The Great Kitchen Debate Criticism - Research Paper Example

The Great Kitchen Debate Criticism There were numerous reforms during the post war period. One of these changes involved reforms in the housing and architecture of houses. There were ideological factors that determined the new architecture designs that became so rampant during the post war period. During that period, there were emerging capitalist and socialist ideologies. These ideologies defined architectural designs during the cold war that started after the conclusion of the Second World War. The great kitchen debate that ensued between U.S vice president Nixon and Russian socialist Nikita Khrushchev provided insights of the factors that determined architecture in the post war region. Political ideologies determined the kind of domestic life that people adopted. This paper will discuss how these ideologies affected the reform in architecture and design. Great Kitchen Debate The great kitchen debate happened in 1959 in a Moscow exhibition. The debate erupted as Nixon guided Khrushchev through the half kitchen in the exhibition1. After the Russian leader caught sight of the newest model of the American kitchen, he reacted in disregard of the capitalist luxury portrayed in the architectural design of the kitchen in the subject (Figure 1). Nixon tried to highlight the fact that the kitchen was a model that featured the essence of giving women easier work in the kitchen. In order to ascertain the logic behind the debate, there is a justification of examining architecture of the kitchen in question2. The Evolution of the Kitchen in America in the Post War Period After the Second World War, every American wanted to own a house. At this time, multiple slums offered inadequate space insufficient space. In a bid to solve this problem, modernism in architecture resulted. There proved to be a dire need of providing people with sufficiency and convenience in their houses. This need led to the innovation of architectural design. Architecture schools sought to impart planning skills to the students. Consequently, architecture attained a new level with houses planned to have multiple rooms. More innovations account for the emergence of separate kitchen and bathroom spaces. Since the 1920s, the kitchen started undergoing a modernization process. The process involved evolution of the kitchen architectural space into an organization that symbolized consumption and hygiene. According to the streamlining ideology, the kitchen adopted a linear sequence that had gained popularity in America’s industrial setting (Figure 2). The sequence was a symbol of the active flow of activity in the kitchen, analogous to the real picture in the industrial setting. The kitchen portrayed the highest reflection of the rampant technological advances during that period3. In addition, it served as a bookmark of the American values and consumer habits. The materials used in the kitchen floors, walls, and appliances were an indication of the latest innovations in the American society. Streamlining of the kitchen involved effective use of the available space. Usually, cabinets assumed a linear arrangement. In addition, architecture in the post war period had aspects of the ease with which Americans had started taking life. Architecture of the Post War Kitchen The post war kitchen had a sink beneath the window and consisted of inbuilt-wall to wall cabinets. The ‘kitchen work triangle ‘concept of designing a kitchen in the new era took its roots. The guidelines for designing an effective kitchen in the 1950s demanded that the door should have a door that presents the kitchen with a clear opening. In addition, the door should allow should not cause a distraction to the functioning of any of the appliances. The design and position of the inbuilt cabinets should leave free space for operations. The free space, commonly designated as the triangle working area, had set dimensions. In essence, the total distance travelled in the work area could not exceed 26” (Figure 3). The work triangle resulted from the arrangements of the cooking surface, the preparation area with sink and the refrigeration storage. In addition, the design of the kitchen included separate working centers while getting rid of any obstruction from tall obstacles. Moreover, the guidelines indicated that the design should present the cook with sufficient space while allowing a walkway through the kitchen. The kitchen architecture also followed other guidelines ensuring that the kitchen area provided enough seating space if the cook decided to adopt a sitting position. For convenience, the architect placed the sink adjacent to the cooking surface and refrigerator. In alternative cases, the sink would take a position across the working surface. Adjacent to sink, a continuous working area presented the cook with preparation space. The dishwasher found its space in the closest distance to the preparation sink (Figure 4). The architecture of the kitchen should take into consideration of the ventilation, safety, and storage spaces. According to Nixon’s argument, the America design of the kitchen represented the views of the society towards women4. He opined that technology presented the American people with the capacity to ease the lives of its people. Khrushchev refuted his argument because of his stringent adherence to socialism. He countered Nixon’s opinion by introducing a new factor about the issue. He highlighted that despite the pace at which new models were spreading fast to all the Americans, some citizens lacked residence. This leads to the inference that the post war streamlined kitchen was a thing of the upper class in the society. The new model represented not only the outcome of technology, but also the social standing of the people5. Vice president Nixon highlighted an additional insight about architecture in the American society that serves to augment one’s understanding of the pace at which it changed6. The society had a craving for new models as time went by, and a design had limited opportunities of persisting in the American society for a limited period. This provides a logical explanation for the changes in the kitchen architecture that took place in the post war period7. The 1956 Smithson prospects into the future concerning the design and materials that would come into use in the 1980s make it evident that ideologies present a powerful force in architecture. The Smithsons predicted plastics would take a central part in architectural designs that would emerge in the 1980s. In addition, they predicted the emergence of curvy shapes. Concerning the kitchen, the Smithson predicted the emergence of sinks that would change the design of the American kitchen (Figure 6). These predictions proved relevant in the years that followed. The Berlin idea of ‘building a better life’ emphasizes the effect of capitalism on architecture. After the Second World War that had detrimental effects in many regions of the globe, many countries ventured into reconstruction in order to undo the detrimental effects of the war8. The essence of ‘building a better life ‘, in terms of architecture indicated the zeal of the people to adopt new architectural designs that symbolized the emerging new society. This attitude finds a lot of relevance and connection to the Nixon’s sentiments concerning the convenience of America’s new kitchen design9. In the 1950s, before the debate, the American merchants, like the majority of other capitalist countries were persuading the American people to try out the new architectures that were offering more convenience. The new wave of modernization inherent in capitalist states was exerting pressure on the people to adopt the attractive architectural designs. Since architects formed part of the proletariat, the persistent ideology did not allow each American to own the exemplified the exemplified kitchen because it largely depended on the financial ability. In order to provide sufficient housing to the people, brutalist architecture took a centre stage. This form of architecture denotes the linear and blockish types of houses that prevailed between the 1950s and 1970s. Criticisms of the linear buildings noted that these were subject to fast degradation, as the materials could not withstand the climatic conditions10. Weather changes led to the decay of these materials, indicating that they these architectural designs had very short life spans. It is worth noting that the emergence of brutalism intended to bring into existence houses that could last for a period of 1000 years, but the degradation of these buildings with time proved the architects wrong. The description of the post war kitchen ascertains what Nixon asserted about the convenience of the American kitchen. However, such convenience brought utility to the upper class society11. The kitchen triangle presents a convenient working and preparation area. On the other hand, Khrushchev argued that socialism influenced architecture in the Soviet Union. Although technological advancements affected the direction taken by architects after the world war, socialism had its effects as well. The Soviet Union strived to ensure that each citizen had access to decent housing. For the socialists, architects designed styles that had the capacity to last longer. The post war wave of architectural urbanization seeking to address the needs of people during the reconstruction period affected both capitalists and socialists. The capitalist states adopted modernization and all its technological features. For the socialists as Khrushchev argued, it was a period of redefining the socialist ideology through provision of housing to all their citizens. The state exercised control over planning and land allocation. On the other hand, technology had positive implications on the American society driving architectural reforms in the post war period. The great kitchen debate has received multiple criticisms from analysts. On one point, socialists supported Khrushchev’s opinion on the capitalist control of consumerism. Capitalism posed challenges for the lower class in society12. With fast evolution, modernity and innovations targeted for the kitchen, modernizing kitchen came with a heavy economical debt. This limited the people who had access to the streamlined kitchen facility. The Soviet Union adopted the avant-garde architecture that led to the emergence of the factory kitchen (Figure 5). The factory kitchen sought to achieve a large-scale production of food for the entire society. The factory kitchen symbolized an industrial production of food. The factory became a defining feature of the emerging society in the post war region. It was mandatory for all residential zones to have a factory kitchen that symbolized the Russian commitment to collectivism13. The kitchen allowed the Russian communities to produce food economically and collectively, a factor that allowed women to attend to other important sector for the social good. The factory kitchen had an explicit architectural design. The factory kitchen architecture still stands out and the Russians have expressed their concerns against any demolition ventures. This kitchen represented the socialist views that were inherent in the Soviet Union. The emergence of factory kitchen inspired the development of the modern kitchen that later spread to the Nazi Germany. It is worth noting that the true origin of the American modern kitchen described above was the socialist community. The Nazi Germany was the pioneer of the socialist kitchen that spread further to the capitalist world. The capitalists only modified the socialist with Europe adopting its own variation while America found pride in the modern techno kitchen, as showcased in the 1959 exhibition in Moscow. The exhibition aimed at refuting the socialist claims of technological dominance. For the majority of the Americans, they found pleasure in what technology had enabled them to achieve. It is evident that the kitchen debate served to reveal a great deal of information concerning the effect of socialism and capitalism on architecture in the post war period. The criticality of the debate centered on what American capitalism offered the people and the cost. The soviet leaders had a conviction that despite their commitment to providing the soviet citizens with housing, they took a leading position in architectural technology. Bibliography Kushner, MS 2002, 'Exhibiting Art at the American National Exhibition in Moscow, 1959: Domestic Politics and Cultural Diplomacy', Journal Of Cold War Studies, 4, 1, pp. 6-26, Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 1 December 2012. Manning, Martin. 2004. Historical dictionary of American propaganda. Westport, Conn. [u.a.]: Greenwood Press. Oldenziel, Ruth, and Karin Zachmann. 2009. Cold War kitchen Americanization, technology, and European users. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press. http://site.ebrary.com/id/10269467. Spechtenhauser, Klaus. 2005. The kitchen life world, usage, perspectives. Basel: Birkha?user. Tolvaisas, T 2010, 'Cold War "Bridge-Building"', Journal Of Cold War Studies, 12, 4, pp. 3-31, Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 1 December 2012. Appendices Figure 1 Illustration of the kitchen reflected in the ‘great kitchen debate’ From http://www.google.co.ke/imgres?imgurl=http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_RMIeFF2Drjg/SlZxPw9s1rI/AAAAAAAABJE/OeSyX2s-5Pk/s400/kitchen%2Bdebate.gif&imgrefurl=http://potpourri-variety.blogspot.com/2009/07/moscow-kitchen-debate-july-24-1959.html&h=267&w=322&sz=134&tbnid=RwqYv860CHkYeM:&tbnh=93&tbnw=112&zoom=1&usg=__O5w025ak1VQT7wTs_umcFFACjLY=&docid=HZB3-ig82wGYVM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=omijUJ6COsG5hAeW-YHoDQ&ved=0CEQQ9QEwCw&dur=512 Figure 2 Typical streamlined kitchen from http://www.google.co.ke/imgres?imgurl=http://www.kitchenbuilding.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/1033267iw.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.kitchenbuilding.com/tag/kitchen-storage/&h=460&w=360&sz=47&tbnid=6ETt_7PSa-zchM:&tbnh=97&tbnw=76&zoom=1&usg=__VFgrhoQc8WkLGdVy5cX5Oc_3ylE=&docid=TRQVkVYNc8J8SM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=EGajUPWCDYOGhQfz_oCwAw&ved=0CDEQ9QEwBg&dur=722 Figure 3 Design of the modernized triangle kitchen From http://starcraftcustombuilders.com/kitchen.design.rules.htm Figure 4 The Kitchen Work Triangle From http://starcraftcustombuilders.com/kitchen.design.rules.htm Figure 5 Architecture of the Russian Factory Kitchen From http://minsk-old-new.com/minsk-3132-en.htm Figure 6 Smithson’s predicted Kitchen From http://starcraftcustombuilders.com/Architectural.Styles.Postwar.htm Read More