National Library 1+1 of a n a d a Bibliothèque nationale du Canada

Acquisitions and Acquisitions et Bibliographie Services services bibliographiques 395 Wellington Street 395, rue Wellington Ottawa ON KIA ON4 Ottawa ON K I A ON4 Canada Canada

Your lile Votre dfdrence

Our lSle Notre rélBr8nce

The author has granted a non- exclusive licence allowing the National Library of Canada to reproduce, loan, distribute or seli copies of this thesis in microfom, paper or electronic formats.

The author retains ownership of the copyright in this thesis. Neither the thesis nor substantial extracts fiom it may be printed or otheIUrise reproduced without the author's permission.

L'auteur a accordé une licence non exclusive permettant à la Bibliothèque nationale du Canada de reproduire, prêter, distribuer ou vendre des copies de cette thèse sous la fome de microfiche/film, de reproduction sur papier ou sur format électronique.

L'auteur conserve la propriété du droit d'auteur qui protège cette thèse. Ni la thèse ni des extraits substantiels de celle-ci ne doivent être imprimés ou autrement reproduits sans son autorisation.

fo r Melissa, for everything.

iii

Table of Contents

List of Illustrations ................................................. v Abstract ............................................................ vii

Acknowledgements ................................................... viii Introduction

Architecture and Cultural Expression ............................ 1 Part: One

A Brief History of the Roma.in Slovakia ......................... 3 Jarovnice: Current Conditions .................................. 13

Part Two

Romipen ........................................................ 22 Romipen and the Traditional Camp ............................... 24

Part Three

A Critical Analysis of Current Conditions ...................... 27 Ingredients and Goals for Intervention ....................... 30

Part Four

Program ........................................................ 31

Urban Stxategy ................................................. 31 Construction Materials and Methods ............................. 38 Passive Systems ................................................ 38 Romipen: Basis for a Romani Architectural Cosmology ............ 44

Part Five

Conclusions: Towards a Romani Architecture ..................... 48 Epilogue ........................................................ 49

Bibliography ......................................................... 50

List of Illustrations Note: Al1 drawings, models and photos are by the author unless otherwise

indicated.

Figure 1: Map of Slovakia Figure 2: Regional map of area surrounding Presov Figure 3: Map of Jarovnice indicating location of Romani settlement

Figure 4: The Romani settlement at Jarovnice

Figures 5, 6 and 7: Views of the Romani settlement at Jarovnice

Figures 8 and 9: Paintings by the ~omani children of Jarovnice; photos

by the author Figure 10: Graphic representation of Romipen as it pertains to the body Figure 11: Typical section of Romani self-built house Figure 12: Exploded model isolating tectonic elements of typical Romani

self-built house and illustrating horizontally-biased strategy for maintaining ritual purity of interior space

Figure 13: Photo montage of model showing elements of intervention

Figure 14: Section [a-al through gathering hall, gallery and washing

pavilion

Figure 15: View of gatehouse Figure 16: Section through gallery

Figure 17: View of gallery Figure 18: Section through gathering hall

Figure 19: View of model across cistern and square to gathering hall Figure 20: Section through washing pavilion Figure 21: View of washing pavilion and foot bridge

Figure 22: Site map of Romani settlement showing position of proposed

intervention and its relationship to donated farmland Figure 23: View of model depicting relationship between elements of

intervention Figure 24: View of model from across river Figure 25: Construction sequence

Figure 26: Fragment model representing detail of structure and envelope

at corner of gathering hall

Figure 27: Fragment mode1 light study demostrating integration

of passive solar strategy and nested spatial zones mediating

the threshold between inside and outside

Figure 28: Section through gathering hall demonstrating potential for

spatial expansion and contraction according to seasonal

climate changes and user requirements

Figure 29: Exploded axonometric demonstrating phenomenological

relationship between building elements and natural elements

Figure 30 [Epilogue]: Romani children in Hermanovce, Slovakia

Abstract

The Roma (Gypsies) constitute the largest ethnic minority in

Europe. Their history is a litany of systematic, state-sponsored

repression and endemic racial prejudice.

The estimated 520,000 Roma of Slovakia are among the poorest in

Eastern Europe. The majority live in some 300 to 400 racially segregated

settlements on the outskirts of rural Slovak villages, for the most part

lacking electricity, fresh water, sewage systems, toilets and paved

roads. Jarovnice is one such community - the largest in eastern Slovakia - with a population of approximately 2,500. A shantytown constructed from scrap materials, it has no sanitation infrastructure and relies on

water £rom standing pipes. The community suffers from an estimated 95%

unemployment and few progress beyond basic school.

The thesis explores the contention that architecture can act as a

catalyst for positive change and Romani cultural regeneration.

At its core, Romani culture rigorously maintains the interna1

cohesion of the group and its physical and symbolic distance £rom the

majority (gadze) population through a tightly woven complex of pollution

( m a r i m e ) taboos and ritual observances. Developed during centuries of nomadism, strict adherence to these fundamental codes ( R o m i p e n ) still

permeates Romani life. External forces, however, determined the Pace of

the Romani culture's transition from a nomadic to a sedentary existence,

leading to a profound disjunction between fundamental Romani cultural

codes and their built environment.

The project aims to redress this cultural discontinuity through

the development of building strategies grounded in traditional cultural

frameworks and addressing contemporary realities. Initial conceptual

analyses of existing conditions, fundamental cultural codes and their

traditional expression in the spatial organization of nomadic camps,

yield the basis for constructing a new cosmology addressing sedentary

conditions. Manifested in a multi-purpose, public complex for Jarovnice,

the resultant design also atternpts to combine traditional skills and

existing methods of construction with strategies fox resource self-

sufficiency in an effort to develop marketable construction skills. The

ultimate goal is the building of autonorny in order to aid in community

cultural regeneration.

vii

For their invaluable help during the research phase of this project, I would like to thank:

Milena Hubschmannova [Charles University, Prague] Milada Zavodska [Charles University, Prague] Jana Kramarova [Charles University, Prague]

Ron Lee and Patricia Ritter [Roma Advocacy Centre, Toronto]

Nidhi Trehan [European Roma Rights Centre, Budapest]

Elena Lackova [Presov, Slovakia 1

Jan Sajko [Jarovnice Basic School, Jarovnice, Slovakia]

and al1 those individuals and families who so generously opened their comrnunities and homes to myself and my companions during Our stay in Slovakia.

viii

Introduction

Architecture and Cultural Emression

In his Stud ies in Tectonic Culture, Kenneth Frampton asserts that "building provides the basis for life and culturev (27). This notion

that architecture and the act of building express and support the

culture of those constructing and engaging built space provides a

fundamental conceptual framework for design. Implicit in this idea is

the contention that

nothing in the human world can be merely utilitarian: even the most ordinary buildings organize space in different ways, and in doing so they signify, issue some kind of message about society8s priorities, its presuppositions concerning human nature, politics, economics, over and above their overt concern with the provision of shelter, entertainment, medical care, or whatever. (Johnson, 55)

Architecture, like culture, is a socially constructed phenomenon,

exerting a profound capacity to "set the frame for social life" (Blundell Jones, 2 2 ) . Given that culture, by definition, constitutes a

comprehensible and coherent system of shared values and practices, an

architecture expressing its culture must be similarly constructed.

"Through the imposition and articulation of underlying principles, human

cultures create order [cosmos] out of primeval disorder Cchaos3"

(Pearson, 12). As a result, the social production of architecture is

governed by organizational principles - including "gender and sex pollution, kinship and moiety patterning, the symbolic structures

linking the earth and the cosmos, etc." (Ibid., 28 ) - consistent with the culture of its builders.

A particularly meaningful manner in which architecture expresses

culture is through its potential to "concretize an existential space

which is neither external object nor interna1 experience" (Norberg-

Schulz, 12). It is through architecture that 'undifferentiated space is

transformed into marked and delineated place" (Ibid.). In other words,

architecture constitutes perhaps a culturets most significant

expression of its understanding of its place in the cosmos, as the need

for humans "to establish their place cognitively within the world and

cosmos tends to have spatial - and therefore arguably architectural - implications" (Blundell Jones, 2 4 ) . The architectural expression of this

human need to "acquire orientation in chaos, to fix limits and establish

order" (Pearson, 12) has meant that "building has been deployed

throughout time in such a way as to create a life world that is

cosmogonically coded" (Frampton, 13).

The architectural expression of cosmological notions may, in turn,

be achieved through any number of organizing mechanisrns, including

"structured oppositions, the establishment of an axis or imago mundi,

homologies of the cosmos and strategies of boundedness and decoration"

(Pearson, 29), for example. In the Romani culture, the most significant

generators of order are the 'concentric structuring of space into centre

and periphery and diametric organization according to axes" (Levi-

Strauss, 132-163) and "the structure human body with its potential

divisions of top and bottom, left and right, front and back, vertical

and horizontal, male and female, etc. providing a simple framework which [the Roma] impose upon the world, linked to concepts such as sacred and

profane (Pearson, 10).

In cultures such as that of the Roma, where those concerned build

directly for themselves, there exists a "greater awareness of the built

environment, engendered by this active participation in building" (Yuan,

104) and, as a result, their architecture closely "expresses and

embodies their social order and conception of the world" (Blundell

Jones, 22). In addition, the architecture of relatively non-literate

cultures - the Roma being one example - "is often a 'pre-text' for the handing d o m of traditions, rituals and cosmologies" (Yuan, 112-117).

Consequently, it is the contention of the thesis that architecture

has the capacity to act as a catalyst for positive change and cultural

regeneration in the Romani settlement at Jarovnice, Slovakia.

Part One

A Brief Historv of the Roma in Slovakia

The history of relations between the Roma and the various states controlling the territory of what is now Slovakia is marked by a continuous shift between policies openly hostile, even murderous, toward Roma on one hand, and more subtle policies of assimilation and cultural genocide disguised as assistance, on the other. (Cahn, 37)

It is important to trace this history in order to understand the forces

behind the creation of the current climate of marginalization, prejudice

and exclusion facing the Roma in Slovakia.

Oriains and Earlv History

Scholars now agree upon the Indian origin of the Roma, with recent

lexico-statistical analysis estirnating their original northwestern

migration to have begun in the mid- to late tenth century. The

intervening period between their exodus from India and their arriva1 in

mediaeval Europe, however, remains the subject of speculation. The first

reliable mention of the Roma in the region that comprises modern

Slovakia dates £rom 1261 (Crowe, 32).

Over the next several centuries, the Roma were the subject of

extensive legislation aimed at controlling their movements or securing

their outright expulsion from the region. Cornmon punishments for

violators of these royal decrees were deportation, torture or death.

Eiahteenth and Nineteenth Centuries

The wholesale persecution of Roma in the region, however,

accompanied early attempts at modern state building under the reign of

Maria Theresa in the mid-eighteenth century. Royal decrees aimed at the

"expulsion of Gypsies, vagrants and foxeign beggars" (Cahn, 37) were

followed by assimilation policies legislating "Christianization,'

forced sedantarization and an early kind of proletarianization"

(Ibid.). These took the form of bans on music playing, horse dealing,

speaking Romanes, and the selection of comunity leaders, as well as the

removal of Romani children to be relocated in non-Romani foster homes.

These "civilizing" attempts represented a concerted assault on the

interna1 cohesion and cultural traditions of Romani groups, but failed

as "even those who assimilated continued to Wear residual exclusion on

their skin" (Ibid., 3 8 ) .

Some gains were made following the emancipation of serfs in the

aftermath of the revolutions of 1848 and 1849, including the state-

founding of schools for Romani children in some areas. After the 1867

constitution of the new Austro-Hungarian state, however, authorities

"refused to recognize the existence of separate nationalities and did

not grant them collective national rights or political institutions"

(Crowe, 40).

Over the course of the following two decades the government began to closely monitor demographic trends among the Roma, conducting

censuses in 1880 and 1893 specifically for this purpose. Theix fears

were compounded by the revelation of population increases of 203% to

578% in the four urban areas with the largest concentrations of Roma

(Ibid., 41). In addition, the 1893 census was the first to classify the

36,231 Slovak Roma along regional, gender, employment, literacy and

occupational lines:

92% of those surveyed were sedentary. [This radical demographic shift was mainly the result of government coercion combined with urbanization accompanying rapid industrialization; also, those who were sedentary had a much greater likelihood to be included in the census]. 26% of Slovak Roma of employable age were found to be without work and more than half of those employed worked in traditional occupations such as brick making and -laying, blacksmithing and weaving. Illiteracy was found to be at 92% and 12% of Slovak Roma were classified as beggars, thieves and petty criminals . ( Ibid. )

The only Roma to rise econornically at this time were court musicians.

They were allotted land on which to build homes, often providing the

basis for a Romani settlement. The majority of Slovak Roma were reported

to be living in "isolated settlements, ... in backward conditions without regular income; illiterate and supported only by old traditions, customs

and superstitionsr8 ( C a h n , 40) .

Earlv Twentieth Centurv and the First Czechoslovak Re~ublic

By the end of the nineteenth century, the police and state organs

in the Slovak region had begun keeping extensive "Gypsy" files, as part

of a policy of 'official registration and harassment" (Cahn, 41). The

Roma, living 'on the social and economic periphery of the mainstream

population" (Orgovanova, 2) were continually classified by the

authorities "not as a distinct ethnic minority, but as a particularly

anti-social and criminal group" (Ibid.).

The emergence of the autonomous First Czechoslovak Republic (1918-

1939) only served to stoke the fires of ethno-nationalism and was

accompanied by widespread pogroms and an intensification of genocidal

rhetoric aimed at the Roma. A major Slovak-language daily newspaper at

the time denounced the "Gypsy element [as] ... an ulcer on the body of [theirl social life which must be cured in a radical way" (Cahn, 37), despite the 1920 Czechoslovak constitution8s guarantee of "absolute

equality in the eye of the law for al1 Czech nationals, that they might

enjoy the same political and civil rights without distinction of race,

language or religion" (Crowe, 43).

In the years preceding the outbreak of the Second World War, the

Czechoslovak government's monitoring of the Roma became increasingly

'scientific," concentrating its efforts on Nazi-influenced mandatory

registration, genealogical classification and the measuring of skulls.

The Romani Holocaust

The 1938 Munich Agreement effectively dismembered the First

Czechoslovak Republic. Soon after, a radically nationalist Slovak gov-

ernment under Prime Minister Vojtech Tuka "rapidly irnplemented Nuremburg

racial policy" (Cahn, 37), deporting most Slovak Jews to Auschwitz

between 1942 and 1943. The Rorna were the only other ethnic group

specifically targeted for extermination by the Nazis. As a result,

Tuka's fascist-allied goverment established concentration labour camps

for Roma, who were forbidden from travelling on public transport and

whose admission to towns and communities was limited to prescribed days

and hours. Many Roma were expelled £rom settlements or murdered in

village pogroms by Slovak fascists.

The full German occupation of Slovakia began in 1944, resulting in

the liquidation of several settlernents, incidents of mass killings and

the deportation of more than 7,000 Slovak Roma to a special camp at

Auschwitz. In all, the number of Slovak Roma who perished in the Porraimos (the Romanes term for the Romani Holocaust, literally meaning

"the devouring") is estimated to be in the tens of thousands.

The Post - WWTI Years

Czechoslovakia was liberated by the Soviet Red A m y in the Spring

of 1945. In the Communist-led political climate immediately following

the end of the war, the Czechoslovak state "dismantled wartime genocidal

infrastructures, but bureaucratic mechanisms became more efficient and

policy intrusion into the lives of Roma became almost total" (Cab, 37).

In 1946, Czechoslovakia expropriated the Sudetenland, expelling

more than two million Sudeten Gerrnans. Thousands of Roma left their

isolated settlements in rural Slovakia, rnigrating westward to fil1 the

resulting housing and employment gap. At this time, the Czechoslovak

Minister of the Interior called for the 'application of not only harsh

but restrictive rneasures towards the Gypsies" (Crowe, 55). Many Roma

were sent to camps in northern Bohemia and Moravia to work as unskilled

labourers as part of the authorities' way of "exacting social and labour

conformity from gypsies" (Ibid., 5 4 ) .

A 1947 census was specifically directed at "al1 wandering Gypsies

and other work-shy vagabonds, reporting 84,438 Roma in Slovakia and

16,752 in the Czech lands" (Ibid.1. In Slovakia, more than 6,000 Roma

still travelled regularly about the countryside.

The Earlv Communist Era

A coup in 1948 saw the Czechoslovak Communist Party complete

its seizure of political power. While Masxist-Leninist doctrine provided

for the protection of national minorities, the new government stated

that its "ultimate goal in ministering to the needs of the gypsies in

Czechoslovakia was their integration with the rest of the population,

and the raising of their economic, social and cultural levels to those

of the Slavic society" (Cxowe, 55). Integration meant assimilation, as

the Roma were "regarded as outmoded: an anachronism incompatible with

the new social order" (Guy, 3). Assimilation was believed to be in the

Roma1s own good.

In the decades to follow, Czechoslovak policy 'was variously

typified by a blend of condescension and impatience, of paternalism and

despotism, of benevolent inactivity and strenuous attempts at radical

solutions" (Fraser, 277). Studies in 1950 and 1951 concluded that the Gypsy question will be solved if they willingly and quickly become accustomed to conscientious work, adopt trades, take part in socialist competition, become shock workers [workers highly committed to the Communist Party]

and members and functionaries of the Czechoslovak Communist Party and the revolutionary trade union movement. (Crowe, 5 5 )

A 1952 edition of the major dictionary of the Czech language went so far

as to define "Gypsy" as "a member of a wandering nation and a symbol of

mendacity, theft, wandering jokers, liars, impostors and cheaters"

(Ibid. 1.

Çommunist Partv Decree no. 74: The Ban on Nomadisrq

By 1956, authorities were speaking of a "Gypsy crisis" in

Czechoslovakia which they believed to be derived £rom nomadism,

reporting that "only 40% of the Gypsy population had settled d o m to

work in government industry and agriculture" (Crowe, 56). Denying that

the Roma were an ethnic group, but were rather "people maintaining a

markedly different demographic structure" (Fraser, 2 7 8 ) , in 1958 the

Communist Party issued Decree no. 74, titled "On the Settlement of

Nomadic and Semi-nomadic Peoples,"

In reality, however, only '5 to 10% of the Romani population still

travelled on a regular basis" (Orgovanova, 3). The goverment's true

motive was the control and final assimilation of the Roma. The Decree

required that

local authorities provide comprehensive assistance to persons leading a nomadic life to enable them to adopt a settled way of life; in particular they were obliged to help such persons in finding suitable employment and accommo- dation and by educational means aim at making them orderly working citizens, [warning that] ... whoever continued in a nomadic way of life, in spite of being offered help to settle permanently, would be punished for the offence by six months8 to three years' deprivation of liberty. (Guy, 3)

Its effect was.to "bring to an end in five brief days a traditional way

of life that had survived in Czechoslovakia for as many centuries"

(Ibid.). Few of those R o m forcibly settled were compensated for the

removal and, in most cases, slaughter of their horses, and for many,

housing meant simply their carts with the wheels torn off. Some were

provided modern flats, but for the majority, no re-housing was provided,

'as local authorities showed great reluctance to allocate council flats

or building plots outside existing settlements" (Ibid.).

As a result, the Roma were forced to build illegally in existing

segregated villages that frequently lacked electricity, adequate

sanitation and drinkable water. In yet another failure of local

authorities, officials proved disinclined to "provide such basic

amenities to settlements scheduled to be demolished in a few years"

(Ibid.). Victims of both official action and its absence, the R o m

suffered greatly.

In 1964, a report from East Slovakia - "the region with the largest Romani population in Czechoslovakia" (Ibid., 4) - revealed the extent of the government's impotence, as

the achievement of goals for the elimination of al1 substandard settlements in the region by 1970 was found to be out of the question, since only a dozen settlements had been demolished since 1958 and over four hundred remained. (Ibid. )

Meanwhile, conditions within the settlements were steadily deteriorating

just as populations were growing. The acute lack of clean water and

sanitation facilities was leading to infant mortality and tuberculosis

rates "more than double the national average" (Ibid.). It was estimated

that "of the 153,000 gypsies in Slovakia, 103,000 (67.3%) lived in such

settlements under conditions which were 'not fit for human living'"

(Crowe, 57).

Goverment officials concluded that their piecemeal efforts were

not working and that more radical steps needed to be taken.

Communist Partv Ordinance no. 502: Disnersal

In 1965, the Communist Party issued cornmands for local authorities

to "begin obtaining extensive background data regarding the Gypsy

population, in preparation for what was to be called a 'universa1,long-

range assimilation plan'" (Crowe, 57). Party Ordinance no. 502 demanded

the "full-employment of able-bodied Gypsies as the precondition of a

decent living standard, the liquidation of Gypsy hamlets and the

dispersal of these people throughout Czechoslovakia" (Ibid.). Effective

dispersa1 was to be ensured by

regular, planned transfers of Gypsies £rom what were termed "undesirable concentrations" [settlements in Slovakia] to places with few Gypsies [small t o m s and villages in the Czech lands] . (Guy, 4)

Efforts were centred on the destruction of substandard housing in "1,266

Romani settlements in Slovakia, which would have involved the transfer

of 64,096 gypsies" (Crowe, 57) . It was left to municipal officiais to cïassify local Romani

populations according to their potential for successful assimilation.

In addition, al1 migration outside of government initiatives was banned,

effectively preventing those relocated from returning home and denying

the free movement of those not selected for dispersal.

Those Roma excluded £rom the plan included a substantial portion

of the Slovak Romani population and were categorized as

the most backward and wretched part of the Gypsy population, living a typical Gypsy life in a Gypsy concentration, having no interest in leaving this concentration, ... working irregularly, not sending their children to school nor taking rnuch care of them. (Guy, 4)

The Ordinance went on to describe these Roma as "not having attained any

cultural level" (fbid.), adding that "they live in filth and from their

number are recruited parasites and criminals" (Ibid.) and concluding

that "the solution of problems in assimilating Gypsies from this group

will be very demanding" (Ibid.). These Roma were to be left for later,

though basic amenities were to be provided to existing settlements.

In the end, the plan failed through a combination of underfunding

and the unwillingness of Czech municipalities to provide housing and

employment for the newcomers. By 1968, "only one third of the

settlements targeted for destruction were eliminated" (Crowe, 58),

'fewer than 500 Romani families had been relocated" (Guy, 4) and

"Czechoslovakia's estimated 223,993 Roma constituted one of the largest

populations in the Eastern Bloc" (Crowe, 58).

1968: Prame S~rinq

After its settlement and dispersal plans collapsed in 1968, the

Czechoslovak government - as part of widespread reforms that came to be known as the "Prague Spring" - "tentatively adopted the idea that the best results might be achieved by allowing Gypsies to take a hand in the

planning of their future" (Guy, 4). Leaders from the Romani community

were granted Party permission to form their first national associations:

one in the Czech lands, one in Slovakia. The 'Union of Gypsy-Romanies,"

as they were called, were mandated to "elevate the social and economic

levels of Gypsies in the country ... and to improve the majority population's awareness and understanding of Gypsy culture" (Crowe, 58).

Their rnembership grew quickly, drawing from both the ranks of the poor

and the Romani intelligentsia believed to have been totally assimilated,

"swelling to over 20,000 over the first three years" (Ibid., 59). They

published magazines and promoted festivals of music and dance. For the

first tirne, Roma appeared on television - speaking and singing in Romanes. At its height, the movement could boast of "over 200 musical

groups and more than 30 football clubs" (Ibid.). The promising

experiments of the "Spring," however, were to prove short-lived.

August 21, 1968 saw a Soviet-led Warsaw Pact invasion reaffirm

strict Communist control of Czechoslovakia. By the end of 1969, al1

"Prague Spring" reformers had been purged from the Communist Party.

In 1973, the Unions of Gypsy-Romanies were forcibly disbanded and

outlawed by Party decree for "failing to live up to their integrative

function" (Guy, 5). At the time, most Czechoslovak Roma

still lived in their old segregated settlements in Slovakia ... [and] though the outward appearance of these settlements was changing gradually, this was due largely to the Roma's own efforts in building new brick houses; basic amenities were being installed with a painful lack of urgency, even though the government had long accepted that the settlements couldn't be eliminated in the near future. (Ibid. )

Illiteracy and unemployment remained high, housing conditions poor and

few Romani children were finishing their basic education, mainly due to

their limited knowledge of the language of instruction upon entering

school. What followed was a renewed effort to force Roma assimilation

and control their growing numbers.

1972: Communist Partv Decree on Sterilization

A 1970 census showed a population of 226,467 R o m in

Czechoslovakia, while other estimates put the number at more than

300,000 (Crowe, 59). More than three-quarters of these lived in Slovakia

(Ibid.). Even with growth rates more than double that of the majority

population - 'one child born in ten was Romani" (Guy, 5) - government policy 'arose as much from the fear of the complex socioeconomic

problems that accompanied the population increases than from actual

growth in numbers" (Crowe, 59).

As a result, measures were sought to reduce Romani birth rates

and, in 1972, the Communist Party issued a "Decree on Sterilization"

under the auspices of the Ministry of Health. The Decree was used to

"encourage the sterilization of 'unhealthy' women in order to reduce the

'highly unhealthy' [a government euphemism for \Rorna81 population"

(Ibid.). In the end, 'a disproportionately high percentage - 36.6% - of women sterilized under the program were Romani" (Cahn, 38).

Despite government efforts, the Czechoslovak Romani population

grew "from 219,554 in 1970 to 288,440 in 1980: a more than 30% increase,

compared to the 6% growth of the general population" (Crowe, 60). Great

numbers of Slovak Roma continued to migrate to Czech areas in search of

employment opportunities, though between 1972 and 1980, the

authorities had only rnanaged to "destroy 4,000 'unfitl Romani homes and

relocate 4,850 Roma" (Ibid., 61) . In the government's opinion, conditions for Czechoslovakiats Romani

population had improved over the period, as

70% of the Romani population lived in apartments by 1980, with only 10% living in settlements scheduled to be razed by 1990; ... the number of Roma living in "unfit" housing dropped from 80.7% to 49%; ... kindergarten attendance was up from 10% to 58.5%; ... T and] the number of Roma attending college rose from 39 to 191. (Ibid. )

Admittedly, some gains were made; however, there was still much cause

for grave concern, for

a high proportion of Romani children were assigned to special schools for the mentally retarded, knowing as few as 200 Slovak words upon entering schools; ... only 33% finished basic school and only 4% of Romani children progressed to college; ... unemployment rates, especially among Romani women, were substantially higher than national averages and more than three quarters of those employed worked in a low-paying, unskilled capacity. (Tbid.)

Most importantly, the Roma were denied nationality status and robbed of

the rights and support afforded recognized minorities. In addition, they

faced an ever-intensifying climate of racial prejudice: denounced as

parasitic and unjustly blamed for an escalating crime rate.

Meanwhile, their numbers continued to grow. In 1988, the

government estirnated Czechoslovakia's Romani population at 391,000,

representing a 35.6% increase since 1980; independent groups put the

number as high as ïOO,OOO (Ibid. , 64) .

The days between November 17 and December 29, 1989 saw the

dramatic transfer of power in Czechoslovakia from the Communist Party to

a democratic government headed by dissident playwright Vaclav Havel.

In the aftermath of the "Velvet Revolution," several Romani political

parties emerged, the most influential being the Romani Civic Initiative.

While the opening of Czechoslovak society benefited the Roma in some

ways - they were granted full minority status, rights and privileges in 1990, leading to the emergence of over 30 Romani cultural organizations

and the creation of university programs in Romani Studies - political freedoms also

created a new atmosphere for open, virulent expressions of prejudice, whose numbers increased dramatically ... as the Roma were depicted as symbols of everything gone awry accompanying the difficult transition to a capitalist economy . (Crowe , 64 )

Renewed charges of Romani criminality coincided with growing fear of

their escalating numbers, prompting the Slovak Premier to express his

feeling that it was "necessary to curtail the extended reproduction of

the socially unadaptable and mentally backward Gypsy population by

decreasing family allowances" (Ibid., 65). Other officiais stated that

"the Gypsies should be perceived as a problem group that was growing in

size and if not dealt with now, they would deal with us later" (Ibid.),

that "within a century the country may well have to be renamed the

Romska Republika" (Ibid.) and one city mayor suggested that "the only

solution to Slovakia's Gypsy problem was to shoot them all" (Ibid.) . Meanwhile, unemployment among Roma soared over 50% (Ibid.),

opinion polls reported almost universal hatred and mistrust and skinhead

attacks were beginning to occur with alarrning frequency. In 1993,

following the dissolution of the Czechoslovak federation, Czech

President Havel challenged the people of the region, stating that "the

Gypsy problem is a litmus test not of democracy, but of a civil society;

and one is unthinkable without the other" (Ibid., 67).

The Current Climate in Slovakia

The most reliable accounting of Slovakia's current Romani

population is found in a 1995 Minority Rights Group publication that

estimates their numbers at between 480,000 and 520,000 (Gheorghe, 7). At

approximately 10% of the population at large, this ranks Slovakia as

having one of the highest per capita Roma populations in the world

(Cahn, 7).

Most Slovak Roma live in isolated settlernents on the outskirts of

villages, towns and cities. A 1992 Helsinki Watch report estimated 300-

400 Romani ghettos concentrated on the outskirts of Slovak villages, for

the most part lacking electricity, fresh water, sewage systems, toilets

and paved roads (Cahn, 32). As a result of this physical and

socioeconomic exclusion, the Roma in Slovakia tend to suffer from

disproportionately high rates of poverty, unemployment, illiteracy,

crime and disease (Organova, 2).

In addition, due to the relative lack of other ethnic minorities,

the Roma have, since the fa11 of Communism, come to feel the "real heat

of Slovak national populism" (Cahn, 36). Skinhead attacks are comrnon and

through their inaction, government and law enforcement have demonstrated

nothing but complicity in these attacks. In 1995, for example, a Romani

youth was surrounded by skinheads, doused with gasoline and polystyrene

and set on fire: he died ten days later (Petrova, 19). It is common in

Slovakia to see graffiti expressing sentiments such as "Gypsies to the

gas," "Gypsies bad, Skins O.K." and "good Gypsy, dead Gypsy."

Jarovnice: Current Conditions

The site of the thesis is the village of Jarovnice, approximately

fifteen kilornetres northwest of the regional capital, Presov. Situated

in Eastern Slovakia's rolling, agricultural landscape, Jarovnice

appears, at first glance, to be a typically quiet, rural Slovak village;

the reality is sornething altogether different.

The following is an excerpt from 'Tirne of the Skinheads: Denial

and Exclusion of Roma in Slovakia," a 1997 report commissioned by, and

published under the auspices of, the European Roma Rights Centre:

Jarovnice is home to about 3,500 villagers: about 2,500 are Roma, 1000 are non-Roma. The village is ethnically segregated. Two sections of Romani shanty-toms begin at the edge of the main street, where only non-Roma reside. On the Romani side of tom, one section houses several wealthier Romani families, while the majority lives in impoverished squalor in homes assembled out of odd pieces of wood and metal. The [Romani] village has been provided with electricity, though running water in the shantytown is only available from several water pipes. Tndoor plumbing is

- -

Figure 1: Map of Slovakia

Figure 2: Regional map of area surrounding Presov

rare, and there is no sewage system. A police station lies at the junction between the Romani and non-Romani sections of the tom, as if marking the divide of the village and acting as a garrison for the Slovak villagers. The R o m of Jarovnice suffer from an estimated 95% rate of unemployment and their only source of income at present is state social support and seasonal labour. (Cahn, 21)

In March of this year, 1 travelled to Eastern Slovakia, visiting

Jarovnice and several other Romani settlements, and compiled my own

report on prevailing conditions there.

As mentioned in the E.R.R.C. report, the Romani and Slovak

sections of Jarovnice are strictly segregated. The Romani settlement is

situated on the periphery of the main village, occupying vacant land

along the Mala Svinka river between the village and adjacent farmland.

The settlement occupies land that was previously the site of the Slovak

village's garbage dump. The Roma have no legal tenure to the land,

though the settlement has existed on the site for at least as long as

living memory. In addition, al1 structures in the Romani village, aside

from those provided by the government, were built "black", i.e., without

proper building permission and not to code regulations.

Al1 public conveniences and institutions - the basic and special schools, t o m hall, shops, bus stops, etc. - are located within the Slovak section of the village, some distance from the Romani settlement.

Relations between the Romani and Slovak sections of Jarovnice are,

to Say the least, tense. The Slovak villagers constitute the minority in

this context and feel threatened by the sheer number of Roma; numbers

are ever-increasing due to much higher birth rates. The Roma are viewed

as a lazy, parasitic and criminal element and their presence is not

welcome in the village. The Slovak villagers have gone so far as to bus

their children to the next village so that they can pursue their

education free from Romani influence.

On several occasions in the past, the enmity between Jarovnice's

ethnic factions has erupted in violence.

On 20 July, 1995, at dawn, more than 100 masked and unmasked policemen suxrounded the segregated Romani section of Jarovnice and proceeded to raid the comrnunity, with the excuse that they were recovering stolen goods. They randomly beat the population: men, women, children. A month later, in an interview with the local newspaper, the townls mayor said he was "satisfied with the results of the raid," adding that "one action every two years is not enough if we realize what

Figure 3: Map of Jarovnice indicating location of Romani settlement

this settlement means for its surroundings. Our citizens reacted very positively to this action." (Petrova, 18)

Infrastructure

Incoming paved roads end at the junction between the Slovak

village and the Romani settlement, becoming rutted dirt tracks. The

settlement is collectively provided with electricity which is, in turn,

distributed to the majority of individual households. Most homes have

electric lighting and a television; a few possess direct-link satellite

dishes. Indoor plumbing exists only in the few simple, single-family

houses supplied by the government under settlement clearance prograrns of

the 1970s. The overwhelming majority of homes lack running water, proper

sanitation Eacilities and any rneans of central heating apart from wood

burning stoves, which are also used for cooking. Water for drinking,

cooking and washing must be collected fvom the garbage-choked stream

bisecting the settlement or from one of a few water outlets. There are

neither private nor communal washroom Eacilities. There is no garbage

collection aside £rom the small dumpster at the end of the main paved

road.

Housina: Materials and Construction Methods

Aside from the few houses and two small housing blocks provided by

the government, the settlement consists of self-built houses. Most have

only one room in which large families conduct al1 daily activities:

sleeping, cooking and eating, washing and social activities.

A typical house has walls constructed from mud-brick or concrete

blocks. The exterior is often unfinished, while interior walls are

invariably stuccoed and painted or whitewashed. The pitched roof

structure usually consists of an unfinished log frame, often left open

at the gable ends, covered with any available scraps of roofing

material: corrugated steel, asphalt sheeting, plastic, etc.

Occasionally, houses are constructed entirely from logs or used railroad

ties, or assembled entirely from salvaged rnatexials. There is extensive

use of recycled building components. In addition, there is often great

ingenuity displayed in the reuse of available items: unfolded al.uminurn

garbage cans used as roofing "tiles" and car hoods used as wall panels.

Ownortunities for Chanue

esp pi te the desperate conditions prevailing in the Romani

Figure 4 : The Romani settlement at Jarovnice

Figures 5 (top), 6 and 7: Views of the Romani settlernent at Jarovnice

settlement and increasing tensions, even violence, between the

inhabitants of Jarovnice's "two solitudes," there are some hopeful signs

indicating a potential for positive change.

First, within the settlement itself, a group of its members has

organized a funding drive, canvassing community donations for the

erection of a church. This effort demonstrates a growing sense of

community solidarity and the collective desire for improvement in local

conditions.

Secondly, the Slovak villagers - attempting to prevent the Romani community's amual harvesting of agricultural produce from their fields

- have agreed to donate a portion of their farmland to the Romani village. ~ h e i r hope is that the Roma will cultivate their own food and

will be less likely to raid their crops: admittedly a self-serving

gesture, but a positive attempt at peaceful coexistence nonetheless.

Thirdly, there are the efforts of Mr. Jan Sajko, art teacher at

the all-Roma Jarovnice Basic School. Over the course of his twelve-year

career in Jarovnice, Mr. Sajko has - without adequate state funding or much outside encouragement - developed the art program to the level where he and his students receive international recognition for their

large-scale paintings. Their work has garnered awards in several

international student-art competitions and has been the subject of

gallery exhibitions in Prague and Vienna, often creating unique

opportunities for him and some of the children to travel. Currently, he

is selling greeting cards with images of the children's artwork to fund

the building of a permanent home for the school's collection. He has

developed a close relationship with the Roma children of Jarovnice, and

their work together is a great source of pride for both the children and

the Romani community.

Figures 8 (top) and 9: Paintings by the Romani children of Jarovnice

Part Two

Romi ;pen

At its essence, Romani culture rigorously maintains the intefnal

cohesion of the group and its physical and symbolic distance from the

majority (gadze) population through a tightly woven complex of pollution (marime) taboos and ritual observances: Romipen (also called "Romanis"

or "Romanye," literally meaning "gypsynesç" or "gypsyhood"). These

pollution beliefs 'can be seen as the core element of [Romani] culture"

(Fraser, 2 4 5 ) and "they are the key to the unusual ability of gypsies

everywhere to endure persecution and drastic change of many kinds and

remain Rom" (Fonseca, 49). The rules of Romipen draw clear and strict

distinctions between behaviour that is pure (wuhzo) and polluted

(marime), informing al1 interaction between male and female and between

Gypsy and gadzo.

The conception and codification of the rules of Romipen "are

resolved in their symbolic application to the body" (Okely, 80). They

draw a fundamental distinction between the inside and the outside of the

body:

... the outer body symbolizes the public self or role as presented to the gadzo, ... it is a protective covering for the inside, which rnust be kept pure and inviolate. The inner body symbolizes the secret ethnic self, sustained individually and and reaffirmed by the solidarity of the group. (Ibid.)

According to Romipen, the human body is symbolically divided at the

waist into two halves: the lower half of the body is regarded as marime

because of the genital and anal areas - potential sources of pollution - while the upper half of the body is considered wuhzo. The waistline is

emphasized as the symbolic boundary. The female lower body is

particularly defiling due to menstruation and childbirth, and poses the

greatest threat to ritual purity. The commingling of the two halves of

the body creates pollution and is therefore strictly prohibited.

As a result, Romipen encompasses a complex of taboos allied to

daily life and cornmonplace practices "relating to perçons, objects,

parts of the body, foodstuffs, and topics of conversation" (Fraser,

2 4 6 ) . Particularly dangerous are those events which potentially bring

the inside and outside, or their associated products and related

Figure 10: Gxaphic xepresentation of Rornipen as it pertains t o the body

objects, into contact: eating, washing, sex, defecation, childbirth,

etc. For example, strict washing regulations are enforced, such as

separate basins, towels and soaps for the two body zones.

There should be separate bowls for washing food, crockery and cooking utensils, the main laundry, the body, women's bodies, the floor and the trailer and one for washing a newborn infant. (Okely, 81)

In addition, "anything taken into the body via the mouth must be

ritually clean, demanding attention be paid to food, vessels and

cutlery: al1 that contacts the entry to the inner body" (Okely, 80). Any

contact between shared utensils and the mouth is scrupulously avoided.

The term marime refers both to "the state of pollution or defilement and to the sentence of expulsion imposed for violation of

purity rules or any behaviour disruptive to the Roma community"

(Courbet, 2). For a Rom to be declared polluted is the greatest shame an

individual can suffer:

... it is social death, for the condition can be passed on and anything he or she touches or wears or uses is polluted for others. For a people for whom communal life is of major importance, and where marriages, baptisms, parties, feasts, and funerals are frequent social occasions, such a sentence is much feared and very effective punishrnent. (Fraser, 246)

Small infractions, obviously unintentional, are usually instantly

forgiven. More serious offences must be pardoned by community consensus

and the most serious sentences can be revoked only through the decision

of a k r i s (community court proceeding).

In practice, marime codes "safeguard the cohesiveness of Romani communal life by defining al1 non-Roma as impure" (Sway, 46). The g a d z o

by definition unclean, being ignorant of the system and lacking in a proper sense of shame: they exist outside the social boundaries, and their places and their prepared food present a constant danger of pollution. The code thus serves to isolate those gypsies who actively practise it from any intensive, intimate contact with gadze. (Fraser, 247)

R o m i ~ e n and the Traditional C a m ~

In addition to the ritual observances regarding washing, eating

and interpersonal relations, Romipen also detemines Romani "use and conception of space and the placement of objects in that space" (Okely,

78). As the rules of Romipen were codified over the course of centuries

of nomadic existence, it follows that the spatial implications of Romani

beliefs are most clearly illustrated in the organization of the

traditional temporary camp. In the example of a traditional camp, the "dichotomy of inside and

outside in body symbolism is expressed in the organization of domestic and public space" (Ibid., 85). Romipen applies to both the inside and

outside of the trailer, tent or caravan itself, as well as to the proto- urban arrangement of dwellings inhabiting the campsite.

In the case of the individual dwelling, the 'distinction between

inside and outside in spatial tems is more pronounced among those who live in wagons or caravans as opposed to tentsn (Ibid.). This can be explained by the fact that the floor of the wagon is elevated from the

potential pollution of the earth and thus inner purity is protected by a more pronounced and defensible threshold. As with the symbolic division

of the body, purity increases with vertical distance from potential pollution: the head is therefore the most wuhzo.

As the caravan or trailer "must not risk being a storehouse of pollution" (Ibid., 86), there are certain objects and activities banned

from the inside space. These include washing and the storage of bathing

and laundering bowls, cooking, animals and al1 objects and actions

concerning death and childbirth. When possible, objects stored outside are placed undex the trailer or on the stoop or roof in order to avoid

pollution by the earth.

Just as the inside space of the trailer is kept wuhzo, the trailers collectively comprising an encampment group are traditionally organized in a roughly circular configuration, thus defining a largex

inside space whose purity can be maintained. There are, in turn, ritual

laws to be observed regarding objects and activities allowed inside the

camp circle. Washing should be done at the periphery of the circle and waste water disposal, laundering, defecation, urination and the quartering of animals must occur at some distance outside the encampment

borders. In addition, death and birth should be kept £rom tainting the inside of the circle: 'the appropriate treatment for polluted articles,

including the possessions of the dead, is burning" (Ibid., 87).

Space inside the circle, "with its single entrance to deter outside visitors" (Ibid., 891, is reserved for cooking and gathering fires, sleeping in warm weather, socializing, the playing of children

and working. The space outside the trailer is not, however, maintained as meticulously as its interior, and if the ground is to be

appropriated, for example, as work space, often "the area of order is

extended by laying a carpet, a piece of linoleum or even by laying d o m

leftover tarmac immediately outside the trailer" (Ibid., 86).

In addition to the symbolic and practical importance of the

encampment8s interna1 configuration, its relationships to both the

natural and man-rnade environments were vital considerations. As the Roma

have always relied on the gadze economy, both as producers seeking

customers and as consumers requiring gadze goods and services, one of

the primary criteria for the siting of a camp was its close proximity

a gadze settlement. A safe distance was rigorously maintained, of

course, and thus Romani encampments were usually situated just outside

the periphery of a gadze village or tom.

Equally important was the ready availability of fresh, running

water. Rorna would never draw water from a standing source, nor risk

ritual pollution by drinking £rom or bathing in anything but flowing

water. The rules of Romipen also strictly applied when drawing water

from a river adjacent to an encampment.

Water drawn from the farthest upstream (the purest) was used for drinking and cooking, the next position downstream was for washing dishes and bathing, the next for washing and watering horses, the next for washing clothes and the position farthest downstream is used for washing the clothes of pregnant or menstruating women. (Courbet, 3)

P a r t Three

A Critical Analysis of C u r r e n t Conditions

As outlined in the previous section, there existed during the

nomadic past of the Roma a fundamental harmony between the ritual

observances and prohibitions that collectively constitute the basis of

the Romani cultural identity and the underlying structure of the

traditional Romani living environment. The roots of this mutually-

reinforcing integration of R o m i p e n and Romani nomadism, displaying remarkable resilience and adaptability over the centuries, can be traced

back to the traditions of the Roma1s Indian ancestors.

The past century, however, has seen the erosion of the economic

basis for nomadism followed by the successful implementation of

assimilation policies, resulting in the sudden cessation of the Romani

nomadic tradition. The abrupt and coercive character of the transition

from nomadism to a sedentary condition undermined any potential for the

development of a culturally expressive Romani vernacular architecture.

Consequently, Romani settlements such as Jarovnice represent an almost

absolute discontinuity between Romipen and the built environment.

The traditional Romani nomadic camp was structured in concentric

zones around a communal fire, establishing a series of thresholds

mediating between the m a r i m e "outside" and the space occupied by the

camp, and creating a succession of increasingly wuhzo 'inside" areas free £rom the threat of ritual pollution. Daily activities were assigned

to appropriate zones and the observance of strict codes of behaviour

preserved the sanctity of the appropriated 'Romani space." This combined

application of symbolic strategies of boundedness and centredness both

expressed and reinforced the structural orders underlying Romipen . Currently, the disjunction between R o m i p e n and the physical

character of the Romani settlement at Jarovnice is most vividly

demonstrated by the absence of a legible, culturally consistent

structure regulating both the community's centre and its margins.

The margins of the settlement are arbitrarily circumscribed by the

property boundaries of the Slovak village and the adjacent farmland, as

opposed to their clear definition £rom within the traditional camp.

The threshold between the 'outside" and the "inside" is, therefore,

abrupt and ill-defined and, consequently, the ritual integrity of the

space appropriated by the community is compromised: there is no wuhzo outdoor space. In addition, the settlement lacks a communal centre

around which ritual life may be organized, further reinforcing the

undifferentiated nature of outdoor space.

The symbolically hazardous nature of external space in the

settlement produces a situation wherein the interior spaces of

individual houses constitute the only sufficiently bounded and centred

spatial entities to form ritually pure zones of inhabitation. As a

result, these interior volumes represent cramped, isolated rafts of

"Romani space" floating in a vast sea of potential pollution.

The extreme poverty of the community and the consequent lirnits

imposed upon its capacity to build have, in turn, resulted in the

construction of houses consisting of one multi-purpose room. While the

absence of fixed interior partitions delineating space allocated to

specific activities is a condition consistent with the expression of Romipen - in which boundaries are symbolic and reinforced by ritual observance rather than physical separation - the extent to which interior space is compressed in the Romani settlement at Jarovnice does

not support its practice: interior space is insufficient to encompass

meaningful gradations in ritual purity.

The cumulative effect of these discontinuities between the orders

underlying Romipen and those currently determining the composition of the built environment in the settlement is a fundamental erosion of the

autonomy of the community. The organizational mode1 manifested by the

traditional camp established a self-sufficient, self-defining entity

that effectively controlled the relationship between Roma and gadze. The

prevailing character of the Romani settlement at ~arovnice, however, is

one of absolute dependency upon the Slovak majority for everything from

income subsidies to urban infrastructure.

A thorough critical analysis of conditions regarding the built environment in the Romani settlement at Jarovnice does, however, reveal

examples of the underlying influence of Romipen: subtle traces of

cultural expression with the potential to provide a foundation upon

which to construct a Romani architecture.

As previously mentioned, the degree of ritual purity assigned to

spatial entities in the traditional camp was expressed through changes

in elevation in relation to the ground plane and thxough concentxic

proximity to a central fire: the symbolic heart of the composition.

In the Romani settlement at Jarovnice, houses are constructed upon a

foundation platform, resulting in interior floors elevated from six

inches to a foot above grade. This subtle differentiation between the

m a r i m e "outside" and the wuhzo "inside" is sufficient to create and maintain a ritual threshold. In addition, an analysis of the components

of a typical Romani self-built house reveals that the wuhzo interior

volume is strongly protected from pollution along the horizontal axis by

heavy brick walls, while the elements of the roof assernbly in the vertical axis are often separated into discrete functional layers - a layer of shelter from rain and snow, often with open gable ends, above a

thin layer forming the interior ceiling. This suggests a need to

emphasize the impermeability of the wall - protecting against human, and therefore ritual, pollution - over that of the roof - which provides shelter £rom the ritually neutral natural elements.

Inaredients and Goals for Intervention

The thesis contends that an architectural intervention in the Romani settlement at Jarovnice has the potential to significantly

contribute to the redressing of the current discontinuity between Romani

culture and the built environment. Through the development of building

strategies attempting to reconcile Romipen and the sedentary condition,

the thesis aims to create the seed for the emergence of a culturally

meaningful Romani architecture. A s a result, the conceptual basis for

the proposed intervention is derived from Romipen and the model for its

expression provided by the organization of the traditional camp, as well

as the results of the critical analysis of current conditions and

building practices.

In addition, the thesis proposes to address and help alleviate the

harsh conditions in the settlement through the introduction of passive

building technologies that aim to lessen the settlement8s dependency

upon outside resources and to reduce the amount of energy the comrnunity

is required to expend in order to satisfy the most basic human needs. In

the same spirit, the project intends to present an opportunity for the members of the comrnunity to develop construction skills that may be

utilized in future building projects within the settlement, as well as

providing a basis for outside employment.

The ultimate goal of the thesis is to develop integrated urban and

building strategies that could, together, provide a model for a Romani

architecture to be employed, by the Roma, in the subsequent development of the settlement at Jarovnice and in other Romani communities

throughout Slovakia.

Part Four

One of the primary contentions underlying the thesis asserts that

the impetus to improve conditions for the Roma in Jarovnice must derive

from within the community itself, if the project is to truly empower the

community and not merely represent the latest in a long line of outside

impositions. Just as the conceptual framework for the development of a Romani architecture aims to express and reinforce the practice of

Romipen, the principal programmatic components of the intervention are

derived from the expressed desires of the community. In addition,

secondary programmatic elements are drawn from a careful analysis of

both prevailing conditions and the routine activities of the community,

in an attempt to discern how to best allocate community effort and

resources in the service of' enhancing the quality of life in the

settlement.

Consequently, the program for the proposed intervention builds

upon current initiatives conceived by the community - the construction

of a church and a place to house the large-scale paintings executed by

the children of the settlement - by encompassing a multi-purpose gathering hall and a gallery, in addition to providing a laundry washing

pavilion, a foot bridge connecting the two halves of the Romani

settlement on opposite sides of the Mala Svinka river, and a public cistern for the collection of rain water. The main elements of the

intervention are centred around a public square with a central £ire

platform, creating a forum for community gathering.

Urban Strateav

At the urban scale, the intervention addresses conditions in the

centre and on the margins of the Romani settlement at Jarovnice, with

the goal of supporting and guiding its developrnent into an autonomous

urban entity.

The proposed intervention attempts to redefine the threshold

between the Romani settlement and the Slovak village through the

creation of a gatehouse marking this transition and situating the shift

£rom the marime "outside" to a wuhzo "inside" in the context of its

cistern

gallery

fixe platform

gathering hall

1 washing pavilion

1 footbridge

Figure 13: Photomontage of mode1 showing elements of intervention

gathering hall gallery washing pavilion

Figure 14: Section [a-al through gathering hall, gallery and washing pavilion

Figure 15: View of mode1 showing gatehouse

Figure 16 (top): Section through gallery Figure 17: View of mode1 showing gallery

F i g u r e 18 (top): Section through gathering hall F i g u r e 19: View of mode1 across cistern and square to gathering hall

Figure 20: Section through washing pavilion

Figure 21: View of mode1 showing washing pavilion and foot bridge

relationship to a central sacred space. The proposed core of the Romani

settlement is defined by the grouping of the main components of the

intervention into a community complex that, in turn, defines the

boundaries of an elevated square with a central fire platform. In this

way, the intervention attempts to reintroduce the strategies of ritual

spatial definition employed in the structure of the traditional camp:

concentric proxirnity and elevation relative to the ground plane. In

addition, a proposed foot bridge connects the halves of the settlement,

linking the central complex with the farmland donated by the Slovak

village, and aiming to contribute to the development of an integrated

urban whole.

Construction Materials and Methods

The proposed intervention employs traditional materials - wood, brick and metal - currently utilized by the comrnunity in the construction of housing. In addition, however, the project proposes a

mode1 for construction that incorporates passive building technologies,

revives traditional craft skills by adapting them to the construction

trades, and attempts to invest these traditional materials with ritual

signif icance.

The proposed sequence of construction is planned in order to

maximize comrnunity participation through a staged building process that

could be undertaken gradually, as funds, materials and manpower become

available, and in which the proposed structures could be inhabited at

each stage in their erection. In this way, the community would dictate

the Pace of construction, utilizing the skills and labour of its

members, through which they, in turn, would gain valuable construction

skills to apply in the fabrication of their own homes or in the

employment marketplace.

Passive Svstems

The project attempts to develop building techniques and models

incorporating passive, low-technology strategies for reducing the

community8s dependence upon outside resources. Currently, the settlement

has no access to any means of central heating aside from the wood-

burning stoves also used for cooking. In addition, there are few

Figure 22: Site map of Romani settlement showing position of proposed intervention and its relationship to donated farmland

Figure 23 (top): view of mode1 depicting relationship among elements of intervention

Figure 24: View of mode1 from across river

Figure 25: Construction sequence

Figure 26 (top): Fragment model representing detail of structure and envelope at corner of gathering hall

Figure 27: Fragment model and light study demonstrating integration of passive solar strategy and nested spatial zones mediating the threshold between inside and outside

Figure 28: Section through gathering hall demonstrating potential for spatial expansion and contraction according to seasonal climate changes and user requirements

available sources of drinking water - or even water for washing and bathing - and none that are reliably sanitary. The collection of

firewood and water for drinking, cooking and washing constitutes the

main occupation for adults, and even children, in the community,

demanding a huge investment of time and physical effort in the service

of basic subsistence. The people of the Romani settlement at Jarovnice

are unemployed, but forced to labour tirelessly to survive.

As a result, the proposed intervention encompasses building

strategies employing passive-solar heating techniques and rnethods of

collecting rainwater, while harnessing an existing stream to create a pavilion for washing laundry.

In addition to employing a thermal-mass wall for passive-solar heating, the interior volume of the gathering hall is passively

ventilated, having the potential to adapt to seasonally changing

climatic conditions and the spatial needs of its users by expanding or

contracting as required.

R o m i ~ e n : Basis for a Romani Architectural Cosmoloav

As described in Part Two, it is the contention of the thesis that

the structure of.the traditional nomadic camp represents a harmonious

continuity between Romipen and the built environment. Integral to this

harmony, however, is the practice of nornadism: a combination that

resulted in the development of a transitory, contingent definition of

the position of the Roma in the world relative to the gadze and the

natural environment, a definition expressive of the placelessness of the

nomadic condition. The major goal of the thesis is to reconcile the

spatial implications of the ritual observances and prohibitions of

Romipen with the sedentary condition, in the context of the Romani

community at Jarovnice.

In attempting to develop a Romani architecture, the proposed

intervention aims to articulate a Romani architectural cosmology: a

symbolic expression, based in Romipen, of the Romani world-view,

situating the sedentary Roma relative to both the gadze and the natural

elements. Currently, the prevailing character of the settlement is one

of fragile ephemerality and dependence upon the Slovak village, despite

its long history in the same location. The thesis aims to suggest to the

Roma of the settlement at Jarovnice the ritual means through which to

define their fixed position in the world, thus providing the community

Figure 29: Exploded axonometric illustrating phenomenological relationship between building elements and natural elements

with a basis £rom which to make a cornmitment to the place and to the

permanence of the settlement.

In the traditional nomadic camp model, the spatial order

governing ritual purity is aligned to a vertical axis - along which ritual purity increases with elevation relative to the m a r i m e ground - and a concentric structure around a central fire - in which purity decreases with distance £rom the centre. There is no fixed horizontal

axis in the nomadic world-view because the position of the camp relative

to the potential source of pollution on that plane - the gadze - and the natural features of the landscape, was constantly changing.

In adapting the relativistic cosmology of the nomadic camp model

to the sedentary condition, however, there exists the necessity to

establish the position of the Romani community with regard to the gadze

and the natural environment.

Consequently, the cosmological structure of the proposed

intervention establishes a set of primary axes m u n d i in the horizontal and the vertical plane. A roughly east-west horizontal axis is

interpreted to represent that of potential pollution, situating the

Romani comrnunity in relation to the Slovak village. Along this axis are

aligned the gatehouse and the gallery, together forming the threshold

between Roma and gadze. The approximately north-south horizontal axis is

that which unites the two halves of the Romani community and which links

the community with the farmland donated by the Slovak village, and is

therefore free £rom threats to ritual purity. Along this axis are

aligned the gathering hall, the washing pavilion and the foot bridge.

The point at which the horizontal axes meet is the location of the

ritual centre of the community: the £ire platform.

As in the camp model, ritual purity in the proposed cosmology

grows with elevation along the vertical axis. As one approaches the

proposed centre of the settlement, both elevation and ritual purity increase. When translated to refer to natural elements, this vertical

cosmological axis travels from the m a r i m e earth to the wuhzo sky. Thus,

in the proposed cosmology, earth and air represent the structured

oppositions of pollution and purity of R o m i p e n . The relationship between the proposed cosmology and the natural elements is extended to consider

that, in the order governing the natural world, fire and water represent

the elements which mediate between earth and air. This conceptual

analogy seems consistent with the importance placed upon fire and water

in both Romipen and the structure of the traditional camp. Consequently,

the proposed intervention marks the important thresholds along the route

between the m a r i m e "outside" and the wuhzo "inside" with either a fire

or water element, in addition to a change in elevation. At the building scale, the cosmology governing the configuration

of the proposed intervention builds upon the traces of the influence of

Romipen perceived in the analysis of current construction techniques in

the settlement. There, a horizontally-biased strategy of maintaining the

ritual integrity of the wuhzo interior volume was interpreted as being

represented by heavy brick walls and a light, selectively-permeable roof

structure separated into discrete, functionally specific layers. This

forms the basis for a building strategy that aligns protective brick

walls perpendicular to the east-west axis of potential pollution and

allows for building elevations facing the north-south axis to consist of

permeable screens. In addition, the proposed intervention similarly

incorporates a layered, selectively-permeable roof structure in order to bring natural light into the main gathering space and to allow for

passive-solar heating.

Finally, both the overall composition of the proposed intervention

and the organization of space within the gathering hall are

concentrically ordered around the central £ire platform and the main

gathering volume, respectively.

Part Five

Conclusions: Towards a Romani Architecture

The thesis raises several difficult issues regarding the role of

the architect in community-based development projects, the potential for

architecture to play a meaningful role in the preservation and

regeneration of endangered cultures, and the capacity for the architect

to successfully express and reinforce another culture through the means

at his disposal, to name a few. The intent of the thesis was, £rom the

beginning, to use the academic context as an initial testing-ground for

potential architectural intervention in Jarovnice, and other of the

hundreds of Romani settlements in Slovakia alone. The ultimate and only meaningful goal is to continue the work and see it through to its

realization in the community it was, and is, intended to help. The

situation in Jarovnice demands action.

The challenges facing the Roma in Slovakia and elsewhere are as

multi-faceted as they are extreme. Ultimately, if conditions are to

change, the impetus will have to come as much from the Roma through

community organization, political agitation and the defiant preservation

of Romani culture and language, as it will from the majority communities

in countries such as Slovakia, through the efforts of a few dedicated academics, or from international development agencies. In addition to an

increase in racial intolerance directed toward the Roma and a

deterioration in the socioeconornic conditions they must confront, the

past few years have seen an unprecedented resurgence in Romani activism

and political and cultural consciousness. The Roma and their culture

have, throughout their tragic history, continually demonstrated an

uncanny ability to adapt and persevere in the face of adversity. The

road that lies ahead for the Roma seems likely to be the most difficult

they have travelled in their long and arduous journey, but they will

endure.

Romanov: We need separate schools, fox our own language to be taught in those schools, and Our own villages. We must build houses for our people, new houses in new neighbourhoods, not mixed in with the gadze with whom we cannot get along. To have a home is, after all, even more important than having a country.

Fonseca: Isn't there a danger of creating an even bigger Gypsy ghetto?

Romanov: The greater danger is to disappear.

- Isabel Fonseca, in conversation with Manush Romanov, Bulgarian Romani activist. (Fonseca, 299)

1. Books and Articles

Acton, Thomas. Gypsy Politics and Social Change. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1974.

Blundell Jones, Peter. " A n Anthropological View of Architecture." Architectural Design, vol. 22, no. 3 (March 1994): 22-25.

Cahn, Claude, and Nidhi Trehan. Time of the Skinheads: Denial and Exclusion of Roma in Slovakia [Country Reports Series No.3). Budapest: European Roma Rights Centre, 1997.

Courbet, M. "Romani Customs and Traditions. " The Pa txin Web Journal. http://www.geocities.com/Paris/512l/patrin.htm (February 1998).

Crowe, David. A History of the Gypsies of Eastern Europe and Russia. New York: St. Martin's Press, 1994.

Eco, Umberto. A Theory of Semiotics. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1979.

. "Function and Sign: The Semiotics of Architecture." In Signs, Symbols and Architecture, ed. Charles Jencks et al, 11-70. New York: Wiley and Sons, 1980.

Fonseca, Isabel. Bury Me Standing: The Gypsies and Their Journey. New York: Vintage, 1995.

Frarnpton, Kenneth. Studies in Tectonic Culture: The Poetics of Construction in Nineteenth and Twentieth Century Architecture. Cambridge: M.I.T. Press, 1995.

Fraser, Angus. The Gypsies. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 1992. Gheorghe, Nicolae, et al. Roma / Gypsies: A European Minority. The

Hague: Minority Rights Group International, 1995. Guy, Wily. Afterword to Gypsies, by Josef Koudelka. New York: Aperture,

1975. Jencks , Charles. "The Architectural Sign. " In Signs, Symbols and

Architecture, ed. Charles Jencks et al, 71-118. New York: Wiley and Sons, 1980.

Johnson, Paul-Alan. The Theory of Architecture. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1994.

Kenrick, Donald, and Grattan Puxon. The Destiny of Europe's Gypsies. London: Sussex University Press, 1972.

Levi-Strauss, Claude. Structural Anthropology, trans . C . Jacobsan and B.G. Schoepf. New York: Basic, 1963.

Norberg-Shulz, Christian. Existence, Space and Architecture. London: Studio Vista, 1971.

Okely, J. The Traveller Gypsies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983.

Orgovanova, Klara. "The Roma in Slovakia." Endangered Cultures / Endangered Peoples: Bulletin #15, Vol. 4/No.4 (May 1994) : 2-4 .

Pearson, Mike Parker, and Colin Richards. "Ordering the World: Perceptions of Architecture, Space and Time." In Architecture and Order: Approaches to Social Space, ed. Pearson and Richards, 1-37. New York: Routledge, 1994.

. "Architecture and Order: Spatial Representation and Archaeology." In Architecture and Order: Approaches to Social Space, ed. Pearson and Richards, 38-72. New York: Routledge, 1994.

Perin, Constance. Everything in i t s Place: Social Order and Land Use in America. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1977.

Petrova, Daniela. 'Get Out You Stinking Gypsy." Transitions, vol. 4, no. 4 (September 1997) : 14-21.

Rapoport, Amos. House Form and Culture, Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1969.

Soravia, Giulio. 'Wandering Voice: The Language of the Gypsies." I%NESCO Courier (October 1984): 1-5.

Sway, Marlene. Familiax- Strangers: Gypsy Life in America. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1988.

Trudgill, Peter. Sociolinguistics. New York: Penguin Books, 1994. Yuan, Yi-Fu. Space and Place: The Perspective of Experience. London:

Edward Arnold, 1977.

2. Individuals and Oraanizations

European Roma Rights Centre, Nador Utca 11 [4th Floor/Rm. 4171, 1051 Budapest , Hungary .

Galjus, Orhan, and Erika Godlova, c/o Nevipe Foundation, Bratislava, Slovakia.

Gina, Ondrej, c/o Foundation of Hope and Understanding, Krece 1003/11, 33701 Rokycany, Czech Republic.

Hancock, Dr. Ian, c/o International Roma Federation, Manchaca, TX 78652- 0822.

Hubschmannova, Dr. Milena, c/o Department of Indology, Charles University, Stepanska 29, 11000 Praha 1, Czech Republic.

Lee, Ronald, c/o Roma Advocacy Centre, Toronto, ON. Olah, Dr. Vladimir, c/o Romani D e j , Vondrousova 1193 [Repy II], 16300

Praha 6, Czech Republic . Ritter, Patricia, c/o Roma Advocacy Centre, Toronto, ON. Roma National Congress [Romnewsl, Simon von Utrecht Str. 8 5 , D-2000,

Hamburg 36, Germany. Samkova, Klara, and Ivan Vesely, c/o Dzeno Foundation, Rubesova 1, 12000

Praha 2, Czech Republic. The Gypsy Lore Society, 5607 Greenleaf Road, Cheverly, MD 20785.