Houses

In the second half of the nineteenth century, housing became a study topic and the subject matter of handbook literature. Catalogues, lists, and repertoires were the classifications that emerged in relation to the imbalances in blue-collar housing, or the houses of the “dangerous and working” classes. Taking into consideration the unequal layouts and quantity of houses, the incommensurable differences and the impossibility to calculate, it is possible to develop several disciplinary approaches regarding our idea of houses. The first in-depth subject to be examined is the economy: how did the quantity and spatial distribution of houses become part of the reproduction process of capital? Comprehensive visions of economic relations that structure society are proposed in authorial interpretations that sometimes evolved until they became general theories. The status quo, hypothetical interventions, and reforms are described within the frameworks that moved in this direction. They usually referred to the house as a patrimonial and financial asset (obviously the terms are not synonymous) and to the housing market, in a dialectic relationship with the role of the state and public intervention in general. A second line of research on housing involves political thought. In this case, the house is important for the purposes of production, consensus, and the needs expressed by society, or segments of society. In this context, the crucial question behind policies and projects is not an objective, natural, and quantitative term but is instead activated within theoretical constructs. Housing policies and systematic projects of housing ensembles position the political role played in the field of housing centre stage.