You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
aesthetic’. It denoted a high level of functionality and came to be seen by<br />
many as the modern interior aesthetic of the twentieth century. Although<br />
the style was initially only applied to domestic kitchens, bathrooms and<br />
other work-oriented areas, as it increasingly came to represent modernity<br />
itself, and, by extension, the modern lifestyle, it quickly spread to other<br />
areas of the house as well, the living room and dining room among them.<br />
<strong>The</strong> effect was yet another blurring of the distinction between the appearance<br />
of interiors outside and inside the home. That function-driven,<br />
rational, essentially non-domestic – or, as it became in the hands of the<br />
<strong>Modern</strong>ists, ‘anti-domestic’ – approach to home interiors appealed, at<br />
one and the same time, to housewives seeking to put their domestic role<br />
on a professional footing, to a group of early twentieth-century feminists<br />
who sought to develop collective housing as a means of supporting a<br />
way of life that rejected the Victorian ideology of domesticity, and to<br />
politically-motivated <strong>Modern</strong>ist architects and designers who set out<br />
to develop standardized social housing projects that would provide<br />
large numbers of people with access to basic living standards.<br />
By the first decade of the twentieth century the principles of<br />
scientific management that had transformed the factory and the office<br />
were also beginning to have an impact in the home. Particularly in the<br />
us, where acquiring servants was especially difficult, many middle-class<br />
women sought to professionalize their domestic activities by comparing<br />
them to work undertaken in the factory or the office. 3 <strong>The</strong>y also sought<br />
to reorganize their household work and to apply rational principles to<br />
it. Aided by new technological developments both inside and outside<br />
the home – the advent of sewing machines, refrigerators and factory<br />
food processing among them – many housewives, or ‘home-makers’ as<br />
they increasingly called themselves, began to engage with the infatuation<br />
with efficiency that was becoming increasingly widespread in the workplace.<br />
By the end of the nineteenth century women such as Ellen<br />
Swallow Richards – the first woman to enter the Massachusetts Institute<br />
of Technology and the founder, in 1910, of <strong>The</strong> Journal of Home Economics<br />
– had helped turn what was called, alternatively, ‘domestic economy’,<br />
‘domestic science’ or ‘home economics’ into a discipline capable of being<br />
taught.’ 4 <strong>The</strong> title of Richards’s 1882 article, ‘<strong>The</strong> Chemistry of Cooking’,<br />
demonstrated her uncompromisingly scientific approach to her subject.<br />
Back in the middle of the nineteenth century a number of female<br />
advocates of household efficiency had already begun to articulate ideas<br />
about its effects on the workspaces of the home. It was the American, 131