The summer of 1990 was spent travelling through central Europe with an experimental architecture project called ‘Whaur Extremes Meet’.This involved constructing a ‘debating chamber’ in seven cities, most of which were in that immedi- ate transitory state that follows revolution. For many people in locations such as Prague this structure became a utilitarian symbol performing part of their transformative activity.The intention of such architecture was not so much a question of liberating form as liberating people.
House, homeland, self-determination: the Gameti Ko project, NWT
Gavin Renwick
j oseph Beuys declared that culture relates to freedom because cul- ture implies freedom. Vaclav Havel said that ‘because of the materialistic and science based nature of modern civilisation, culture … has been taken out of context, robbed of its broader and deeper meaning.’ There was a time when culture was scarcely ever mentioned as a separate sphere of human activity.The reason for this was simple: culture was part of daily life.’ 1 In the Northwest Territories there is a major change in the socio- political landscape. After years of negotiation the Dogrib Dene may soon have self-government and their land claim settled — an extraor- dinary event of international importance. On Dogrib land culture is part of daily life — life is woven into the fabric of the whole day. On the land work is neither compressed into prescribed hours nor spatially isolated. The architecture of the bush does not spatially determine, or isolate, an activity. This illustrates the dichotomy between the western idea of house (as a spatial unit in the built environment) and the Dogrib idea of home . In western convention a ‘house is a physical unit that defines and delin - eates space for the members of a household. It provides shelter and protection for domestic activities’. This prevents the idea of a house being anything other than ‘a territorial core, [ rather than ] a complex entity that defines and is defined by cultural, socio-demographic, psy - chological, political and economic factors’ 2 Within Dogrib culture it is an oral tradition that links archaeologi- cal and cultural landscapes. Land use and occupancy are inextricably linked. Home is not contained but lived, and understood, as an expan- sive experience. Gameti elder, Romie Wetrade, says ‘When we say home it is as if the land is that home.This is why we worked hard and took care of our home.’ In the relationship between camp and land , spatial prepositions like in or out are superfluous, as both camp and land mean home . You are always on the land. Such a geographically expansive, domestic intimacy is not locked into a fixed place and illustrates the inextricable link between hearth and cosmos, home and world.
On Site review 11
9
Spring 2004
Made with FlippingBook interactive PDF creator