Not wanting to analyze the building of dwelling houses in Estonia inefficiently and seemingly
scientifically (where would I have got competent statistics from), I simply try to express the
thoughts which are connected with that topics somehow and have come into my mind.
What kind of "scientific" analysis it could be or who should make it, if even the architectural
critics seem not to manage with the simplest things. That reminds me an article in the EE
some time ago about a Finnish lady (naturally in Finland) completing or taking her doctor's
degree. She was examining Finnish post-war modern house, it's morphology, the structure
of the Finnish family, the connections between them and making conclusions which extend
to this day. Those observations about architecture were much more smarter than those
that the most of self-confident architects could do. Unfortunately it has to be confessed that
I don't remember such a research work or sentiments in Estonian science, but no doubt,
they could be necessary.
The typology of the houses used by most of the architects goes
back to the living model of the middle class at the end of the 19th century. That model was
idealized and carried on through a hundred of years up to the end of this century. No doubt
that our living style is changing -- repeating banalities: paradigm changes -- as well as the
composition and make-up of the family. There was a news in a newspaper about Estonia
which declared that 50 % of the children are illegitimate (it is possible, of course, that some
parents live together without getting married officially) and 12,5 % of the born children
know nothing about their fathers. The living with grandparents is not so popular any more.
(As to the models of living it is...