private and public use of the living room - Bilkent University
private and public use of the living room - Bilkent University
private and public use of the living room - Bilkent University
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
Benjamin (1995) states that <strong>the</strong> concept <strong>of</strong> home ga<strong>the</strong>rs <strong>the</strong> physical <strong>and</strong> mental<br />
environment with <strong>the</strong> conceptual space <strong>of</strong> domestic family life. Rybczynski (1987)<br />
claims that <strong>the</strong> dwelling stays as a machine, not as a home unless <strong>the</strong> idea <strong>of</strong><br />
comfort which is <strong>the</strong> fundamental notion <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> domestic well being is not<br />
recognized. Based on “<strong>the</strong> Onion Theory <strong>of</strong> Comfort”, Rybczynski (1987) claims that<br />
<strong>the</strong> notion <strong>of</strong> comfort developed historically without missing <strong>the</strong> past meanings <strong>and</strong><br />
“…each new meaning added a layer to <strong>the</strong> previous meanings, which were<br />
preserved beneath. At any particular time, comfort consists <strong>of</strong> all layers, not only<br />
<strong>the</strong> most recent” (p. 231). When describing <strong>the</strong> whole idea, separating those layers<br />
makes <strong>the</strong> whole concept disappear. It is claimed that although <strong>the</strong> concept <strong>of</strong><br />
home can be described by its parts <strong>and</strong> its whole, it is possible to miss <strong>the</strong> whole<br />
sight (Moore, 2000).<br />
The philosophical <strong>and</strong> phenomenological context <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> home is examined by <strong>the</strong><br />
studies that question <strong>the</strong> relationship between place <strong>and</strong> dwelling. For example,<br />
Bachelard (1969) claims that “… it is not enough to consider <strong>the</strong> ho<strong>use</strong> as an<br />
“object” on which we can make our judgments <strong>and</strong> daydreams react” (p. 3), “…our<br />
ho<strong>use</strong> is our corner <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> world” (p. 4). As a result, more “spiritual <strong>and</strong> existential”<br />
aspects <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> concept <strong>of</strong> home are examined in a “conceptual <strong>and</strong> symbolic<br />
approach” (p. 209). Those studies inspired psychologists to consider <strong>the</strong> idea <strong>of</strong><br />
place <strong>and</strong> home. Since those studies are conducted by environmental psychologists,<br />
<strong>the</strong>y are unable to cite <strong>and</strong> <strong>use</strong> <strong>the</strong> symbolic <strong>and</strong> conceptual approaches in a critical<br />
way (Moore, 2000).<br />
3