This topic’s generating a lot of interest – 9 replies in what, about 2 hours? Anyway...
Yes, the examples I gave are subtle, but I subscribe to the view that subtle worldbuilding is best; and I know that there is a difference between worldbuilding and mapmaking, but they are very closely aligned, especially on a website like this one.
I also think that subtle differences can have a huge impact on street layout and architecture. Stone boxes and peaked roofs (or wooden cylinders, or leather tents or whatever Androidfan wants, really) are still an efficient form, and I expect they’d still exist in a ‘feminine’ city.
I read earlier this year an interesting observation about gender and power – in many past societies, men initially acquire power through martial prowess; women through childbirth and family-raising. A man is at his physical strongest when young (~25-30 years); if he gets too grey in the tooth, some young upstart will oust him. The power wielded by a man is public (i.e. it has an influence on the entire society); his legacy takes the form of the deeds accomplished in his vigour. A woman’s power increases as soon as she has her first child; she is responsible for the child’s education and upbringing – it is a very important role. When the woman becomes a grandmother, her power is even greater – she has a strong influence on her own children, and the children of her children. The power she wields is thus private power (confined to the household) but it increases as she ages, and it lasts longer overall. The woman is excluded from public life, but that doesn’t mean she doesn’t care about her personal legacy, just as the men do. The woman’s family is her legacy.
Many examples of this effect can be seen in past societies – for example, think of the (stereotypical) role of grandmothers in traditional Greek, Italian and Indian households. I’m reminded of a scene from Godfather 2 where Michael Corleone – a powerful male – is troubled; what does he do? He goes to his mother for advice. There are hundreds of other examples, anthropological (yawn) and anecdotal.
Now, how does any of this manifest in urban form? If men are remembered by their deeds, and women by their families, perhaps you wouldn’t have monumental (not to mention phallic) objects like Nelson’s Column or the Washington Monument in cities; you wouldn’t have grand boulevard’s that culminate in some expression of military glory, like the Arc de Triomph.
The alternative might be closer to Atpollard’s suggestion: large houses that hold many branches of an extended family, presided over by a maternal individual, a grandmother, aunt, mother etc. It isn’t far-fetched – it is the basic model for medieval Italian domestic architecture. It is interesting to compare on GoogleEarth images of an Italian town (like Bologna) with a north European one (like Amsterdam, where, I suspect, family structures are very much more concentrated on the husband/wife/children, rather than the whole extended family). The Italian town has many courtyards, narrow twisted streets, convoluted roofs; the Dutch town has rows of houses with much more straightforward street layouts. You can try this with many other towns from different parts of the world.
Why do these towns look different? Why does Bologna look like other Italian towns but unlike Dutch towns? I think there can only be one explanation, and that is culture (environmental/economical factors also come into it, but culture is the big one). And a big part of culture is the family structure. And a big part of the family structure is the relative power roles of men and women.
The point of all of this is to demonstrate that gender can have a big impact on the way a town looks. I assume that the original poster is suggesting that women hold public power in his/her world, instead of/in addition to private power. His/her task involves figuring out what that is going to mean for the urban form.
EDIT: Atpollard, I didn't see your latest post until after I'd added this comment. You've provided a reasonably detailed and sound possiblity for how a 'feminine' city might look. I have to say it doesn't sound that different from a male-dominated city, but it's still pretty good. And you are absolutely 100% completely and totally right: imagination is the only limit to the possibilities.
Reply With Quote