A Critical Reflection on the Gendering of the 21st Century Western City by Anneleen Brandt

A CRITICAL REFLECTION ON THE GENDERING OF THE 21ST CENTURY WESTERN CITY

THROUGH THE CASE STUDY OF POMPEII

MASTER DISSERTATION by Anneleen Brandt Promoter: Filip Mattens Co-Promoter: Arnaud Hendrickx Master in Architecture 2019-2020 KU Leuven Faculty of Architecture Campus Sint-Lucas Brussels

This master dissertation was developed within the studio Graduating through Portfolio (Afstuderen per Portfolio). The studio is run by Filip Mattens and Arnaud Hendrickx, who have supported and guided my project for its entire duration. They have allowed me to explore, by means of defining my own topic, but also by means of being able to choose my own medium. Therefore, I owe them a tremendous debt of gratitude, as this dissertation, which I am truly proud to present, would not have been possible without them.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

During my exchange program at the Technical University of Munich, I developed a growing interest in the topics of gender, through several courses, and city planning, particularly through an urban design studio run by Mark Michaeli and Ute Schneider. During this program I also came to see how writing about architecture is a design process in its own, which enables a deeper and broader understanding of the matter. Therefore, I wish to thank everyone who was involved in making my exchange program possible. In the process of exploring the relationship between gender and city planning, an encounter with professor Hilde Heynen marks a significant moment of progress. Thus, special thanks go out to her as she directed me towards many useful literary sources and therefore helped me in finding a way to approach the topic.

MASTER DISSERTATION by Anneleen Brandt Promoter: Filip Mattens Co-Promoter: Arnaud Hendrickx Master in Architecture 2019-2020 KU Leuven Faculty of Architecture Campus Sint-Lucas Brussels

Throughout history there have been contesting ideas in the discourse on the gendering of the city. More often than not, the city was seen as masculine, for numerous reasons. One of these reasons is simply the fact that city planners and architects were predominantly male. Other reasons often entailed an opposition between male and female, between, respectively, city and nature, active and passive, public and private, work and home, centre and suburbs, productivity and consumerism. However, on occasions, the city itself was described in feminine terms, by for example colonialists and city planners, as something unpredictable, sick or threatening that needed to be controlled.

ABSTRACT

In recent years the discourse on gender in the field of architecture has significantly expanded and gained in visibility. The interest of this master dissertation lies in the relation between gender and city planning. How do they relate to, and more importantly, influence each other? How do I, as a future architect or city planner design for our 21st century Western cities, conscious of this relation? To shed new light on the relation between gender and city planning, the ancient Roman city of Pompeii is called into play. In AD 79, the volcanic eruption of Mount Vesuvius suddenly disrupted every form of life and activity in Pompeii. After years of excavations, which are still not completed today, the city of Pompeii provides us with a sort of time capsule that reveals its ancient society and city planning. Therefore, it is possible to analyse certain aspects of the Pompeiian society, which I covered in three chapters: the position of women, the different relations of power, and the temporal aspect of gender, all in relation to its city planning. This case study of Pompeii in its turn provides a ground for comparison to the contemporary equivalents of these aspects and allows me to establish a critical reflection on the gendering of the 21st century Western city. This theoretical master dissertation consists of two complementary parts: The first part is an essay, preceded by an intensive literature study. The second part is a short film, which highlights some of the obtained insights from the written work, through visual narration.

Link to film: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rMF_JS8fTPQ

INTRODUCTION 6

Fig.1: Master of Cassoni Campana, The Cretan Legend in four compositions (detail Labyrinth), 1500-1525, oil on panel. This detail shows Theseus fighting the Minotaur in the Labyrinth. Ariadne attached the thread, that will guide Theseus out of the Labyrinth, at the entrance where she is waiting with her sister.

INTRODUCTION

“That adulteress [Pasiphae] who in a cow of wood beguiled a savage bull and bore a monster [the Minotaur] in her womb! ... His [Minos’] dynasty’s disgrace has grown; the monstrous beast [Minotauros] hybrid beast declared the queen’s obscene adultery. To rid his precincts of this shame the king planned to confine him shut away within blind walls of intricate complexity. The structure was designed by Daedalus, that famous architect. Appearances were all confused; he led the eye astray by a mazy multitude of winding ways ... Daedalus in countless corridors built bafflement, and hardly could himself make his way out, so puzzling was the maze. Within this labyrinth Minos shut fast the beast, half bull, half man, and fed him twice on Attic blood, lot-chosen each nine years, until the third choice mastered him. The door, so difficult, which none of those before could find again, by Ariadne’s aid was found, the thread that traced the way rewound.”1

Ovidius, Metamorphoses 8.

INTRODUCTION

INTRODUCTION The ideology of the separate spheres is a 19th century conception about gender roles that dictated the position of men and women, their occupation and their behaviour in Western society from then on. In this conception men and women were seen as totally different and therefore belonging to separate spheres. In Sesame and Lilies, two lectures published by John Ruskin in 1865, this clear distinction between the sexes imposed by the ideology of the separate spheres is exemplified:2 The man’s power is active, progressive, defensive. He is eminently the doer, the creator, the discoverer, the defender, with an intellect for speculation and invention and energy for adventure, war and conquest. The women, on the other hand, have a power for rule and an intellect for sweet ordering, arrangement and decision.3 Furthermore Ruskin’s approach to the ideology of the separate spheres claimed that women were best suited for the private realm, ruling the domestic spaces, while men were best equipped for the public spheres, including politics and commerce.4 Hence this ideology also reflected onto the domain of architecture and city planning. D. Cordea, ‘Two Approaches on the Philosophy of Separate Spheres in Mid-Victorian England: John Ruskin and John Stuart Mill’, p. 117. 3 J. Ruskin, Sesame and Lilies - with notes, cited in D. Cordea, ibid., p. 117. 4 D. Cordea, ibid., p. 117. 5 D. Hayden, ‘What Would a Non-Sexist City Be Like? Speculations on Housing, Urban Design and Human Work’, p. 266 in Gender Space Architecture. 2

INTRODUCTION

In the discourse on the gendering of the city there have been contesting ideas throughout history. Dolores Hayden for example clearly sees the city and therefore city planning as well, as male-dominated. In her text What Would a Non-Sexist City Be Like? Speculations on Housing, Urban Design and Human Work, she accuses the design professions of utilising the implicit principle ‘a woman’s place is in the home’ as a design tool. She also shows deep frustration for how “Dwellings, neighborhoods, and cities designed for homebound women constrain women physically, socially, and economically”.5 Hayden’s critique aligns with the conception in which the city centre is seen as masculine as opposed to the feminine character of the suburbs, omnipresent in the American cities of the 20th century. As Hilde Heynen explains in Modernity, Gender and the City: “The city center is the place with an active public life, the place of employment and the suburbs are the place where women and children have their space. The man goes each night to the suburbs and in the morning he returns to the city to be productive”.6 Another conception of the city as being masculine arises when opposed to nature. In this case the city is seen as the starting point of civilization, the place where “humankind is able to carve out a space of its own (…) offering protection against nature’s threats”7 in which the feminine pole is closely related to nature, presented as fertile but also as unpredictable and threatening.8 Although the gendering of the city was, and still is, mostly considered to be male-dominated, on occasions and especially in literature the city was gendered as being more feminine, sometimes in almost erotic ways. Barbara Hooper for example “reads the plans for the modern city (…) as poems of male desire, fantasies of control, written [designed] against the fears and upheavals of the nineteenth century which the female body comes to represent.”9 In analysing how planners and architects like Haussmann and Le Corbusier presented their urbanistic work, in this case the urban transformation of 19th century Paris, Hooper says it becomes clear that the existing city was seen as a sick (female) body that needed controlling:10 As Paris is conceptualized as a diseased body, a she, so the female body is conceptualized as a medicalized, pathologized city, a geography to be conquered and operated on by the authority and science of male mind. (…) On the one hand, there is the controlled, regularized, domesticated body, the planned body of the good, respectable bourgeois wife, the virtuous woman, living under a patriarchal roof who is the upholder of social and moral order, and whose body is devoid of excesses, irregularities, surprises, appetites and desires. On the other hand, there is the prostitute body, the obscene, unclean, unplanned body that with its contagions, excesses and syphilitic fluids infects the city and empire, subverts social order, and brings sickness and racial degeneration to an entire people.11

H. Heynen, ‘Modernity, Gender and the City’, pp. 2-3. Ibid., p. 2. 8 H. Heynen, ‘De Gegenderde Stad: Stad en Stedenbouw vanuit Genderperspectief’, p. 276 in De Stad. 9 L. Sandercock, ‘Introduction: Framing Insurgent Historiographies for Planning’, p. 27 in Making the Invisible Visible. 10 H. Heynen on B. Hooper in ‘Modernity, Gender and the City’, p. 3. 6 7

INTRODUCTION

In this conception city planning was seen as a means to socially control women and to discipline their threatening character towards the male order. Hence this idea of the city remains a male-dominated one even though the city itself was characterised as female. In looking at earlier interpretations of the gendering of the city however, as can be found in ancient mythology, we come across a more balanced view regarding both sexes. In the Greek myth of Daedalus, the male architect who created the labyrinth, it is Pasiphae, king Minos’ wife, whose actions caused for the invention of architecture:12 Pasiphae (…) was overcome one day by the desire to copulate with a white bull sent to Minos by Poseidon for the purpose of being sacrificed. Pasiphae fell in love with the bull and prevented this sacrifice. She ordered Daedalus to make her a cow costume, which actually fooled the bull. The offspring of that sexual encounter was the Minotaur, half man, half bull, a monster that had to be hidden from the world. For that purpose, Daedalus invented the first instance of architecture, a labyrinth from which the monster could not escape.13 Pasiphae, a she, can therefore be seen as the first female patron that instigated the need for the creation of architecture. The one to unravel the secrets of the labyrinth and therefore destroy the masculine art of architecture, was also a she. It was king Minos’ daughter Ariadne who solved the riddle of the labyrinth by leading Theseus, who was chosen to be fed to the Minotaur, out of the labyrinth.14 As ‘Ariadne’s thread’ is still a commonly used metaphor for solving a mystery, the metaphor of ‘the city as a labyrinth’ is also still a very vibrant inspiration to many artists, writers, designers and theoreticians. For example in Walter Benjamin’s reading of the city as a labyrinth, his Minotaur was “three-headed, being the three prostitutes in a small Parisian brothel. In either case, fear mixed with an obscure or suspect pleasure lay at the heart of the city’s secret courtyards and alleyways.”15 The 19th century Western city was the place where democracy and individualism could manifest themselves, but also gave way to the arising of a revolutionary threat. “The threatening masses were described in feminine terms: as hysterical, or, in images of feminine instability and sexuality, as a flood or swamp.”16 The city had now become a place where men started to feel threatened as the Minotaur at the heart of the labyrinth was replaced by a female Sphinx who “strangled all those who could not answer her riddle: female sexuality, womanhood out of control, lost nature, [and] loss of identity.”17 Whether the city as a labyrinth has a secret centre with a lurking male Minotaur or a female Sphinx, or is just centreless, the magical and dreamlike character of the city lies in its constant process of change. The city changes at such a fast pace, that even when you take the same route twice, you will rediscover parts of the city, as if you were wandering through an everchanging labyrinth. Therefore, the magical but also the most terrifying B. Hooper, ‘The Poem of Male Desires: Female Bodies, Modernity’ and ‘Paris, Capital of the Nineteenth Century’, pp. 227-54 and pp. 240-41 in Making the Invisible Visible, and cited in H. Heynen, ‘De Gegenderde Stad’, pp. 281-82 in De Stad. 12 D. Kuhlmann, ‘Gender in the History of Architecture’, pp. 91-92 in Gender Studies in Architecture. 13 Ibid., p. 91. 14 Ibid., pp. 91-92. 11

INTRODUCTION

aspect of the city lies in the journey, in the discovery, and not so much in the quest towards finding its centre. According to Elizabeth Wilson it is exactly this “continual flux and change [that] is one of the most disquieting aspects of the modern city.”18 One of the largest and only cities however that is no longer subjected to continual change in time, is the Roman city of Pompeii. In AD 79 the suddenness of the volcanic eruption of Mount Vesuvius almost instantly froze the bustling city of Pompeii and buried it entirely in volcanic ash within three days.19 Every form of life was eliminated and with it Pompeii’s continual change was disrupted. After this destructive event the then fully buried and forgotten city of Pompeii has only known two major changes. The first of which is its excavations that intensively started in the middle of the 18th century. Induced by the excavations, the second major change can be found in the deterioration of the remains of the city caused by mass tourism; which will be left aside in this argument. The excavations however are of crucial importance as they provide a sort of time capsule that allows us to unravel Pompeii’s labyrinth from above, retracing Ariadne’s thread through the tissue of the city prior to its destruction. As archaeologists and researchers carefully unravelled the city of Pompeii, it is not my intention to add to, nor to comment on, their findings. Rather, professor Ray Laurence’s findings in his book Roman Pompeii: Space and Society, will now become my thread, my guide to unravel the mystery of the gendering of the city in the 21st century, by looking back at the exposed labyrinth of Pompeii in the very 1st century. The gendering of the Roman city is, equally to the gendering of the 21st century city, not that straightforward. Even though the Roman society was clearly patriarchal, it is for example impossible to distinguish clear gender divisions through the remains of the Pompeiian houses.20 On top of that, according to Dörte Kuhlmann there are no indications to be found that Roman architecture would ever have been intentionally used to strengthen or establish a hierarchical separation between the sexes, as on the contrary was found to be the case in classical Athens. Though, when opportunities arose, Roman buildings were (ab)used to strengthen the patriarchal society, depending on the circumstances. Therefore it is important to be aware that architectural design can mitigate or initiate specific social and gender-based discriminations, depending on the influence by other conditions.21

The relation GENDER CITY PLANNING is therefore a construct determined by a set of conditions within a certain framework. This essay will focus on some of the elements of that framework and present the background to which the gendering of the city ought to be read and understood.

E. Wilson, ‘Into the Labyrinth’, p. 147 in Gender Space Architecture. Ibid., p. 151. 18 Ibid., p. 148. 19 E. L. Will, ‘Women in Pompeii’, p. 34 in Archeology. 20 R. Laurence, ‘Urban Space and the Production of Adult Citizens’, pp. 173-74 in Roman Pompeii: Space and Society. 21 D. Kuhlmann, ‘Women in Ancient Greece and Rome’, p. 132 in Gender Studies in Architecture. 15

16 - 17

TABLE OF CONTENTS

WOMEN GENDER GENDER

3 5 6 13

SOCIETY SEX TIME

15 21 27

+++

FRAME WORK

TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION TABLE OF CONTENTS

REFLECTIONS ON GENDER BIBLIOGRAPHY LIST OF FIGURES

CITY PLANNING

31 36 38

WOMEN

+ SOCIETY

CHAPTER 1 WOMEN SOCIETY Since Laurence’s work Roman Pompeii: Space and Society will become my guide, it is of key importance to summarise the core idea of his work at the beginning of my own work. Therefore, his conclusive note is my starting note: In the end, [for starters] we must say that the Roman city consisted of the social actions of its inhabitants and visitors in space and time. These were inscribed upon the fabric of the city, and they accumulated to produce urban formations such as Pompeii upon the eve of its destruction in AD 79.22 Laurence thus concludes that society and urban space are closely interrelated. However, this relation is rather unbalanced, given that society has a greater ruling over urban space than the other way around. Laurence also refers to Pompeii’s urban space as being a social product. The social production of urban space will later on also become a key element in my own argument and will result in a reflection on the ability city planning does or does not possess to induce societal changes.

R. Laurence, ‘Urbanism in Roman Italy’, pp. 190-91 in Roman Pompeii: Space and Society. Aeschylus, Euminedes, An Anthology of Greek Drama, pp. 89-90, 665 cited in D. Kuhlmann, Gender Studies in Architecture, p. 111.

22 23

+ SOCIETY WOMEN

It is clear however, that in order to understand any city’s urban fabric, we ought to understand the society that produced it. Therefore, it is also evident that deeply rooted societal ideas concerning power, sex and gender roles, amongst others, must have left their traces in the urban fabric and perhaps still play a shaping role in the production of the 21st century urban space. In order to obtain a better understanding of the ancient Roman and Greek society, and therefore also of its city planning, it is useful to start looking at the position of women in those societies. Both Roman and Greek society were highly patriarchal, the Greeks for example “believed that the important parent is the father who donates his sperm to a nurse, namely the mother”23, the paternal line was thus the most important element on which citizenship was decided in, for example, ancient Athens.24 Greek women were considered to be mobile elements, whereby daughters were passed on from their father to their husband in marriage, as a literal transferring of goods.25 The husband’s task now was to control the mobility of the wife, “since women were thought to be unable to control themselves, they were dangerous or endangered as soon as they left the protective boundaries of the house.”26 Architecture thus became a means to establish the controlling of women and to enforce the social structure of the city-state. In the limitation of women to the private spheres of the home and their banishment from the public spheres (unless when accompanied by slaves), we can find the precursor for the 19th century ideology of the separate spheres and hence for the tradition of Western architecture. The ancient Greeks declared women to be inferior to men based on women’s supposed inability to handle the cold or the heat: For the divinity has fitted the body and mind of the man to be better able to bear cold and heat, and traveling, and military exercises, so that he has imposed upon him the work without doors, and having formed the body of the woman to be less able to bear such exertions, he appears to me to have laid upon her… the duties within doors.27 This societal constructed idea inscribed itself upon the formation of the domestic as well as of the urban space. The entrance door of domestic spaces was controlled by the man, as the head of the household. The front of the house thus contained the rooms of the men, while the women often had their rooms towards the back of the house or on another level, definitely within doors, ensuring privacy, but also hindering them from entering the public spheres.28 According to Kuhlmann, there must have been a clear differentiation between the male (andronitis) and female (gynaikonitis) rooms. Women most likely were able to go to all the rooms in the house, but on occasions were banned from the male rooms, for example when feasts (symposia) were held by the head of the household. During these events, which were meant to

D. Kuhlmann, ‘Women in Ancient Greece and Rome’, p. 111 in Gender Studies in Architecture. A. Carson, ‘Putting Her in Her Place: Woman, Dirt, and Desire’, pp. 135-70 in Before Sexuality: The Construction of Erotic Experience in the Ancient Greek World. 26 D. Kuhlmann, ibid., p. 112. 27 Xenophon, Xenophon’s Minor Works, cited in D. Kuhlmann, ibid., p. 113. 28 D. Kuhlmann, ibid., p. 113. 24 25

+ SOCIETY

With regards to the urban space, the idea that women had to stay within doors, which was also enforced by laws, resulted in a severe underrepresentation of women in the city. A direct result is also the complete political exclusion of women, as politics were discussed in the open air in the agora, where women were not allowed to go.32 Thus, in ancient Greek society, architecture was certainly utilised to enhance and strengthen the power of the male elite not only over women, but also over other inferior groups of society.

WOMEN

demonstrate power and importance, only men, female slaves and prostitutes were present. The wife, who could not attend, had duties to prepare and clean up afterwards.29 The social separation between the male and female rooms was observed strictly, as can be derived from a metaphor by Antisthenes30 stating that “going from Athens to Sparta, the two famous enemy territories, was like going from the gynaikonitis to the andronitis.”31

Compared to the position of women in the ancient Greek society, Roman women might have been slightly better off: They enjoyed a bit more freedom and presence in public life, and generally enjoyed a higher regard in comparison to the Greek women who were seen as mere goods. Some of the main differences between Greek and Roman society, in regards to architecture and the position of women, were described by Kuhlmann: While Greek women were for the most part locked up in the private spheres of their homes, Roman women could accompany their husbands in visits to other homes as well as when receiving guests in their own homes.33 The Roman house therefore generated a more public character and provided space for activities such as politics and trades. Although politics were now seemingly more approachable for women, since they took place inside, Roman women as well were still banned from political activities. A freedom they did have over Greek women though, is that they could engage in trades and in economic activities. There is evidence that in Pompeii, a women called Faustilla was the owner of a pawnshop.34 Since Roman women were allowed to be more present in the public spheres, the Roman houses, which also became semi-public in some cases, no longer had a clear division into male and female rooms.35 This however does not mean that the Roman houses were gender neutral or that they had a balanced gender-representation.36 As in ancient Greece, the head of the Roman household was male (paterfamilias) and stayed in control over his wife and children.37 Although the gender roles ascribed to the Roman household could not directly be derived from the remains of, for example, Pompeiian houses, a large number of (wall)paintings have been found during Pompeiian excavations that clearly show a specific gendering. Roman paintings often depicted a sort of “mythologised sexuality”38 and were very present in the houses, which also means that these images played an important role in the gender representations children were exposed to and D. Kuhlmann, ‘Women in Ancient Greece and Rome’, p. 114 in Gender Studies in Architecture. Antisthenes, Theon, Progymn. 215; Keuls, The Reign of the Phallus, pp. 210-12. 31 D. Kuhlmann, ibid., p. 114. 32 D. Kuhlmann, ibid., p. 116. 33 J. F. Gardner, Frauen Im Antiken Rom: Familie, Alltag, Recht. 34 D. Kuhlmann, ibid., p. 125. 29 30

+ SOCIETY WOMEN

therefore saw as the norm. Namely, the paintings “categorise and eroticise the female body as powerless and pale, in contrast to the male body as young, heroic and tanned.”39 Wallace-Hadrill therefore sees paintings of this type, such as the painting of Pasiphae and the bull, found in the House of the Vettii in Pompeii, as adding to a “system of thought that categorised female chastity as a surrender to male sexual violence.”40 In the urban space, Roman women were far more present than Greek women, which also expressed itself in many important places, such as temples, with a clear female connotation. Some public Roman amenities even provided an almost equal serving for both men and women (and even slaves). The baths for example, were open to all inhabitants, regardless of gender or social status. Some bathing facilities therefore had a separation between men and women, such as the Stabian Baths in Pompeii. Remarkable, however, is that in other facilities men and women were mixed, which as a result sometimes gave way to sex scandals:41 Men and women are bathing together, and with their clothes, they also strip their virtues… But they bathe along with their servants and undress completely before their slaves; they let themselves be massaged by them thus give free reign to lurking desire.42 Occasional restrictions, based on gender or social status, did occur in other public facilities. Theatres for example often had a separation of gender and social classes, easily organised since there were multiple staircases leading to different sections of the theatre. The architecture thus “facilitated hierarchical groupings or the exclusion of certain groups, such as women, slaves, children, foreigners, and so on.”43 Sometimes the architecture did not facilitate such separations. In that case women were occasionally either allowed and could sit wherever or they were excluded altogether. It is clear that the architecture here was not the determining factor for the initiation or mitigation of exclusions, but that it was definitely an enabler. The matrix of determining factors, containing societal ideas, politics, power relations, and so on, is thus of great importance as these factors can induce a different functioning of the same architectural means.44 Architecture is thus positioned in a submissive role towards a societal constructed ruler. The fact that Roman architecture was in first instance not intended to generate hierarchical separations based on gender or social status, might come across as a negative finding in this essay, as in Pompeii it will thus not be possible to find gender patterns through its architecture. However, the lacking of specifically male or female spaces in Pompeiian architecture and urban space, provides the ideal situation for comparison to the architecture and urban space of the 21st century.

D. Kuhlmann, ‘Women in Ancient Greece and Rome’, p. 124 in Gender Studies in Architecture. R. Laurence, ‘Urban Space and the Production of Adult Citizens’, p. 174 in Roman Pompeii: Space and Society. 37 D. Kuhlmann, ibid., p. 125. 38 R. Laurence, ibid., p. 174. 39 A. Wallace-Hadrill, ‘Engendering the Roman House’, pp. 104-15 in I Claudia, Women in Ancient Rome, cited in R. Laurence, ibid., p. 174. 35 36

WOMEN

+ SOCIETY

21st Century Western architecture should in general be designed in a way not to restrict access or use to certain groups of people, as discriminations based on gender, race and beliefs, are legally prohibited. However, there seems to be one gender-specific type of architecture, categorised under privacy laws, most people agree on: The separation into strictly male or female rooms for toilets, dressing rooms and shower rooms. Even though generally accepted, these types of gender-specific architecture have come to be more and more contested over the last few years. This is not because of the separation between male and female itself, but because of how this binary separation excludes everyone who does not fit within one of these two categories. This binary separation into male and female also used to entail a certain hierarchy. Throughout history being male was always regarded as superior to being female, as being female was defined as being not-male, due to the lack of a phallus. Nowadays, this hierarchy of males over females is, theoretically, not in place anymore, as males and females have obtained equal rights. There has thus been a great positive evolution in terms of how women are regarded. However, nowadays the separation between male and female presents a whole set of other problems in terms of expected behaviour. The 21st century Western society still ascribes an expectation upon what a man and a woman should represent and behave like. Anything or anyone not fitting in that image will find difficulties in being accepted by society. Consider for example the LGBTQ-community or things as simple as boys wearing pink shoes or playing with dolls.

A. Wallace-Hadrill, ‘Engendering the Roman House’, p. 114 in I Claudia, Women in Ancient Rome. D. Kuhlmann, ‘Women in Ancient Greece and Rome’, p. 129 in Gender Studies in Architecture. 42 U. Kiby, Bäder Und Badekultur in Orient Und Okzident: Antike Bis Spätbarock, cited in D. Kuhlmann, ibid., p. 129. 43 D. Kuhlmann, ibid., p. 128. 44 D. Kuhlmann, ibid., p. 132. 40 41

GENDER

+ SEX

CHAPTER 2

GENDER SEX In order to be able to correctly address gender differences and how they are related to city planning, it is important to make a clear distinction between the terms gender and sex, as they do not have the same meaning. Jane Rendell describes the difference between those two terms as follows: sex – male and female – exemplifies a biological difference between bodies and gender – masculine and feminine – refers to the socially constructed set of differences between men and women.45 Following Rendell’s definition, sex differences are biologically based and concern the physical differences between males and females. Gender differences, on the other hand, address the socially constructed ideas of what is seen as masculine versus what is seen as feminine. The difference in behaviour that is expected from men and women, for example by the ideology of the separate spheres, is thus a difference based upon gender. Gender, and by default also gender differences, are produced culturally, socially and historically, which makes them changeable over time and place.46 J. Rendell, ‘Introduction: Gender’, p. 15 in Gender Space Architecture. B. Severy-Hoven, ‘Master Narratives and the Wall Painting of the House of the Vettii, Pompeii’, p. 548 in Gender & History. 48 Ibid., p. 541. 45 - 46 47

+ SEX GENDER

The way in which gender is constructed differently by each culture, also means that the degree to which gender differences are used to express relations of power, can potentially vary over time and place. Pompeii definitely kept a hierarchy in place based on gender (masculine/feminine), but another dynamic determining everyday life in Pompeii was definitely the relation of power based upon status (free/slave).47 If we look at Roman society from an angle of slavery and sexuality, it will become clear that the dynamic of power based upon status was perhaps even more important than the hierarchy based upon the binary male/female idea. Beth Severy-Hoven argues that even though Pompeii was a male-dominated society, focussing solely on gender-differences results in “a poor job of articulating relationships of power.”48 Her argument contains a case study of the wall paintings of the House of the Vettii in Pompeii, which exemplify those scenes of “mythologised sexuality”49 talked about in the previous chapter. Important now is to shift the perspective in which we regard these paintings, from the male/female dichotomy to a master/slave dichotomy. Now it is not the male body which is presented as “young, heroic and tanned”50, but the body of the master or dominus. The body that was presented as “powerless and pale”51 can still belong to a female, but might as well be the body of a male slave. The relationship between master and slave was kept into place through sex, which was defined as penetration, and physical punishment.52 The wall paintings thus not only presented an image of male dominance, but even more presented the image of a master, who happened to be male. The different wall paintings in the House of the Vettii complemented each other by showing eroticised torture of both a male body and a female body on adjacent walls. The painting of Pasiphae and the bull, where she was punished by the gods, is balanced out by an adjacent painting of the punishment of Ixion, a mortal man who desired after a goddess.53 Therefore, “the paired paintings purposefully undermine any hierarchy between the genders and instead subordinate both a male and female body to the gaze of the viewer.”54 The viewer here is the master, who “was inscribing his own power to punish or to enjoy onto his very walls.”55 I would argue that even though these paintings had a balanced view in regards to (sexual) punishment of both females and males, the hierarchy based on gender is still remotely present considering that the master, who holds the power, was always male. It is clear, however, that there was no gender based hierarchy amongst slaves, both male and female slaves belonged to the same social and sexual class and could therefore be penetrated by a master as an act of power. Sexual and physical punishment from a master towards a slave was thus a mechanism used to keep the social hierarchy in place, which might have had a greater impact on the Roman everyday life than the hierarchy based on gender had. From this point of view it is now easier to understand that there might have been a dynamic based on one-sex thinking in Roman society, where, according to Thomas Laquer, “bodies were understood as falling along a sliding scale of sexual difference, rather than being either one or the other in a binary male/female system.”56 He also adds that the binary male/female system of thinking is a modern era conception, which was thus not

R. Laurence, ‘Urban Space and the Production of Adult Citizens’, p. 174 in Roman Pompeii: Space and Society. A. Wallace-Hadrill, ‘Engendering the Roman House’, pp. 104-15 in I Claudia, Women in Ancient Rome, cited in R. Laurence, ibid., p. 174. 52 B. Severy-Hoven, ‘Master Narratives and the Wall Painting of the House of the Vettii, Pompeii’, p. 561 in Gender & History. 53 Ibid., p. 552. 49

50 - 51

GENDER

+ SEX

in place in the ancient Greek and Roman world.57 In this one-sex thinking, men, women, slaves, children, foreigners,… all in a sense started their lives at one end of the sliding scale of sexual difference, and throughout their lives could slide over towards the other end. Being born as male, was thus no guarantee for having an elevated status.58 However, some males could slide over to the far other end as they became a master. Releasing a slave resulted in a similar shift in that direction, as the now former slave gained more freedom. This scale, on which people were measured, was thus not a scale based on biological sex-differences, nor on societal gender-differences, but based on a slave/master dichotomy. The range of the scale thus goes from being completely unfree and under someone’s power and control, to being fully free and a master over others. For women it was also possible to slide along this scale throughout life, but only to a certain extent, as they could never reach the far end of being a master, which was a solely male position. The importance of the master/slave dichotomy over the male/female dichotomy in the ancient Roman world, might also form an explanation to why there were no clear gender divisions to be found in the material remains of Pompeii. If urban space is a production of society, it would make more sense to find the hierarchy based on status (master/slave) to be inscribed in Pompeii’s urban fabric rather than the hierarchy based on gender. This line of thought can be supported by some of Laurence’s findings. A day in the life of the male elite in Pompeii was built up out of a strict set of activities or so called duties, which created a daily routine. When this routine was mapped out in space, in the form of dots (duties) connected with lines (movement), it established a certain pattern of movement from one duty to another, throughout the whole day. (figure 2) This pattern was so important that it therefore structured the urban fabric of the city. The routine and therefore also the pattern through the city, assured that the male elite could always be seen at a certain place and time in the city each day. To be seen, accompanied by an entourage of clients, was a representation of their status.59 The male elite could thus showcase their status on an urban level through public display, but also their private houses were designed in order to exhibit their status.60 The spatial design of the house contributed to the structuring of movement throughout the house, as was the case in urban space, in order to frame social events within a certain space. In the morning, for example, the male elite received clients at their houses, against a backdrop of wall paintings such as the one of Pasiphae and the bull or the punishment of Ixion, serving as an expression of power and status towards their clients. The next duty of the male elite was to go to the forum accompanied by their clients, therefore the forum had to be located within a short distance from their homes. The next dot in the spatial pattern were the baths, which on their turn had to be in close proximity of the forum.61 This spatial patterning also accounted for a city fabric that was not divided into different zones of any type. The importance of the male elite’s personal processions from their houses to the forum, caused for a dispersal patterning of their houses throughout the city. B. Severy-Hoven, ‘Master Narratives and the Wall Painting of the House of the Vettii, Pompeii’, p. 560 in Gender & History. 55 Ibid., p. 561. 56 B. Severy-Hoven on T. Laquer in ‘Master Narratives and the Wall Painting of the House of the Vettii, Pompeii’, p. 561 in Gender & History. 57 T. Laquer, Making Sex: Body and Gender from the Greeks to Freud. 54

+ SEX GENDER

Equally important was the spatial separation between the forum and the baths, in order to be able to continue the procession throughout the day. The importance of male elite display as a presentation of their status thus structured the urban fabric, which in its turn also structured the lives of the rest of the population, for whom a patterning of movement was not a part of their daily routine.62 We thus see that Pompeii’s urban fabric had to abide by the pattern of movement of the male elite, as they were the ones participating in politics and thus the ones who could master the city planning. In analysing the hierarchies that were kept in place in Pompeii and the mechanisms used to do so, it becomes clear that what seemed to be strictly gender based, is far more complex. The importance of other conditions thus comes into play again, stretching the necessity of a wider approach towards the gendering of the city. As much as gender differences would have inscribed themselves upon the urban fabric of the 21st century Western city, so did differences based upon race, beliefs, status, and so on… Even more important, is to be aware that they influence each other and should therefore not be analysed in isolation if we want to obtain an adequate view of the mechanisms present in our cityscapes. In 2010 Bartolomei conducted a study concerning male domestic workers, who carry out so called “feminine household and caring tasks within the domestic spheres”.63 The results of this study showed, interestingly, that the difficulty for the male domestic workers didn’t necessarily lay in doing the feminine tasks in itself, but rather in being at the service of a woman while doing so.64 This idea thus rather aligns with the conception of a master/slave dichotomy than a male/female dichotomy, as male servants didn’t seem to have issues with doing feminine tasks, but they did have issues with doing tasks for a female master. This study thus shows a similar complexity concerning relationships of power, as seen in Pompeii, which are not solely based on gender differences but add other factors into the equation.

B. Severy-Hoven, ‘Master Narratives and the Wall Painting of the House of the Vettii, Pompeii’, p. 561 in Gender & History. 59 R. Laurence, ‘The Temporal Logic of Space’, p. 163 in Roman Pompeii: Space and Society. 60 J. F. Trimble, ‘Greek Myth, Gender, and Social Structure in a Roman House: Two Paintings of Achilles at Pompeii’, p. 226 in Memoirs of the American Academy in Rome. Supplementary Volumes. 61 R. Laurence, ibid., p. 162. 58

GENDER

+ SEX 1. the House of the Vettii 2. the Forum 3. the Stabian Baths pattern of movement

R. Laurence, ‘The Temporal Logic of Space’, p. 166 in Roman Pompeii: Space and Society. P. F. Pozarny, ‘Gender Roles and Opportunities for Women in Urban Environments’, p. 6. Fig.2: Possible pattern of movement from the male elite in Pompeii. In this case, dots (duties) 1 to 3 represent, respectively, the House of the Vettii, the Forum, and the Stabian Baths.

63 - 64

GENDER

+ TIME

CHAPTER 3

GENDER TIME An important factor that should be taken into consideration when assessing gender problematics on an urban level, is the aspect of time. We’ve seen earlier, that in Pompeii gender divisions didn’t necessarily manifest themselves spatially and could thus not be detected through the remains of Pompeiian architecture. However, Laurence’s findings state that these spatially undetectable gender divisions were emphasised in a temporal way.65 Studying the aspect of time and its relation to city planning could thus unravel some of the gender divisions of Pompeii, and possibly also of the 21st century Western city? In Pompeii, the male elite’s daily routine of duties, combined with their need for self-presentation through public display, had a spatial effect on the one hand, in the way that it largely determined the location of their places of residence, of the forum and of the baths in the city. On the other hand, their routine also had a temporal effect as each duty had a set timeframe. (figure 3) Performing the whole routine meant that the male elite spent most of their day outside of the house, which resulted in a temporal gender division of the domestic spaces.66 65 - 66

R. Laurence, ‘The Temporal Logic of Space’, p. 166 in Roman Pompeii: Space and Society.

GENDER

+ TIME

In the first two hours of the day the house would have been utilised (…) for the purpose of receiving clients. From the end of the second hour until just before the ninth hour it would be dominated by the activities of the household without the adult male presence of the paterfamilias. At the ninth hour, the house would revert to the role of receiving guests and emphasising the position of the paterfamilias in Pompeian society.67 Simply said: When the paterfamilias was at home, it implied the domestic spaces were male-dominated and when the paterfamilias was not at home (from the second to the ninth hour), the domestic spaces became female spaces.68 Therefore, the gender divisions of the Roman homes were spatially indistinct, but presented themselves temporally. Roman males and females were thus not separated through architectural mechanisms, but instead they were separated as a result of their daily routines being organised according to different timelines. Recent writings on the gendering of the 21st century city have also indicated that the aspect of time is not to be overlooked, as deviating timelines for males and females is a recurrent topic. Pamela F. Pozarny for example draws attention to the issue of time poverty in a report, dating from 2016, on gender roles and women’s opportunities in urban environments.69 She focuses mainly on cities of the global South, but some of her findings can, however to a lesser extent, also be applied to Western cities. She states that gender differences are still present when it comes to the division of labour, where “men’s labour is typically in productive/income-generating work, while women typically fulfil the major role in reproductive, unpaid labour (e.g. routine domestic chores, specialised care work).”70 This statement still closely matches with the conception in which the city centre was seen as the place for men to perform paid productive labour, while the house in the suburbs was the place where women performed unpaid domestic work. This mid-20th century conception however, started to fade away as the division between the place of work versus the place of the home became less distinct, and women more and more started to engage in paid labour, outside of the house, as well. Nowadays, according to Pozarny, women usually still carry out most of the caring tasks, both in and outside of the house, but are now also concerned with the need to earn an income, which used to be a solely male concern. Women being the primary caregivers, combined with the need to earn an income, can result in time poverty, especially for poor women who often have demanding labour hours in low-paid sectors.71 For Pozarny, the potential to better the urban living quality not only for women but for all residents, therefore lies in the recognition of the importance of unpaid caring tasks and time poverty, which are factors often overlooked by policymakers and city planners.72

R. Laurence, ‘The Temporal Logic of Space’, p. 166 in Roman Pompeii: Space and Society. Ibid., p. 162. 69 P. F. Pozarny, ‘Gender Roles and Opportunities for Women in Urban Environments’. 70 - 71 Ibid., p. 8. 72 Ibid., pp. 8-9. 67 68

GENDER

+ TIME

Dolores Hayden also attested that the changing needs of households, meaning the entering of women into the paid labour force, was a factor that was overlooked by city planning.73 Her main point of critique in 1981 was that “housing, neighborhoods, and cities continue[d] to be designed for homebound women.”74 This, by now almost forty years old critique, was partly based on the expectation laid upon employed women and mothers, to still perform the same domestic and care-giving work as homebound non-employed women did. With little to none of those domestic and care-giving tasks being picked up by men, employed women inevitably faced the risk of time poverty. Today, in a lot of households we will still witness men and women living according to different timelines. Women on average work closer to home and make more and shorter trips by car than men. In doing so, they are able to combine shopping, dropping off children and working, all in multiple short trips, while men often work further away from home and hence do fewer but longer trips.75 Therefore, the average man’s use of the city today is still different from the average woman’s use of the city.

Location

The aspect of time in regard to city planning and gender roles already was an important aspect in ancient Roman cities such as Pompeii and has proved to still play a role in 21st century cities. Therefore, new urban strategies should incorporate planning based upon different timelines and different patterns of movement, not only of the average man and woman, but also of different age groups and social classes.

the House

the Forum

the Baths

Hours

D. Hayden, ‘What Would a Non-Sexist City Be Like? Speculations on Housing, Urban Design and Human Work’, p. 266 in Gender Space Architecture. 75 D. Vanneste, ‘Vrouw, Stad, Geografie’, pp. 368-94 in Onze Alma Mater. Fig.3: Daily routine of the male elite in Pompeii, in space and time. 73 - 74

REFLECTIONS ON GENDER

+ CITY PLANNING

REFLECTIONS ON GENDER CITY PLANNING What does this case study of the gendering of the city of Pompeii now teach us about the gendering of the 21st century Western city? This final chapter contains three more elaborate points of reflection based on the three previous chapters, respectively women x society, gender x sex and gender x time. The reflections arose during the course of writing the previous chapters. This essay is thus true to its title as it really is a reflection through the case study of Pompeii, rather than a set of predefined conclusions, proved with elements of the Pompeiian society. As a result, this chapter will also contain some unanswered questions that appeared during the writing process and that encourage further reflection by the reader. Throughout his study of the Pompeiian society, Laurence emphasises the close relationship between the urban fabric of the city and the society that produced it. He states that “urbanism needs to be seen as a social product in time and space”76 and that “it goes without saying that a city is a projection of society upon space”.77 This almost mathematical definition of a city makes us wonder what role the element of architecture has in the equation. 76 - 77

R. Laurence, ‘Urbanism in Roman Italy’, p. 184 in Roman Pompeii: Space and Society.

+ CITY PLANNING REFLECTIONS ON GENDER

If we imagine space as a blank canvas, then a city is created through the appropriation of that space by a certain society. That society therefore colours the blank canvas by projecting itself onto it, in terms of social and cultural processes, but also in terms of architecture, an architecture that is inherent to that society. In that sense, architecture can be seen as a tool that enables the material projection of society upon space. Now, if architecture, social and cultural processes are all tools to project society upon space, it means they are different embodiments of the same societal ideas. This raises the question, introduced in chapter 1, whether architecture and city planning have the ability to induce societal changes. More specifically, in the light of this essay, can city planning change the gendering of the city? If we trace back to Kuhlmann’s assessment of Roman architecture,78 mentioned in chapter 1, the architecture in itself did not initiate nor mitigate exclusions based on gender. The determining factors for such exclusions were to be found in certain societal ideas, whereas the architecture’s role was limited to whether or not enabling the exclusions to take place. Changing the architecture, in this case, would thus not result in a societal change, gender-based exclusions would still take place, regardless of whether the architecture facilitates them or not. In order to change the gendering of the city, we thus need a change of the core societal ideas concerning gender differences. As long as our society constructs gender as a binary separation between male and female and ascribes certain expectations upon their behaviour and occupation, architecture will be used in a way that reflects that construct. However, architecture, as well as paintings and other forms of art, do play a significant role in the reproduction of gender patterns. As the city planning of Pompeii kept reproducing its hierarchical master/slave dichotomy, so do more contemporary cities, according to feminists like Hayden, keep reproducing certain gender patterns that give a male-dominated connotation to the city. Architects and city planners thus need to be aware of the reproductive power of their designs, but how do we free our designs from the gender patterns that are so deeply embedded in our daily lives? Hayden tried to answer this question through speculations on what a non-sexist city could be like.79 In order to do so however, she says we have to deal with the following paradoxical problem: “women cannot improve their status in the home unless their overall economic position in society is altered; women cannot improve their status in the paid labor force unless their domestic responsibilities are altered”.80 This paradox shows how gender patterns are also influenced by and established through other societal factors. This intricate relation thus makes it impossible to deal with gender patterns as an independent matter, which brings us to a second point of reflection that has been worked out through the course of chapter 2. In Pompeii the daily dynamic was based on an interplay between the master/slave dichotomy and the male/female dichotomy. Leaving one or the other out of the analysis would result, as Severy-Hoven argued,81 in a misunderstanding of that dynamic.

D. Kuhlmann, ‘Women in Ancient Greece and Rome’, p. 132 in Gender Studies in Architecture. D. Hayden, ‘What Would a Non-Sexist City Be Like? Speculations on Housing, Urban Design and Human Work’, pp. 266-81 in Gender Space Architecture. 80 Ibid., p. 270. 81 B. Severy-Hoven, ‘Master Narratives and the Wall Painting of the House of the Vettii, Pompeii’, in Gender & History. 78 79

If we assessed our contemporary cities, we could immediately detect multiple other dynamics, besides the one based on gender differences, that determine our daily lives and spatially inscribe themselves upon the urban fabric. To the same degree that gender patterns can be expressed and reproduced through architecture, other societal constructs as well can be presented and reproduced by architecture. Think of how park benches are often specifically designed to make it impossible to sleep on them. This architectural design choice directly results from the socially constructed idea that homeless people are undesirable and should therefore be hindered to use the benches as a sleeping space.

REFLECTIONS ON GENDER

In feminist literature on the gendering of the city, the argument often solely focusses on the aspect of gender itself, and more specifically on how the city is discriminative towards women. Dealing with a subject like gender possibly demands an even more careful assessment of the sources that are used, compared to when dealing with less stirring topics. It is evident that literature on the topic of gender from female versus from male authors will result in largely diverging insights. However, even amongst female writers, not all contributions on gender are like-minded. According to Rendell, whose take on the distinction between the terms gender and sex I utilised in this essay, it is exactly in the nature of that distinction and in the importance that is ascribed to each term, that we can detect the basis of any feminist theory.82 Ironically, as I did not formulate my own distinction, I tried to take on a critical position by nuancing the conception of a male-dominated city. Approaching the matter through the case study of Pompeii allowed me to highlight a broad range of aspects, which aided this nuance.

+ CITY PLANNING

A third point of reflection arises from the close relationship between gender and time, presented in chapter 3. As we discovered that gender divisions also manifest themselves in a temporal way, city planning now not only concerns spatial design, but also temporal design. The average man and woman, today and throughout history, use the city in a different way, which results in different patterns of movement according to different timelines. This difference in itself however, is not the problem as a city thrives on differences. After all, we cannot forget that if we compared the way in which the city is used by people of the same sex but from different age categories, the result would also be a number of different patterns and timelines. As stated by Heynen, the problematic aspect of gender differences rather lies in the hierarchy that is often installed between the sexes, and in particular the superior position that is often granted to man and masculinity.83 If we now translate the main feminist critique that the city would be male-dominated into a critique in terms of time, it would mean that the city ascribes superiority to the male timeline of daily activities over the female timeline. This hierarchy therefore results in an overrepresentation of the male pattern of movement through the city, which makes the notion that the city would be designed for men suddenly seem not so out of place anymore. An often presented strategy to deal with this notion is to instate all-female city planning teams and design collectives. As the profession of architecture is 82 83

J. Rendell, ‘Introduction: Gender’, p. 15 in Gender Space Architecture. H. Heynen, ‘Modernity, Gender and the City’, p. 4.

+ CITY PLANNING REFLECTIONS ON GENDER

still predominantly male, creating a balance by educating and employing more women in the field of architecture is definitely a good cause, however, the idea of instating all-female teams raises some questions. In the year 1405 Christine de Pisan described an allegoric city which was designed and built by women and for women, in The Book of the City of Ladies 84 (figure 4). What would happen if we projected such allegory onto our contemporary cities? Would it result in a balance between the representation of the male and female pattern of movement or would we now get an overrepresentation of the female pattern? We could also use this notion to reflect on what being an architect should entail. Haussmann, Paris’ 19th century city planner, referred to his urban design as to the work of a doctor: cutting into a diseased body and thereby curing it. The diseased body was a metaphor for the dysfunctional urban fabric, which he transformed by cutting big boulevards through it as a part of the famous Haussmannisation85 of Paris. Countering the overrepresentation of the male pattern of movement by instating more female city planners gives away the assumption that only women are able to design for women and only men are able to design for men (hence the current male-dominance of the city). This assumption indirectly forms a hidden basis of many feminist arguments on the gendering of the city. Strangely, however, it goes against a very important competence I was taught an architect should possess, namely the ability to move him- or herself into the position of the client and thus to produce a design fully based upon the client’s needs and timeline of activities. How does it happen that this ability seems to disappear once the topic of gender is highlighted? Should a city planner not be able to account for all the different ways of using the city, despite of his or her own personal use of the city? Although Haussmann’s methodology might have been questionable, the metaphor of an architect as a doctor does entail the possibility of being able to design for any situation, sex or age group, regardless of their own, as a doctor can treat any patient without having to experience the same medical problem. These points of reflection were established within the select framework created in this essay. Therefore, the relation between gender and city planning presented here only covers the full notion to a certain extent. Without a doubt, there are more important factors to consider and to keep in mind if we want to obtain a gender-conscious design methodology.

C. de Pisan, Le Livre de la Cité des dames. “Name commonly given to the transformation of Paris undertaken, under the aegis of Napoleon III, by Baron Georges Haussmann” (definition by Oxford Reference). 84 85

regular

groot

inter

REFLECTIONS ON GENDER

calibri

+ CITY PLANNING

INTRODUCTION

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BIBLIOGRAPHY Aeschylus, Euminedes, An Anthology of Greek Drama, Thomson, G. (trans.); Robinson Jr., C. A. (ed.), New York: Rinehart, 1954. Anisthenes, Theon, Progymn. 215, n.d. Carson, A., ‘Putting Her in Her Place: Woman, Dirt, and Desire’ in Halperin, D. M.; Winkler, J. J.; Zeitlin, F. I. (eds), Before Sexuality: The Construction of Erotic Experience in the Ancient Greek World, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1990, pp. 135-70. Cordea, D., ‘Two Approaches on the Philosophy of Separate Spheres in Mid-Victorian England: John Ruskin and John Stuart Mill’, in Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 71, 2013, pp. 115-22. Gardner, J. F., Frauen Im Antiken Rom: Familie, Alltag, Recht. Munich: Verlag C. H. Beck, 1995. Hayden, D., ‘What Would a Non-Sexist City Be Like? Speculations on Housing, Urban Design and Human Work’, in Rendell, J.; Penner, B.; Borden, I. (eds), Gender Space Architecture: An Interdisciplinary Introduction, London: Routledge, 2000, pp. 266-81. Heynen, H., ‘De Gegenderde Stad: Stad en Stedenbouw vanuit Genderperspectief’ in Dings, M. (ed.), De Stad, Rotterdam: Uitgeverij 010, 2006, pp. 275-86. Heynen, H., ‘Modernity, Gender and the City’, 2016. Heynen, H., ‘Vrouw in de Stedelijke Ruimte, Ruimtelijke Organisatie en Gender’, in RoSa, Uitgelezen, jg. 13, no. 1, 2007. Hooper, B., ‘The Poem of Male Desires: Female Bodies, Modernity’ and ‘Paris, Capital of the Nineteenth Century’, in Sandercock, L. (ed.), Making the Invisible Visible: A Multicultural Planning History, Berkeley: University of California Press, 1998, pp. 227-54 and pp. 240-41. Kiby, U., Bäder Und Badekultur in Orient Und Okzident: Antike Bis Spätbarock. Cologne, Germany: DuMont Buchverlag, 1995. Kuhlmann, D., ‘Gender in the History of Architecture’, in Gender Studies in Architecture: Space, Power and Difference, Abingdon: Routledge, 2013, pp. 89-110. Kuhlmann, D., ‘Women in Ancient Greece and Rome’, in Gender Studies in Architecture: Space, Power and Difference, Abingdon: Routledge, 2013, pp. 111-32. Laquer, T., Making Sex: Body and Gender from the Greeks to Freud. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1990.

Laurence, R., ‘Urban Space and the Production of Adult Citizens’, in Roman Pompeii: Space and Society, Abingdon: Routledge, 2007, pp. 167-81.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Laurence, R., ‘The Temporal Logic of Space’, in Roman Pompeii: Space and Society, Abingdon: Routledge, 2007, pp. 154-66.

Laurence, R., ‘Urbanism in Roman Italy’, in Roman Pompeii: Space and Society, Abingdon: Routledge, 2007, pp. 182-91. Ovidius, Metamorphoses 8, Melville (trans.), Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://www.theoi.com/Ther/Minotauros.html. Pozarny, P. F., ‘Gender Roles and Opportunities for Women in Urban Environments’, GSDRC Helpdesk Research Report 1337, Birmingham, UK: GSDRC, University of Birmingham, 2016. Rendell, J., ‘Introduction: Gender’ in Rendell, J.; Penner, B.; Borden, I. (eds), Gender Space Architecture: An Interdisciplinary Introduction, London: Routledge, 2000, pp. 15-24. Ruskin, J., Sesame and Lilies - with notes, Toronto: W. J. Gage & Co, 1890. Sandercock, L., ‘Introduction: Framing Insurgent Historiographies for Planning’ in Sandercock, L. (ed.), Making the Invisible Visible: A Multicultural Planning History, Berkeley: University of California Press, 1998, pp. 1-33. Severy-Hoven, B., ‘Master Narratives and the Wall Painting of the House of the Vettii, Pompeii’, in Gender & History, 24, no. 3, November 2012, pp. 540-80. Trimble, J. F., ‘Greek Myth, Gender, and Social Structure in a Roman House: Two Paintings of Achilles at Pompeii’ in Memoirs of the American Academy in Rome. Supplementary Volumes, 1, The Ancient Art of Emulation: Studies in Artistic Originality and Tradition from the Present to Classical Antiquity, 2002, pp. 225-48. Vanneste, D., ‘Vrouw, Stad, Geografie’, in Onze Alma Mater, 55, no. 3, Augustus 2001, pp. 368-94. Wallace-Hadrall, A., ‘Engendering the Roman House’, in Kleiner, D. E. E.; Matheson, S. B. (eds), I Claudia, Women in Ancient Rome, New Haven, 1996, pp. 104-15. Will, E. L., ‘Women in Pompeii’, in Archeology, 32, no. 5, September/October 1979, pp. 34-43. Wilson, E., ‘Into the Labyrinth’, in Rendell, J.; Penner, B.; Borden, I. (eds), Gender Space Architecture: An Interdisciplinary Introduction, London: Routledge, 2000, pp. 146-53. Xenophon, Xenophon’s Minor Works, London: George Bell & Sons, 1878. 37

LIST OF FIGURES

LIST OF FIGURES Cover Figure: Pompeii presented as a labyrinth. Own work; based on ‘Map 1: Base map of Pompeii’, in Laurence, R., Roman Pompeii: Space and Society, Abingdon: Routledge, 2007, p. 4. Fig.1: Master of Cassoni Campana, The Cretan Legend in four compositions (detail Labyrinth), 1500-1525, oil on panel. https://culturedecanted.com/2014/07/31/the-psychology-of-the-maze-as-amodern-symbol/ Fig.2: Pattern of movement from the male elite in Pompeii. Applied on ‘Map 1: Base map of Pompeii’, in Laurence, R., Roman Pompeii: Space and Society, Abingdon: Routledge, 2007, p. 4. Fig.3: Daily routine of the male elite in Pompeii. Own work; based on ‘Figure 9.3: The elite’s temporal sequence’, in Laurence, R., Roman Pompeii: Space and Society, Abingdon: Routledge, 2007, p. 161. Fig.4: Page from Le Livre de la Cité des dames, Christine de Pisan, 1405. World Digital Library: wdl.org/en/item/4391/

MASTER DISSERTATION by Anneleen Brandt Promoter: Filip Mattens Co-Promoter: Arnaud Hendrickx Master in Architecture 2019-2020 KU Leuven Faculty of Architecture Campus Sint-Lucas Brussels