Instytut Historii Sztuki <Posen> [Editor]
Artium Quaestiones — 17.2006

Page: 72
DOI issue: DOI article: DOI Page: Citation link: 
https://digi.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/diglit/artium_quaestiones2006/0074
License: Free access  - all rights reserved Use / Order
0.5
1 cm
facsimile
72

PIOTR KORDUBA

Dom gdański kształtowały w okresie nowożytnym stałe zasady or-
ganizacji przestrzeni. W ciągu epoki precyzowały się jedynie ich wza-
jemne relacje odpowiadając na wzrastające potrzeby mieszkalne patry-
cjatu. Potrzeby te dotyczyły zarówno poszerzenia przestrzeni publicznej
czyli reprezentacyjnej, prywatnej, jak i wytworzenia obszaru półpublicz-
nego o reglamentowanym dostępie. Z tak złożonym schematem funk-
cjonalnym nie mamy do czynienia w obszarze mieszczańskiej kultury
mieszkalnej. Odpowiada on wysoce złożonym wymogom rezydencjonal-
nym. Dom gdański nie przeistoczył się jednak w wieloosiowy miejski
pałac o apartamentowym układzie pomieszczeń. Pozostaje tym samym
odosobnionym przypadkiem mieszczańskiej siedziby; autorską kreacją
lokalnego patrycjatu.

ON THE HISTORY OF HOUSING AND URBAN DWELLING IN POLAND
Summary
The present paper is an attempt to sum up the conclusions and present the
method of research (see “Analysis”) continued by the author in his studies of the
Gdańsk patrician townhouse in the early modern times.
The tradition of the studies of the patrician townhouse in Poland has been
dominated by the stylistic and typological analyses or considerations focusing pri-
marily on the structural aspects of architecture. As regards the ąuestion of dwelling,
it has been addressed separately, most often in the context of phenomenological
thought. Therefore, what is needed is a complex research program allowing one to
consider the house both in its materiał and socio-cultural aspects.
The limitations of the study of the patrician townhouse and its lifestyle have
been dictated not only by a methodological gap, but also by the separation of re-
sources taken into account (either only yisual, or only written). Taking them into
consideration together would make it possible to work out a parallel interpretation
on dflfferent levels of meaning. To reach that goal, it is necessary to renounce the
standard approach to the house as an architectural object and view it as a dynamie
structure which functions as a complex set of relations between its residents and
architecture, decoration, and facilities.
Bringing together various disciplines, from art history to social Sciences, re-
ąuires a set of concepts possibly common for all of them. A search for such concepts
cannot fail to consider an opposition of the “public” and the “private,” crucial for
cultural history. Applying this opposition to the problematic of the patrician town-
house and dwelling there, one may assume that the “public” includes the outside
world as a scene of work and representation, while the “private” refers to family life.
These two areas are manifested in the first place in the socio-cultural sphere of so-
loading ...