EN TR
Adaptive Domesticity Research
Context & Simulation01-03 - OBJECT TO APARTMENTWorking Note2024

Adaptive Domesticity

Why does a Tokyo apartment feel different from a Paris one? We started counting.

Scale 01-03 Multi
Typologies 5 cities
Sources Plans 1920-today
Tools Python CV
Type Working Note
Updated 2026-07
01

Walk into a Tokyo apartment. The kitchen flows into the living room. No door, no threshold. It feels open, almost exposed.

Walk into a Paris apartment. The kitchen hides behind a door. Always. The salon is for guests; the kitchen is for work. They don't mix.

Walk into an Istanbul apartment. There's a formal salon for guests, completely separate from the family living room. Two worlds under one roof.

Why? These aren't random preferences. They're cultural patterns encoded in space. Privacy gradients. Hospitality protocols. Rules about who sees what. This working note reads those patterns through published floor plans and typology literature, and asks which of them can actually be counted.

Comparative analysis of furniture joinery across cultures

Furniture as Evidence: Semper's claim, taken literally: joint complexity may predict spatial hierarchy. A pattern we keep seeing in typologies, and still want to test properly.

02

Theoretical Framework

01

Furniture Scale

Joinery typologies as cultural evidence. Semper's claim, read literally: cultures with complex joinery tend to build more nuanced room transitions. For now a hypothesis, not a proof.

02

Room Scale

Threshold counting. How many doors, level changes, and implied boundaries stand between street and the most private room? Countable on any plan.

03

Typology Scale

A century of published floor plans, 1920 to today. Adjacencies, circulation, and privacy gradients read across housing types.

04

Cultural Synthesis

The patterns feed a typology vocabulary we want SpaceCraft to eventually understand: a scanned room means more when its cultural grammar is legible.

03

Research Process

01

Read Typologies

Published plans and typology literature from five city grammars

02

Count Thresholds

Privacy gradients and buffer zones read plan by plan

03

Index Patterns

Adjacency, visibility, and hospitality indices per typology

04

Synthesize Vocabulary

Cultural pattern vocabulary for future product integration

04

Research Phases

01

Typology Reading

Comparative reading of published plans and typology literature across five city grammars: Tokyo, Paris, Istanbul, Marrakech, Los Angeles.

02

Threshold Mapping

Counting privacy thresholds and buffer zones plan by plan; building the gradient index.

03

Joinery Hypothesis

Testing Semper's furniture-to-space claim against documented joinery traditions. Honest status: not yet done.

04

Product Integration

A cultural pattern vocabulary for SpaceCraft's scanned rooms. Planned.

05

Key Metrics

5
City Typologies
Tokyo to Los Angeles
1→5
Threshold Range
Street to most private room
2.3×
Buffer-Zone Gap
Istanbul vs. Tokyo plans
100
Years of Plans
1920 to today
06

Key Thinkers

01

Gottfried Semper

German Architect, 1803-1879

Semper argued that architecture begins with textile weaving and furniture joinery, not monumental form. We take him literally and read furniture joints as spatial evidence.

02

Gaston Bachelard

French Philosopher, 1884-1962

The Poetics of Space taught us that houses are emotional, not just geometric. Corners protect us. Attics dream. Cellars store fears. Our indices try to count what Bachelard described.

03

Junichiro Tanizaki

Japanese Author, 1886-1965

In Praise of Shadows explains why Japanese spaces value penumbra while Western spaces chase illumination. There's no universal 'good design.' There are cultural grammars.

04

Edward T. Hall

American Anthropologist, 1914-2009

Hall invented proxemics: the study of human spatial relationships. Comfortable distances vary by culture. Our privacy gradient metrics extend his framework to plans.

07

Case Studies

Tokyo Compact Typology

Japan

Around 32 square meters with no doors between living spaces. Privacy through ritual, not walls. Morning routines choreographed to avoid collision; the plan assumes it.

~32 m² Size
0 Thresholds

Paris Haussmann Typology

France

Classic bourgeois layout. Kitchen hidden from salon. Service corridor for staff. Roughly 95 square meters with four distinct threshold conditions.

~95 m² Size
4 Buffer Zones

Istanbul Multi-Generational Typology

Turkey

Guest salon completely isolated from family living. Often a separate entrance for the grandmother's quarters. Hospitality and intimacy don't share space.

~140 m² Size
Isolated Guest Salon

Comparative Analysis

Tokyo

The Flowing Space

No doors between living areas. Privacy through ritual, not walls. Kitchen is the social center.

OpenRitual-BasedJapan

Paris

The Hidden Kitchen

Kitchen always separate. Service and served spaces don't mix. Guests see the salon, not the mess.

CompartmentalizedFormalFrance

Istanbul

The Guest Salon

Two living rooms: one for family, one for guests. Hospitality has its own architecture.

Dual ZonesHospitalityTurkey

Marrakech

The Courtyard Home

Blank exterior, rich interior. All rooms face the central court. Maximum privacy from street.

IntrovertedClimate-AdaptedMorocco
05

Optimization Results

100% 75% 50% 25% 0%
5%
5%
3%
3%
1%
Istanbul
Marrakech
Tokyo
Paris
LA (Open)

How many thresholds between street and most private room?

Scenario model: typology indices from our plan readings

08

Key Findings

01

Thresholds are countable. The distance from street to the most private room can be read off any plan: five thresholds in Istanbul and Marrakech typologies, one in an open-plan LA loft.

1 to 5 thresholds
02

Turkish apartment plans carry roughly 2.3 times more buffer zones than Tokyo plans. Hospitality protocols are encoded in circulation.

2.3× more buffers
03

Parisian kitchens read consistently smaller than Tokyo kitchens in same-sized plans, and always behind a door. The privacy gradient trumps cooking space.

Smaller, always hidden
04

Furniture joints may predict spatial hierarchy. Cultures with complex joinery (Japan, Scandinavia) tend to have more nuanced room transitions. A pattern we keep seeing, not yet a proof.

Hypothesis to test
09

Honest Limitations

Data Dependency

This is plan-reading, not fieldwork. Published plans show intention; they don't show how families actually live.

Data Dependency

Our sources skew middle-class and urban. Social housing and luxury follow different grammars.

Behavioral Assumption

The joinery-to-hierarchy link is a hypothesis we find compelling. We haven't tested it at a sample size that would satisfy a statistician.

Temporal Limitation

Plans from 1920 and life in 2026: building stock evolves slower than domestic ritual.

10

Conclusion

Domestic space encodes culture. The way a door is positioned, where the kitchen sits, how many thresholds separate street from bedroom: these aren't random choices. They're cultural grammars. Some of them can be counted on any floor plan; this note is our running attempt to count them carefully.

Limitations

  • Plan-reading, not fieldwork
  • Middle-class urban focus

Future Directions

  • Extend to social housing typologies
  • Test the joinery hypothesis properly