A History of Domestic Space: Privacy and the Canadian Home. By Peter Ward. (Vancouver and Toronto: University of British Columbia Press, 1999, ix + 182 p., black/white photographs, colour plates, reference notes, index, CAN $39.95, ISBN 0-7748-0684-2)

Peter Ward proposes two goals in this book. First, he intends to demonstrate how Canadian domestic architecture over the last three centuries has shaped and has been shaped by family and social relationships. Second, he argues that the changing form, setting and domestic technology of the home has profoundly impacted individual privacy both within the home and the community. Underlying his intentions is the notion that the home is the place where “people spend their lives”(3). The first chapter, “Housing and Privacy,” is a brief introduction to the relationship between privacy and the home. Ward distinguishes between two types of privacy: personal privacy which “sets the individual apart from the group, creating opportunities for seclusion,” and family privacy which “creates a boundary between itself and the larger community”(6). It is Ward’s intent to illustrate the way in which domestic architecture is divided into private and public spaces. Ward goes on to examine the form, size and development of the domestic interior of the Canadian home over the last 300 years. He analyzes aspects such as crowding, organization of space and the effects of domestic technology on personal privacy. He also presents each of the “primary” domestic rooms in turn: bathroom, bedroom, parlour and kitchen. He concludes with a discussion on the apartment as domestic space, both in past and present times. Ward makes several interesting points in this chapter as he traces the development of domestic forms from 1-2 room dwellings to homes consisting of rooms dedicated to specialized functions. He also considers the evolution of heating and lighting sources into their modern forms and their impact on increasing privacy in the home. Family members no longer needed to gather around a central heat and light source and could retire to other rooms in the house. Ward also considers the relation of status to the organization of space in the home. He argues that the parlour, for example, represented the family’s tastes, interests, status, possessions and cultural standing. It usually contained a piano, a “mark of prosperity” of the well off, and a hearth, traditionally the central gathering space for the family. While the presence of pianos in the parlour is decreasing, the presence of the hearth retains a symbolic role in the living area of many homes. The kitchen of today is typically segregated from the rest of the home, with the exception of homes utilizing the open-air plan. Ward, with a nod to gender theory, suggests that as the kitchen was separated from the rest of the family social areas, so was the housewife. Ward also points out that as housing sizes increased, sleeping areas were allocated based on authority, age and sex, the parents possessing their own room and the children separated by sex in the other rooms. By the twentieth century, family size started to decrease as well, creating the opportunity for each member, excepting the parents, to have their own room, and thus more privacy. In chapter three, “The House and Its Setting,” Ward traces the changes in house settings, building regulations and the development of the exterior counterparts of the home, the yard, deck and verandah. In the eighteenth century, farmhouses were built close together and near the road. By the late nineteenth century, houses were set back from the road and at a distance from neighbors. Physical barriers, such as hedges, were constructed, imposing boundaries between houses. The country villa developed at this time as a “retreat from urban life… for pleasure and relaxation in a rustic setting” (105). The early city houses were set close to the road and in close proximity …