| Summary: | 碩士 === 樹德科技大學 === 應用設計研究所 === 92 === With Makazayazaya in Pingtung County as an example, the theme of this article was to discuss the change process of construction mechanism and spatial form of the traditional Paiwan indigenous tribe in the historical and societal transition. As to the approach, this study was conducted mainly with the empirical phenomenon analysis; i.e., analyzing the spatial forms of the study objects’ surroundings to understand different spatial forms caused by the situation and the technology of the society during specific times.
In past, the orientation of relevant architectural researches had been about form performance and had a neglect of the implied nature, based on the form, and the relevant condition of the construction environment. In contrast to those themes, this article was intended to verify that the tribe, even combined in the living condition of the lowland economic system, was not fully overwhelmed. Probably, factors affecting the transition of the house spatial form were of inevitability and contingency, but not absolute inevitability and contingency. Though the tribe was somewhat limited with the economic factor mainly, it was found that the mythology or taboo consciousness contained in the tribe’s traditional societal culture had been affecting the contemporary concept in house use distinctly or indistinctly.
The current investigation was in an attempt to restructure the space construction realization process of the tribe by analyzing the construction mechanisms of different periods, so that to present the appearance of Makazayazaya’s spatial form in transition, understand the responding mode and the transition process of the tribe’s spatial form in the social contexts during varied periods, and survey the profound cultural implications behind the community space.
It was concluded with analyses of the construction mechanism of Makazayazaya indigenes’ houses that the economic factor had changed the way they used space and made them closer to the so-called lowland life style. But as shown in some traces of life, their traditional life style has not disappeared along with the economic factor. Though the lowland construction system dominated the tribe’s construction form, the tribe was not dominated completely in respect of the life style. Instead, the traditional life style was hidden in real life in the adapting process to the new life style and there was a balance achieved between both the traditional and the new. In observing the transition in Makazayazaya’s space and societal culture, there indicated the alteration, of the traditional indigenous community life style, made to adapt to the so-called lowland life.
|
|---|
