Historically, race has been a central concept in the formation of the Australian nation. It has operated here as a marker to exclude those who were not considred to eligible to be members of the nation. It has worked as a guarantor of a particularised homogeneity. Homogeineity of language and culture as well as race, was throughout the nineteenth century and up until recently, the most basic concern of the nation. Since 1788, the primary basis of Australian culture has been Anglo-Celtic. Following World War II and through to 2000, almost 5.9 million of the total population settled in Australia as new immigrants, meaning that nearly two out of every seven Australians were born overseas. As a result of post-war migration Australia has become a religiously plural, multicultural society.
When migrants come to Australia, they do not choose to settle in country areas. They want to settle in the areas where they can find work, where they can find support services, where they can find other people who speak the same languages and share the same experiences. Culturally, however migrants were always positioned as the unspoken and invisible other of mostly white aesthetic and cultural discourses. Politically, migrants also were always associated with the common experience of racism and marginalisation in Australia. It thus came to provide the organising category of a new politics of resistance, amongst groups and communities with, in fact, very different histories, traditions and ethnic identities.
Negotiating the insertion of new types of building into existing urban environments is often cause of contestation, as they are usually judged on the degree of their departure from what are considered to be original elements. The architectural interventions of recent immigrant groups are particularly problematic in this case, especially if they have overt cultural content and expression or what is considered as ethnic architecture. As well as the more usual disputes about overlooking, site coverage, they must contend with the privileging of the Anglo-Celtic original – indigenous culture. The architectural impact of non Anglo-Celtic societies and cultures in Australia have thus been mainly considered in terms of how built others or other spaces might not be fitting into surrounding styles and forms or existing environments. This essay will analyse whether suburbia is a utopian idea. Furthermore this essay also will analyse the relation between migrant architecture, hegemonic concept of nation/identity and abjection. These aspects will be discussed in turn in this essay.
According to Theophanous (1995:197) multiculturalism is the belief that Australia is, culturally, a pluralist society, that this should be recognised, and fostered to an extent by various means. Howard may well have been the first person to publicly make the link between multiculturalism and national identity in Australia. In interview during the immigration debate, which he ignited in 1988, he argues that the issue [with multiculturalism] is whether the emphasis is on those things that brings us together as Australian nationals rather than on those things that keep us separate, as overseas-born or Australian-born…[He also considers that] national identity cannot be plural. (Stratton, 1998:106-7). In other words Howard sees national identity as something singular, and unifying in its singularity. Like Howard, Alan Jones the host of 2GB talkback radio show also made a statement, which suggests that national identity as something that has to be singular. In November 2003, Jones concludes his Today Show editorial by stating, We are multi-racial but monocultural. And if there are some people who can’t live under the Australian cultural umbrella, then we are better off without them (Lygo, 2004:135). Jones points out that Australian culture is superior to other cultures by declaring we are better off without people who can’t live under the Australian culture umbrella.
The policy of multiculturalism is organised according to a metaphorical spatial structure in which migrant ethnic cultures are peripheral to a core culture, named these days as Anglo-Celtic, which is privileged. The rhetorical distinction has become pervasive in Australia between migrants, who can be people who have been born in Australia but who are from non-British or Irish backgrounds, and Australians, sometimes identified as real Australians. These are the people whose ancestors, it is implied, settled Australia. The privileging of culture gets played out in surprisingly recent development of the discourse of national identity. In Australia, the concern with national identity, as opposed, for example, to some notion of an Australian type, or way of life.
Plato devised the first idea about ideal place in his Republic (4th c. BC). Long after Plato, however Sir Thomas More was the first to apply the word of Utopia (from Greek ou, 'not' + topos, 'place') to a literary genre when he named his imaginary republic Utopia that is ‘place (where all is) well… (Cuddon, 1998:957). Furthermore, More (2003) suggests a welfare state to explain further about the concept of Utopia that is no private property, free universal education, six hours manual work a day, utility clothes, free medical treatment, meals in civic restaurants (meals accompanied by reading or music) and all religions were to be tolerated. The idea of a place where all is well also a utopian analysis which assumes that social structures and process have developed for the good of all and that these tend to represent the best possible practices. The seeming impossibility of utopia and the many failures to create it has produced its converse: dystopia or anti-utopia. A dystopian analysis assumes that social structures and processes do not automatically function for the good of all or even the majority. Dystopian analysis speculate that these may well function to the disadvantage of many, if not the majority.
The ideal city and the dream house are the key symbols in the grand narrative history of occidental architecture. As utopian spaces, the ideal city and dream house are abstract mathematical production. The history of architecture has established a dialectical relation between this ideal-dream and the real inscriptions on the ground – the real city and the real suburb. These spaces are constituted as maps. At the same time other spaces would be seen to be the spaces in the crevice, in the interstices between architecture, or the space of contradiction and ambiguity.
According to Davison (1994:99):
For over two centuries, Australian dreams of the good life have been shaped by a cluster of interrelated ideas we may loosely describe as the suburban idea. The owner occupied, single-storey house standing in its own garden in suburban area was the standard of domestic comfort to which most Australians have continued to aspire.
In other words the suburb has become so closely identify with popular conception of the good life that any move away from it, is apt to be viewed as an attack upon people’s living standard. In this view, the idea of suburban for some people is seen as utopian space or the ideal place to live.
For over two centuries, Australian dreams of the good life have been shaped by a cluster of interrelated ideas we may loosely describe as the suburban idea. The owner occupied, single-storey house standing in its own garden in suburban area was the standard of domestic comfort to which most Australians have continued to aspire.
In other words the suburb has become so closely identify with popular conception of the good life that any move away from it, is apt to be viewed as an attack upon people’s living standard. In this view, the idea of suburban for some people is seen as utopian space or the ideal place to live.
King (1997:57) argues:
The suburb was instrumental in producing the architectural form of the bungalow, just as the bungalow was instrumental in producing the spatial form of the suburb. It was a process that, in the early twentieth century, was to be repeated in the suburbs of Anglophone colonial and post-colonial countries worldwide: the United States, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand.
In this view, the bungalow (fig.1) is seen as a form of architecture which suitable for the suburbs whether in North America, Australia or in other countries where English is the main language that is spoken. Moreover King points out that in Australia the developments of bungalow in suburban have gone much further than Britain, and suburban, single family, single-storey homes are the typical pattern. The bungalow is generally regarded as the first truly national type of domestic and suburban architecture. Ironically bungalow, in fact, comes from India, which is a non-Western country.
The suburb was instrumental in producing the architectural form of the bungalow, just as the bungalow was instrumental in producing the spatial form of the suburb. It was a process that, in the early twentieth century, was to be repeated in the suburbs of Anglophone colonial and post-colonial countries worldwide: the United States, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand.
In this view, the bungalow (fig.1) is seen as a form of architecture which suitable for the suburbs whether in North America, Australia or in other countries where English is the main language that is spoken. Moreover King points out that in Australia the developments of bungalow in suburban have gone much further than Britain, and suburban, single family, single-storey homes are the typical pattern. The bungalow is generally regarded as the first truly national type of domestic and suburban architecture. Ironically bungalow, in fact, comes from India, which is a non-Western country.
Australia’s suburbs were shaped, decisively, by the successive waves of immigrants who pioneered them. The demands for land, for space and for independence have always been prominent in the aspiration of immigrants to Australia. Earlwood, like many Sydney suburbs held up as monuments to the story of multiculturalism. This area is densely populated. In June 1995, 43,2% of its 129,235 residents were born in non-English speaking countries… The Greek community is the biggest…19% of the Australian born residents have both parents from overseas, and 53% speak a language other than English at home. (Allon, 1997:4). This fact is making Earlwood one of the most multicultural populations in Australia.
One of the significant features of this area has been the transformation of the traditional bungalow and Federation housing styles (fig.2), which regarded as indigenous or national styles of Australian house. As Allon (1997:3) puts it The experience of post-World War II immigration has resulted in the rise of hybrid housing forms, including one style in particular that has been termed, using a rather awkward neologism, Mediterraneanisation. This means that many of the typical red and dark-purple brick bungalows and Federation houses have been changed with what the hegemonic culture labelled as Mediterranean Palace – that is to signify migrant house. The label is given to migrant house because some of them decorate their gateway with sculptures of eagles or lions (fig.3&4). Some decorate their garden and/or backyard with figures of goddess (fig.5&6) and/or mythical symbols (fig.7&8).
Many housing researchers and practioners argue that the interactions of people with their external social, economic, political and physical environments, in particular their houses and local neighbourhoods are important to construct their sense of belonging and identity of the place where they live. Personal identity according to Casey (2000:406 in Easthope 2004:130) is no longer seen as a matter of sheer self-consciousness but now involves instrinsically an awarness of one’s place, [an awareness that] there is no place without self and no self without place. A sense of place can be seen as part of our cultural interpretation of the world around us. Rose (1995) provides a working definition of a sense of place. In her arguments about the nature of senses of place, she argues that A sense of place is part of the politics of identity…this includes the idea of defining oneself in opposition to an other (Rose, 1995:103-4).
As a multicultural society, we have seen a growth in the opportunities for groups of people to meet and experive the initial recognition of difference in Australian. Once difference has been recognised, groups begin to form boundaries to differentiate themselves from the other and this may lead to an idealisation of the group and a negative stereotyping of the other. Penrose and Jackson (1993) address these issues in their discussion of the connections between place, race and nation.
They say that:
The social construction perspective…. reveals that much of what is deemed to be natural or a matter of common sense deeply rooted in the dominant ideologies of particular societies. [Both race and nation are] empowered by their assumptions of naturalness and by their tendency to be viewed as unproblematic by those whom they privilege…place contextualizes the construction of race and nation, generating geographically specific ideologies of racism and nationalism. (Penrose & Jackson, 1993:202-5).
In this view, people’s sense of place can become heightened when they think that it is being threatened. The ideas of home-place thus have equally been important bases for resistance and liberation.
The social construction perspective…. reveals that much of what is deemed to be natural or a matter of common sense deeply rooted in the dominant ideologies of particular societies. [Both race and nation are] empowered by their assumptions of naturalness and by their tendency to be viewed as unproblematic by those whom they privilege…place contextualizes the construction of race and nation, generating geographically specific ideologies of racism and nationalism. (Penrose & Jackson, 1993:202-5).
In this view, people’s sense of place can become heightened when they think that it is being threatened. The ideas of home-place thus have equally been important bases for resistance and liberation.
The creation of places is influenced by physical, economic and social realities. As Gieryn (2000:465 in Easthope, 2004:129) explains with reference to the work of Soja, places are doubly constructed: most are built or in some way physically carved out. They are also interpreted, narrated, perceived, felt, understood, and imagined. It means that the physical environment is an essential part of place, but it is always an interpreted element. A work of architecture cannot be seen as merely material point, Architecture intervenes, maps, and signifies and in doing so it constructs identities. Architecture can also be powerfully symbolic - it can take on a totemic quality. Eagles and lions adorning the gateway to the migrant house, for example, they do not merely function as decoration to adorn the gateway, but they carry certain meanings. They are mythical masculine symbols of war and defence. They adorn the gateways of the migrant house – which perceived as big and labelled Mediterranean Palace by the hegemonic culture – in a masculine gesture to fend off enemy. For migrant the hegemonic culture is seen as the enemy. The hegemonic culture recognises migrant houses by these mythical creatures, which guard the gateways and something the site perimeter of the migrant territory.
The migrant house and the migrant enclave according to Lozanovksa (1994:193)
…play in deconstructing a persistent an mythic, hegemonic culture in Australia… the strong negative reaction often associated with the migrant house can be understood by its similarity to abjection – an unconscious revulsion before our own body and ambiguous but necessary precondition for subjectivity. The addition of symbol and signs on the migrant house are seen as physically distinctive. The lions and eagles are no longer just ornamental objects for the hegemonic culture. They become a sign – or representation for migrant as neither subject nor object. They were transferred from object to abject. In other words the lions and eagles become symbol of abjection because they disturb identity, system and order, rules, boundaries or limit of culture and language. Since they are the sign for the abject, thus they become a sign of cultural resistance to dominant.
…play in deconstructing a persistent an mythic, hegemonic culture in Australia… the strong negative reaction often associated with the migrant house can be understood by its similarity to abjection – an unconscious revulsion before our own body and ambiguous but necessary precondition for subjectivity. The addition of symbol and signs on the migrant house are seen as physically distinctive. The lions and eagles are no longer just ornamental objects for the hegemonic culture. They become a sign – or representation for migrant as neither subject nor object. They were transferred from object to abject. In other words the lions and eagles become symbol of abjection because they disturb identity, system and order, rules, boundaries or limit of culture and language. Since they are the sign for the abject, thus they become a sign of cultural resistance to dominant.
As Lozanovksa (1994:197 – 198) puts it:
Whilst for migrant these figures are images of power and force, in transfer into mythic signification they become figures of the marginal. They signify the migrant as non-citizen, as other. At the same time though, what meaning do they impose on their environs; as figures of war and defence they signify the environment as a hostile territory, they make visible mythic territorial divisions. They become figures of resistance.
Whilst for migrant these figures are images of power and force, in transfer into mythic signification they become figures of the marginal. They signify the migrant as non-citizen, as other. At the same time though, what meaning do they impose on their environs; as figures of war and defence they signify the environment as a hostile territory, they make visible mythic territorial divisions. They become figures of resistance.
According to Lozanovksa (1994:201-3) The architecture of the migrant house constructs a reversal of the function of tongue between the host culture and the migrant. The host culture respond to the migrant house: it is an architecture of bad taste… a mild form of oral disgust… Ah yuk! Ah yuk is the response sometimes unspoken, to images of migrant house e.g. Mediterranean palace in Australia. Kristeva suggest that oral disgust – aah yuk – signifies the abject. Kristeva identify oral disgust as the most archaic form of abjection and one would extrapolate that aah yuk as a distinctly non-verbal response signifies that the body has already begun to transgress the boundaries between inside and outside, into the space of self-repugnance: abjection.
For Lozanovksa, The migrant house represents the site of the abject for the unstable subject position of the host culture. The migrant house threatens the homogeneity and hegemony as the site of abjection, the migrant house is the limit to its (unstable cultural) subjectivity. In other words the image of territoriality of the migrant house is particular response in the hegemonic culture because it marks the limit to their consistency and standardisation. The migrant houses terrorize the apparent unity of the host subjectivities with disruption and dissolution. The distinctive styles and forms of migrant houses mark both the point of their recognition of difference and therefore the instability of their host subject position. Thus, from this point of view, it seems that suburbia is a dystopian idea.
The geographer Yi-Fu Tuan coined the term of topophilia to describe the affective bond between people and place...this bond may be stronger for some individuals than for others and can be expressed differently by people form different cultures (Duncan & Duncan, 2001:41). Topophilia is an affective response to place by people who live in that place. This means the places and the spaces influence human memories, feelings and thoughts. For the migrants, a backyard to the site of perimeter contained symbolic statues, ornament or signs of ritual elements embody certain meanings, where memories, history and identity are attached to them. All ornaments in migrant backyard function as topophilia for the migrants.
In conclusion it appears that the architectural of migrant houses in Australia have been mainly considered not appropriate into surrounding styles and forms or existing environment. Migrant houses have challenged with the privileging of the Anglo-Celtic original – indigenous culture with their physical distinctive form. The dissimilarity becomes a sign of abjection and resistance to hegemonic concept of nation/identity. For migrant their garden and backyard decorated with symbolic statues and/or ornament of ritual elements have strong connection with their personal and cultural identity. It is a site of resistance and refuge against assimilation ideologies of the dominant culture.
IMAGES
Fig.1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
N/A
N/A
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
REFERENCE
Allon, F (1997) ‘Home as Cultural Translation’, Communal Plural Vol.5.
Cuddon, J.A. (1998) Dictionary of Literary Terms & Literary Theory, London: Penguin.
Davison, G (1994) ‘The Past and Future of the Australian Suburb’ in L.C. Johnson (ed)
Suburban Dreaming, Geelong: Deakin University Press.
Duncan, J and N. Duncan (2001) ‘Sense of Place as a Positional Good: Locating Bedford
in Place and Time’ in P. Adam, S. Hoelscher and K. Till (eds) Textures of Place: Exploring Humanist Geographies, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Easthope, H (2004) ‘A Place Called Home’ Housing, Theory and Society Vol. 21 (3).
King, A (1997) ‘Excavating the Multicultural Suburb: Hidden Histories of the
Bungalow’, in R. Silverstone (ed) Vision of Suburbia, London and New York: Routledge.
Kristeva, J (1982) Powers of horror : an essay on abjection, New York : Columbia
University Press.
Lozanovksa, M (1994) ‘Abjection and architecture: The migrant house in multicultural
Australia’ in Johnson, L.C (ed) Suburban Dreaming, Geelong: Deakin University
Press.
Lygo, I (2004) News Overboard: The Tabloid Media, Race Politics and Islam, n.p.:
Southerly Change Media.
More, T. (2003) Utopia, translated by Paul Turner, London: Penguin.
Penrose, J and P. Jackson (1993) ‘Conclusion: identity and the politics of difference’, in
Penrose and P. Jackson (eds) Construction of Race, Place and Nation, London: UCL Press.
Rose, G (1995) ‘Place and Identity: a sense of place’, in D. Massey and P. Jess (eds.) A
Place in the World?: Places, Cultures and Globalisation, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Stratton, J (1998) Race Daze. Australia in Identity Crisis, Annandale: Pluto Press.
Theophanous, A.C (1995) Understanding multiculturalism and Australian identity,
Melbourne : Elikia Books.
Allon, F (1997) ‘Home as Cultural Translation’, Communal Plural Vol.5.
Cuddon, J.A. (1998) Dictionary of Literary Terms & Literary Theory, London: Penguin.
Davison, G (1994) ‘The Past and Future of the Australian Suburb’ in L.C. Johnson (ed)
Suburban Dreaming, Geelong: Deakin University Press.
Duncan, J and N. Duncan (2001) ‘Sense of Place as a Positional Good: Locating Bedford
in Place and Time’ in P. Adam, S. Hoelscher and K. Till (eds) Textures of Place: Exploring Humanist Geographies, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Easthope, H (2004) ‘A Place Called Home’ Housing, Theory and Society Vol. 21 (3).
King, A (1997) ‘Excavating the Multicultural Suburb: Hidden Histories of the
Bungalow’, in R. Silverstone (ed) Vision of Suburbia, London and New York: Routledge.
Kristeva, J (1982) Powers of horror : an essay on abjection, New York : Columbia
University Press.
Lozanovksa, M (1994) ‘Abjection and architecture: The migrant house in multicultural
Australia’ in Johnson, L.C (ed) Suburban Dreaming, Geelong: Deakin University
Press.
Lygo, I (2004) News Overboard: The Tabloid Media, Race Politics and Islam, n.p.:
Southerly Change Media.
More, T. (2003) Utopia, translated by Paul Turner, London: Penguin.
Penrose, J and P. Jackson (1993) ‘Conclusion: identity and the politics of difference’, in
Penrose and P. Jackson (eds) Construction of Race, Place and Nation, London: UCL Press.
Rose, G (1995) ‘Place and Identity: a sense of place’, in D. Massey and P. Jess (eds.) A
Place in the World?: Places, Cultures and Globalisation, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Stratton, J (1998) Race Daze. Australia in Identity Crisis, Annandale: Pluto Press.
Theophanous, A.C (1995) Understanding multiculturalism and Australian identity,
Melbourne : Elikia Books.
This is a really interesting piece of work. Through my interest in Photography I recently started looking at the "Urban Exploration" genre of photography, which is primarily concerned with old and abandoned places. This set me on a path to learning about pychogeography, a term not wholly different from topohilia, and all this combined together to led me to consider what it is that sets a place apart from the others.
ReplyDeleteI started a project to capture on camera some of the old and abandoned places of which there are many in Sheffield (UK) where I live. However, in considering my motivation for choosing a place to photograph I started to think about the conditions that a place might have that made me think of it as abject. For me, the abject spaces, buildings etc within a city are a challenging subject for photography.
There's a block of flats, for example, behind the office block where I work that are now all boarded up and they're a complete no-go area because they are the haunt of a group of junkies that go there to shoot up methadone from a clinic just around the corner. When you stand in the place, assuming you can be there alone, there isn't much wrong architecturally with the space; however, there's something very dread about it because of the actions that you know take place there. It's quite a challenge, trying to capture that which makes a place abject when it isn't the architecture itelf.