An Investigation on the Role of In-Between Spaces in Iranian Traditional Houses As an Architectural Heritage: the Case of Kashan Houses
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
An Investigation on The Role of In-between Spaces in Iranian Traditional Houses as an Architectural Heritage: The Case of Kashan Houses Abbas Havashemi ( [email protected] ) KIAU: Karaj Islamic Azad University Mina Peysokhan Abacus Institute of Higher studies Behnaz Aminnayeri Islamic Azad University Siamak Oanahi Islamic Azad University Research article Keywords: in-between spaces, traditional houses structure, Kashan city, Iran Posted Date: September 7th, 2021 DOI: https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-837972/v1 License: This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Read Full License Page 1/24 Abstract In-between spaces have the duty of separating other space by putting a distance between them, facilitating spatial identication and specication along with creating consequent spaces which gradually lead passers from public environment to more private sections. Designing such spaces was considered a necessity with signicant importance in the architecture of Iranian Traditional Housing. Therefore, regarding the importance of the issue under study, the goal is to discover strategies applied in Iranian Traditional Houses by beneting from the data gathered through a survey carried out on 50 respondents and technicians in the eld of Iranian Traditional Architecture. To do so, EFA was utilized to specify factors creating by in between spaces in traditional houses. The result revealed that elements of continuity, hierarchy and spatial organization are the most evident factors in the architect of Iranian Traditional Houses and as the statistic showed that the highest level variance belonged to spatial organization. 1. Introduction The last years at 19th century brought about changes in human modern lifestyle due to universal developments in various aspects of life (Inglehart 1997; Hesari et al., 2018; Norouzizadeh et al., 2021). Forming physical conguration were altered to suit new social, cultural encountered drastic changes in this era as well (Gottdiener 1995). Traditional architecture, the offspring of long-lasting challenge between the Iranians and the harsh environmental situation, encompasses a series of humanistic which from a homogeneous system with a specic physical identity (Kasma 2003). It is endowed with a unique functional nature which responds to the human needs and expectations, their activities and productive elements and environmental setting, reecting spatial multi-functionality and connectivity (Razjoian 2009). Iranian architects had been aware of special techniques to benet from ceiling, oor and wall and to separate a certain spatial unit based on the climate and culture of users (Balilan 2001; Kasmai 2003; Ahmadi 2012; Ghafourian et al., 2017a; 2017b). Changes were also evident in the architecture of buildings, housing in specic, one of which was to eliminate successive spacing by in-between spaces built in accordance with Iranian culture (Balilan 2001; Ahmadi 2012). In modern Iranian architecture, such spaces have faded away, resulting in the loss of private zones, enhancing dominance of neighboring spaces and in some cases excessive extroversion not in line with Iranian culture (Norouzi 1999; Bulilan 2001). In fact, in-between spaces are realized as interface spaces (Nooraddin 1998, 2002) affecting spatial conguration of architectural and urban complexes in the past which play substantial role in creating spatial link among elements sharing similar identity, the removal of which would lead to gradual demolition of boundaries either in the eld of social relationships or structural foundation. Moreover, these spaces count for organizing the components and elements of architecture and urban spaces Parsaee et al., 2014). Different studies, have dened the term as a spatial setting for bilateral functions, or as the moment of charge from one space to another or connection/disconnection of outer/inner Page 2/24 spaces (Anderson 1991; Gehl 1996; Hajer and Reijndorp 2001; Hillier and Hanson 1984; Skjaeveland and Garling 1997; Stevens 2007; Dovey and Polakit 2007). Connection or disconnection of two spaces requires a third (mediating) space (Oldenburg 1999) known also as articulation (Rezakhani, 2013). According to terminology, understanding spatial features of in- between space which requires words or terms reecting multiple aspects of form, meaning and relevance of the space is the tool to impose changes in in-between space (Rezakhani 2013; Balilan 2011). Grutter (1987) calls for this mediating space in order to recognize an object. Articulation does not merely mean connection, but it has the ability to discipline the overall architecture (Hojat & Nadimi 1981). Studies conducted so far in Iranian setting have focused on documentation of traditional housing in different parts of country. Research projects on "in-between spaces" are either discussing the issue in urban scale e.g. (Ahmadi 2001). Or fundamental studies on the concept of between-ness (Noroozi 2013; Ahmadi 2012; Bemanian 2015). According, the present study aims at specifying the role of in-between spaces in organizing and creating spatial link among architectural elements of traditional Iranian houses. Thus, implementing and inductive approach, through a descriptive-analytical method. Today, due to limited architectural space and especially reduced size of contemporary habitation compared to traditional houses in the past, in-between spaces do not emerge in form of a specic structure or micro-space. So, the present study tends to ll in the existing gap in this regard. The present study concentrates to nd principle create by in-between spaces in the Iranian traditional houses. It is realized that in-between spaces have always played the role of a boundary line for identication and sacredness to certain places while they were built. Finally, special communication features of gain space determines theoretical framework of in-between spaces in accordance with main example of Iranian architecture. 2. Literature Review 2.1 Denition and concept of in-between spaces Different researchers and scholars have proposed various denition and dimensions r the term “in- between spaces” Over the years. In technical architectural dictionary it is dened as “ A dynamic, moving space (Grosz 2001). A space within itself (Hillier 1996). A boundary built in sideline, vague hybrid, underestimated, unknown (Anderson 1991; Gehl 1996; Hajer and Reijndorp 2001; Hillier and Hanson 1984; Skjaeveland and Garling 1997; Stevens 2007; Dovey and Polakit 2007). It is not necessarily empty, vacant or remaining space (Gehl 2001). According to geometrical dimensions of a space counting in-between section, it turns into a stable Inhaled and exhaled by geometry, a location for simultaneous conditions (Nooraddin 1998, 2002). Page 3/24 Therefore, in-between spaces do not separate, but they connect spaces. (The Metapolis Dictionary of Advanced Architecture, 2005) The term "in-between" is synonymous to connection, continuity (distance, separation, border, limit, edge, chamber and threshold). From another point view, it is dened as the third or mediatory space (Grosz 2001). Either connection or disconnection of neighboring spaces require a third space to appear (Oldenburg 1999). In an architecture-based setting Such words are meaningful whenever the true existing spaces are homogeneous. As a result, the issue of recognizing distinct border between spaces is discussed, since architectural spatial zones are dened by distinguishing and differentiating them (Tschumi 1975). The boundaries between objects or even spaces identify structural and meaning-based characteristics of each, as well as their communication features. Division between internal and external spaces dates back to the time when human built shelter for the rst time. The signicant difference between these two spaces is claried when human beings brought their outdoor activities inside by developing novel patterns for their various activities (Nooraddin 1996). The link between internal and external spaces has obsessed with preserving the ties between nature and society simultaneously. On the other hand, every fronting shelter unit creates setting for different activities as well as a location for gatherings. In fact, this relationship is inevitable since any function of the enclosed space would be impossible without such a link (Nooraddin 1996). This, in-between space acts as a location for the confrontation of interior and exterior functions (Balilan 2011). Concerning the distinction of interior and exterior Bollnow maintains that " Such dichotomy between inside and outside is the basis for spatial perception and it can be considered as the key during the whole life (Grutter 1987). The space bordering two objects (in-between space) is not hollow (Luz 2004). It is essential for specifying the objects. Without such spaces it is not possible to identify objects distinctly become of the signications role that they play in creating tics between single elements of space with other spatial segments (Grutter 1987). 3. Research Context 3.1. Identication of the case studies In order to investigate in-between strategy, cases including similar climate and culture features were needed. Three houses were considered in this study, all of which located in Kashan in Iranian Central Plateau (Fig. 1). Kashan is a city located in western fringe of central desert of Iran, a historical city dating back to pre- historic era. Figure 1 illustrates city map. Despite its historical background, Kashan mostly owns architectural