Talk:Hall and parlor house

Jan 7, 2010 edit

The article now has more references and is organized more clearly. Still lacks examples, a photo, or a coherent description of the style's lengthy history. Needs treatment by someone more knowledgeable of the subject. I assessed as low importance, but if anyone on WP:ARCH disagrees please re-assess as necessary. Andyo2000 (talk) 06:57, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

I just noticed your changes to the article. It seems you have some different early examples in mind than I had. The central hearth design that developed to a central chimney stack which in turn is the origin of such designs as the Cape Cod house is now completely missing. Also in the hall and parlor house the parlor is always to the side of the hall similar to the ancient Greek oikos house. The design with the parlor behind the hall is of a different origin. In North America it my have been reinvented from the eastern religious tent camps and the pioneer town merchant house. In Europe it developed from middle age urban merchants houses while the hall and parlor design developed in a more rural context akin with old Germanic designs such as saxon houses, the scottish Black house, viking halls, the later Fachhallenhaus and above all the Ernhaus. Not to forget the hall was always at all times until very recently, say the last hundred years, the general living and working space, never the parlor. --T.woelk (talk) 14:19, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

It sounds as though you are an expert on the subject. Please edit/delete what I did as necessary to improve the article. I merely cobbled together what I found from a number of sources to make the article more definitive and easy to understand. Andyo2000 (talk) 14:53, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Name in Nigeria

So, lots of reverts in the past two days between Jamie Tubers and Nyttend. I happened to be watching Nyttend's talk page because I edited it very recently to give him notice I finished a request of his at the WP:GL...when I saw someone templated him, so looked further.

I'm not all out opposed to this change...but I feel like the way it was added is not helpful to readers. The rest of the article makes sense, Britain colonized USA, British people built this type of house, then Americans started building it. But the Nigeria blurb in the lead is never followed up on in the history section, and the sources cited for it are extremely flimsy, so it just confuses readers (and myself) as to whether it was truly related. Because Nigeria was also colonized by Britain, I feel like "parlour" is going to be a more accepted word there anyway. As Nyttend said succintly in edit summary:

Did the Yoruba derive their houses from the English? Similar plans with unrelated origins do not belong here.

I agree. This idea, a house with two rooms in it, is not so novel that it could not have developed independently, and he cites historical facts ignored by Jamie Tubers (the late period of colonization and the fact fewer Brits moved to Nigeria during its colonial period than USA).

So, I'm joining Nyttend in consensus against the change and requesting from all parties that the edit war stop and discussion be brought to the talk page. If more sources are found as to the term's history in Nigeria I'd be happy to change my mind. Psiĥedelisto (talk) 04:07, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

• Hello, @Psiĥedelisto:

You are missing two things. One is that a template asking that the article be globalized was removed by you and Nyttend, and two, a cited addition confirming the presence of this architecture-style and the name in Nigeria was removed recently by you. So my questions are pretty simple:

1. Do you believe 2-room configuration house in the article only exist in Britain? If yes state why you think so. For me, I think that's a lie, because I provided links that says that it exists in Nigeria, and I'm sure there are several links talking about 2-room houses in other parts of the world. Now removing a template that points out that the article needs to be globalized is disruptive.

2. Do you think other variations in the world need to have a british background to be included in the article? If yes, why do you think so? For me, It is basically very outrageous to think that, and it reeks of exceptionalism and bias. Every civilization has distinct culture; however, there is usually very similar/related cultures in other civilizations. Yes it is possible that some cultures are derived from other cultures, but it is really pointless to feel they have to be linked to be included in this kind of articles. It's just like someone arguing that variations of Studio apartments (or other form of architecture) in other countries need to have an American (or insert the claimed first country to develop it) history to be included in the Wikipedia article. Or that variations of Dowry in other parts of the world need to have an Indian (or whatever country) history for the article to be globalized. That's just plain silly. Common history has nothing to do with inclusion in an architecture article. What is needed is to have similar plans. Except ofcourse, the article is meant for just a specific region's architecture; which should be reflected in the article title. With that said, even some sources say that some of the "hall and parlor houses" in America, were a blend of the British and Nigerian versions.

I already asked from Nyttend to clearly state and defend their stance, which they haven't done. You also need to clearly state what you are saying. I am not against reverting an edit, but you should be ready to defend the reason for your reversion when it is requested. Regards.--Jamie Tubers (talk) 16:04, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

@Jamie Tubers: So, to answer your questions of me...

1. "Do you believe 2-room configuration house in the article only exist in Britain?" No, it's quite clearly stated in the article that it exists elsewhere, and I think that two room houses probably exist all over the world.
2. "Do you think other variations in the world need to have a british background to be included in the article?" Yes, because this article is named hall and parlor house, not two room house...this article is about a specific style of British house and how it rose to prominence, spread, and then fell out of favor. Other kinds of two room houses should have their own articles if they are not based on the British one or related, in my opinion. I think that if we end up having a lot of articles about this type of architecture around the world, it might make sense to make a list type article where hall and parlor house and the hypothetical other two room house articles are listed. It's like how the article about teepee doesn't mention wigwam. Yes, they're both really similar! Both made from the earth and sometimes textiles, both usually only have one room, but they were developed independently by different peoples and it makes no sense to conflate them together in the same article unless a reliable source says that one led to the other.

So yeah, I really think that if you want to make another article about architecture styles in Nigeria, that's a really interesting and worthwhile addition to the project, but trying to shoehorn unrelated but similar in appearance designs does not do anyone any favors, especially not readers ... at most I would say that your hypothetical article could go in a "See also" section. Psiĥedelisto (talk) 09:33, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

As I told you repeatedly, you need sources demonstrating that the Yoruba and Anglo concepts are related. Your sources don't even use the word "hall", according to a Google search of the books you provided (if it does, you need to quote the source as a form of verification, as well as citing it properly), but you still added a statement that they connect this concept to them: that's fraud, and in real life it leads to significant sanctions. Claiming that the Yoruba influenced British vernacular architecture before the colonial period, or that no-longer-in-favour British vernacular architecture influenced Yoruba vernacular architecture during the colonial period, is a truly exceptional claim that needs solid sourcing, while if the sources don't consider them to be related, treating them as related is also not appropriate. Meanwhile, I invite you to consider Glassie's perspective in works such as his Vernacular architecture, OCLC 44128193, and Folk housing in middle Virginia, OCLC 630814189, which discuss the history of this house form without mentioning anything except a European origin. Also consider the following writeup, which I put together this evening.

Extended content

Traditional Yoruba domestic architecture, like that of other forest-dwelling Nigerian peoples, consisted of rectangular mud buildings constructed together to form complexes with shared courtyards and roofs (11), single-story structures much longer than their width; as families grew, the typical solution was the construction of additional structures to expand the complex and create new courtyards (13). Such buildings routinely combined ordinary rooms and internal verandas, the latter being separated only by low walls from the unroofed courtyards (14). Like the small round houses of Nigeria's northern savannah dwellers, typically built in tightly enclosed villages, the traditional compounds of Nigeria's forest peoples appear to have developed locally, without influence from other parts of the world (2). Non-African influences in Yoruba architecture began midway through the nineteenth century as freed Yoruba slaves leaving Brazil brought Portuguese Baroque architecture with them as they returned to their ancestral homes (73). During the colonial period, British officials sponsored the construction of two-story buildings with heavy reliance on pillared colonnades, but their styles were unpopular and caused no significant changes in vernacular architecture (76), and only the advent of modernism in the 1950s displaced the Portuguese style from its dominance (75).

All citations go to Carroll's Architectures of Nigeria, OCLC 636181190, which is sitting on my lap as I type this. I was tempted to write a Yoruba vernacular architecture article because of the wealth of information in this book, but since I don't have access to any of the items in his bibliography, the article would deserve to get a {{One source}} tag. If you have access to any other sources on Yoruba vernacular architecture, I'd suggest that you write such an article and incorporate my writeup into the article. I can provide you with citations for the items in Carroll's bibliography if you're interested. Nyttend (talk) 02:24, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

• Okay, I think I get it now. You both want this article to only talk about the British vernacular architecture. However, does "hall and parlor house" solely refer to the British architecture? "Hall and Parlor house" is pretty much a very generic name.--Jamie Tubers (talk) 16:39, 14 February 2017 (UTC)