Developmental and Structural Analysis of the Social and Cultural Changes and Its Effects on Local House in Turkmen, Gomishan and Gorgan

Document Type: Original Paper

Authors

1 Ph.D. Department of Art and Architecture, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.

2 Associate Professor, Tarbiat Modarres University, Tehran, Iran.

3 Professor, Department of Art and Architecture, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.

Abstract

The Clarification of the field-oriented thought in Iranian contemporary architecture through the sociological knowledge model can be studied and analyzed as a comparative model as well as the location of the phenomena of Iranian contemporary society, especially architecture. Although sociology of knowledge must be able to control the cause of social and historical deviation in the context of Iranian architecture and identify ways by correct standards of human thought to guide the social phenomenon, such as Architectural. In this article, structural and evolutionary analysis methods and data collection tools such as in-depth interviews, observation and local navigation, documents analysis, photographs and fieldwork to observe and analyze the social behavior and cultural changes in the design of the house were used. At the end of this study, the concept of approach, methodology and understanding the operational range were mentioned, and then the impact and influence of culture on the architecture in native housing areas and vice versa in the cases of surveys area were analyzed.

Keywords


Afrough, E. (1998). space and social inequality. (1thed). Tehran: Tarbiat Modarres University Press.

Afshar Naderi, K. (1999). land to place. Architecture magazine, Issue 6, autumn.

Ashtari, B. (1986). Turkmen and ethnic. The (third book). Tehran: Proceedings of Anthropology.

Bahraini, H. and Tajbakhsh, G. (2008). The concept of territory in urban areas and role of own urban design to realization. Fine Arts, Tehran, No. 6.

Bigdelli, MR. (1986).  Iranian Turkmen. (1thed). Tehran: Press Pasargadae.

Bremner, L. (1994). Space &the nation: three texts on Aldo Rossi. Society and Space, No.12, pp: 287-300.

Conlantonio, A. (2007). Measuring Social Sustainability: Best Practice from Urban Renewal in the EU: EIBURS Working Paper Series.UK: European Investment Bank.

Goli, A. (1987). Turkmen political and social history. Tehran: Elm publishing.

Golmohammadi, A. (1998). Globalization, culture, identity. Tehran: Ney publication.

Habib, F. (2001). Urban space context of social interaction (social interaction approach to sustainability). Journal of architecture and culture, the seventh year, No. 24, 1380.

Kanani, MA. (2000). Iranian Turkmen. national studies, (4).

Pajohandeh, MH. (2001). Ideas of sociology of culture. Mashhad: Andisheh Houzeh.

PoorKarimi, H. (1966). Iranian Turkmen. Public art magazine, Volume 4, No. 41, 42 and 64.

Pourdeihimi, S. (2001) .Culture and Housing. Housing and rural environment, No. 134.

Pourjafar, MR., Akbarian, R., Ansari, M. and Pourmand, H. (2006). Thinking approach in the continuation of Iranian architectural. Quarterly Scientific Research Journal Safeh, Year 16, Number 45.

Qadiri, B. (2006). New structures in historic areas. Tehran: Cultural Research Bureau.

Sarli, T. (2002). The political, social, economic and cultural Turkmen at the end of the Qajar to Pahlavi. Unpublished master’s thesis, University of Zanjan, Zanjan, Iran.

Shaikh Zainuddin, H. (1989). The form of architecture. Architecture and culture, the first year, No. 1.

Tavalaee, N., (1989). urban space and socio-cultural relations. Nameh Pajohesh Farhangi, the seventh year, N.5.