok into the people’s city

The process of urbanising Bangkok continued without the domination of the young king, Rama VIII, following the abdication of Rama VII (r. 1925–1935) in 1935, which removed the Thai monarchy from the political scene. The People’s Party took over the leading role in modernising Bangkok following the trajectory established by Thai kings. After the 1932 revolution, the organisation of sacred and profane spaces changed but the settlement morphology and topology of Bangkok remained relatively unchanged.

283

New order of sacred and profane spaces The presence of The People’s Party government transformed Bangkok to be a space of Thai people. This involved profane space suppressing sacred space through the construction of public buildings, and the transformation of royal space to serve communal purposes. This Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model essentially ‘faded away’ from the space of Bangkok at the phenomenological level. Superimposing profane space on sacred space removed the sacred centre, Mount Meru, from the settlement system. This changed the image of Bangkok from the sacred capital of Thai kings to a city of the people. Constructing and transforming buildings for the lower classes changed ‘human togetherness’ by modifying the spatial organisation of sacred and profane spaces. The modern settlement of Bangkok, under the leadership of The People’s Party, shows how modernisation without significant intervention of Rama VIII changed the modern space. It gathered the people and celestial in a new way in modern space. The settlement of Bangkok, without royal domination, in the period 1935–1946, became a landscape of people. At the conceptual level, the emphasis on communal functions superimposed profane space on sacred space in merging the dual settlement systems of Bangkok. This created another form of inverted hierarchy, where the Thai people were higher than the ruling class.

Transforming Rattanakosin Island from Thai king’s place into people’s place Modern roads were paved following the existing canal network, not leading to royal public spaces and buildings. The road system was built to serve the spaces and architecture of all Thais, such as the Democracy Monument on Ratchadamnoen Avenue, transforming the Royal Playground into an area of public services (hospitals, theatres, parliament buildings, etc.) and mass housing. Many royal and government buildings such as the Grand Palace were also repurposed to serve public. Buddhist temples were transformed to make them more communal (figure 8.1) while retaining their sacred function and remaining as residences for the associated monks.

284

Figure 8.1: Bangkok in the reign of Rama VIII. This shows changes in Ratchadamnoen Avenue and the Royal Playground on Rattanakosin Island in the orange area.

Urban space: The people’s modern-sacred space

Urban interior of People’s Party The modernisation policies and processes of Bangkok’s urban space, through the intervention of The People’s Party government, transformed the ‘urban interior’ to serve for the Thai people; it reshaped the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model mapped onto the urban space. The duality of sacred and profane spaces still existed when merged into the modern space, but profane space was emphasised through public buildings and houses.

285

Figure 8.2: The urban interior of Bangkok removed Mount Meru to transform the space for Thai people. The sacred area of Mount Meru, imitated in the middle of the urban interior, was conceptually removed as profane space replaced sacred space. Modernisation of the urban ground plane made sacred and profane spaces coexist, with profane space overlaying sacred space. The boundary of the invisible urban wall that divided Rattanakosin Island from the rest of Bangkok was blurred through the flattening of water/land settlements. The outer invisible urban wall functioned to distinguish Bangkok, as the capital, from the countryside.

The ‘urban interior’ still an integrated morphology between sacred and profane spaces (figure 8.2). However, the development of profane space by The People’s Party repurposed the public space of Rama V (r. 1868-1910). Removing Mount Meru, or the sacred space, from modern space gave the modern space of Bangkok a less sacred dimension. Rattanakosin Island, in the middle of modern Bangkok, was no longer distinguished from everyday space. The sacred island emerged as a part of the modern space, representing profane space laid on top of sacred space. The double urban wall and floor no longer distinguished a hierarchy of sacred and profane spaces inspired by the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model. Modern planning

286

highly influenced the spatial structure of the ‘urban interior’ with the king (now Rama VIII) no longer driving modernisation policies and processes. However, the belief in the upper realm from the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model remained, and could be seen in the remaining traditional buildings such as the Grand Palace and Buddhist temples, which reflected people’s belief in heaven. Though they believed the sacred space, heaven, was in the sky, on the urban ground plane the sacred space essentially disappeared. This changed the double urban ceiling; the first urban ceiling of Rattanakosin Island disappeared. Then only the second urban ceiling, the heaven in the sky, remained in the ‘urban interior’.

Modern road that serves for public The 20th century streets of Bangkok, in the absence of royal domination, changed the way they hybridised sacred and profane spaces by connecting people to communal spaces and buildings. The integrated morphology under Rama IV (r. 1851-1868) was unchanged, although profane space came to ‘suppress’ sacred space. The way people gathered, ‘human togetherness’, changed slightly in the modern space, but retained the concept of spatial dualism where sacred and profane spaces coexisted through the superimposition of profane space on sacred space. Human space was emphasised over celestial space in the less hierarchical (or ‘flattened’) urban space but they continued to coexisted in modern space. The upper and lower classes were still distinguished in the coexisting sacred and profane spaces, but the disappearance of the water and land settlement system allowed people from different classes to connect freely with less hierarchy. Although the urban topology was still non-hierarchical, as in the reign of Rama V, during the era of The People’s Party royal space was no longer clearly delineated within the urban space. The way urban space was modernised without the intervention of royal authority contributed more to the existence of humans (Thai people) in the modern space of Bangkok. However, the way sacred and profane spaces were arranged in the modern space did not present class equality through the flat settlement system, because although the dualism of sacred and profane spaces existed, the emphasis on communal spaces and buildings located profane space higher than the sacred space through the superimposition. These sacred and profane spaces existed in a Thai way, where sacred 287

and profane spaces were superimposed on each other depending on the shifts in political power between the people and Thai kings.

New Public buildings: Turning to be a space of people

The repurposing of royal spaces for the Royal Playground and Ratchadamnoen Avenue, and the construction of communal buildings like the Supreme Court Building, the Chaloemthai Theatre, and The People’s Party’s Department of Public Relations Headquarters on Rattanakosin Island (figure 8.3), served as architectural symbols of the changing social order as it shifted from domination by Thai kings to People’s Party government. They built public buildings on Rattanakosin Island to serve the working class and also transformed royal spaces, such as the Royal Playground and Ratchadamnoen Avenue, to serve the public. This superimposed profane space over sacred space at the phenomenological level; it made the communal function of the space and buildings serve the people, rather than the ruling class as it had under Rama V. The way The People’s Party turned Rattanakosin Island and Bangkok into a space for humans by modifying the royal space and building communal buildings presented a new image of Bangkok as a modern capital for Thai people.

288

Figure 8.3: A map of Bangkok in the reign of Rama VIII. The grey highlights show the sites of three public buildings erected to serve the people.

Public space in the urban space of Bangkok after the 1932 revolution expressed a new identity for the city. The change in the function of the public spaces and buildings explains how the spatial structure of Bangkok’s existential space changed at the public- building level.

Repurposing the Royal Playground for public use Firstly, The People’s Party transformed the Royal Playground into a public space, repurposing it as a Sunday market. After World War I (r. 1914–1918) in the reign of Rama VI (r. 1910–1925), through to the reign of Rama VII (r. 1925–1935), Bangkok faced economic hardship. Thus, The People’s Party government began the ‘formal-informal’ or semi-formal function of the Royal Playground. They decided to open the Royal Playground to the public for selling goods, which helped stimulate the economy (figure 8.4). Its service as a Sunday market also, by turning the space over to communal use in the centre of 289

Bangkok, demonstrated that while the dualism of sacred and profane spaces remained, the public function of profane space was now overlaid onto sacred space.

Figure 8.4: The Royal Playground, on the right, was repurposed as a Sunday market. (Source: Withaya, “Bangkok Flea Markets.”)359

Repurposing the Ratchadamnoen Avenue for public use Beside the Royal Playground, to the northeast, Ratchadamnoen Avenue, which had served the royal celebrations of Rama V, had a new role superimposed on it through the building of the Democracy Monument by The People’s Party. Finished in 1939, it was a political symbol of the overthrow of the royal regime of Rama VII in 1932.360 The Democracy Monument transformed Ratchadamnoen Avenue, symbolically and practically, to be a space of the people (figure 8.5). At the same time, in 1939 the government changed the name of the country from Siam to Thailand, meaning the country of free people; this also reflected that not only Bangkok but the whole country was a place of the people.

359 Withaya, “Bangkok Flea Markets,” Asian Oasis Blog, 22 December 2015, www.asianoasisblog.com/bangkok-flea- markets/ 360 Baker and Phongpaichit, A History of Thailand, 124. 290

Figure 8.5: The Democracy Monument on Ratchadamnoen Avenue. (Source: Marek Ślusarczyk, “Democracy Monument in Bangkok, Thailand”.)361

Secondly, The People’s Party celebrated its new regime by erecting public buildings on Rattanakosin Island, which Thai kings had used to demonstrate how they had made Bangkok modern like the West. The People’s Party government used Rattanakosin Island as a site where profane space was superimposed on sacred space at the physical and the conceptual level of Bangkok’s urban fabric. Three iconic modern buildings built by The People’s Party will be discussed in this chapter—the Supreme Court Building, the Chaloemthai Theatre, and the Department of Public Relations Headquarters—explaining how they incorporated modern buildings that served the people into the urban space of Bangkok. All three of these buildings were strategically placed along Ratchadamnoen Avenue (figure 8.3),362 and are examples of how The People’s Party developed a new type of public building, moving on from the pattern set in the reign of Rama V (r. 1868–1910).

361 Marek Ślusarczyk, “Democracy Monument in Bangkok, Thailand,” Wikimedia Commons, 30 March 2009, commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Democracy_monument,_Bangkok,_Thailand.jpg. 362 Noobanjong K., “The Poetics of Destructions: Demolitions of Iconic Modernist Buildings in Bangkok” (paper presented at the 13th International Conference on Thai Studies, Chiang Mai, 15–18 July 2017). 291

This changed Ratchadamnoen Avenue from a royal promenade into a truly public space of Thai people and The People’s Party. This reflected the way that, after The People’s Party overthrew Rama VII (r. 1925–1935) in 1932, the process of modernisation, which was previously championed by Thai kings, was now in the hands of The People’s Party government. The location of these three iconic buildings, as illustrated earlier, explained how The People’s Party superimposed profane space on sacred space by erecting public buildings that served the people.

The Supreme Court Building The Supreme Court Building was built at the south-east of the Royal Playground, with the Grand Palace at its south-west and the royal palace to the north. Its construction represented Bangkok’s new power structure Bangkok, after the shift from absolute to constitutional monarchy in the revolution of 1932, depended on The People’s Party. (figure 8.6). The People’s Party espoused what it saw as the six principles of modern Thailand: independence, security, economic welfare, equality, liberty, and education for the people. These were shown on the six columns at the front of the Court of Justice buildings (figure 8.6), one of the three sections of the Supreme Court Building (figure 8.7).363 The placement of these six columns in the public realm of the Court of Justice buildings presented a new, unified identity for Bangkok after the 1932 revolution. At this public ‘dwelling’, the spatial planning of the six columns expressed that the spatial structure of Bangkok had supposedly been ‘freed’ from royal domination and that profane (public) space had replaced sacred (royal) space.

363 Prakitnondhakarn C., Politics and Society in Architecture: Siamese Era, Applications in Thai Design, and Nationalism (Bangkok: Matichon, 2004), 109. 292

Figure 8.6: Location of the six columns inside the entrance of the Supreme Court Building. Columns are indicated by red marks. (Source: Created by the author based on the Supreme Court Building’s plan, obtained from the Fine Arts Department of the Thai Ministry of Culture.)

Figure 8.7: The entrance of the Supreme Court Building, built 1939–1943. (Source: Martin Lorenz, “Good Morning Old Bangkok.”)364

364 Martin Lorenz, “Good Morning Old Bangkok: Can the Supreme Court ศาลฎีกา Be Saved?” My Krung Thep กรุงเทพฯ (Bangkok), 6 January 2013, traveltobangkok.blogspot.com/2013/01/good-morning-old-bangkok-can-supreme.html 293

The Chaloemthai Theatre The location of the Chaloemthai Theatre and the Department of Public Relations Headquarters along Ratchadamnoen Avenue also expressed how profane space had come to dominate sacred space. The Chaloemthai Theatre was built to be an entertainment space for people at the urban scale (figure 8.8); its function and spatial planning on Ratchadamnoen Avenue, as a space for theatrical performances, represented that the public morphology of sacred and profane spaces had come to coexist in the modern space. The emphasis on communal buildings showed that at the phenomenological level, the profane space was overlaid on top of the sacred space, disclosing that the topology had become flattened as change occurred from the previous spatial order.

Figure 8.8: The Chaloemthai Theatre opened in 1933 and was refurbished between 1949 and 1953. (Source: Metrobear, “ย้อนอดีตยามเมื่อโรงหนังใหญ่ๆ ในกรุงยังรุ่งโรจน์ [Looking to the Past when the Theatres in Bangkok Still Prospered]”.)365

The Department of Public Relations Headquarters Changes in the public morphology can also be seen in the Department of Public Relations Headquarters on Ratchadamnoen Avenue; this served as a profane space (figure 8.9). The building functioned as a large auditorium for The People’s Party to promote and advertise

365 Metrobear, “Looking to the Past when the Theatres in Bangkok Still Prospered,” OK Nation Blog, 26 July 2014, oknation.nationtv.tv/blog/metrobear/2014/07/26/entry-1 294

the new Thai culture called rathniyom (figure 8.10), and the six principles of The People’s Party,366 in the public sphere.

Figure 8.9: The Department of Public Relations Headquarters, built in 1963. (Source: Association of Siamese Architects.)

366 Noobanjong, “The Poetics of Destructions,” 10. 295

Figure 8.10: “Don’t and Do in Thai Culture” poster issued by the Office of the Prime Minister in 1940. This poster showed the working class how to dress to be modern like the West, in a Thai way. The concept of being modern while preserving the original Thai identity is reflected here. The right side says people must dress like Westerners in public space, showing how people should clothe themselves in garments such as long-sleeved shirts and long pants. Nevertheless, the poster explains how to translate traditional dress such as the sarong into a Western style, as shown by the two women in the right-hand “Do” illustration. This poster expressed The People’s Party view of being modern like the West in public space, continuing from the intention of Rama V (r. 1868–1910). (Source: Department of Public Relations.)

Building the Department of Public Relations Headquarters made the communal urban space on Ratchadamnoen Avenue dominate the royal space, reflecting how profane space now dominated the royal space on the street created in the reign of Rama V (r. 1868–1910). The change of the spatial order, and the relationship between sacred and profane spaces in the coexisting morphology at the public-dwelling level, again shows us how the hierarchy between sacred and profane surfaces was ‘flattened’ even more.

Converted public buildings from houses of the upper class The modern palaces and houses of the ruling class, as has been discussed in chapter 7, were repurposed by The People’s Party government and turned into communal buildings.

296

This eliminated hierarchy at the house level, as the ruling class’s houses changed to serve public purposes. This also changed house design for the working class. The Dusit Palace of Rama V was converted into a museum of Thai culture that opened for the public, representing how the space of the royal family had been turned into a space for the people. This also happened in the case of Norasingh House (figure 8.11), which became the house of the Prime Minister in 1941 under The People’s Party regime.

Figure 8.11: The Norasingh House, serving as Thailand’s Government House. This photo was taken during the tenure of Prayut Chan-o-cha and his cabinet (2014–). (Source: “Thai Cabinet Meets King.”)367

367 “Thai Cabinet Meets King; Doubt Grows about Power Handover Schedule”, Today, 4 September 2014, www.todayonline.com/world/thai-cabinet-meets-king-doubt-grows-over-power-handover-schedule 297

The changing public realm In the public realm, the modification of the existing royal spaces of Rama V and the construction of new public buildings by The People’s Party expressed how the power of public, led by The People’s Party, affected the duality of sacred and profane spaces through the changing morphology and topology. The presence of a new kind of public space and building, originating from the people, showed that at the conceptual level, in the urban space of Bangkok after the 1932 revolution the ‘existential spatiality’ of the Thai sense of home had hybridised along with the shift in political power. It disclosed how public spaces, which were transformed to be people’s space by The People’s Party, represented the existential process of hybridisation in the Thai concept of home while, at the same time, retaining the duality of sacred and profane spaces. This was similar to how Rama V (r. 1868–1910) had introduced the idea of formal public space in a Thai way. The People’s Party followed the royal modernisation policies and processes of Thai kings by continuing to make Bangkok modern like the West but in a Thai way. They transformed the space and architecture of Bangkok to serve the people, while adapting the duality of sacred and profane spaces in the Thai idea of home.

Private dwellings: Modern living that serves for the working class

One of the consequences of the two World Wars was a decreased demand for rice which was one of Thailand’s main exports, in the global market. Bangkok faced economic hardship as this export industry contracted. The fall of the Thai monarchy and the rise of The People’s Party, from 1932, also brought political instability. The sociopolitical shifts of the 1932 revolution changed the way Bangkok was to be modernised. At the public scale, the government built many communal buildings on Rattanakosin Island to commemorate the rise of the people by emphasising profane space over sacred space. The same process occurred at the domestic scale of the private house. There were two types of housing during The People’s Party era: attached and detached houses. The attached house type included the row house or shophouse and apartments, and attached housing meant multiple domestic units in one building or on

298

one plot of land. Attached housing was mostly built in urban areas, and could lack basic infrastructure such as electricity, water, gas, and communication services. The detached house type was a single house built on land, or individual houses built on land in an allocated village format with proper basic infrastructure.

Mass housing and the new hierarchy in the Sino-Thai In the 1940s and 50s, the Sino-Thai population of Bangkok grew larger as a result of interracial marriages with local people, internal migration from rural areas, and improved medicine and healthcare.368 However, most of the Sino-Thai working class was at the poverty line due to economic hardship. This opened an opportunity for the private property-development industry to flourish. The government and some wealthy business families bought land and built mass housing around Bangkok to handle the growing population of low- to middle-income families.369 Medium- and high-density residential buildings such as shophouses (row houses), and apartments were built on the laneways (sois) inside the main road such as Sukhumvit. During The People’s Party era, in the 1930s, Bamrung Mueang Road was extended to Rama I Road and then Sukhumvit Road to expand the urban space and stimulate the economy, raising income from land taxes. Many canals were filled and paved as modern roads and laneways following the existing, traditional settlement patterns (figure 8.12).370 This created a new kind of living space in Bangkok called chumchon,371 which meant living in the city in a group of modern houses or mass housing (figure 8.13). More specifically, a group of detached houses arranged together on land with proper basic infrastructure would be called a mubanjadsaan (community village) (figure 8.14).372 Although class divisions between the working and ruling people faded, the creation of chomchon and mubanjadsaan on many modern roads

368 Hiencheeranun N., The News of City Planning, vol. 26 (Bangkok: Ministry of the Interior, 1972). 369 Baker and Phongpaichit, A History of Thailand, 271. 370 Suwannathat-Pian K., Thailand's Durable Premier: Phibun through Three Decades 1932–1957 (Kuala Lumpur: Oxford University Press, 1995), 150–151. 371 Tiptus and Bongsadadt, Houses in Bangkok, 278–279. 372 Askew M., Bangkok: Place, Practice and Representation, 64. 299

of Bangkok such as Sukhumvit Road reflected the economic hierarchy of low, medium, and high incomes among the working class.373

Figure 8.12: Row houses on Dinsaw Road. The ground floor served as commercial space the first floor as living space. (Source: Tiptus and Bongsadadt, Houses in Bangkok, 280.)

Figure 8.13: House 34 on Nanatai laneway of Sukhumvit Road functioned mostly as a private space. (Source: Tiptus and Bongsadadt, Houses in Bangkok, 320.)

373 Baker and Phongpaichit, A History of Thailand, 278. 300

Figure 8.14: Comparison of the development of Bangkok’s planning before (top) and after (below) urbanisation of the case study area before modernisation (for studying urban space and individual buildings) and Case study area after modernisation (for studying urban space and individual buildings) respectively. The mid-brown area represents the urban area where chomchon were located; some developed into slums. The dark-brown area represents the suburban area where mubanjadsaan were located.

Most modern houses in Bangkok functioned as living spaces, but some of them, such as shophouses and apartments, still incorporated public spaces such as shops or food stalls on the ground floor.374 Some detached houses still had overlapping public and private spaces, with people opening companies and businesses in houses called home office.375 This reflected how the culture of living among the working class from the past was hybridised in the modern house. Although these houses were built for living in the 20th century, people did not distinguish between public and private spaces as they understood them in the Thai sense. However, the presence of communal public buildings from Rama V (r. 1868–1910) to The People’s Party (1930s–50s) shifted the understanding

374 Tiptus and Bongsadadt, Houses in Bangkok, 278. 375 Tiptus and Bongsadadt, 367. 301

of public space in Thai culture towards more Western meanings. Public spaces like those seen in the West manifested in modern Bangkok’s urban space, but Western-style private spaces did not change the understanding of domestic space in Thai culture.

The new order of the overlap of public and private spaces in the detached house of Sukhumvit Road The overlap of public and private functions in the modern house reflected the concept of being modern like the West through architecture. The overlap of public and private spaces represented the concept of dual space, while modern house and space designs represented the urbanisation of Bangkok. Thus, keeping the traditional way of using the private realm in the modern house showed how modernisation in the context of Bangkok adapted local identity to Western culture, retaining its original Thai character in a globalising world.

Figure 8.15: The plan of house number 5 in Ruamrudee Laneway of Sukhumvit Road. The ground floor is on the left, and the first floor on the right. (Source: Tiptus and Bongsadadt, Houses in Bangkok, 349.) 302

As mentioned previously, the versatile function and architectural system of the row house demonstrated the morphology of flexibility at the house scale. The flexible morphology of detached houses can be seen in their plans. The plan of the detached house (figure 8.15) represents a house for the wealthy working class, which was similar to houses of the ruling class from the reign of Rama V (r. 1868–1910) such as Norasingh House, discussed in the previous chapter. Detached houses functioned as private space, with the ground floor designed for domestic activities and the first floor for sleeping. However, the ground floor also incorporated court space that extended from the house’s body. This presented as a semi-public space like the chan baan, because its architectural system was an open space for activities which were not considered appropriate for the house. The court space helped to maximise the space usage in the house,376 presenting a flexible morphology at the house level. Furthermore, the space for maids, which was located next to the court space of its north, was designed to be outside the house (figure 8.15). The division between the house’s owner and the maids represented hierarchy in the way Thai people lived. However, the transition between the house and maid spaces was flexible because they were connected by the court space. Like public buildings in urban space, the house level had no sacred space; the higher or first floor was only for sleeping, like the corresponding chamber in the stilt/floating house. This showed that profane space dominated private dwellings. The superimposition of the profane space at the house level represented a flattening of the domestic topology; the interior space of house number 5’s plan freely connected the ground and first floors, and the interior and exterior, without a conceptually hierarchical floor as seen in the stilt/floating house. As in public spaces, the spatial arrangement of the modern house reflected how the house’s space served communal purposes rather than being sacred space. The flexible morphology and flattening topology of the house ‘flattened’ the microcosm of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model, with profane space superimposed on sacred space as in the ‘urban interior’ in urban space. It changed the process of

376 Tiptus and Bongsadadt, 347. 303

spatialisation in Bangkok’s existential space, causing the hierarchy of sacred and profane spaces to fade and changing the way people in Bangkok manifested their sense of home at the house level. The duality of sacred and profane spaces developed in a new way through how Bangkokians dwelled. This was similar to the royal modernisation era of Rama V (r. 1868–1910), in that there was a shifting superimposition of sacred and profane spaces. Profane space dominated the sacred space in public and private dwellings. This revealed how the dualism of sacred and profane spaces remained in the new order of the inner- imposing of profane space.

Conclusion: Summarising the Thai concept of home as a typological meaning of architecture in Bangkok from 1935–1946

The ending of the royal regime of Rama VII by The People’s Party preserved the concept of the dualism of sacred and profane spaces, but changed the spatial relationship that had come from superimposing sacred space on profane space. The overlapping of profane space and sacred spaces reflected the shift in the balance of power from Thai kings to The People’s Party. The People’s Party represented this at the public-dwelling level by modifying the function of royal spaces and erecting communal buildings on Rattanakosin Island, and in the transformation of ruling-class houses into communal buildings. The typology of superimposed profane space also appeared in the private dwellings of the working class. This represented how the hierarchy at the house level had disappeared as profane space overlaid the sacred space. The settlement of Bangkok without substantial royal intervention of Rama VIII continued the modernisation policies and processes, but The People’s Party government urbanised the city in a way that emphasised profane space. It turned the space of Bangkok to serve the people, while keeping some duality of sacred and profane spaces, as Rama V (r. 1868–1910) had done. However, urbanising the settlement of Bangkok caused the spiritual deterioration of the sacred space. Topologically, it changed the ‘bond’ that

304

related the ‘figural quality’ of the space of Bangkok to the superimposition of profane space at the urban level. By transforming royal space into public space and erecting communal buildings in Bangkok to serve for public, Bangkok became a city for the Thai people while at the same time retaining the integrated morphology and non-hierarchical topology introduced by Rama V albeit with a communal character now dominating urban space thus changing the way the working and ruling classes lived. The People’s Party expressed typological change by favouring profane (public) spaces over sacred (private/royal) spaces as the new as the inner-imposing of profane space through public space. They transformed royal public space to serve public, and superimposed profane space on the sacred space of Rattanakosin Island by building communal buildings. The People’s Party government did this to interpret the profane space of Thai people as dominating the sacred space of Rama V (r. 1868–1910). This expressed a new typology of the inner-imposing of profane space as a public image of Bangkok. This new typology of inner-imposing profane space was manifested at the house level eliminating hierarchy there as well. Working-class housing was designed to serve communal activities, emphasising their ordinary character. Like public space, this reflected how the spatial meaning of sacred and profane spaces at the house level expressed a typology of predominantly profane space.

305

Figure 8.16: Dualism with inner-imposing of profane space.

Transforming Bangkok into a city for the Thai people retained the merged ‘existential spatiality’, with profane space now overlaying sacred space. It represented how the diminished power of the Thai monarchy and the rise of The People’s Party affected the spatial structure in the Thai concept of home through architecture. The spatial versatility existed between sacred and profane spaces, but modernisation policies and processes by The People’s Party government shifted the pattern of spatial domination without significantly changing the duality of sacred and profane spaces. The People’s Party still aimed to make Bangkok modern like the West, but with a working-class slant. The dualistic concept of sacred and profane spaces remained, now existing alongside a new typology of predominantly profane space in the Thai idea of home (figure 8.16).

306

9. The American modernisation of Bangkok and the return of Thai identity under King Bhumibol (Rama IX, r. 1946–2016)

Introduction

This chapter explores how King Bhumibol Adulyadej (Rama IX, r. 1946–2016), as an ally of the United States, revived royal modernisation policies and processes in a Thai way through changing morphology and topology in the architectural space of Bangkok. It discusses how the Thai idea of home hybridised to reflect Rama IX’s revival of Thai identity. While Bangkok’s urbanisation was inspired by an American city model, it also served the Thai king—in contrast to a purely modern city—through the presence of sacred space. This model was opposed to the vision of a city for the people espoused by The People’s Party. Morphological and topological relationships, both in Bangkok’s urban space and in individual buildings, changed when sacred space was juxtaposed with profane space in the flat settlement system. This chapter analyses how the massive urbanisation and revival of traditional space hybridised the existential space of modern Bangkok to be a space where the present and past coexisted. It then discusses how the coexistence of modernity and Thai tradition interpreted the changing typology of Bangkok’s space. Thus, it discloses how the changing and hybridising Thai idea of home represented modern Thai identity through the space and architecture of Bangkok, through to the 21st century. This chapter explores how the existential structure of the new Thai concept of home changed and hybridised through royal modernisation policies and processes and urbanisation in the 21st century. It discusses the ‘four modes of dwelling’ of modern Bangkok, and explains how the new Thai sense of home was constructed at the phenomenological level of modern architecture.

307

Settlement: The modern landscape of ritual

The People’s Party advanced the modern settlement system of Bangkok during the reign of Rama VIII. During World War II, Bangkok survived due to The People’s Party government shifting between being allied with the Axis powers (e.g. Japan) and the United States. This made urbanisation in Bangkok continuous, while wars destroyed other cities in South East Asia. However, after World War II ended in 1945, there was a major change inside Bangkok.

A new direction for modernising Bangkok under the influence of the United States In 1946, Rama VIII (r. 1935–1946) died of a gunshot wound under mysterious circumstances; this made the political status of The People’s Party deteriorate until the Cold War began to intensify in the 1960s. Following the enthronement of Rama IX in 1946, The People’s Party divided into two groups: one that supported the royal family and another that criticised the Thai monarchy. The anti-monarchist group, led by Phibun, was more powerful in The People’s Party, which took over the political scene from the 1940s as The People’s Party government, but governed in a military fashion. The royalists in The People’s Party criticised the dictatorship of The People’s Party from the 1950s to the 1960s. In the 1960s, Rama IX allied with the United States in support of democracy, which ended the regime of The People’s Party as Phibun was overthrown. From the 1960s, the United States was a strong cultural and economic influence on Bangkok, while Rama IX gained the power to revive the Thai monarchy and Thai identity through the mass media. The process of modernisation in Bangkok under Rama IX had two directions (figure 9.1):

1. urbanising Bangkok to be modern like the West, inspired by the concept of the American automobile city 2. reviving the Thai tradition of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model in a way that reached a compromise with the West, as Rama V (r. 1868–1910) had done

308

Figure 9.1: The settlement system of Bangkok under the reign of Rama IX. Rattanakosin Island is shown in the orange area.

Different degrees of integrating Western and Thai culture in the ‘flat’ settlement system At the phenomenological level, the modernisation of Bangkok continued under Rama IX, further ‘flattening’ the settlement system of modern Bangkok from the strongly vertical Hindu-cosmological model imposed in the 1780s by Rama I. This time, sacred and profane spaces were merged in a way that juxtaposed Western and Thai culture. It represented a new character of inconsistency in Bangkok’s urban space, through the emergence of the ‘superblock’ road network. The new superblock typology was created through main roads laid according to the existing canal network, which were not thoroughly connected to each other (figure 9.2). Smaller laneways randomly interconnected the spaces between the main roads following clusters of canals. The informal settlement system of canals hybridised the geometric design of urban planning from the West with the traditional 309

system, representing a new order of spatialisation in modern Bangkok’s space. The superblocks showed how royal modernisation policies and processes assembled existential space in a way that emphasised sacred and profane spaces within a morphology of coexistence.

Figure 9.2: The superblock morphology of Bangkok. Main streets cannot fully connect because of the old canal-based settlement system.

Sacred space was given importance along with profane space in the reign of Rama IX, in an attempt to restore the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model to the modern space of Bangkok, which was becoming modernised as a car-dominated city like many in the United States. This juxtaposed sacred and profane spaces, which were both clearly apparent in the modern space because the modernisation program under Rama IX saw Western and traditional spaces being built at the same time. This turned the Bangkok of

310

Rama IX into a landscape of contrasts, because sacred and profane spaces were both given importance, without a spatial hierarchy like that of the past. The sacred (Rattanakosin Island) and profane (modern) spaces freely connected to each other through different modes of modern transportation, including roads, highways, the BTS, and the subway (MRT). This made the sacred space of Rattanakosin Island into a place of working and upper classes, where modern buildings worked in combination with traditional spaces such as shrines. Under this arrangement, Rattanakosin Island was not privileged as in the past. It reflected how the settlement system of Bangkok under Rama IX had a coexisting morphology, where sacred space was given the same importance as profane space, and where the order of sacred and profane spaces was rearranged from one involving an inner-imposition of profane space over sacred space to one where there was inner-contrast of sacred and profane spaces.

Rearranging sacred and profane spaces The coexistence of sacred and profane spaces in the modern space of Bangkok merged the concept of Western architecture into the sacred space of Rattanakosin Island at the same time as Rama IX was instigating the process of reviving Thai tradition.377 It arranged the settlement system of Bangkok in a way that made sacred and profane spaces coexist in the modern context without the consistent order imposed by following the Hindu- Buddhist cosmological model, as earlier royal construction and modernisation programs had done (see chapter 5). Rattanakosin Island, after modernisation, served communal purposes. However, when there was a royal event, such as the royal cremations of Rama IX (October 2017), Rama VIII in 1946, and Princess (Rama IX’s older sister) in November 2008, Rattanakosin Island and the entire space of Bangkok again served a sacred purpose (figure 9.3). After these cremations were complete, the Royal Playground again turned to serve communal purposes such as playing with , Sunday markets, and public recreation.

377 Askew, Bangkok, 289–291. 311

Figure 9.3: The Royal Playground used for sacred and profane purposes. The Royal Playground when occupied with communal activities such as playing with kites (left) and transformed into the site for the royal cremation of Rama IX (right). (Source: “Sanam Luang Park” [left] and The Nation, “250,000 Expected” [right].)378

Figure 9.4: A giant black-and-white portrait of Rama IX erected on Sukhumvit Road to pay respects to the late king.

378 “Sanam Luang Park (The Royal Field),” Bangkok.com, accessed 27 August 2018, http://www.bangkok.com/magazine/sanam-luang-park.htm; The Nation, “250,000 Expected to Attend Royal Cremation,” The Nation, 30 September 2017, http://www.nationmultimedia.com/detail/kingdomgrieves/30328066 312

For the royal cremation, a pyramid-like structure called phra meru was built on Rattanakosin Island, transforming it into a sacred space. The phra meru was built on the Royal Playground to imitate the Mount Meru of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model. The ocean of infinity was symbolised by the empty space surrounding the phra meru (see discussion of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model in chapter 4). Royal cremations also affected the space outside Rattanakosin Island; for the cremation of Rama IX, for example, other areas of Bangkok erected portraits of the late king in black and white and performed religious ceremonies to symbolise that he had ascended to heaven (figure 9.4). This phenomenon in Bangkok space during Rama IX’s cremation showed how the spatialisation of sacred and profane spaces contrasted on the flat settlement system. The new spatial arrangement of sacred and profane spaces had them appearing together in the same time and place; this revealed a contrast in topology as sacred and profane spaces coexisted, not mixing but expressing their own distinct characters at the same time.

Figure 9.5: The skyline of Bangkok in the 21st century. The skyline shows a contrast between modern and traditional architecture. (Source: KB4Images.)379

The contrasting topology demonstrated new ‘human togetherness’ in the juxtaposition of the lower and upper classes. This can be seen from the skyline of modern Bangkok. Modern buildings that served commercial purposes, such as offices, department

379 David, accessed 20 September 2018, http://kb4images.com/Bangkok-Images/number-18238.html 313

stores, hotels, and banks, were erected adjacent to traditional buildings such as the Grand Palace and Buddhist temples. Traditional buildings were lit with yellow lights and built with traditional giant gabled roofs (figure 9.5). The architectural system of juxtaposition showed that the different classes expressed two separate identities without imposing on each other as they had done in the reign of Rama V and The People’s Party era (1935– 1946). The ‘human togetherness’ of Bangkok under Rama IX showed that the working and upper classes existed, as they had in the sakdina social system, but appeared in the modern landscape without being spatially organised by that social hierarchy. Conceptually, this made it so that humans lived with celestial beings in the modern landscape of sacredness and ritual, where the new and old coexisted with contrast but perfectly fit the modern context of Bangkok as it was being adapted by the modernisation programs of Thai kings and The People’s Party.

Urban space: A space of inconsistency

The new direction of modernisation in Bangkok in the reign of Rama IX attempted to revive the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model, which had inspired the planning of traditional Bangkok. However, restoring the model to the flattening settlement system of modern Bangkok brought sacred and profane spaces into a new order of juxtaposition. It created an inconsistency of time and space in the urban space. The spatial relationship between sacred and profane spaces followed an arrangement that presented the existences of new and old within an order of inner-contrast.

From Bamrung Mueang Road on Rattanakosin Island to Sukhumvit Road: The site of reordering sacred and profane spaces Sukhumvit Road, which was extended from the Bamrung Mueang Road of Rama IV (r. 1851–1868) from the 1940s to the 1990s (figure 9.6) exemplified how urban space juxtaposed sacred and profane spaces. Sukhumvit Road was similar to many important streets in Bangkok in its physical structure and function, but having been constructed on the traditional settlement area and the eastern side of Rattanakosin Island, it shows how

314

morphology and topology changed at the scale of urban space, as discussed in chapters five to eight. This makes Sukhumvit Road present an evolution of the existential spatiality of the spatial and architectural arrangements in the modern architecture along the road from The People’s Party era to that of Rama IX. Sukhumvit Road was a site that continued the urbanisation program of The People’s Party in the 1940s to 1950s, but in a new direction, from the eastern side of Rattanakosin Island. This represented how the revival of Thai identity under Rama IX, along with massive urbanisation with the economic support of the United States, changed the ‘urban interior’ of modern Bangkok.380

Figure 9.6: The case study area and important roads in Bangkok. The Sukhumvit area selected for the case study is shown in the white rectangular region, and was urbanised from water settlements, as discussed in chapter 5.

380 King, Reading Bangkok, 91–94. 315

Figure 9.7: The urban space of Bangkok in the 21st century. The space of Sukhumvit Road transformed from being a traditional settlement (top) on the eastern side of Rattanakosin Island. The orange objects in the two 3D models of Bangkok’s changing urban space are sacred buildings such as Buddhist temples.

316

Figure 9.8: Two Thai shrines in modern Bangkok. The Erawan Shrine and Erawan Shopping Centre (left); a Thai shrine on the roof of a shophouse (right).

Figure 9.9: A floating shrine in a shophouse.

An attempt to revive the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model in a modern space of Bangkok, such as Sukhumvit Road, reflected the return of royal modernisation policies and 317

processes under Rama IX. In urban space, the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model was represented by the rearrangement of sacred space in relation to profane space in a new order of inner-contrast. This created a “transforming and hybridising world”381 on Sukhumvit Road, where the profane spaces of Western-style modernity and the sacred spaces of Thai tradition coexisted at the same time and place (the modern Shopping Centre of Erawan and the Erawan shrine in figure 9.8). The phenomenon of this ‘transforming and hybridising world’ became apparent in the buildings of Sukhumvit Road, where sacred spaces or objects such as shrines appeared in unexpected places of a modern building—on the roof, porch, or entrance, or in the domestic space of a shophouse, for instance (figures 9.8 and 9.9). This demonstrated how Sukhumvit Road has a coexisting morphology where sacred and profane spaces appeared separately but spontaneously on the same horizontal plane of the modern street. The modern space of Sukhumvit Road came to display multiple layers of new and old modes of living.

Urban interior of inner-contrast The phenomenon of the ‘transforming and hybridising world’ on Sukhumvit Road reflects the change in the urban interior of modern Bangkok under Rama IX (figure 9.10). The ‘urban interior’ no longer had a spatial hierarchy of sacred and profane spaces, which it had lost during The People’s Party era. However, sacred space was still clearly distinguished from profane space, creating a visible juxtaposition. This showed how the concept of the dualism of sacred and profane spaces resulted in a particular spatial arrangement when there was an attempt to revive the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model in the flat settlement system. This illustrated how modern Hindu-Buddhist urbanism in Bangkok hybridised through the coexistence of Western and Thai cultural influences. This changed the double urban wall, floor, and ceiling to imitate the Hindu- Buddhist cosmological model in a new way.

381 Varavarn P., “Landscape of Consumption and Hidden Heritage: Case Study of Sukhumvit Road,” (PhD diss., architecture and tourism, Silpakorn University, 2007), 138–140. 318

Figure 9.10: Inner-contrast of sacred and profane spaces in the urban interior of Bangkok.

The coexisting morphology blurred the hierarchical urban wall that divided Rattanakosin Island from urbanised space. The process of reviving the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model created an inner-contrast in the duality of sacred and profane spaces, conceptually dividing human and celestial places in the flattened settlement. However, these sacred and profane spaces were merged by modern transportation. The urban floor ‘flattened’ following urbanisation, and coexisting sacred and profane spaces brought humans to live with supernatural things in such a way that sacred and profane spaces existed separately but together in the modern space. This coexisting duality responded to the royal modernisation policies and processes of Rama IX, making traditional modes of living hybridise with the modern way of life inspired by the American city. It also represented the new order of the spatial structure created by flattening and contrasting

319

sacred and profane spaces. Sacred and profane spaces were still distinct, but both were given importance as they coexisted.

Figure 9.11: People worshipping at the Erawan Shrine on Sukhumvit Road.

The changes in the urban wall and floor, imitating the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model in the modern space of Bangkok, hybridised the traditional way of life with modern space in the urban ceiling (figure 9.10). Restoring the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model separated sacred space, which had profane space superimposed on it by The People’s Party, but did not restore the spatial hierarchy, as sacred and profane spaces now coexisted in a relationship of inner-contrast. This made the urban ceiling express the distinction between an earthly and heavenly ceiling, following the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model. However, the earthly ceiling of Rattanakosin Island and its sacred

320

spaces coexisted, in a relationship of contrast, with modern and traditional buildings on Sukhumvit Road. In urban space, this was demonstrated in the hybridisation of Western and Thai traditions of urban life on Sukhumvit Road (figure 9.11). Together with Erawan Shopping Centre, the Erawan Shrine was built in the 1950s next to the Chit Lom BTS station beside Sukhumvit Road.The Erawan Shrine and Shopping Centre represented the persistence of the traditional dualism of sacred and profane spaces according to the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model in a new juxtaposition of sacred and profane spaces. This sacred space existed on the same horizontal plane as profane space; people performed communal activities in modern space, shifting to worship at the shrine when they entered its area. This represented how the earthly ceiling of the profane space had become adjacent to the upper realm, as there was no hierarchy between the lower and higher spaces. The change in architectural components of the ‘urban interior’, which arranged sacred and profane spaces to be in juxtaposition, showed how the spatial organisation of the topology had changed from being non-hierarchical in The People’s Party era to being contrasting, in response to a modernised direction of urbanisation that sought to make Bangkok like an American city, reviving the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model under Rama IX.

Modern roads supporting the coexistence of sacred and profane spaces The system of modern roads in Bangkok was similar to that of many cities in the United States. There were complex layers of roads, highways, public transport like the BTS, and smaller roads (laneways, or sois) built in the urban space to connect people to the city (figures 9.12 to 9.14). This complex modern transportation network thoroughly connected sacred and profane spaces as well as modern and traditional buildings. This made the function of modern streets in Bangkok equally complex, as they hybridised the traditional settlement system of the canal network and supported the duality of sacred and profane spaces. Building modern roads in the reign of Rama IV had introduced the road as a new space that transformed people’s lives, shifting the focus of their activity from water to land. Roads were a symbol of how Thai kings hybridised the Thai identity with modernity,

321

as could be seen from the New Road and Bamrung Mueang Road of Rama IV and the Ratchadamnoen Avenue of Rama V. The road, as a space of the royal modernisation policies and processes of Thai kings, celebrated those kings’ legacy. One example is Rama I Road (part of Sukhumvit Road), which was built at the beginning of the 20th century to celebrate the successful modernisation of Rama V, and as a memorial to Rama I (r. 1783–1809) as the founder of Bangkok. It extended Bamrung Mueang Road, on the eastern side of Rattanakosin Island, to Sukhumvit Road throughout the 20th century, extending the reach of royal modernisation policies and processes through the south-east area of Bangkok. The construction of roads to celebrate Thai kings made modern roads, under royal modernisation policies and processes, a symbol of Thai kings and higher space. On the other hand, a number of laneways or sois were built according to People’s Party policy to fill in the canal network in Bangkok to handle the growth of mass housing around the main roads of the Thai kings. This put laneways in an inferior position to roads, because roads were built to serve kings while laneways were built to serve Thai people. The presence of roads and laneways reflected class hierarchy through modernisation. The hierarchy of buildings on roads and laneways can be seen in the level of urbanisation. On roads such as Sukhumvit Road, we can see more complex infrastructure such as six-lane roads, skywalks, and the BTS (figures 9.12 and 9.13). Laneways, for example around Sukhumvit Road or in the suburb of Bang Na, had lower levels of urbanisation, as can be seen where there is only a small laneway running through an allocated village (figure 9.14).

322

Figure 9.12: The complex layers of a Bangkok street: the modern road, skywalk, and BTS.

Figure 9.13: A highway connecting urban and suburban areas.

323

Figure 9.14: The built environment of an allocated village in Bang Na.

The space of modern roads in the reign of Rama IX, such as Sukhumvit Road, was combined with other modes of land transport such as elevated roads or highways and the BTS, a practice influenced politically and economically by the presence of the United States, and their implementation in other major Asian centres like Hong Kong and Singapore. This made roads into open spaces with a more public aspect than laneway spaces (sois). On the other hand, the sois were more public for their dwellers and had a hierarchy, the major ones eventually evolving into roads. Thus, modern buildings built along roads functioned as more public space. This can be seen, for example, in the apartments and shophouses along Sukhumvit Road, which served public functions as shops, stores, food stalls, and service locations.382 Shophouses and detached houses in laneways and suburban areas had more private functions,383 because laneways and suburban areas were less open to urban development.

382 Askew, Bangkok, 33. 383 Askew, Bangkok, 76–77. 324

The shophouses characteristic of the modernisation program of Rama IX were different from the mid-19th-century shophouses that Rama IV had commanded to be built to implement a Western model of modernisation taken from the British colony in Singapore. The shophouses in Rama IX’s reign demonstrated different degrees of the overlap of public and private spaces on roads like Sukhumvit, determined by their location in urban space. For example, a shophouse in an urban area or by a main road would function as public space more than private space. A shophouse located in a suburban area or laneway, though, would function as private space more than public space. Roads and laneways, and urban and suburban areas, have demonstrated how the modern space of Bangkok hybridised through the overlap of public and private spaces as a result of the city planning and modernisation policies and processes of Thai kings and The People’s Party. Coexisting morphology and contrasting topology arranged the public and private realms flexibly and distinctively in a way that represented togetherness through the coexistence of the upper and working classes in the modern space, in the same way that sacred and profane spaces coexisted in a relationship of inner-contrast. The urban space and pathways of Bangkok created by the modernisation program of Rama IX presented the concept of dual space involving a relationship of inner-contrast between sacred and profane spaces.

Public buildings: The inner-contrast between sacred and communal spaces

The contrast between sacred and profane spaces in the urban space of Sukhumvit Road was also expressed in public spaces. Many notable shopping malls, such as Siam Paragon, MBK, Siam One, Siam Discovery, Siam Centre, CentralWorld, Central Embassy, Erawan, Emporium, EmQuartier, Terminal 21, and Gateway were built along both sides of Sukhumvit Road, creating the Western character of Bangkok. Nevertheless, the modern buildings of Bangkok also served sacred purposes, as has been mentioned in relation to the Erawan Shrine in the previous section. The appearance of sacred space in the public realm demonstrated the revival of Thai identity under Rama IX and the changed spatial relationship involving the inner-imposition of profane space on the sacred space.

325

The flexibility of dual spaces strengthened the identity of both sacred space and profane space. This represented an attempt to restore the hierarchy of sacred and profane spaces inspired by the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model, but created contrast because the spatial structure of Bangkok’s urban space had already been flattened. The new order of inner-contrast between sacred and profane spaces is especially visible in three notable public buildings of Bangkok: CentralWorld, the new parliament complex, and the MahaNakhon tower. CentralWorld has been chosen for analysis because it shows how Rama IX incorporated his way of modernising Bangkok’s urban space and Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model at the public building level. Bangkok’s new parliament complex represents an attempt to revive the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model in the flattening settlement system, where inner-contrast of sacred and profane spaces is presented through the building’s section. Finally, Mahanakorn illustrates how the German Architect Ole Scheeren of OMA interpreted modern Bangkok’s identity through the tower’s distinctive design.

CentralWorld shopping centre The flattening in the spatial order of sacred and profane spaces as a result of late-20th- century urbanisation increased the flexibility of the relationship between sacred and profane spaces. It made this relationship more freely connected and advanced the flexible use of spaces in public buildings. This is exemplified in the floor plan of the CentralWorld shopping centre, one of the landmarks of modern Bangkok, which opened in 2001 (figure 9.15). According to the concept of dwelling articulated by Norberg-Schulz, this landmark expressed the spatial structure of place more clearly than normal buildings did. Landmarks were distinguished from normal buildings by having more of a function for social gatherings, meaning they expressed and shared in collective identity more than normal buildings. CentralWorld is a good example to use when discussing the spatial structure of Bangkok places in the public realm.

326

Figure 9.15: Flexible space use in the ground-floor plan of CentralWorld.

Examining space usage in the ground-floor plan of CentralWorld shows the innovative ways that different kinds of modern and traditional spaces have been incorporated into one building. CentralWorld, as a landmark of modern Bangkok, has been able to gather people and social interactions from the local area and abroad into the public space. Social gatherings in its public space have seen a sharing of the collective identities of international and local people, while the new spatial arrangement of sacred and profane spaces was organised in response to the modernisation policies and processes of Rama IX and the influence of the United States. The modern functions of public space in facilitating education, commerce, eating, banking, fashion, and outdoor activities have integrated with temporary domestic space in the form of hotels and serviced apartments. CentralWorld also incorporated sacred spaces alongside communal spaces. The shrine space was distinct from the communal space, but its location was not in the central and higher place mandated by the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model. This shrine is located at the entrance, in open space, showing a contrast between sacred and profane spaces. This placement represents the hybridity in modern Hindu-Buddhist

327

urbanism, where sacred and profane spaces are interconnected and contrasted in the flattening settlement system, without a spatial hierarchy. This reflects how the spatial arrangement of CentralWorld represents a versatile morphology in the spatial system of the building.

Figure 9.16: The Trimurti Shrine located in front of CentralWorld.

Moreover, the integration of sacred and communal (profane) space in CentralWorld (figure 9.16) transformed the sacred space of the shrine into an everyday space, like the communal space. For instance, a Hindu shrine to the trimutri (trinity – the three main Hindu gods of Shiva, Vishnu, and Brahma) and to phikhnes (Ganesha), in the open space of CentralWorld on the corner of Sukhumvit and Ratchaprasong Roads, freely connected to the modern space of the street and mall and was open for people to worship. The spatial versatility of modern public buildings transformed sacred space into semi-celestial space; the spatial system of the sacred space in communal buildings saw it connected to profane spaces on the same horizontal plane. However, the design of these sacred spaces in the public realm is still intended to serve celestial purposes. The architecture of the shrine space at CentralWorld, for example, was designed at

328

superhuman scale when compared to the design of communal spaces such as shops and restaurants. The shrines at CentralWorld were built to be extraordinarily high and disproportionately large to differentiate them from profane space and make them inaccessible to humans. The base was built higher than a human can reach, and bears symbols to indicate that access to the space around the shrine is prohibited. Building a Hindu shrine adjacent to the communal spaces of CentralWorld shows how sacred and profane spaces coexist, but the exaggerated scale of its architecture, along with the signs prohibiting entry, distinguishes the sacred space from the profane creating a kind of ‘inner-contrast’ between sacred and profane in public space.

Bangkok’s new parliament complex Construction of Bangkok’s new parliament complex, Suppaya-sapha-satan (place for making good things) began in 2011 (figure 9.17). Two hundred Thai architects designed the complex in response to the government’s demand for a new parliament as a symbol to handle political instability in Bangkok, such as conflict between the ‘red shirt’ and ‘yellow shirt’ factions.384 Bangkok’s new parliament complex is located on Samsen Road, next to Ratchadamnoen Avenue. The design of Suppaya-sapha-satan demonstrated the new spatial relationship between sacred and profane spaces, which revealed the new versatile morphology of public space in modern Bangkok. This section on Bangkok’s new parliament shows how the communal buildings juxtaposed sacred and profane spaces as CentralWorld does. The architecture of Suppaya-sapha-satan represents how sacred and profane spaces have been arranged to illustrate the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model in a new way. The tower or Mount Meru at the centre indicates sacred space, but incorporates elements more associated with profane space, such as a museum of Thai history and a museum of democracy on the ground floor. A group of communal buildings surrounds the central building, and the design of Suppaya-sapha-satan reflects how the Thai architects interpreted the new Thai concept of home during Rama IX’s reign. They

384 This conflict began with members of the Sino-Thai middle class in Bangkok participating in the establishment of the ‘yellow shirt’ movement (the People’s Alliance for Democracy) to remove Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra in 2007; this sparked the formation of the ‘red shirt’ movement (the United Front for Democracy Against Dictatorship) to support Thaksin. 329

believed that applying the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model to the parliament’s structure would help bring traditional order and divinity back to the city.385

Figure 9.17: The design of Thailand’s new parliament complex, Suppaya-sapha-satan. (Source: “Contract for New Parliament Signed”)386

385 Ardrugsa W., ”‘Mount Sumeru’ and the New Thai Parliament House :The ‘State of Exception’ as a Paradigm of Architectural Practices,” Najua Journal: History of Architecture and Thai Architecture, 10 (2013), 102–129. 386 “Contract for New Parliament Signed,” Bangkok Post, 30 April 2013, https://www.bangkokpost.com/news/local/347778/stecon-signs-contract-to-build-new-parliament-in-dusit-within-900- days. 330

Figure 9.18: Section of Suppaya-sapha-satan. The section illustrates the building’s imitation of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model (see chapter 5) in combination with modern architectural features. (Source: “A ‘Symbol of Thainess’ “.)387

This attempt to create the traditional order of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model in a public building reflected high flexibility in the way sacred and profane spaces can be arranged. This shows how the spatial structure of places in modern Bangkok display inner-contrast between sacred and profane spaces. This new order represents a topology of contrast, demonstrating that the spatialisation of places in Bangkok, through the royal modernisation policies and processes of Rama IX, organised sacred and profane spaces in a coexisting juxtaposition (figure 9.18).

The MahaNakhon Tower German architect Ole Scheeren of OMA represented the versatile and increasingly flexible relationship between sacred and profane spaces through the architectural system and spatial planning of MahaNakhon, a luxurious residential and retail complex that opened to the public in December 2016. Located on Sathon Road, close to Sukhumvit Road, it is a symbol of hybridisation between Western and Thai cultures.388 The concept of MahaNakhon, designed by a German architect, interprets the hybrid identity of Bangkok through a Western understanding of Thai identity and a cubic design that creates a long scratch line twisting around the building (figures 9.19 and 9.20). This unique design

387 “A ‘Symbol of Thainess’: Thousands of Teak Trees to be cut down for Thailand’s New Parliament Building,” Asian Correspondent, 26 July 2018, https://asiancorrespondent.com/2016/07/thailand-teak-trees-parliament-building/. 388 King, Reading Bangkok, 189–190. 331

reflects the increased flexibility of space in Bangkok. MahaNakhon was designed with a geometric pattern, representing an attempt to incorporate the geometry of urban planning into the traditional settlement. However, the long scratch line running around it represents how the organic settlement of Bangkok influenced urban planning, as can be seen in how it was designed to be asymmetrical and highly flexible to hybridise with the traditional settlement system (figure 9.21). The spatial planning of MahaNakhon demonstrated versatile morphology through the way interior space was laid out to reach a compromise with the organic settlement. The asymmetrical, geometric design of the building and plan reflected a contrast between the geometry of the modern architecture and organic settlement system of Bangkok. This expressed contrasting topology through the orientation of the modern space of MahaNakhon in the context of the city.

Figure 9.19: The MahaNakhon building, completed in 2016, represents disorder and modernity. (Source: http://www.mahanakhon.com/)389

389 MahaNakhon website, “Design,” accessed 3 September 2018, http://www.mahanakhon.com/design.php. 332

Figure 9.20: The conceptual design of MahaNakhon, illustrating geometrical disorder and chaos. (Source: https://www.archdaily.com/)390

Figure 9.21: The floor plan of MahaNakhon. The plan demonstrates asymmetrical design in modern architecture and the flexible use of spaces such as facilities, offices, residential services, and restaurants. (Source: Created by author from plan posted by Darren Chang.)391

390 Cilento K., “MahaNakhon / Ole Scheeren, OMA,” ArchDaily, 23 July 2009, https://www.archdaily.com/30025/mahanakhon-ole-scheeren-oma. 391 Darren Chang, Da(rren) Vinci, accessed 20 September 2018, https://darrenvinci.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/24-hill- plans-sections_page_05.jpg. 333

The cremation of Rama IX: The island is sacred once more In the same year as MahaNakhon opened, 2016, Rama IX was cremated on the Royal Playground. This had been communal space for the public from the time Rama V opened the Royal Playground for public use, up to The People’s Party era, but was suddenly transformed into sacred space through a sacred ritual after Rama IX passed away on 13 October 2016. By dying and being cremated, Rama IX effectively reclaimed public space that had become profane (figure 9.22) as royal space that was sacred once more. A structure standing for Mount Meru, called phra meru, was built on the Royal Playground to embody the image of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model in Bangkok space, as had been done in the past. This created a temporary hierarchy in the flattening settlement, making the sacred space more apparent than profane space. In comparison to MahaNakhon, the cremation of Rama IX interpreted Thai identity from the perspective of the late king’s modernisation program. This presented sacred space as more important in the public realm, while other public buildings such as CentralWorld, Bangkok’s new parliament, and MahaNakhon emphasised profane space.

Figure 9.22: The royal coffin of Rama IX being burnt in the phra meru. (Source: https://edition.cnn.com/)392

392 Olarn K. and Cripps K., “Thailand's Royal Cremation Ceremony Caps Year of Mourning,” CNN, 27 October 2017, https://edition.cnn.com/2017/10/26/asia/thailand-king-bhumibol-adulyadej-cremation/index.html 334

Public spaces expressed an image of openness, in which modern Bangkok has high flexibility in arranging sacred and profane spaces in the public realm. This can be seen in the versatile morphology of the architectural system, and in the spatial planning of modern buildings and hybrid spaces like the Royal Playground. Higher versatility in the way sacred and profane spaces could be arranged led these spaces to coexist at the same time and place. This phenomenon represented contrasting topology, as there was contrast of new and old in the orientation of the duality of sacred and profane spaces in the public building.

Private dwellings: The coexistence of sacred and profane in different house types

The housing-development industry in Bangkok also followed Western models, principally the suburban sprawl of American cities. Many modern houses and housing projects were built by private developers following the row-house format from mid-20th-century planning, inspired rows of shophouses along roads like New Road and Bamrung Mueang Road. In the urban area, high-density residential buildings such as apartments were built to handle the growing Sino-Thai middle class. Medium- to low-density residential buildings such as shophouses and detached houses were mostly built in new suburban areas in the north, east, and south-east to spread the population density of the urban area. Suburban houses were also cheaper than houses in more central areas.

Different degrees of public and private spaces use in urban and suburban areas The design and spatial planning of modern housing in Bangkok considered efficiency and function in a similar way to American housing, because private developers wanted to be cost-efficient whether the projects were big or small. Furthermore, the revival of Thai tradition under Rama IX changed the order of sacred and profane spaces at the house level. At the urban level, sacred space was given the same importance as profane space. At the house level, sacred spaces, such as spaces for worship, were built more often and merged with everyday spaces such as living areas, kitchens, and working space. The distinction between public and private spaces continued, but took on different layers 335

reflecting levels of urbanisation and suburbanisation, where urban areas had a more public aspect and suburban areas a more private aspect. The building of housing projects by commercially incentivised private developers standardised the design of private dwellings. This provided a new spatial order of sacred and profane spaces, representing a microcosm of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model at the house level. The revival of Thai identity under Rama IX restored the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model in a new way in the form of modern house architecture.

Figure 9.23: Degrees of public and private spaces in different areas of Bangkok. Blue indicates a dominant public aspect, orange indicates a slightly stronger public aspect, and green indicates a dominant private aspect based on field study and observation in Bangkok in 2017.

336

Figure 9.24: Types of modern Thai housing prevalent in urban and suburban areas. Towards the left (more in urban areas), we see higher-density residences such as apartment units. The ground floor of apartment buildings functions as public space for uses such as offices and shops. As we move to the right (more in suburban areas), housing types decrease in density, to shophouses, office houses, and detached houses. Shophouses, which were located close to or in urban areas, had more public functions, such as selling goods. Office houses and detached houses had similar forms, but office houses functioned more as public space and were located closer to urban areas than detached houses. Detached houses were mostly located in the suburbs and had a more private function, but sometimes people could turn them to serve a public function.

The overlap of public and private spaces appeared in all kinds of modern house, with different degrees of public and private overlap. This arranged sacred and profane spaces in a new way to demonstrate the spatial structure of the revived Hindu-Buddhist approach to urbanism under Rama IX. All kinds of modern Thai house had semi-public space, though there were also houses like the West. The understanding of public and private spaces remained similar to what it had been in relation to stilt/floating houses, though there were now formal public buildings like in the West. The degree of public and private spaces in dwellings differed between locations in Bangkok (figures 9.23 and 9.24); houses in urban areas had a more public aspect because they opened to more Western spaces such as urban planning, modern roads, and buildings which were influenced by the presence of the USA. Rama IX further modernised Bangkok to be like the West based on the USA’s city planning model of automobile-based metropolis and hybridised it with the

337

Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model resulting in the modern Hindu-Buddhist city and space. On the other hand, houses located in suburban areas had a more private aspect because they were less open to Western space. The various degrees of public and private spaces made the spatial arrangement of Thai houses highly versatile. The architectural system or morphology of the houses in different locations of Bangkok was flexible like that of public buildings, as has been mentioned in the previous section. The increased flexibility at the house level rearranged sacred and profane spaces in a new order of inner-contrast, which made people live closer to the celestial due to the presence of sacred space in the modern house.

High-density residential: Apartments The apartment was different in the Bangkok context to in the West; in Bangkok, it saw public and private spaces overlap in one building. The public space of apartments also retained sacred space, which in Thai culture was understood as public space from the dual settlement system of water and land (see chapter 5). Figure 9.25, the ground-floor plan of an apartment, shows how overlapping public and private spaces brought the sacred space of the Chinese shrine (figure 9.26) to coexist with the communal spaces of apartments’ unit and office spaces in an order of inner-contrast, reflecting the contrasting topology that will be discussed below in subsections on shophouses and detached houses.

338

Figure 9.25: Plan of a five-storey apartment in Bang Na, a suburb close to urban areas.393

Figure 9.26: A Chinese shrine on the ground floor of an apartment This occupies space shared with residential space.

393 This research uses the term ground floor to refer to the lowest floor (above the basement), while first floor is the first one above the ground. 339

Figure 9.27: An apartment unit on the ground floor, serving as private space.

Figure 9.28: An office space located on the ground floor of the apartment building. This office functions as public space, in the same way that sacred space does, and shares the ground floor with private space.

340

The more flexible relationship between sacred and profane spaces, and between public and private spaces, made the architectural and spatial system of apartments able to hybridise the traditional way of life in stilt/floating houses with the high-density design of apartments. The difference between apartments and shophouses and detached houses was that apartment buildings consisted of multiple private spaces in the form of apartment units. Each unit functioned as private space (figure 9.27), because the size of the room was not big enough to incorporate public and sacred spaces. However, every unit in the apartment shared spaces with a public function, such as sacred spaces and office spaces (figure 9.28). The sharing of spaces in apartment buildings demonstrated flexible morphology, as it made public and private spaces, and sacred and profane spaces, coexist in a new order of contrast. Furthermore, apartments’ location close to Western spaces such as main roads influenced the way they functioned as temporary residences. This made the private function of living units take on a public aspect, as they were not only used by a single person or family; their residents could easily change. In this sense, the temporary use of apartment units made them a kind of public space in which people could live temporarily. This showed how high-density housing types such as apartments394 had a more public aspect than other types.

Medium-density residential: Shophouses Typical shophouses, like those located on Sukhumvit Road, represented how modern Hindu-Buddhist urbanism and modern architecture influenced internal spatial arrangements where public space was dominant (figures 9.29 and 9.30). This demonstrated how sacred space coexisted with profane space in the absence of the spatial hierarchy found in the traditional Thai house. Additionally, at the house level, sacred space was equivalent to public space and profane space was equivalent to private space. This arrangement was influenced by the dual settlement system of water and land

394 The term apartment has a specific meaning in the Bangkok context. In Bangkok, apartment buildings have no owner- occupiers: all are renters. However, in condominium buildings, there is a mix of owner-occupiers and renters. 341

(see the section “Private Dwellings: The Hierarchical Overlapping of Public and Private” in chapter 5). Interior spaces in the majority of shophouses served sacred functions and communal activities at the same time. The sacred and communal areas of domestic spaces merged into the public function of the shophouse. This represented increased flexibility in the architectural system and spatial planning. Morphology at the house level was associated more with flexibility, as sacred and profane and public and private spaces freely connected horizontally on the plan and vertically in the section.

Figure 9.29: Comparison between the plans of a traditional Thai house and a modern shophouse.

342

Figure 9.30: Comparison between the sections of a traditional Thai house and a shophouse on Sukhumvit Road, close to the Thonglor BTS station.

Low-density residential: Suburban houses Detached houses in the suburbs also show this flexible morphology (figures 9.31 and 9.32). Sacred and profane spaces coexisted and merged in a new order of inner-contrast in the absence of the spatial hierarchy of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model. The private aspect of the detached house was stronger than that of the apartment or shophouse, as it was less open than the Westernised space of urban areas. The sense of sacred space or traditional Thai public space corresponding to Thai identity appeared to be stronger in the domestic space of the suburban house, as it was less connected to Westernised spaces such as Sukhumvit Road. This was also the case for the relationship, in more urban areas, between shophouses on major roads and dwellings on laneways, as discussed earlier in the section “Urban Space: A Space of Inconsistency” in chapter 9.

343

Figure 9.31: Comparing traditional and modern styles of detached house planning. Plan and section of a traditional house (left) and of a detached house in suburban Bang Na (right), with photography of modern domestic sacred spaces.

Figure 9.32: Flexible and informal use of space in the living area of a house selected for study.

344

The overlap of public and private spaces in the modern Thai house, in a new order of inner-contrast, arranged sacred and profane spaces in a new way that represented the distinction between public and private (see the section “Private Dwellings: The Hierarchical Overlapping of Public and Private” in chapter 5). During the modernisation policies and processes of Rama IX, the modern Thai house responded to the inner-contrast of sacred and profane spaces that was evident in urban space. At the house level, sacred and profane spaces were arranged with a new order that produced an effect of contrast. This brought the profane space of people into coexistence with the sacred space of the celestial, making the modern Thai house a place where the supernatural existed alongside the people. This belief is reflected in contemporary house-building. The traditional belief in the spirit of the land still influenced many private developers and individual house owners to perform traditional construction rites like those used in the process of sanctifying traditional Bangkok (see chapter 4), to tell the spirits of the land that they wanted supernatural power to protect residential projects and houses from bad luck. However, construction rites in the 20th century did not involve incorporating the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model into the house’s structure by using the concept of hierarchical floors to recreate it in microcosm. Instead, construction rites were used to show respect to the spirits of the land. Once the house was built, a domestic shrine was added to the house’s communal space, creating inner-contrast of sacred and profane spaces while providing a place for the spirit to live and to be worshipped on special occasions. This demonstrated that the modern house of Bangkok was a place for celestial beings to live with the people, reflecting the coexistence of sacred and profane spaces in a relationship of inner-contrast at the house level.395 The flexible morphology of the modern Thai house changed the hierarchy of sacred and profane spaces through inner-juxtaposition; it oriented them in a new way, in a new order where they coexisted at the same level. Therefore, the topology of the modern Thai house had more flexibility in presenting the duality of sacred and profane

395 Karnchanaporn, Fear and Domestic Architecture, 211–213. 345

spaces, as illustrated in the sections of the three houses used as case studies in figures 9.25, 9.29, and 9.31. The spatial orientation of sacred and profane spaces exhibited a new topology of contrast as they were placed within the new order, whereby sacred and profane spaces were hybridised within the flattening settlement system. Conceptually, profane space was oriented at the same level as sacred space, in the same way that in public spaces, sacred and profane spaces coexisted in juxtaposition. While maintaining the duality of sacred and profane, both kinds of space could appear at the same time and place, oriented in any direction, in a relationship of inner-contrast. The new order of sacred and profane spaces in the modern Thai house retained the concept of dualism of higher and lower spaces from the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model, but also responded to the progressively ‘flattening’ settlement system. This shows how the modern house in Bangkok was a microcosm of modern Hindu- Buddhist urbanism. Increased flexibility in the relationship of sacred and profane spaces was the key that hybridised the spatial structure of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model at the house level. It changed the domestic morphology and topology into a new, non-hierarchical order, while retaining the duality of sacred and profane spaces. The coexistence of sacred and profane in the modern house reflects how the royal modernisation policies and processes of Rama IX revived the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model and hybridised the Thai idea of home, moving on from the inner-imposition of profane space onto sacred space from The People’s Party era, as discussed in chapter 8. It explained how the Thai concept of home hybridised with Rama IX’s modernisation to restore the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model to the settlement system flattened by urbanisation. The corresponding evolution of the Thai sense of home showed how dwelling and the process of expressing the spirit of place in modern Bangkok, from the levels of urban space to the individual house, interpreted the hybrid Thai concept of home through the modernisation progress of The People’s Party government and Thai kings. The new order of spatial arrangement of sacred and profane spaces in the modern Thai house showed that the idea of spatial dualism in the Thai sense of home had taken on a new spatial relationship of inner-contrast. It disclosed how the duality of sacred and

346

profane spaces from the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model adapted to modernisation policies and processes in an innovative way, expressing an original identity as well as the idea of being like the West in a Thai way. The hybrid Thai sense of home in Bangkok demonstrated how local identity adapted and hybridised with Western culture without Western intervention. The internal hybridisation process was unique in the way the Thai concept of home was created and evolved, which is demonstrated through the ‘four modes of dwelling’.

347

Re-exploring the changing space, architecture, and identity of Bangkok as the result of royal modernisation policies and processes

The modernisation policies and processes of Rama IX made the Bangkok landscape one characterised by modern transport: it removed aquatic spaces such as rivers and canals, and incorporated traditional planning with the new reality (figures 9.33 and 9.34). Bangkok became a hybrid space of new and old; the organic city planning of Bangkok presented the remaining evidence of the past. The Chao Phraya River was still used for water transport connecting the eastern and western sides of the city, but the modern road system and urban planning polluted the river and transformed people’s dwelling space from water into land. Roads integrated sacred and profane spaces, creating an increasingly flexible relationship between the dual spaces in the ‘urban interior’. This transformed the people’s living arrangements to bring them closer to celestial beings such as the Thai kings; the modernisation of Bangkok connected people to the kings more closely than before, which made the sacred space (land) in the traditional sense of Bangkok also become a space of the people. This gave a new order to the spatial hierarchy between sacred and profane spaces, but the revival of Thai identity distinguished them from each other in the flattening settlement system of modern Bangkok within an order of sacred and profane space juxtaposed and given equal importance.

348

Figure 9.33: The landscape of 21st-century Bangkok is characterised by modern transport. Aquatic spaces such as rivers and canals have been removed; traditional planning has been incorporated with the new.

Figure 9.34: The Westernised built environment of Bangkok.

349

The evolution of Bangkok’s modernisation While the modernisation process created a new order in the space of Bangkok, it always elevated the city’s status as the most modernised in the country to demonstrate how Thai kings adopted different aspects of the Western model of modernisation to preserve Bangkok’s privileged status as the capital of Thailand. This is evident when looking at Bangkok from above. The map in figure 9.35 shows urbanised areas of Bangkok in light grey, and the non-urbanised area in green. The difference between the urbanised and non-urbanised areas shows how Bangkok used its level of modernisation to retain its status as a capital in the modern world. This reflected how the modernisation policies and processes of Thai kings and The People’s Party used modern planning and architecture keep Bangkok as the centre of Thailand, influenced by the Western model of modernisation adopted by Rama IV. Urbanisation in Bangkok represented a process of hybridising the duality of sacred and profane spaces so that it went from being hierarchical to being merged and contrasting, representing the evolution of the Thai idea of home.

Figure 9.35: Levels of urbanisation in Bangkok and surrounding provinces. Satellite map data can show the degree of urbanisation in Bangkok and the provinces that border it. Urbanised areas are shown in grey and non-urbanised areas in green. 350

Figure 9.36: Bangkok planning before and after modernisation. Comparing the differences in Bangkok’s urban plan before (left) and after (right) the four phases of modernisation pursued by Thai kings and The People’s Party from the mid-19th to the 21st century.

The process of modernisation through constructing modern roads and buildings was similar to the modification of the Chao Phraya River in the Ayutthaya era, and the superimposing of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model under Rama I (see the section “Applying the Hindu-Buddhist Cosmological Model to Bangkok” in chapter 5). Modern planning had a political dimension, and was implemented by Thai kings to shape and reshape the built environment of Bangkok (figure 9.36). It was a symbol of success in adapting Bangkok to Western influence from the mid-19th century onwards. Also, urbanisation represented the unique hybridisation process of incorporating Western-style modernity into the sacred capital of Bangkok. This explained how the city retained the duality of sacred and profane spaces while being modernised. Especially, the way Rama IX modernised Bangkok and adapted traditional spaces to Western culture created a unique architectural system, which brought the human and the celestial to live together under the concept of modern Hindu-Buddhist urbanism, where sacred and profane spaces coexisted on the same horizontal plane in a relationship of inner-contrast. The royal modernisation policies and processes commercialised the land (sacred space) of Bangkok, which changed the cultural meaning of land from a belonging of Thai kings to a belonging of the people. In doing so, it transformed the water settlement of the people into a land settlement. This changed the vertical relationship between sacred and 351

profane spaces by further ‘flattening’ the hierarchy between them and connecting them via modern roads. However, sacred space was still distinguished from profane space: a relationship of contrast. It showed a new urban morphology of versatility and contrast in Bangkok. The modern space of Bangkok now had a flexible function that could serve either the human or the celestial. Therefore, the transformation of the traditional settlement system by royal modernisation policies and processes represented a successful story of how Thai kings, especially Rama IX, retained their influence through modernisation policy. At the same time, these kings and People’s Party were able to reach a compromise with Western powers in different ways, from the mid-19th century Western influence to the political and economic presence of the United States in the 20th- century post-war era.

The ‘four modes of dwelling’ in modern Bangkok Making Bangkok modern like the West under the influence of Thai kings was a cultural process of hybridising Thai identity with that of the West. Figure 9.37 shows how the change in the spatial structure of Bangkok under Rama IX was the final phase of a process that began in the mid-19th century, of making the Thai concept of home modern like that of the West. On the other hand, the space of Bangkok was a political space where Thai kings used different Western models of modernisation to change Bangkok to be modern like the West, but in a Thai way. At the conceptual level, the modernisation of Bangkok by the royal regime reflected how Thai traditions, like the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model from Ayutthaya as mentioned in chapter 5, reconstructed and adapted to the West as living history. Modernising in a Thai way made Bangkok distinct from Ayutthaya because Thai kings hybridised the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model with their chosen model of modernity. This made the modern Hindu-Buddhist urbanism of Bangkok demonstrate how Thai culture had adapted to the dynamics of a globalising world.

352

Figure 9.37: Architectural reflection of existential space (‘four modes of dwelling’) in modern Bangkok.

353

The influence of the Western modernity through the modernisation of Rama IX changed the existential space of modern Bangkok to serve the people via the development of profane space, while empowering the sacred space of Rama IX with a new order of inner-contrast. The attempt to revive Thai identity in the Western space of Rama IX created the spatial structure where sacred and profane spaces were reconstructed to show inner-contrast. Making the sacred space contrast with profane space was a solution for preserving the Thai identity of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model and adapting it to the modernisation program. This created a new kind of Western living in a Thai way, in which city planning and modern architecture merged the human and celestial realms in modern space. It made modern architecture a place of coexistence and juxtaposition, as can be seen in the ‘urban interior’ of modern Bangkok (discussed in the “Urban Space” section of this chapter). This was due to the increased flexibility in the architectural system afforded by the change from the hierarchical traditional settlement of water and land. Thus, when the modern architecture was integrated into Bangkok’s space and architecture, it oriented humans to live alongside the celestial, following the inner- contrast of sacred and profane spaces. The modern space and architecture of Bangkok were places of coexistence with a new kind of spatial hierarchy: inner-contrast. The hybrid function of the modern space and architecture of Bangkok expressed the idea of a ‘modern-sacred’ life which describes how living in modern Bangkok was a process of cultural hybridisation between the present and the past. The ‘modern-sacred’ character of late 20th-early 21st centuries Bangkok demonstrated the political and cultural results of applying modernity in the context of Bangkok, made the city modern like the West but in a uniquely Thai way. Particularly, the royal modernisation policies and processes of Rama IX reconstructed the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model in a modern Hindu-Buddhist urbanism. Rama IX created a new Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model that reconstructed the existential space of modern Bangkok.

Modern Hindu-Buddhist urbanism The modern Hindu-Buddhist urbanism of the royal modernisation policies and processes of Rama IX influenced the way people built and lived in modern Bangkok; they came to 354

live like Westerners while at the same time preserving traditional aspects of Thai life. The modern way of life in Bangkok represented the art of adapting to a globalising world while creating a new identity and spirit of place in the form of modern architecture. Therefore, the modern architecture of Bangkok reflected a different story about how Western and Thai culture hybridised to make Bangkok a place of colourful life, cultural hybridisation, and hybrid identity.396

Figure 9.38: The influence of the traditional settlement system of canals on modern Bangkok. The traditional settlement system of canals influenced the organic urban planning and building arrangement of modern Bangkok.

Modern Hindu-Buddhist urbanism hybridised the geometric design of Western city planning (figure 9.38). The organic settlement pattern influenced the modern road

396 Askew, Bangkok, 291–292. 355

network, which was laid in accordance with the traditional aquatic settlement system. This represented another form of hybridisation of modern planning through the physical environment. The ideas of modernism aimed to create a place for people to live through urbanisation. Nevertheless, in the context of Bangkok, modernism and urbanism did the opposite. They brought the human and celestial to live closer than before, by creating a new order in the spatial hierarchy of sacred and profane spaces. This made the space and architecture of modern Bangkok hybridised, with the hybrid character expressed through the modern settlement pattern. The ‘unplanned urban planning’ of Bangkok created inconsistency in time and space between the present and past; it hybridised Western culture and Thai tradition in the modern space. Hence, modern roads in Bangkok were a space that brought the sacred and profane, and the Western and the Thai, to coexist in juxtaposition.

Figure 9.39: Praying at the Erawan Shrine. In front of the Erawan Shopping Centre on Sukhumvit Road; Sukhumvit Road is located on the left of the image but the umbrellas and the people praying obstruct the view of the road.

356

Figure 9.39 illustrates how the modern roads of Bangkok represented the historical continuity of how Thai culture was hybridised with Western culture from the mid-19th century to the 21st century via the modernisation programs of Thai kings. This could be seen from the coexistence of the sacred space of the Erawan Shrine and the profane space of Erawan Shopping Centre in the modern space of Sukhumvit Road, in a relationship of inner-contrast. The duality of sacred and profane spaces from the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model hybridised to modernity as a result of modernisation via the building of modern roads from Rama IV onwards. The juxtaposition of modern and traditional buildings on the modern road such as Sukhumvit demonstrates how the rise and fall of Thai kings was expressed through changes in space and buildings of modern Bangkok in the 20th century. For instance, as has been discussed previously in the analysis of ‘four modes of dwelling’, the first modern road, New Road, was built in the mid-19th century by Rama IV to express the concept of making Bangkok modern like the West. The word modern, in the context of Bangkok, meant making the local place and buildings modern like the West without losing their original identity through the process of hybridising with Thai identity. It could be hybridised with different kinds of modernity depending on the socio-political interactions between the internal and external influences on Bangkok. Thus, the modernisation policies and processes of Thai kings in the 19th and 20th centuries were a process of making Bangkok modern like the West. Hybridising elements of the local identity, such as the concepts of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model, was at the core of the modern Hindu-Buddhist urbanism in the reign of Rama IX. The space of modern roads demonstrated how royal modernisation policies and processes was redirected by The People’s Party from the 1930s to the 1950s as space and architecture were turned to serve working-class people. The support of Rama IX for democracy, backed by the United States in the 1960s, changed the spatial structure of roads from one involving inner- imposition of profane space over the sacred space to one involving inner-contrast of sacred and profane spaces (figure 9.39).

357

Conclusion: Summarising the Thai concept of home as a typological meaning of architecture in Bangkok from 1946–2016

The resurgence of the Thai monarchy under Rama IX changed the relationship between sacred and profane spaces in the Thai concept of home, bringing them into an order of inner-contrast in the Thai sense of home. The attempt to restore the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model in the modern space of Bangkok hybridised modern Hindu-Buddhist urbanism and the hierarchy of sacred and profane spaces hybridised with a progressively ‘flattened’ settlement system. This changed the morphology and topology of Bangkok’s space. Sacred and profane spaces appeared in (and at) the same time and place, reflecting a new typological meaning in the way the Thai idea of home hybridised under the modernisation policy of Rama IX. This new character of inner-juxtaposition appeared at every level of the ‘four modes of dwelling’. This represented how the royal modernisation policies and processes of Rama IX re-characterised the space of Bangkok that had been modernised by The People’s Party from the 1930s to 1950s, and explained the process of hybridising the Thai idea of home in present-day Bangkok. At the settlement level, the typology of juxtaposed sacred and profane spaces placed at an equal level of hierarchy was represented in the urbanised area of Bangkok with the whole of Rattanakosin Island, preserved as a traditional space. In the reign of Rama IX, the sacred space of Rattanakosin Island was evident but not superimposed on profane space as it had been under Rama V. This demonstrated that Rama IX preserved the concept of dual space from the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model, but arranged human and celestial spaces within a new order of inner-contrast. Sacred and profane spaces coexisted but did not merge or experience a superimposing of sacred space over profane space as in the reign of Rama V. This new typology showed that the ‘bond’ that related to the ‘figural quality’, or the way people experience place in Bangkok’s spatial structure, changed in a way that emphasised the non-hierarchical relationship between sacred and profane spaces. The typology of inner-contrast characterised the urban space of modern Bangkok through the juxtaposition of sacred and profane spaces. The inner-contrast represented in 358

the ‘urban interior’, where human and celestial spaces appeared on the flattening settlement system, reflected how modern space that had served public in The People’s Party era changed to serve the coexistence of the human and celestial. Communal and sacred buildings hybridised to create an urban space characterised by inconsistency in time and space between the new and old. Many modern buildings, like those on Sukhumvit Road, had an element of sacred space, demonstrating that the urban space of modern Bangkok was a space of coexistence between the people and the Thai king within a new spatial of inner-juxtaposition. Public space reflected the coexistence and contrast between sacred and profane spaces. Notable public buildings, such as CentralWorld, visualised how the modern space of Bangkok was one where people and celestial beings would coexist. It showed people living closer to the supernatural, as in the case of the shrines located in the modern shopping centre of CentralWorld. This made modern public buildings in Bangkok unique, as they were an architecture of the people that served a sacred purpose. The typology of inner-contrast made the public buildings of Bangkok express the public image of people and celestial beings living together; it represented how the duality of sacred and profane spaces was preserved while hybridising with Western practices in a Thai way. Private dwellings of this era demonstrated innovative ways to hybridise the dualism of spaces, and of the public and private, with modern architecture. Although there were public residential buildings, houses had overlapping public and private spaces; both sacred and profane spaces existed within them. As in the traditional Thai house, sacred spaces were located in public space, but somehow this was now also understood to be private space. The difference was that sacred and profane spaces were arranged in the house’s space within a new order of non-hierarchical coexistence, reflecting the typology of inner-contrast. Furthermore, public and private spaces could be arranged in many ways; this was demonstrated through the different degrees of public and private spaces in different modern house types of Bangkok, across urban and suburban areas. Those closer to Western spaces, like those in urban areas, had more public aspects, while houses located far from Western spaces, as in suburban areas, had less.

359

Figure 9.40: The spatial relationship of sacred and profane spaces in an order of inner-contrast.

The existential spatiality of dualism in the hybrid Thai concept of home of Rama IX’s modernisation policies and processes coincided with new spatial relationships between sacred and profane space. This showed that the royal modernisation program of Rama IX had restored the concept of division between sacred and profane spaces from the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model. However, the flattening settlement system produced by urbanisation created a new spatial order and hierarchy at the urban scale. It made sacred and profane spaces coexist in a relationship of contrast, representing a modern form of Hindu-Buddhist urbanism that disclosed the hybrid Thai idea of home under Rama IX, characterised by dualism with inner-contrast.

360

10. The hybridising Thai concept of home

Introduction

This chapter concludes the explanation of how Bangkok’s geography, culture, politics, and architecture, which changed as a result of successive royal modernisation programs from the mid-19th to the beginning of the 21st centuries, influencing the Thai concept of home through a progressive hybridisation process. This idea of a hybrid Thai sense of home has been arrived at through an application of the theory of place/sense of home on Rattanakosin island, the study of existing Thai scholarship on the Thai idea of home, and the author’s own experience of the Thai concept of home in Bangkok. It summarises the evolution of the Thai sense of home to disclose how the Thai idea of home changed through the spatial arrangement of Bangkok’s architecture and urban form driven by royal and government-driven modernisation policies and processes (figure 10.1). The thesis has analysed the hybridising Thai concept of home by looking at how the city’s spatial and architectural structures changed as a response to both social and urban modernisation. Based on the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model, the concept of home went through cycles of hybridisation as the relationship between sacred and profane spaces changed in both the public and the private realms through a progressive ‘flattening’ of the vertical hierarchies of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model through progressive processes of overlay, merging and super-imposition. The ‘language of architecture’ has been analysed in relation to sociopolitical changes to disclose the Thai idea of home from a new angle. This has been done, in this research, by comparing the study of the hybridising Thai concept of home to the theory of place/sense of home in the context of Bangkok through its various phases of modernisation. In this chapter, I will introduce an autoethnographic perspective by bringing in my own understanding of the Thai sense of home in Bangkok and my experience of living there.

361

Figure 10.1: Key streets, public buildings, and houses used in the analysis. These examples demonstrate the evolution of the Thai concept of home from the reign of Rama IV (r. 1851–1868) through to the end of that of Rama IX (r. 1946–2016).

The evolving Thai concept of home

The process of evolution in the understanding of the Thai concept of home in Bangkok, as expressed through architecture, involved multiple layers of sociopolitical interaction between the people, the West, and Thai kings. Together, these influences contributed to a hybridisation of the local Thai idea of home – based on the concept of dual spaces from the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model – and Western culture in the form of social, urban and architectural concepts of modernisation (figure 10.2). 362

Figure 10.2: The evolution of the Thai concept of home from 1783 to the present. Changes in the spatial relationship between sacred and profane spaces in the reigns of kings Rama I through IX, as part of the process of modernisation, provoked the evolution of the Thai concept of home.

Chapter 5 discussed the origins of the Thai sense of home in the reign of Rama I (r. 1783–1809), who superimposed the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model on the local aquatic settlement of Bangkok from 1783. The Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model created a strong vertical hierarchy in the settlement of the local landscape by establishing the land (Rattanakosin Island) as sacred and the water (the canal network) as profane. This created a dual landscape in Bangkok, and although there was a clear hierarchy dividing sacred and profane spaces, in some cases they were overlaid on each other and connected in a flexible relationship. This contradictory relationship between sacred and profane spaces set up the Thai concept of home based on dualism with an inherent- contradiction. Chapter 6 explained how the modernisation policies and processes of King Mongkut (Rama IV, r. 1851–1868) brought significant changes to Bangkok in a bid to make it ‘modern like the West’. In this way, Rama IV modernised Bangkok while preserving the 363

Thai identity and the longevity of his dynasty by adapting Western ideas to the Thai context. Rama IV had modern roads built around Rattanakosin Island, inspired by the way the British had modernised Singapore through the construction of modern roads and shophouses. He wanted to demonstrate that modern space could change understandings of the Thai concept of home, bringing the city to be modern like the West but in a Thai way. For instance, New Road and Bamrung Mueang Road on the eastern side of Rattanakosin Island, with their rows of shophouses, merged sacred and profane spaces while retaining the concept of dual space. The presence of roads began to ‘flatten’ the hierarchy of the previous settlement system by integrating sacred and profane spaces, creating a stronger connection between the two that simultaneously offered more flexibility. The change in the spatial relationship between sacred and profane spaces presented an attempt to live in a modern land settlement like those of the West while adapting Western ways of life to the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model. This hybridised the Thai concept of home through a process of merging. The introduction of roads and shophouses brought about a new level of flexibility in the relationship between human and celestial realms, and between social classes by breaking down spatial and social hierarchies. However, sacred space was superimposed on the profane space through this merging during the modernisation of Rama IV, showing that making Bangkok modern like the West changed the understanding of the Thai idea of home from one that involved living in a hierarchical space to one arising from a ‘flatter’ settlement system. As the flexibility of Bangkok space increased, its hierarchy decreased. Chapter 7 has shown how royal modernisation policies and processes continued under King Chulalongkorn (Rama V, r. 1868–1910) through the building of Ratchadamnoen Avenue and the introduction of public space to Rattanakosin Island through the repurposing of the Royal Playground. Rama V exemplified the formal form of private space or housing, in the Western sense, in his new palace. The way he introduced public and private spaces to Bangkok represented a merging of sacred and profane spaces that emphasised sacred space as the modern space for the upper class. Royal functions took priority in modern space. This demonstrated the continuity of the spatial relationship of

364

sacred and profane spaces from the era of Rama IV, where sacred space was superimposed on the profane space. Rama V clearly showed how sacred space was to be considered superior to profane space by introducing formal public and private spaces. He indicated that higher space was superior through emphasising the royal function of public space and by building modern palaces were fully private instead of being semi-private and semi-public like a shophouse. This served as a reminder that though sacred and profane spaces had merged in Western- style modern space, the dualism of lower and upper spaces still existed in a new relationship that involved the inner-imposition of sacred space. This developed a new kind of spatial hierarchy where sacred and profane spaces merged but sacred space was given more importance. Chapter 8 discussed how the 1932 revolution of The People’s Party took over the process of modernisation under a constitutional, rather than an absolute, monarchy. During the reign of King Ananda (Rama VIII, r. 1935–1946), The People’s Party government continued urbanisation through the construction of roads and modern buildings, emphasising communal functions in the public and private realms. They turned the Royal Playground to public use, built the Democracy Monument on Ratchadamnoen Avenue, and constructed several communal buildings in the sacred space of Rattanakosin Island. In a sense, they reversed what Rama V had done, by superimposing profane space on what had been sacred space. They retained the concept of dual space from the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model and the way Rama IV and Rama V had merged sacred and profane spaces. However, The People’s Party emphasised profane space over sacred space, reflecting the shifts in power of different social classes and the creation of modern space serving all Thai people. During The People’s Party era, some upper-class houses were transformed into communal buildings thus turning the previously privileged private (sacred) sphere of the upper classes into public (profane) space for the people. In other domestic spaces, the overlap of public and private spaces remained, because public space was not clearly

365

separated from private space in houses and public buildings. Sacred and profane spaces still merged, but with more importance given to profane space. Chapter 9 discussed how King Bhumibol (Rama IX, r. 1946–2016) took the throne in 1946 and restored an absolute monarchy. He allied with the United States with the aim of seeming more democratic and distancing Thailand from communist regimes in neighbouring Laos, Cambodia, and Vietnam. In return, the United States poured money and American culture into Bangkok, allowing Rama IX to restore royal influence and, in turn, reprise the practice of royal modernisation policies and processes on his terms. Rama IX firstly turned Bangkok into an automobile-centric modern city like those of the United States and, secondly, restored Thai identity by reviving the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model. This created a strong contrast between sacred and profane spaces, placing modernity and tradition side by side. The juxtaposition of new and old was evident from Bamrung Mueang Road on Rattanakosin Island to Sukhumvit Road, and reflected a new kind of dualism of sacred and profane spaces that could emphasise both in coexistence. The relationship between sacred and profane spaces maintained a subtle hierarchy and emphasised the coexistence of celestial and human and sacred and profane spaces. There was an increase in profane space through rapidly spreading urbanisation, which was financially supported by the United States, while at the same time, the sacred space of Rattanakosin Island was preserved and more closely identified with the holiness of the king. The strict hierarchy of sacred and profane spaces had certainly weakened since the reign of King Yodfa (Rama I, r. 1783–1809), but Rama IX was able to create islands of sacred space throughout the city by having them coexist with profane space in the new order of ‘inner-contrast’, giving the city a sense of juxtaposition between sacred and profane, traditional and modern, Thai and Western.

Reconstructing the dualism of sacred and profane spaces

In the 1850s, Western influence grew aggressively in South East Asia, spurring Rama IV to the realisation that he needed to Westernise Bangkok himself before the West could

366

impose itself on the country. The idea of making Bangkok modern like the West originated when Westerners began to live and work in Bangkok in the 19th century. They passed on Western ideas such as class equality and modern architecture to the emergent class of Sino-Thais. As Sino-Thais increased their wealth, their descendants went to work in the court and some Sino-Thai girls married into the royal family, gaining social status. Through this, Western culture was slowly integrated into the upper class, in a bottom-up process. Social changes occurred thanks to a combination of bottom-up and top-down processes. The social and political mechanisms behind making Bangkok modern like the West went through different stages that depended on each king and his relationship with Western powers and ideals. The flexible relationship between sacred and profane spaces developed further as Bangkok modernised to be like the West, which involved merging celestial and human spaces in modern space. At the same time as the hierarchy between sacred and profane spaces broke down, the old-fashioned vertical division between upper and lower spaces in the water and land settlement system of old Bangkok also disappeared as roads replaced canals bringing about a progressive ‘flattening’ of the Hindu-Buddhist hierarchy between sacred land and profane water. However, the spatial dualism of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model remained throughout the different stages of modernisation despite the symbolic flattening of the landscape. The duality of space persisted with more and more flexibility, a progressively weaker hierarchy, and increased contrast. Therefore, the key to retaining the Thai concept of home in a globalising environment was the hybridisation process that allowed for the process of modernisation to continue without the loss of local identity.

Reading the ‘language of architecture’ to arrive at a hybrid sense of home

This research has argued that the spirit of place (genius loci) behind Thai concept of home can be disclosed through the ‘language of architecture’, as described in relation to Norberg-Schulz’s concept of dwelling. It has added to the scholarship on phenomenological studies of Thai architecture by examining a different story: looking at

367

the architecture of Bangkok through its spatial arrangement and ‘language of architecture’ and considering how that architecture interacted with a changing society and urban form.

Previous study such as A Tradition Rediscovered: Toward an Understanding of Experiential Characteristics and Meanings of the Traditional Thai House by Devakula, which involved the personal interpretation of place, suggested that the Thai sense of home existed only in traditional architecture such as Buddhist temples and stilt/floating houses, and was therefore totally distinct from modern forms of architecture. However, by looking at Thai architecture in Bangkok from a new angle and using different methods, this thesis has argued that the Thai idea of home has been through several stages of evolution and development and is, in fact, a hybrid model where modernity and tradition overlap and coexist. This can be seen in the changing spatial relationships between sacred and profane spaces, at both architectural and urban scales, which are influenced by the flexibility and hierarchy in public and private spaces. Two other studies, The Study of Conservation and Revitalisation in the Area of Samphaeng by Aisrathramnuy and Fear in Domestic Architecture by Karnchanaporn analysed the Thai concept of home through individual researchers’ experience identity, and interpretation. Although this is a valuable approach, it does not look at the shared or collective identity of the people who live in the place. The present research embraces both the collective and individual dimensions exploring four modes of dwelling (settlement, urban space, public building, and house) to explain how people have interpreted their understanding of the Thai concept of home at the architectural and urban scales in public and private spaces. This research has also considered social, political, and historical change in Bangkok to examine the development of a sense of home as a process of sociopolitical interaction, because the sense of place is a product of how humans and culture interact with the landscape.

368

The theory of place/sense of home and the hybridised concept of home in Bangkok

As mentioned above, two previous understandings of the sense of place/home have been applied to Bangkok in the 20th and 21st centuries by Thai scholars. Traditional conceptions of the Thai sense of home have described how continuity in the sense of home has been preserved by retaining the authentic identity of being inside. This was the traditional approach of previous Thai scholarship on the Thai sense of home.397 A more contemporary conception of home in a Thai context sees it as the product of internal and external interactions hybridising people and culture to continuously reconstruct the place’s identity. This is a new approach that the thesis has applied to discuss the hybridisation process in the Thai concept of home extended to the urban space as well. An analysis of the hybridising Thai concept of home has demonstrated that the process of hybridisation is key in creating a sense of home in Bangkok. The Thai concept of home has always been some form of hybrid, beginning from the superimposition of the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model onto the local aquatic settlement by Rama I in the 1780s, and continuing through the various phases of modernisation policies and processes of kings Rama IV to Rama IX.

397 Suwatcharapinun and Fungfusakul, “Phenomenology: Rethinking the Uses.” 369

Figure 10.3: The changing boundaries of sacred and profane spaces. From stages 1 through 4, we see the process of change in the inner boundary of sacred space and outer boundary of profane space in Bangkok. The outer boundary was also the boundary for Bangkok as a whole both before and during the various phases of modernisation promoted by Thai kings and The People’s Party.

However, throughout the period of modernisation the boundaries between sacred and profane spaces have changed (figure 10.3). Before modernisation, the inner boundary between sacred and profane spaces was determined by the geographical distinction between water and land settlements, and the outer boundary was determined by the interaction between sacred and profane spaces in Bangkok’s urban space. However, throughout the modernisation process, there were different kinds of boundaries, such as those between water and land settlements, to divide sacred and profane spaces. At the same time, the modernisation and urbanisation of Thai kings and People’s Party distinguished Bangkok’s urban space making the Thai concept of home could hybridise in a way that preserved local identity. This mechanism made the identity of place and the 370

understanding of the Thai sense of home for Bangkokians one that included the idea of being flexible to be distinctive. As we see in figure 10.3, a higher level of urbanisation in Bangkok to delineate the city’s outer boundary, gave Bangkok special status as the capital and distinguished it from smaller cities in Thailand. When modernisation in the reign of Rama IX revived the dualism of sacred and profane spaces by creating inner contrast between new and old, the Thai concept of home in the context of Bangkok regained a separate inner boundary, which was a tool for retaining the concept of dual space. Cultural hybridisation was at the core of forming the Thai idea of home. This saw the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model hybridised with the local settlement of Bangkok to create a sense of home characterised by dualism with inner contradiction. Cultural hybridisation and royal modernisation policies and processes interacted to adapt modernity to the Thai concept of home. The result was the emergence of a spatial dualism with inner contrast through multiple stages of hybridisation from the reign of Rama IV to that of Rama IX. It became evident that being flexible to be distinctive, as part of the cultural hybridisation of the Thai idea of home, was a key concept that distinguished Bangkok amid a globalising world, in a way that reached a compromise with Western culture. The definition of the Thai concept of home in the Bangkok context related to the theory of place/sense of home in the Western world in many ways. However, study of Bangkok’s hybrid Thai idea of home reveals the different way that Thai culture has understood the sense of home. It has thus been worthwhile to study the idea of home in relation to a different geography and culture to enrich the theory of place/sense of home and reflect how people around the world (in places such as Bangkok) have understood a sense of place/home differently to Western theories of place/sense of home. Study of the Thai concept of home demonstrates the unique way that people in Bangkok reflect their knowledge of being-in-the-world.

371

The hybridising Thai concept of home in Bangkok: The author’s experience

Before studying the evolution of the Thai concept of home Before I began this research on the changing Thai sense of home, as a Bangkokian I always felt the new Thai identity of modern Bangkok was to be modern like the West. I considered this understanding of the changing Thai concept of home as similar to that of many Bangkokians. Nevertheless, I became interested in deepening my understanding of Bangkok’s relationship to Western models of identity and urbanisation after visiting cities like Vancouver in 2005, Chicago in 2007, and Melbourne, Australia, from 2009. Those trips made me think about how Thai identity had changed but was still clearly present in the modern city. Physically, the Bangkok of the present was urbanised like many modern cities in the Western world, with the same basic infrastructure: roads, major buildings, and public transport. Thais and foreigners alike walked on the streets, shopped in the big department stores, and ate in the restaurants, reflecting its international status. However, when I compared my feeling of place in Bangkok to what I experienced in other, Western cities, I discovered that though modern Bangkok looked like the West, it retained a sense of uniqueness.

After studying the evolution of the Thai concept of home Analysis of the evolution of the Thai idea of home made me realise that my experience of Bangkok’s uniqueness had to with the existence of sacred space in the modern city, which gave me a special feeling. For instance, although I lived in a modern house, my parents always reminded me to respect the place because there was a land spirit there. Sometimes, I heard my friends telling me about supernatural things in their own homes, and at schools, hospitals, shopping centres, hotels, and so on. They said many places in Bangkok were home to something celestial. In my own experience, I never saw, met, or felt anything supernatural. In fact, I found the idea that the supernatural was present in these places bizarre, because I was living in one of Asia’s most Westernised cities. This feeling was reflected in the juxtaposition of modern and traditional buildings.

372

In the 2000s, when I was studying at a Bangkok high school called Satit Patumwan or PDS (Patumwan Demonstration School), I saw the Siam Paragon shopping mall being built right beside a Buddhist temple called Wat Patumwanaram. The juxtaposition of modern and traditional buildings eventually aided a realisation of this thesis about how the identity of place in Bangkok hybridised with Western culture in a way that preserved local character through the contrast between new and old. This inspired me to think that the Thai sense of home had always been hybrid; even before the country’s first encounters with the West, it had assimilated and adapted foreign ideas such as the Hindu- Buddhist cosmological model. Thus, I applied the idea of reading the ‘language of architecture’ in the four modes of dwelling (settlement, urban space, public building, and house) from the concept of dwelling of Christian Norberg-Schulz. Using the theory of place/sense of home, this thesis has been able to discuss how the Thai idea of home evolved through modernisation to present me with the sense of juxtaposition between new and old buildings that I experienced when I saw the Siam Paragon being constructed right beside the Buddhist temple.

During a field trip to Bangkok in 2016, the second year of my doctoral studies, I noticed a similar juxtaposition around the Hindu shrine built on the street corner in front of the Erawan Shopping Centre. In my personal feelings, I considered Thai identity expressed in traditional forms as part of modern architecture. And on conducting this research, it became hard to say that modern buildings in Bangkok were wholly modern. I saw people performing traditional rituals in the sacred space that existed as part of modern buildings or developments. This made Thai identity stand out, especially in the Chit Lom district, one of the most commercial and Westernised areas of Bangkok, which nevertheless reserved space for rituals and celestial beings. I had a similar experience during the cremation of Rama IX in the Grand Palace and Royal Playground during my field trip to Bangkok in 2017. When I was a child, these two places were communal space: the Grand Palace was a tourist destination, and the Royal Playground was used as a commercial space for selling goods and as a public park. After

373

the death of Rama IX, they became sacred spaces for the royal cremation, and the construction of the phra meru began. My curiosity about and observations on the evolution of the Thai concept of home in Bangkok throughout my candidature inspired me to research how this evolution came about, and I was surprised by my discovery: Thai identity and culture had hybridised with that of the West but continued to live in a dual space between sacred and profane, so it was no wonder that when I was living and growing up in Bangkok, I always heard people strongly believing in superstition, even if I did not believe in it myself. I wanted to explain how the Thai identity of Bangkok in the 21st century was not about the physical appearance of buildings – about whether they used traditional Thai decoration, for example - it is a reflection of how the sociopolitical dynamic of Bangkok has hybridised the Thai concept of home. Finally, I learnt that the modernisation had changed the physical space of Bangkok to be like the West, but at the phenomenological level, that modernisation had hybridised the Thai idea of home with adaptations of Western ideas without losing local identity. The spirit of place of Bangkok in the 21st century was and still is Thai.

Conclusion: The hybrid concept of home

The understanding of the Thai sense of home in the context of Bangkok has been produced through a process of hybridisation that adapted to Western culture in a way that preserved Thai identity throughout the modernisation process. The Thai concept of home in Bangkok demonstrates that Thai identity could adapt to both Hindu-Buddhist and Western cultures. Hybridisation was a process that united space, time, and sociopolitical activity, in which the Thai sense of home continued to change to retain Thai identity within an evolving Thai idea of home. Every change in spatial relationships hybridised the Thai concept of home in different ways, retaining the dualism of sacred and profane spaces through a flexible order. The way the Thai idea of home developed in the context of modern Bangkok represented the dynamism of Thai identity, in which hybridisation was the key to creating and processing Thai culture.

374

The understanding of the Thai concept of home that has emerged from this thesis’s analysis of its hybridisation through the space and architecture of Bangkok challenges the understanding of the Thai idea of home in existing Thai scholarship. We can see how the Thai sense of home responded to conceptions of authenticity associated with place in the 20th century and to hybridisation in the 21st century. The Thai concept of home has been able to adopt beneficial elements from elsewhere through hybridisation to adapt to external influences (particularly from the West) and create new forms of identity. The phenomenological analysis of changing and hybridising Thai concept of home from chapters 5 to 9 has explained the central argument through the physical evidences of space and architecture in Bangkok using references from both international and Thai sources. At the conceptual level of place, Thai concept of home is seen as a changing phenomenon. Chapter 5 has discussed how Thai concept of home existed from the birth of the Chakri dynasty in 1783, who superimposed the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model upon the local settlement of Bangkok. This created the dualism of sacred and profane spaces with the hierarchically flexible relationship between the celestial and human realms based on dualism with an inherent-contradiction. Chapter 6 has explained how the modernisation policies and processes of Rama IV began to make a significant change to the dualism of sacred and profane spaces in Thai concept of home. New Road and shophouses were built on the eastern side of Rattanakosin Island to adapt the Western way of life into the Hindu-Buddhist cosmological model hybridising Thai idea of home through the process of merging. Chapter 7 has further discussed how Rama V mastered his father, Rama IV’s modernisation on Rattanakosin Island through introducing the Thai style public space on Ratchadamnoen Avenue and repurposing the Royal Playground, and exemplifying the formal private space or house in the Western sense. Rama V’s modernisation further merged the sacred and profane spaces and emphasised sacred space as the upper class lived in the modern space. Chapter 8 has discussed how the political revolution of People’s Party in 1932 redirected the modernisation policies and

375

processes of Thai kings in the reign of Rama VIII by repurposing the Royal Playground for public use and building the Democracy Monument on Ratchadamnoen Avenue. In doing so, it reversed the order of the sacred and profane spaces from the reign of Rama V and emphasised the profane space. This presented the shift in classes and making the space of Bangkok to serve all Thai people. Chapter 9 has discussed how Rama IX and the presence of the United States restored the Thai monarchy and sacred space, while continues urbanisation as an automobile-centric city. The coexistence of the sacred and profane spaces in the reign of Rama IX presented a new order of sacred and profane spaces on Sukhumvit Road which both emphasised in the juxtaposition with a subtle hierarchy. Studying the concept of home in different cultural contexts, such as that of Thailand, enriches the understanding of the theory of place/sense of home. The present study of the Thai idea of home in Bangkok above has demonstrated that the sense of place/home responded to maintain the local place’s identity in a new way; the concept of home in Bangkok was open to external influences such as Western culture, and able to invite them to be a part of an identity that hybridised Thai and Western elements. Thus, the study of the Thai idea of home in Bangkok has disclosed how a sense of place/home can be a part of time and space, while the authenticity of place hybridises to reach a compromise with change. The Thai sense of home balances rigidity and versatility, as can be seen in spatial relationships of flexibility and hierarchy as they changed through modernisation to preserve the dualism of sacred and profane spaces. The Thai concept of home has had a degree of flexibility in adapting other cultures to the place, but needed social mechanisms to appropriate changes to the local identity: these were the modernisation policies and processes adopted by successive Thai kings and, for a time, The People’s Party. The lesson from the study of change and hybridisation in the Thai idea of home is that a sense of place/home can adopt a mechanism such as hybridisation to preserve local identity, making the spirit of place or concept of home evolve with the globalising world without losing its original essence.

376

11. References

Place (concept of home) theory

Alexander C., Notes on the Synthesis of Form (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1964).

Agnew J. A., Place and Politics: The Geographical Mediation of State and Society (Scoresby: Allen & Unwin, 1976).

Augé M., Non-Places: Introduction to an Anthropology of Supermodernity (London: Verso, 1995).

Bachelard G., The Poetics of Space (Boston: Beacon Press, 1994).

Casey E., The Fate of Place: A Philosophical History (Oakland, CA: University of California Press, 1997).

Clay J., L’impressionisme [Impressionism] (Paris, 1971).

Cresswell T., Place: A Short Introduction (La Vergne, TN: Blackwell Publishing, 2004).

Cronon W., “Kennecott Journey: The Paths out of Town,” in Under an Open Sky, ed. W. Cronon, G. Miles, and J. Gitlin (New York: W.W. Norton, 1993).

De Tocqueville A., et al. Democracy in America: Volume II (New York: Washington Square Press, 1899).

Donat J., World Architecture (London: Studio Vista, 1967).

Duncan J., The City As Text. The Politics of Landscape Interpretation in the Kandyan Kingdom (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990).

Eliade M., The Sacred and the Profane: The Nature of Religion (Orlando: Harcourt, Brace, 1959).

Escobar A., “Cultural Sits in Places: Reflections on Globalism and Subaltern Strategies of Localization,” Political Geography 20, no. 2 (2001), 139–174.

Erikson E. H., Identity and the Life Cycle (New York: W.W. Norton, 1980).

Guidoni E., La citta europea [The European City] (Milan, 1980).

Hallowell I., Culture and Experience (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, 1955). 377

Harvey D., Justice, Nature and the Geography of Difference (Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, 1997).

Heidegger M., Being and Time, trans. E. Robinson (New York: HarperCollins Publishers, 1962).

Heidegger M., “Letter on Humanism,” in Basic Writings (California: Harper San Francisco, 1977).

Heidegger M., “Poetically Man Dwells,” in Poetry, Language, Thought (New York: Harper & Row, 1975).

Heidegger M., Poetry, Language, Thought (New York: Harper & Row, 1975).

Heidegger M., The Essence of Reasons, trans. T. Malick (Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press, 1969).

Heidegger M., “The Origin of the Work of Art,” in Poetry, Language, Thought (New York: Harper & Row, 1975).

Heidegger M., The Question of Being (Woodbridge, CT: Twayne Publishers, 1958).

Lefebvre H., The Production of Space (Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 1991).

Levi-Strauss C., Structural Anthropology (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1967).

Lippard L. R., The Lure of the Local: Senses of Place in a Multicentered Society (New York: New Press, 1997).

Lukerman F., “Geography as a Formal Intellectual Discipline and the Way in Which It Contributes to Human Knowledge,” Canadian Geographer 8, no. 4 (1964).

Lyndon D., “Towards Making Places,” Landscape 12, no. 3 (1962), 31–41.

Malpas J. E., Place and Experience: A Philosophical Topography (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1999).

Massey D., “A Global Sense of Place,” in Space, Place, and Gender (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1994).

Matore G., L’Espace humain. (Paris: La Columbe, 1962).

May J., “Globalization and the Politics of Place: Place and Identity in an Inner London Neighborhood,” Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers 21, no. 1 (1996).

378

Merleau-Ponty M., Phenomenology of Perception (New York: Routledge, 2012).

Moore C. W., Allen G., and Lyndon D., The Place of Houses (Oakland: University of California Press, 1974).

Nairn I., The American Landscape (New York: Random House, 1965).

Olson R. G., An Introduction to Existentialism (New York: Dover Publications, 2012).

Pappenheim F., The Alienation of Modern Man (New York: Monthly Review Press, 1959).

Piaget J., and Inhelder B., The Child’s Conception of Space (New York: Routledge, 1956).

Relph E., Place and Placelessness (London: Pion, 1976).

Sack R. D., Homo Geographicus: A Framework for Action, Awareness, and Moral Concern (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1997).

Schutz A., Collected Papers Volumes I and II (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1962).

Seamon D., A Geography of the Lifeworld: Movement, Rest, and Encounter (London: St. Martin’s Press, 1979).

Seamon D., “Body-Subject, Time-Space Routines, and Place-Ballets,” in The Human Experience of Space and Place, ed. Buttimer A. and Seamon D. (London: Croom Helm, 1980).

Terrasse C., La cathédrale: miroir du monde [Cathedral: Mirror of the World] (Éditions Alpina, 1954).

Tuan Y. F., “Geography, Phenomenology and the Study of Human Nature,” Canadian Geographer 25 (1971), 181–192.

Tuan Y. F., Landscapes of Fear (New York: Knopf Doubleday Publishing, 2013).

Tuan Y. F., “Language and the Making of Place: A Narrative-Descriptive Approach,” Annals of the Association of American Geographers 81, no. 4 (1991), 684–696.

Tuan Y. F., Space and Place (Minneapolis: The University of Minnesota Press, 1977).

Wagner P. L., Environments and Peoples (Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1972).

379

Concept of dwelling

Arnheim R., Art and Visual Perception: A Psychology of the Creative Eye (Oakland, CA: University of California Press, 2004).

Baillie-Scott M. H., Houses and Gardens (London: G. Newnes, 1906).

Binswanger L., Grundformen und Erkenntnis menschlichen Daseins [Basic Forms and Knowledge of Human Existence] (Munich: E. Reinhardt Verlag, 1964).

Bollnow O. F., Vom Vesen der Stimmungen [The Nature of Moods] (Frankfurt, 1956).

Broadbent G., “A Plain Man’s Guide to the Theory of Signs in Architecture,” in Theorizing a New Agenda for Architecture: An Anthology of Architectural Theory 1965–1995 (New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 1996), 122–140.

Broadbent G., Bunt R., and Jencks C., Signs, Symbols, and Architecture (Hoboken: Wiley, 1980).

Frankl P., The Concepts of “Addition” and “Division” (Leipzig-Berlin, 1914).

Jager B., “Horizontality and Verticality,” Duquesne Studies in Phenomenological Psychology 1 (1971), 212–235.

Lynch K., The Image of the City (Cambridge, MA: Harvard-MIT Joint Centre for Urban Studies Series, 1960).

Norberg-Schulz C., Baroque Architecture (New York: H. N. Abrams, 1972).

Norberg-Schulz C., Existence, Space & Architecture (New York: Praeger Publishers, 1971).

Norberg-Schulz C., Genius Loci: Towards a Phenomenology of Architecture (New York: Rizzoli International Publications, 1980).

Norberg-Schulz C., Intentions in Architecture (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1968).

Norberg-Schulz C., Meaning in Architecture (London: The Cresset Press, 1969).

Norberg-Schulz C., The Concept of Dwelling: On the Way of Figurative Architecture (New York: Rizzoli International Publications, 1985).

380

Schwarz R., Vom Bau der Kirche [From the Construction of the Church] (Heidelberg: L. Schneider, 1947).

Scully V. J., Louis I. Kahn, (New York: G. Braziller, 1962).

Scully V., The Earth, the Temple, and the Gods: Greek Sacred Architecture (San Antonio: Trinity University Press, 2013).

Trier J., First. Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Gottingen [Society of Sciences at Gottingen] (1940).

Venturi R., and Scully V. J., Complexity and Contradiction in Architecture (New York: Museum of Modern Art, 1966).

Zucker P., Town and Square (Textbook Publishers, 2003).

Modern architecture and urbanism

Norberg-Schulz C., Roots of Modern Architecture (A.D.A. Edita, 1988).

Sitte C., Der Stadtebau [The Urbanism] (Vienna 1909).

Zevi B., The Modern Language of Architecture (New York: Da Capo Press, 1994).

Others

Martin B. and Hanington B., Universal Methods of Design: 100 Ways to Research Complex Problems, Develop Innovative Ideas, and Design Effective Solutions (Beverly, MA: Quayside, 2012).

Rapoport A., House Form and Culture (Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall, 1969).

Thai studies of place

Aisrathramnuy V., The Study of Conservation and Revivalisation the Area of Samphaeng (Master’s diss., Chulalongkorn University, 1999).

Devakula P., “A Tradition Rediscovered: Toward an Understanding of Experiential Characteristics and Meanings of the Traditional Thai House,” (PhD diss., University of Michigan, 1999).

381

Karnchanaporn N., Fear and Domestic Architecture: A Cultural Phenomenon with Reference to Thai Domestic Architecture (Saarbrücken: VDM Verlag, 2009).

Suwatcharapinun S., “From Epistemology to Methodology: Phenomenology in Architecture” (Research Project MRG5280036 from 16 March 2009 to 15 March 2011, Faculty of Architecture, Chiang Mai University, 2011).

Suwatcharapinun S. and Fungfusakul A. “Phenomenology: Rethinking the Uses of ‘Root and Identity’ in Thai Contemporary Architectural Discourse” (paper presented at the Built Environment Research Associates Conference, BERAC III, Thammasat University in Pathum Thani, Thailand, 25 May 2012).

Thai urban planning and architecture

Askew M., Bangkok: Place, Practice and Representation (London: Routledge, 2002).

“A ‘Symbol of Thainess’: Thousands of Teak Trees to be cut down for Thailand’s New Parliament Building,” Asian Correspondent, 26 July 2018, https://asiancorrespondent.com/2016/07/thailand-teak-trees-parliament-building/.

Ardrugsa W., ” ‘Mount Sumeru’ and the New Thai Parliament House :The ‘State of Exception’ as a Paradigm of Architectural Practices,” Najua Journal: History of Architecture and Thai Architecture, 10 (2013). bkkbaseface,“Bangkok Flood Elevation Map,” accessed 26 September 2018, https://bkkbaseface.wordpress.com/2011/10/24/bangkok-flood-elevation-map/

Chaichongrak R., The Traditional Thai House (Bangkok: Silpakorn University, 1979).

Charernsupkul A. and Temiyabandha V., Northern Thai Domestic Architecture and Rituals in House-Building (Bangkok: Fine Arts Commission, Association of Siamese Architects under Royal Patronage, 1978).

Cilento K., “MahaNakhon / Ole Scheeren, OMA,” accessed 20 September 2018, https://www.archdaily.com/30025/mahanakhon-ole-scheeren-oma

Darren Chang, Da(rren) Vinci, accessed 20 September 2018, https://darrenvinci.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/24-hill- plans-sections_page_05.jpg.

David, accessed 20 September 2018, http://kb4images.com/Bangkok-Images/number-18238.html

382

Durand-Lasserve A., “Speculation on Urban Land, Land Development and Housing Development in Bangkok: Historical Process and Social Function 1950–1980,” (paper presented at the Thai-European Seminar on Social Change in Contemporary Thailand, Amsterdam, 28–30 May 1980).

Errington S., “Embodied Sumange in Luwu,” Journal of Asian Studies 42, no. 3 (1983), 545–570.

Errington S., “The Cosmic House of the Buginese,” Asia (January–February 1979), 8–14.

Fisher R. E., Buddhist Art and Architecture (London: Thames & Hudson, 1993).

Fusinpaiboon C., “Modernisation of Building: The Transplantation of the Concept of Architecture from Europe to Thailand, 1930s–1950s” (PhD diss., University of Sheffield, 2014).

Hiencheeranun N., The News of City Planning, vol. 26 (Bangkok: Ministry of the Interior, 1972).

Jumsei S., “Water Towns,” in Naga: Cultural Origins in Siam and the West Pacific (New York: OUP South East Asia, 1988), 138–172.

Khumsupha M., “Changes in Urban Bangkok 1855–1909: The Impact of the Settlement of the British and their Subjects” (PhD diss., Chulalongkorn University, 2011).

Martin Lorenz, “Good Morning Old Bangkok: Can the Supreme Court ศาลฎีกา Be Saved?” My Krung Thep กรุงเทพฯ (Bangkok), 6 January 2013, traveltobangkok.blogspot.com/2013/01/good-morning-old-bangkok-can-supreme.html

Marek Ślusarczyk, “Democracy Monument in Bangkok, Thailand,” Wikimedia Commons, 30 March 2009, commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Democracy_monument,_Bangkok,_Thailand.jpg.

Metrobear, “Looking to the Past when the Theatres in Bangkok Still Prospered,” OK Nation Blog, 26 July 2014, oknation.nationtv.tv/blog/metrobear/2014/07/26/entry-1

Ministry of Municipal Government. R5 N18.1s/1, Land Purchases for the Construction of Ratchadamnoen Avenue (1899– 1906) (National Archives of Thailand).

Navapan N., “Absolute Monarchy and the Development of Bangkok’s Urban Spaces,” Planning Perspectives 29, no. 11 (2014).

Noobanjong K., “Chakri Maha Prasat Throne Hall” in Power, Identity, and The Rise of Modern Architecture: From Siam to Thailand (PhD diss., University of Colorado at Denver, 2003), 152-161.

383

Noobanjong K., “Power, Identity, and The Rise of Modern Architecture: From Siam to Thailand” (PhD diss., University of Colorado at Denver, 2003), https://books.google.com.au/books/about/Power_Identity_and_the_Rise_of_Modern_Ar.html?id=mzl-qnmCkqUC.

Noobanjong K., “The Poetics of Destructions: Demolitions of Iconic Modernist Buildings in Bangkok” (paper presented at the 13th International Conference on Thai Studies, Chiang Mai, 15–18 July 2017).

Patrick Lepetit, 17 June 2018, http://patricklepetit.jalbum.net/BANGKOK/01- INFO/ATTRACTIONS/Vimanmek%20Palace.html

Phinit Phranakorn B.E. 2475–2545 [Analysing the City Planning of Bangkok from 1932–2002] (Bangkok: Chulalongkorn University, 2006).

Prakitnondhakarn C., Politics and Society in Architecture: Siamese Era, Applications in Thai Design, and Nationalism (Bangkok: Matichon, 2004).

Preyawanit N., “Controlling a Fast-Growing Urban Region: A Case Study in the Bangkok Metropolitan Region,” Na Jua 23 (2009), 219–243.

“Sanam Luang Park (The Royal Field),” Bangkok.com, accessed 27 August 2018, http://www.bangkok.com/magazine/sanam-luang-park.htm; The Nation, “250,000 Expected to Attend Royal Cremation,” The Nation, 30 September 2017, http://www.nationmultimedia.com/detail/kingdomgrieves/30328066

Tambiah S. J., S. J. (1973), “Classification of Animals in Thailand,” in Rules and Meaning, ed. M. Douglas (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1973), 127–166.

Tanabe S., “Historical Geography of the Canal System in the Chao Phraya River Delta,” Journal of the Siam Society 65, no. 2 (1977), 23–72.

ThaiPublica, 15 July 2014, https://thaipublica.org/2014/07/baan-norashing/

Tibek, “The Vimanmek Mansion,” 17 June 2018, http://www.thailandwanderer.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/The- Vimanmek-Mansion-photo-by-tibek.jpg.

384

Tiptus P. and Bongsadadt M., Houses in Bangkok: Characters and Changes during the Last 200 Years (1782 A.D.–1982 A.D.) (Bangkok: Chulalongkorn University Research Affairs Office, 1982).

Varavarn P., “Landscapes of Consumption and Hidden Heritage: Case Study of Sukhumvit Road” (PhD diss., architecture and tourism, Silpakorn University, 2007).

Velltheim-Lottum L., Kleine Weltgeschichte des stadtischen Wohnhauses [A History of the Dwelling House] (Heidelberg: L. Schneider, 1952). MahaNakhon website, “Design,” accessed 3 September 2018, http://www.mahanakhon.com/design.php.

Waterson R., The Living House: An Anthropology of Architecture in South-East Asia (Boston: Tuttle, 2010).

Your Thai Guide Co,. Ltd., “The Chakri Group (Phra Thinang Chakri Maha Prasat),” 12 April 2019, https://yourthaiguide.com/the-chakri-group-phra-thinang-chakri-maha-prasat/

Thai history and culture

Abhakorn R., Ratburi, an Inner Province: Local Government and Central Politics in Siam, 1862–1892 (PhD diss., Cornell University, 1984).

Annual Report 1996 (Bangkok: Bangkok Bank, 1996).

Baker C. and Phongpaichit P., A History of Thailand (China: Cambridge University Press, 2005).

Batson B.A., The End of the Absolute Monarchy in Siam (Singapore: Oxford University Press, 1984).

Cohen E., “Thai Society in Comparative Perspective,” in Collected Essays (Bangkok: White Lotus, 1991), 47–55.

Connors, Democracy and National Identity. “Contract for New Parliament Signed,” Bangkok Post, 30 April 2013, https://www.bangkokpost.com/news/local/347778/stecon-signs-contract-to-build-new-parliament-in-dusit-within-900- days.

Crawfurd J., Journal of an Embassy from the Governor-General of India to the Courts of Siam and Cochin China, vols I and II (London: Henry Colbourn and Richard Bentley, 1830).

385

Damrongrajanuphab, Prachum Pongsawadan Pak Tee 13 Rueng Tumnan Wang Na [A Collection of Chronicles, Volume 13 A History of Wang Na] (Bangkok: Sophonphiphatthanakorn, 1933).

Eawsriwong N., “Phi” [“Ghosts”] and “Nam tuam, phi lae khaw tai” [“Flood, Ghost and Death”] in Yook samai cheua ya lap lu [The Era of ‘You May Not Believe But Should Never Offend’] (Bangkok: Amarin Printing, 1999).

Fineman D., A Special Relationship: the United States and Military Government in Thailand, 1947–1958 (Honolulu: University of Hawaiʻi Press, 1997).

Forest A., Les Missionnaires Francais au Tonkin et au Siam xviie–xviiie siècles. Livre I: Histoire du Siam [The French Missionaries in Tonkin and Siam from the 17th to 18th Centuries. Book I: History of Siam] (Paris: L’Harmattan, 1998).

Haseman J. B., The Thai Resistance Movement during World War II (Chiang Mai: Silkworm Books, 2002).

HuangLao, “Scenes from King Chulalongkorn’s Jubilee of 1908”, Teakdoor.com Siam, Thailand & Bangkok Old Photo Thread, 7 January 2018, http://teakdoor.com/famous-threads/39970-siam-thailand-bangkok-old-photo-thread-241- print.html

Jory P., “The Vessantara Jataka, Barami, and the Boddhisatta-Kings: The Origin and Spread of a Thai Concept of Power,” Crossroads 16 (2002).

Jumsei S., Naga: Cultural Origins in Siam and the West Pacific (New York: OUP South East Asia, 1988).

Kahn J. S., ed. Southeast Asia Identities. Culture and the Politics of Representation in Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore and Thailand (Singapore: Institution of Southeast Asia Studies, 1998).

Kanchanakhaphan, Mua Wan Ni... Krung Thep Chetsip Pi Kon [Yesterday... Bangkok 70 Years Ago]. (Bangkok: Ruangsin Publishing House, 1977).

King Lithai, Traibhumikatha: The Story of Three Planes of Existence (vol. 1a). (Bangkok: Thailand Amarin Printing Group, 1985).

King Mongkut (Rama IV), Prachum Prakard Ratchakarn Tee See [A Collection of Proclamations in the Reign of King Rama IV] (Bangkok: The Teachers Council of Thailand, 2005).

King R., Reading Bangkok (Singapore: Singapore University Press, 2012).

386

King Yodfa Rama I, The Script of Ramakien, the Royal Literary Work of Rama I Phrabath Somdet Phra Phutthayotfa Chulalok Maharach (Bangkok, Ran Nakornsas, 2014).

“Lak Muang, The Ceremony of Sacrificing the Living People for Summoning Their Spirits to Protect Bangkok,” TNEWS, 21 August 2017, www.tnews.co.th/contents/349898

Lewis G., “Capital of Desire: Bangkok as a Regional Media Metropolis,” Social Semiotics 8, no. 2 & 3, 239– 254.

Na Pombhejara V., Pridi Banomyong and the Masking of Thailand’s Modern History (Bangkok, 1979).

Narumit S., Old Bridges of Bangkok (Bangkok: Siam Society, 1977).

Numnonda T., “The First American Advisers in Thai History,” Journal of the Siam Society 62, no. 2.

Olarn K. and Cripps K., “Thailand's Royal Cremation Ceremony Caps Year of Mourning,” CNN, 27 October 2017, https://edition.cnn.com/2017/10/26/asia/thailand-king-bhumibol-adulyadej-cremation/index.html

O'Neil M., Bangkok: A Cultural and Literary History (Oxford: Signal Books Limited, 2008).

Ouyyanont P. and Yoshihiro T., “Aspects of the Place and Role of the Chinese in Late Nineteenth Century Bangkok,” Southeast Asia Studies 39, no. 3, 384–397.

PADCO, Bangkok Land Management Study, vol. 2 (Bangkok: National Housing Authority of Thailand and Asian Development Bank, 1987).

Peleggi M., Lords of Things: The Fashioning of the Siamese Monarchy’s Modern Image, (Honolulu: University of Hawaiʻi Press, 2002).

Phraya Anuman Rajadhon, The Study of Thai Culture and the Thai Way of Life (Bangkok: Hospital Charoentham, 1972).

Prasertkul, S., “The Transformation of the Thai State and Economic Change (1855–1945),” (PhD diss., Cornell University, 1989).

Puaksom D., Khon plaek na nanachat klong krung sayam [Siam's International Strangers] (Bangkok: Sinlapa Watthanatham, 2003). 387

Rabibhadana A., The Organization of Thai Society in the Early Bangkok Period 1782–1873 (Ithaca, NY: Southeast Asia Programme, Cornell University, 1969).

Rajchagool C., The Rise and Fall of the Thai Absolute Monarchy: Foundations of the Modern Thai State from Feudalism to Peripheral Capitalism (Bang Lamung District: White Lotus, 1994).

Reynold C. J., “Globalization and Cultural Nationalism in Modern Thailand,” in Southeast Asia Identities: Culture and the Politics of Representation in Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore and Thailand, ed. J.S. Kahn (Singapore: ISEAS, 1998), 120– 124.

Royal Thai Survey Department, Maps of Bangkok A.D. 1888–1931 (Bangkok: Royal Thai Survey Department, 1999). Roy Cavanagh, “Bangkok City Pillar Shrine,” Thaizer, 8 April 2013, https://www.thaizer.com/tourist-attractions/bangkok- city-pillar-and-shrine/

Saichon, Chat thai.

Saichon, Somdet kromphraya damrong.

Seidenfaden E., Guide to Bangkok with Notes on Siam (Bangkok: Royal State Railways of Siam, 1928).

Smith M., A Physician at the Court of Siam (Kuala Lumpur: Oxford University Press, 1982).

Sternstein L., Thailand. The Environment of Modernisation (Sydney: McGraw Hill, 1976).

Song Sai, “The Tale of the City (Bangkok) Pillar,” Story of Siam, accessed 17 August 2018, storyofsiam.blogspot.com.au/p/blog-page_7896.html

Suwannathat-Pian K., Thailand's Durable Premier: Phibun through Three Decades 1932–1957 (Kuala Lumpur: Oxford University Press, 1995).

Thak. Thailand.

“Thai Cabinet Meets King; Doubt Grows about Power Handover Schedule”, Today, 4 September 2014, www.todayonline.com/world/thai-cabinet-meets-king-doubt-grows-over-power-handover-schedule

388

Thailand. National Economic Development Board, Evaluation of The First Six-Year Plan 1961–1966 (Bangkok: The National Economic Development Board Office of the Prime Minister, 1967).

Thanawat, Tamnan chiwit jao sua: 55 trakun phak 2 [Legendary Lives of the Jao Sua: 55 Families, Part 2], (Bangkok: Nation, 2001).

Thiphakorawong (Chao Phraya) and Yunesuko Higashi Ajia Bunka Kenkyu Senta, The Dynastic Chronicles, Bangkok Era, the First Reign: Text Volume 1 of The Dynastic Chronicles, Bangkok Era, the First Reign (Tokyo: Centre for East Asian Cultural Studies, 1978).

Thiphakhorawong, The Dynastic Chronicles. Bangkok Era. The Fourth Reign (AD 1851–1868), trans. Chadin (Kanjanavanit) Flood, with the assistance of E. Thadeus Flood (Tokyo: Centre for East Asia Cultural Studies, 1966).

Tomosugi T., Reminiscences of Old Bangkok: Memory and Identification of a Changing Society (Tokyo: The Institute of Oriental Culture, 1993).

Turpin F. H., A History of the Kingdom of Siam (Bangkok: The American Pressby. Mission Press, The Committee of the

Vajiranana, 1997)..

Vella W. F. and Vella D. B., Chaiyo!: King Vajiravudh and the Development of Thai Nationalism (Honolulu: University Press of Hawaiʻi, 1978).

Wanlikodom S., The Development of Thai Society and Culture (Bangkok: Muang Bowrang, 2011).

Withaya, “Bangkok Flea Markets,” Asian Oasis Blog, 22 December 2015, www.asianoasisblog.com/bangkok-flea- markets/

Wilhelm G. S., North Thailand, Southeast Asia and World Prehistory (Honolulu: University of Hawaiʻi Press, 1970). H. Cox, “The Restoration of a Sense of Place,” Ekistics 25 (1968).

Wilson C. M., State and Society in the Reign of Mongkut, 1851–1868: Thailand on the Eve of Modernization (New York: Cornell University, 1971).

Wongkul P., Saiyasath krong muang [The Empowerment of Superstitious Belief] (Bangkok: Amarin Printing, 2000).

Wyatt D. K., Thailand: A Short History (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2003). 389

390

Appendix: A timeline of the Chakri dynasty to Rama IX398

398 All the information and references in A timeline of the Chakri dynasty to Rama IX comes from the books: A History of Thailand, Buddhist Art and Architecture, Naga: Cultural Origins in Siam and the West Pacific, and Reading Bangkok. 391

392

393

394

395

396

397

398

399

400

401

402

403

404

405

406

407

408

409

410

411

412

413

414

415

416

417

418

419

420

421

422