Jeffrey Kipnis, the theorist often quips that architecture is like the background score

of a movie. What he means of course is that you dont really pay attention to it,
because there are far more interesting things going on, but it is always telling you
how to feel.
Importantly, it tells you who to be.
How does architecture behave as a character? Or is it merely the stage set for a
character? Does the stage set, the scene, make the actor? Or is it merely a
reflection of her self? Across the centuries architecture has been in a perennial
battle with itself, trying to ascertain the extent of its influence. And more to our
interest, to determine the nature of the scene, the stage set that is the house, the
office, the public space and thereby construct the ideal individual, family, citizen.
And often times, it is built as a critique of these ideal roles. This is the secret
history of architecture wrapped in practical design speak about function,
aesthetics, technology and ease of use.
Our public and private selves, our gendered roles as intellectual, working woman or
housewife are all in a way roles that we perform in certain spaces. Or so says fancy
postcolonial theory.
Therefore we look at houses .Strange houses. Weird houses, uncommon ideas, built
over the last 100 years and see what kinds of characters are imagined to inhabit
them and what kinds of characters the house intended them to be.
After looking at houses we look at our relationship to the objects around us. Perhaps
we can tamper with them to see what changes and what does not. A column that
blocks your way, a door that doesnt let you in, a window that shows not what is
outside but what is inside. Or perhaps we can see how people form relationships to
objects in public space. A street vendor with his wall, a student with his corner in
the cafeteria/studio etc. a hostelite and his route to his classroom.