英文摘要 |
In the context of China's contemporary urban history, Shanghai was the first city which had a great number of its housing units produced as commodities. Most of the dwelling forms were built for sale or to rent, and the majority of the living experiences were invoked and came into being by something made for real estate promotion. Therefore, dwellers' aspiration towards comfort and convenience often coincided with some distinguishable outward appearance and demanded for higher price in the housing market. That was the reason even the new bodily experience of comfort and hygiene in contemporary cities could be related to the modern infrastructure and public utilities; but they often were correlated to visual images about the detached bungalow-like housing units in suburbs. Judgments about dwellings manifested themselves within the factual living experience and visual contact with the outward appearance. After 1949, Shanghai's original housing market encountered stringent intervention from the new socialist state. Housing units were no longer supplied by the market but were rather built and distributed by the state's new institutes according to new building regulations. People's dwelling selections were limited to specific kinds of dormitories which the socialist state could provide. Even more, insufficient housing investment not only reduced the housing supply but also compelled the existing housing units which had been built for sale or rent (e.g. the Shanghai Lilong) to be entirely distributed by the state. Consequently both the housing allotment from the state and self accommodation by the users resulted in dwelling forms being given new functions and meanings under the prevailing egalitarian ideology. This paper focuses on Shanghai's housing development after the socialist reform of the 1950s and explores: 1. The transformation of dwellers' bodily experience that occur when all the housing units were distributed by the state and could no longer be obtained from the market or were necessarily appropriate to one's affordability and how the human body and the interactions between family members accommodated themselves to the new socialist scenarios. 2. Given a high level of state intervention, what is the difference between categories of bodily experience and their connotations and those of the period when market forces ruled. Through an understanding of the transformational process of dwelling forms and the collective living experience, this paper attempts to interpret the correspondence between bodily experience, material conditions, and the social process within the period during which socialist ideologies prevailed. |