Creation of Visual Identity for Post-War America: Julius Schulman and the Case Study House Programme

Creation of Visual Identity for Post-War America: Julius Shulman and the Case Study House Programme

Angel Hsiao 0791184

Creation of Visual Identity for Post-War America: Julius Shulman and the Case Study House Programme

1

MA Architectural Design Architectural Design Dissertation Angel Hsiao 0791184

2

Contents 4 8 19 37 87 102 105 110

3

Abstract Introduction Chapter 1_ A Better Tomorrow: Post-war Condition Chapter 2_ Images of Tomorrow: Visual Elements in Shulman’s Photography Chapter 3_ Iconic Images of Lifestyle and Beyond: The Impending Future or the Nostalgic Memory?

Conclusion Appendix Endnotes, bibliography, image credits

Abstract During the post-war years, Modernism spread from across the Atlantic Ocean to the United States of America. Following the announcement of the Case Study House programme in 1945 through Arts & Architecture magazine, a vision for modern living was promoted. However, there was a need for a developed method visual documentation in order to promote and ‘sell’ modern architecture to the general public. This dissertation explores the work of photographer Julius Shulman, who was commissioned

by Arts & Architecture during the span of programme from 1945 up to 1967 and consequently documented the progress of the programme, and his use of stylised architectural photography in relation to the publicity and mediatisation of Case Study Houses, creating a ‘visual identity’ for selling a modern California lifestyle.

4

5

“He [the photographer] must realise good design is seldom accepted. It has to be sold.

So he’s a propagandist, too. He must create subjective pictures, not snapshots. He must ‘produce’ moods through lighting. He must sell his subject.”1 -Julius Shulman, the photographer’s -Julius Shulman, explainingexplaining the photographer’s responsibility to responsibility to ‘sell’ ‘sell’

1 Joseph Rosa, A Constructed View: The Architectural Photography of Julius Shulman, (New York: Rizzoli Publications, 1994), 88.

6

7

Introduction Before Modernism movement landed in America, the modernist style was only accepted by professionals and corporate bodies.

Modernism in America, especially in the field of residential architecture, would be considered as an alien product imported from Europe. Therefore, the practice of ‘New Photography’ was introduced under two circumstances: the impact of war-born technology and the promotion of modern architecture through images. This visual practice of the ‘New Architecture’ inspired by photographs of cars and planes, which acted as visual prototypes, became the mechanism for conveying the machine aesthetics of early modernism; in Robert Elwall’s words, the machine products ‘revitalised architectural photography.’2 It was considered important to develop a new way to express and to proclaim the emphasis of machine-like qualities of modern architecture. For example, in a photograph of F. L. Marcus’s residential project taken by S. Frank in 1931 (Figure 1), the bird’s eye view presents an entirely different and dynamic way of viewing architecture, within which everyday events happen.

This almost photojournalistic approach was an honest and appropriate way to represent the naturalistic event of diners.3 Nevertheless, it is unusual to see the inclusion of occupants in photographs of early Modernist architecture but it later became a very important visual element in Julius Shulman’s photographs as a ‘sign’ to persuade.

On the other hand, American architects’ effort to design ‘houses 2 Robert Elwall, Building with Light: The International History of Architectural Photography, (London: Merrell, 2004), 120 and 122 3 Ibid, 140.

8

Figure 1. House overlooking the Schwielowsee, near Potsdam, 1931

9

10

Figures 2 and 3. Kun House, Los Angeles

11

as machines’ in the 1930s was somehow not conveyed through photographs as photographers used to only capture the houses as a close visual association with European modern buildings rather than showing a machine-like house sitting in American landscape; it was until Neutra saw Shulman’s photograph of his Kun House (Figure 2 and 3), taken in 1936, had succeeded in capturing the machine-like essence of his architecture in landscape.4 This not only initiated Shulman’s career as architectural photographer but also his extensive documentation for Neutra’s later projects, introducing him into a wider circle of Los Angeles architecture and design scene and, later on, commissions by Arts & Architecture.

In addition to the purpose of visual documentation, photography was used as a means of promoting utopian vision widely during the spread of Modernism in early twentieth century due to increasing demand from advertising and illustrated print publication. As Elwall suggests, modern architecture could never have been ‘put across’ without the aid of photographic representation.5 As a result, the persuasive power of images was especially recognised in the field of commercial advertising as Shulman stated ‘good design is seldom accepted, it has to be sold’.6 In order to ‘sell’ modern designs, it was necessary to establish modern architecture as warm, liveable, glamorous and desirable space, like images of post-war consumer product advertisement (Figure 4). Photography, as a way to produce ‘real’ images, therefore fulfilled the requirement. This is particularly 4 Rosa, 47.

5 Ibid, 122.

6 Ibid, 88.

12

Figure 4. Libbey Owens Ford Glass product advertisement, Arts & Architecture January 1945

Figure 5. May House published in House Beautiful, April 1946

13

evident in the popularity of consumer magazines of which the majority of subscribers were female readers, whose taste was prone to prefer ‘warm, liveable homes’. (Figure 5) In addition, the use of images also indicated emerging trends in both print and television advertising in the post-war years; especially when televisions became a common household appliance in the 1950s, commercial advertising became considerably powerful.

However, architectural photography in America by the end of 1930s became a distinguished mediating tool between the general public and professionals.7 Photographs of modernist homes were extensively featured in publicity in 1940s and 1950s and many of the photographs were produced by Los Angeles-based architectural photographer Julius Shulman, who was, in addition to commissions from popular consumer magazines such as House & Garden, working extensively with the forward-thinking California-based magazine Arts & Architecture and its own architectural programme, the Case Study House programme, that hoped to find a solution to housing shortage and living quality improvement in the upcoming post-war years.

Initiated by John Entenza, the publisher and editor of the magazine, the project was envisioned by Entenza as the future of American housing and a way to improve quality of life by ‘good quality modern design’. During the life span of the programme, the magazine produced extensive updates for each project with photographs and drawings (Figure 6.). These images, along with design drawings, became architectural evidence of the houses

7 Ibid, 129.

14

Figure 6. Case Study House 8 plan update, Arts & Architecture May 1949

15

that were intended to show the general public visually how a modernist home can be liveable. Thus they were intended to be a persuasive medium to ‘sell’ architecture to the general public, creating constructed/staged photographs embedded with idealised visions for a ‘better’ living – later known as ‘California living’ – in a brighter post-war future. As a result of extensive publishing, these images were known by the public within the States and also internationally and became a visual identity of South California architecture.

In the following chapters, the relationship between the architectural photography of Julius Shulman and the Case Study Houses, or the widely perceived images created by Shulman for Case Study Houses instead, will be explored and discussed in terms of the social and cultural conditions of Los Angeles. In Chapter 1, the context will be illustrated by discussing the key figures of the Case Study House programme, John Entenza and the principal photographer Julius Shulman, to demonstrate Shulman’s connection to the architectural context in Los Angeles and South California which allowed him to further extend his architectural network. This will lead to an outline of the Case Study House programme and analysis of the Announcement from the January issue of magazine in 1945 (Appendix 1).

Out of twenty-six built Case Study Houses, Shulman acted as principle photographer for eighteen of them and three of the houses – Eames House (‘Warmth of Machine-Aesthetics’), Bass House (‘Californian-Style Living’) and Stahl House (‘A View to the Glamorous Los Angeles’) – have been selected to form the basis of discussion in Chapter 2 on the stylistic characteristics and methods employed by Shulman. Under the condition of

16

selling modern residential architecture in the 1940s and 1950s, it was essential to re-introduce modern houses as ‘glamorous, desirable objects of publicity’. In addition, the three houses will also be supported by exploring technical conditions, social conditions and physical conditions of Los Angeles respectively, or South California from a wider perspective. Chapter 3 focuses on the critical assessment of the concept of architecture as a product and the metaphoric projections of ‘better living’ onto Shulman’s photographs, creating and selling an ‘American image’ of Californian lifestyle for wider public, nationally and internationally. In addition, this dissertation has been deliberately formatted to respond to Shulman’s photographic practice in 4”x5” prints taken by large format cameras.

17

18

Chapter 1_ A Better Tomorrow: Post-war Condition

19

“When Case Study House programme was announced, it seemed the direction toward many things for which we were searching: a new way of life, better living…” 8 -Craig Ellwood In January 1945, a significant architectural movement in the international history of architecture was announced (Appendix 1). The Case Study House programme, dubbed as ‘the style that nearly’ became a style by James Steele, was initiated by an individual force John Entenza – the publisher and editor of Los Angeles-based Arts & Architecture magazine through an announcement in the January issue of the magazine in 1945. 9 While the War still left many countries in hard times, Entenza was already looking ahead to the post-war era, where the ‘brighter, better future’ was awaiting. Before the announcement in 1945, architectural professionals, including Entenza, had shown enthusiastic interests in affordable post-war architecture and city planning in several editorial articles and speculative proposals.10 They denounced housing shortage and the state of major American cities, especially Los Angeles, that had suffered from the Great Depressions in 1930s and the halt of city construction during war time.11

8 Esther McCoy, Modern California Houses 1945 – 1962, (New York: Reinhold Publishing, 1962), 10.

9 James Steele, Los Angeles Architecture: The Contemporary Condition, (London: Phaidon, 1993), 55.

10 Kevin Starr, “Case Study House Programme and the Impending Future” in Elizabeth A. T. Smith ed., Blueprints for Modern Living: History and Legacy of the Case Study Houses, (Los Angeles: Museum of Contemporary Art, 1989), 131.

11 Paul Gleye, The Architecture of Los Angeles, (Los Angeles: Rosebud Books, 1981), 145.

20

21

Architectural context Although the architectural professionals declared a shortage in housing and city planning, the architectural context in Los Angeles had its position before America joined in the war. There are pre-war works that contained hints of the rise of Modernism from Frank Lloyd Wright, Rudolph Schindler and Richard Neutra. Schindler was the first architect who, after working at Wright’s office, translated the language of International style into the local context of Los Angeles through the use of open rear garden screened off from main living area by glass sliding doors, complimenting the warm climate of California and also encouraging a culture of outdoor living. Another clear example is Neutra’s house design for Dr. Lovell in Los Angeles (Figure 7).

It was built in 1929 and they hosted tours around the house for the public. The house, with programmes fully customised by Dr. Lovell to incorporate the ‘healthy communion with nature’, and Dr. Lovell’s image – sunbathing, leisure culture, healthy diet – can be read as an early personification of the ideal Californian lifestyle.12 Neutra was among those who were interested in adoption of new technology and later became one of the participating architects chosen by Entenza personally for the Case Study House Programme. 13 Apart from being an architect with keen interests in new technology, Neutra was also keen in publicising his work.

After seeing Shulman’s photographs of his Kun House, other photographs and transparencies of Neutra’s buildings were purposely circulated between magazines and manufacturers by himself.14 As a result, Shulman started to receive commissions from editors of consumer and trade magazines, which included 12 Thomas Hines, “Case Study Trouvé: Source and Precedents” in Smith ed., 1990, 86.

13 Gleye, 143.

14 Rosa, 52.

22

Figure 7. Lovell House, Los Angeles

23

the Editor of Arts & Architecture, John Entenza.

John Entenza – the visionary promoter In the early 1940s, John Entenza and other architectural professionals such as Raphael Soriano already started exploring the idea of ‘a home in which the average American can afford to live’ (Figure 8) prior to the end of war.15 Entenza saw himself as a promoter of knowledge in modern architecture when he bought the magazine in 1938.

Both Entenza and Shulman shared a passion for ‘good’ modern designs. The magazine not only covered local and international architectural projects but also addressed important events and developments in art and music. Ever since the Announcement of the Case Study House Programme in 1945 up to the end of the programme when the magazine was sold in 1967, Arts & Architecture was the primary and the ultimate source of project updates. In addition to extensive coverage in text, photographs along with drawings were heavily employed, per Entenza’a direction, as they were considered to be architectural evidence that proved the building’s presence of on-going progress,16 showing the public that modern architecture was more than an avant-garde movement that spread from Europe but was the key to provide a ‘good life’ as a standard of the desirable modern life.17 As the owner of the magazine, John Entenza was a man with multiple roles that were all interconnected to each other – he was the owner, editor and publisher of Arts & Architecture, the Case Study House programme leader and the project 15 “Announcement: The Case Study House Programme,” Arts & Architecture, Jan. 1945, 38 in Travers, 2008.

16 Robert Elwall, Building with Light: The International History of Architectural Photography, (London: Merrell, 2004), 129.

17 Gleye, 146.

24

Figure 8 . Competition for Postwar Living, Arts & Architecture August 1943

25

manager, a client of Case Study House #9 (Figure 9) (designed

by Charles Eames and Eero Saarinen) and a visionary promoter of modernism in Southern California. In response to the housing shortage resulted from end of World War II and the cease of military industry, the purpose of the programme as noted in the Announcement was to: “…create ‘good’ living conditions for eight American families. They will be free to choose or reject, on a merit basis, the products of national manufacturers offering either old or new materials considered best for the purpose by each architect in his attempt to create contemporary dwelling units… each to fulfil a specific living problem in the Southern California area… … We will begin on the problem as posed to the architect, with the analysis of land in relation to work, schools, neighbourhood conditions and individual family need. Each house will be designed within a specified budget… each house will make its appearance [in the magazine] with the comments of the architect – his reasons for his solution and his choice of specific materials [and products] to be used… … Every consideration will be given to new materials and new techniques… these materials will be selected on a purely merit basis by the architects themselves. We have been promised fullest cooperation by manufacturers of products

26

Figure 9. Case Study House 9

27

and appliances… research on the products they intend to offer the public… Each house will be completely furnished… … The house must be capable of duplication and in no sense be an individual ‘performance’… the means and methods must be of necessity remain fluid in order that the general plan can be accommodated to changing conditions and concepts… … The house… will be conceived within the spirit of our time, using as far as is practicable, many war-born techniques and materials best suited to the expression of man’s life in the modern world…

We hope it will be understood and accepted as an attempt… to assist in going some direction to the creative thinking on housing being done by good architects and good manufacturers whose joint objective is good housing.”18 Case Study House The designated sites of the Case Study House programme were initially all within the area of greater Los Angeles, though many of the houses were built in a more general area of Southern California (Figure 10). Among the total of thirtysix design proposals, twenty-six of them were realised and built.

The remaining ones were not built at the time due to lack of site or client, but were still fully illustrated and presented in the 18 “Announcement: The Case Study House Programme,” Arts & Architecture, Jan. 1945, 37 – 9 in Travers, 2008. With own emphasis.

28

Figure 10. Map of Greater Los Angeles with location of the Case Study Houses

Figure 11. Cover of Small Homes Guide, 12th ed., Spring 1944.

29

magazine publication. In the Announcement, the emphasis of using new materials and techniques appeared thoroughly and Entenza’s advocacy in ‘discarding old materials and techniques if their only value is that they have been generally regarded as ‘safe’, implying the conservative attitude that was still apparent in the county of Los Angeles.19 Moreover, each house was supposed to reflect a special living problem of an ‘average’ American post-war single family (Figure 11) – although in most cases ‘average’ American single family turned out to be white ‘middle-class’ family (a family of four with two children, stay-at-home mother and income-earner father) who could actually afford – and should therefore provide a solution to housing shortage that is replicable both in industrial manufacturing and in terms of plan configuration. He used the word ‘good’ in the announcement as an adjective, suggesting the importance of quality as incredible value of ‘good’ life and the source of coveted happiness.20 It is clear to observe Entenza’s visionary architectural response to the post-war condition in the highlighted subjective words and sentences and the essence, or ‘objectives’ in his words, of a good housing would be good architects and good products. Furthermore, the importance of ‘good products’ is apparent throughout the article, products and appliances were even determined right before the house’s detail design and this ‘Case Study House Specification’ is usually found right after the design drawing pages in the magazine 19 “Announcement: The Case Study House Programme,” Arts & Architecture, Jan. 1945, 38 in David Travers, Arts & Architecture 1945 – 54: The Complete Reprint, (Cologne: Tashcen, 2008).

20 Ethel Buisson and Thomas Billard, The Presence of Case Study Houses, (Basel: Birkhäuser, 2004), 233.

30

Figure 12. General specification for Case Study House # 2, Arts & Architecture April 1945

31

(Figure 12). It suddenly poses a slight confusion that, along with numerous product advertisement using photographs of house scale model or finished interior taken by Shulman throughout the magazine, whether it was a showcase of house design or a showcase of products and appliances. In addition, many of the published drawings of unrealised projects are finished with additional information about how the ‘good, modern lifestyle’ can be envisioned by adding ‘modern’ motifs such as automobile, Jeeps or even helicopters (Figure 13 and 14). Human figures were also included in drawings to show the readers how a rich scene from everyday life can be seen. In any case, these motifs and Shulman’s photographs became an important visual mechanism for Shulman and Entenza to show the public how the vision of modern houses can be enriched by adding ‘good products‘.21Selling architecture through the use of images, the houses became objects of desire, commodified like consumer product advertisements.

As the magazine was mainly self-promoted, the houses relied largely on sponsorship of materials from manufacturers and the magazine indeed offered publicity and exposure of products in exchange. In this sense, the houses did not only appear to be instruments of Entenza’s idealised vision of living but also became principal support for product advertising (Figure 15) in the magazine, as the finished houses will provide the public and potential customers a clear demonstration on how the products would fit into the criteria.22 Moreover, the houses presented as furnished products became an elaboration of the dream for 21 Ibid., 225 and McCoy, 11.

22 Buisson and Billard, 225.

32

Figure 13 Proposal for Case Study House #4 by Ralph Rapson

Figure 14. Proposal for Case Study House #4 by Ralph Rapson

33

‘good living’ and the images, whether presented as photographs or drawings, became a tool of publicity and persuasion more than an honest visual documentation (Figure 16).23 The concept of ‘selling’ and publicity will be demonstrated in the following chapter, where selected images of three Case Study Houses will be closely examined, through Shulman’s employment of stylised visual elements.

23 Robert Elwall, “The Specialist Eye” in Martin Caiger-Smith ed., Site Work: Architecture Photography since Early Modernism, (London: Photographer’s Gallery, 1991), 66.

34

Figure 15. Convector product specified in Case Study House #1 advertisement, Arts & Architecture November 1945

Figure 16. Plywood product specified in Case Study House #11 advertisement, Arts & Architecture July 1946

35

36

Chapter 2_ Images of Tomorrow: Visual Elements in Shulman’s Photography

37

“Film [is] stronger and good glossy prints are easier [to] ship than brutal concrete, stainless steel, or even ideas.”24 -Richard Neutra reflecting on Shulman’s photography The importance and the persuasive influence of photographs were not only understood by Shulman but also by architects such as Neutra. Apart from the purpose of visual documentation, photography was utilised as a more direct method to present ideas to the general public. Although, acknowledged by Shulman himself, making a ‘rare start’ with photographing the architecture of Neutra, he had not been only involved in the field of architectural photography, but also experienced in advertising portraits and product photography for manufacturers and trades (Figure 17). We are able to observe the influences from the commercial field when looking at Shulman’s photographs for Case Study House programme. However, photographs of the same house may still convey different narratives or intentions, depending on various aspects such as angles of view, choice of film or the publication. Knowing that most of these photographs were taken in the time when commercial advertising, in print or television, was flourishing to convey utopian view of future, it becomes essential to understand the purpose of images is established on the intention to make the public accept modern architecture. Therefore, the purpose of this chapter is to examine the selected iconic images of three Case Study Houses, supported by relevant contextual conditions, in terms of visual elements and representational techniques; reading how Shulman’s philosophy from his photographs would reflect 24 Rosa. 49.

38

Figure 17. Frankel Gallery with furniture designed by Paul T. Frankel, 1942

39

the architects’ view and therefore the ultimate purpose of the creation of images – to promote good modern designs through ‘selling’.

40

41

42

43

Warmth of Steel-Frame House _ Case Study House #8 – Eames House (Figure 18) Technology During the Depressions, architects became interested in experimenting with new technologies that would provide inexpensive yet graceful materials such as the concept of using prefabricated factory-standardised steel elements. In addition, architects were able to experiment with new products and new methods/technologies that resulted from advancing industry for war effort, such as new plastics in mass production, fineness of steel and lamination of wood, but mostly in the form of paper designs ready for testing once the industry and the public was ready.25 For example, laminated plywood was first developed in aid of strong lightweight material needed in aviation industry (Figure 19); Charles Eames and Entenza were commissioned to produce plywood products for military and aviation industries (Figure 20) and this later led Eames to the use of plywood in his own furniture designs (Figure 21) and maturation of plywood production resulted in the production of structural and curved elements, such as the plywood barrel vaults in Case Study House #20.

The Eames house is built in a natural setting in Pacific Palisades, sharing the same open woodland with Case Study House #9 (Entenza House). Originally, the two houses were supposed to be a joint venture between Charles Eames and Eero Saarinen but it was substantially altered and re-modelled by Charles and his wife Ray. In the introductory page of the two projects in the December 1945 issue of Arts & Architecture magazine (Figure 25 McCoy, 8.

Previous page: Figure 18. Case Study House #8 exterior

44

Figure 19. Plywood product advertisement in Arts & Architecture August 1943

Figure 20. Plywood leg splints designed by Charles Eames

Figure 21. LCW (Lounge Chair Wood) by Charles Eames

45

46

Figure 22. Case Study Houses 8 and 9 project pages, Arts & Architecture December 1945

47

22), the houses are for “people with different occupations but parallel interests… mutual professional commitment in good design” while Case Study House #8, with “client of a married couple both occupied in mechanical experiment and graphic representation,” was designed for “work and recreation intermingled personally and professionally”.26 For the Eames couple, there was no intention to create a ‘new’ style of architecture but a true experiment with vision of functional and playful system in strict application of standard steel elements and industrial techniques.27 However, with the help of published photographs, the well-known designs of Eames furniture and the playfulness of colour, texture and material helped Eames House gain international recognition.

Scene 1_ View of living room with Charles and Ray Eames (Figure 23) “Colour photography… a pure recording of information… colours can be too naturalistic… and therefore a distraction”28 -Eric de Mare Whether using colour in photographs of architecture is a distraction, as architectural photographer de Mare declares, or colour can be used as, in Shulman’s words, ‘an added veneer’, it is acknowledged that black and white photographs constitute the main body of Shulman’s photographic portfolio and they are 26 “Case Study Houses 8 and 9”, Arts & Architecture December 1945, 44 in Travers, 2008.

27 Amelia Jones and Elizabeth A. T. Smith, “The Thirty-Six Case Study Projects” in Smith ed., 1989, 51.

28 Eric de Mare, Architectural Photography, (London: B. T. Batsford, 1975), 9.

48

Figure 23. View of living room with Charles and Ray Eames

49

more recognised than his colour photographs. As mentioned in Chapter 1, Shulman maintained a parallel association with consumer magazines while working under Entenza’s instruction, the colour photographs would be published by popular consumer magazines such as Home & Garden rather than Arts & Architecture as they need the images to have immediate effect of persuasion into consumerism.

In this image, or rather a ‘scene’, the Eames couple have been placed in the centre of the stage and surrounded by artworks, collectables and Eames furniture pieces, forming a focal point of the image and telling the reader the message: life in a modern steel-frame house can be as warm, colourful and interesting as shown here, with the aid of good design. The use of colour photography in this image enhances the idea of richness in life as colours of each object and colour of plastic panels on walls, all very distinctive to each other, are captured and presented. One of the characteristics of Shulman’s practice in photography is the presence of human figures, or implied presence through objects and furnitures when no human figures, or ‘visual witnesses’ as Rosa would call, are introduced.29 In this case, both features are employed and, especially the recognition of Eames’s furniture design, the objects start to take the role in shaping reader’s imagination of an ideal lifestyle. The deliberately placed furniture pieces and display objects, together with the house itself, turn into objects of desire – a desire for ‘good’ live and ‘good’ design. It can almost be read as a showcase of Eames couple’s collection.

In addition, it is very normal to see furniture pieces designed by

29 Rosa, 88.

50

other architects, such as Eero Saarinen and Charles Eames, or by renowned manufacturers such as Herman Miller and Knoll Associates who work closely with architects, heavily featured in photographs. The designer furniture pieces were considered ‘good’ because they were designed by ‘good architects’ and because they were selected by architects on a ‘merit basis’ which almost means ‘quality of life guaranteed’. It was certainly a way for product promotion in the magazine, or even product advertising within the frame of photograph.

The ‘visual witnesses’ here, Charles and Ray Eames, are also the residents, the designer and the clients of the house. This demonstrates another characteristics of Shulman’s photographs is that he often introduced the actual occupants of the house to ‘witness’ the happening of living for general public. While the Eames couple appear to be sitting on low stools, suggesting a sense of casual style, the photograph reveals the dramatic spaciousness of double height living room with glimpses of spiral stair case to suggest functioning spaces above. Interestingly, the dramatic double height living space presented in the photograph also reminds the reader of an exhibition space, with the changing collection of decorative objects and art works. The structural configuration is also slightly hinted as exposed steel frame and trusses can been seen but they are complimented with plants and artworks, showing the possibility of personal expression against the ‘cold, hard space of steel’. The Eames House was entirely constructed with factory-standardised steel element and, after seeing paper designs that utilise war-born techniques and materials in pre-war years, the photographic representation of the house was perhaps treated as photographic evidence of the

51

attempt and outcome. Moreover, since the house is set in natural surroundings, patches of green scenery can be observed from full height glass walls. Towards the right half of image, the living outdoor court can be seen and the studio space beyond. This visual connection reveals the idea of co-existence of professional work and personal life in the same house.

Scene 2_ View from living room towards living court (Figure 24) “Light and shadow brings architecture to life.” 30 -Julius Shulman This image would indeed aid Entenza’s statement in Announcement as it shows the ‘best use of materials’ in order to create the double height living space which was still unusual at that time. If compared to scene 1, the black and white outcome of the photograph suggests that it may have possibly been taken on a different day, as the shadows are much more visible and have stronger contrast, suggesting it might have been a sunny day. As a monochrome image, there is therefore more emphasis placed on the tonal value and contrast between light and dark areas in order to convey a sense of depth. Our eyes follow the composed perspective constructed by glazed façade on the right, with alternating solid panels and glazed panel, leading us to the seemingly transparent glazed wall that separates the living court from the house. Often, shadows are used by Shulman extensively as a way to reflect or mirror design characteristics in order to create a ‘mood.’31 The ever-changing shadows of the industrial 30 Ibid, 70.

31 Ibid, 69.

52

Figure 24. View from living room towards living court

53

window frame and the trees are imposed onto the interior floor and furniture which suggests the fluid flow between interior and exterior and the house’s integration with the open nature beyond.

In addition, the playful use of colour in the house’s interior has been effectively abstracted into blocks of grey in order to respond to the structural feature and the machine-like quality that was possessed by modernist architects. The machine-like aesthetics has been captured and incorporated with the colliding reflected image/shadow on glass and floor, showing the aesthetic potentials of steel elements.

Despite the open plan of the house, there is still a slight sense of intimacy as the reading and sitting area, carefully tucked underneath the balcony, is also included in the photograph though only as a hint. If it is compared to the previous image, it is clear to see that the angle of view is higher to produce a perspective image that accentuates the freedom in planning and spaciousness as benefits from using steel frame. Furthermore, the furniture arrangement has appeared to be different to Image 1 as well, implying the fact that this space has been prepared – or ‘dressed’ as Shulman would refer to – according to each photograph.32 Scene 3_ Charles Eames in the studio (Figure 25) In this photograph, Charles Eames is posed sitting on some carefully arranged carton boxes, with one knee higher than the other and with his head up, confidently. He is not only a man with successful professional career but also a man who is looking 32 Ibid,8.

54

55

Figure 25. Charles Eames in the studio

ahead our time, looking towards the brighter future that is yet to come. To refer back to the optimistic declaration made by Entenza, there is a propagandistic intention or advertising effect in this photograph, even to the slightest extent, and this is an image that expresses the creation of ‘good living conditions’ as the answer to post-war social conditions.

Although according to the title, the photograph is shot in the detached studio unit separated from the living quarter by the outdoor court, the scene does not literally suggest a designer’s studio (some fabric sample in the background and some simple sketches on the back wall can be seen) but it is shown as a space for flexible work use with implied work style of the Eames couple.

The presence of a human figure here also acts as an architectural scale to the space, in conjunction to the slightly lowered angle of view or almost the same viewing level as Mr. Eames would have perceived, in order to emphasize the heightened space. Once again, the space is displayed with a vast collection of various objects and furniture pieces, presenting a somehow idealised visual representation of professional occupancy in a modern post-war house.

56

57

58

59

Figure 26. Case Study House #20 exterior

Californian-Style Living _ Case Study House #20 – Bass House (Figure 26) Social context Despite the city construction halt during war years, there had been a gradual interest in home improvements for home owners across the country. While most of the male constituent of the national population had been called forward for war, women gained increased level of responsibility in looking after their families and houses. Consequently, there was more time spent on home improvements and consumer magazines, whose subscribers were mostly women, emerged. These magazines relied heavily on photographic representation of architecture to show readers visually how the modern lifestyles, in an idealised state, can integrate into their current or future lives and therefore to ‘accept’ modern architecture. These photographs of lifestyle are usually printed in colour, denoting the popularity of colour photography in commercial press and publicity (Figure 27). These photographs, surprisingly, also formed a large part of Shulman’s professional body of work as he received numerous commissions from popular magazines such as House & Garden and Ladies’ Home Journal. As a result, Shulman was able to fully experiment with the idea of ‘dressed scenes’ (Figure 28) which is particularly evident in the images of Case Study House #20.

Case Study House #20 is designed by Conrad Buff, Calvin Straub and Donald Hensman for Saul Bass, an industrial designer specialised in tile design and a visual graphic consultant, and his wife Dr. Ruth Bass, a bio-chemist, and their three children. The clients also acted as design collaborators as Mr. Bass designed

60

Figure 27. Surface product advertisement in Arts & Architecture May 1950

61

Figure 28. Shulman and his ‘portable garden‘

the entrance screen wall which is made of bas-relief tiles of his own design. The house is surrounded by cedars and a giant pine tree appears to be growing out from the house when viewed from garden. The house is one of the few Cast Study House designs that made a full experiment with timber – it is essentially a timber frame building with plywood structural members and the roof consists of curved plywood barrel vaults. The overall design compliments its regional setting in Pasadena, reflecting the Craftsmen style rather the steel post-and-beam structure employed by other Cast Study Houses.33 From the following selected image, the idea of ‘selling’ an envisioned dream of lifestyle will become clear due to the methods and style adopted

by Shulman.

Scene 1_ View of outdoor terrace into the house (Figure 29 and 30) “Camera is employed as a mirror to reflect image or one’s conception.” 34 - Beatriz Colomina, Privacy and Publicity This photograph certainly bears some advertising qualities since it clearly shows the reader how to ‘see’ modern architecture. The photographer’s intention, which also informs Entenza’s vision for modern architecture, is made clear as soon as this image is observed – demonstration of modern living and activities benefiting from the new design of modern house and the in 33 Smith, 2007, 61.

34 Beatriz Colomina, Privacy and Publicity: Modern Architecture as Mass Media, (Massachusetts: MIT Press, 1994), 77.

62

Figure 29. View of outdoor terrace into the house

63

California. In addition, as noted in the Announcement that the Case Study House was proposed as solutions for ‘average American families’, it is now clear that Shulman’s incorporation of human figures, often the real occupants of house, fulfilled the reader’s imagination of what an average American family would be like, and also proved that the so-called ‘average’ actually would mean ‘middle-class’ instead. This would, perhaps, also be the image that ‘sells’ Californian architecture and its characteristics – outdoor living, warm climate – to the East Coast of United States of America, or even the world; after all, photography was employed as a way to consolidate the statements and attitudes toward modern architecture design.35 The pine tree possesses a prominent position in terms of composition, it nearly occupies up to half of the image composition. One of the design statements was the preservation of and integration with nature in harmony, the horizontal roof plane of the house seems to hover between tall trees and the pine tree protrudes out the roof overhang along with another vertical element that seems to break the horizontal roof line of the house – the fireplace chimney.

In order to reinforce the design characteristics, the composition has been rigorously constructed. A strong sense of geometric arrangement can be observed. The horizontal elements of steel define the vertical boundary of the house which is broken by vertical elements of tree trunk and chimney, showing the interactive relationship between house and environment. Near the centre of the photograph stands a steel column that nearly divides the image into two halves. The male figure, Mr. Bass, sits

35 Buisson and Billard, 233.

64

Figure 30. View of outdoor terrace into the house

65

in a rather relaxed position on lower square lounge chairs in the left half of the image, in front of the solid structural panels of the house. The female figure Mrs. Bass is placed in front of the curved form of fireplace, sitting in a curvilinear chair designed

by Eero Saarinen, wearing swimsuit with drink in one hand.

The figures are positioned in this manner in order to show the characteristic of the design: how the strong, harsh appearance of steel can integrate with gently curved form of the brick fireplace.

The female figure, however, appear to be glamorously dressed for an everyday domestic scene, implying the fact that this scene was, with no exception, one of Shulman’s dressed scene in order to gain appeal from viewers.

The visual continuity from outdoor pool through the house to the back of tiled entrance screen wall is achieved through the use of glass sliding doors and open plan. Viewers would be able to understand this essence of design while obtaining a sense of possible activities happening in glimpse of various spaces.

The emergence of outdoor living/leisure culture would have not been made possible without the climatic characteristic of South California as illustrated by this photograph, giving almost all ‘elements of life’ a seductive and enviable aspect. The seemingly dream-like lifestyle is instantly injected into the image by the introduction of occupants, hence making everything ‘more believable’.

Scene 2_ View of living space, looking towards outdoor terrace (Figure 31) Being the only white object, the curved functioning fireplace would possibly be one of the first elements that may be observed.

66

Figure 31. View of living space, looking towards outdoor terrace

67

Interestingly, thirty-four out of thirty-six projects, including built ones and paper designs, are equipped with fireplaces despite the fact that South California is known for warm climate.

Certainly, the presence of fireplace in these Case Study Houses bears less of a functional role but more like a piece of fashion accessory and a ‘household essential’, as seen on one of the covers of House & Garden (Figure 32); the fireplace has been transformed into an attractive product that would appeal to the (female) readers of consumer magazines in terms of generating the sense of heart of family life; it is an element of a ‘good’ life.

Furthermore, the photograph shows glimpse of blue sky and strong shadows are cast on the ground and the female figure appear to be wearing a summer dress, all above would suggest good weather, yet the dark interior of fireplace is lit up by flames.

The functioning fireplace becomes the main visual element to conveying the sense of welcoming and warmth, to establish the ‘goodness’ of modern architecture.

The welcoming gesture is not only implied by the functioning fireplace but also the placement of human figure in the photograph. The viewer is forced to participate in this scene as a visitor to the house who is expected to join in the activity.

In addition, due to the low viewing angle, the reader is invited to examine the juxtaposition of barrel vault ceiling and steel elements with a perspective of a visitor. On the other hand, standing beyond the glass door in the terrace, Mrs. Bass is looking towards the viewer’s side, almost looking out of the image, and is offering hospitality by holding a tray with drink glasses on top. The presence of Mrs. Bass and, especially, the way she is represented highlights the use of domesticity in publicity images

68

Figure 32. Cover of House & Garden February 1960, featuring Bass House

69

in the post-war years.

Scene 3_ View of living room from terrace (Figure 33) The boundaries between interior and exterior have dissolved visually due to extensive use of glazing elements. The glass panels all seem to be clear and the only hint of exterior space is the presence of vegetation and plants. Also the use of wide roof overhang has reinforced the idea of dissolving boundaries, illustrating a fluid continuation of interior living space and activity becomes important. The steel column that holds the glass sliding doors roughly defines the interior with two thirds of the proportion of composition and exterior with one third of composition. The column also acts as a mirroring axis for interior and exterior furniture pieces that have been deliberately placed as a mirror image to reinforce the continuity of space, and leisure activities beyond the picture frame is implied.

The curved fireplace, as an architectural feature here, echoes with the plywood barrel vaults and presents itself as a horizontal penetrating element between inside and outside, similar to the position of the pine tree. Together with the oval-shaped swimming pool, the curved elements proved themselves as distinctive yet rich elements in design. Interestingly, the vaults have been given prominent positions in the photograph in order to emphasize the curved volumes underneath and the visual characteristics of the living space, but also to celebrate and advertise the maturation of plywood manufacturing techniques during war years and its capability as sculptural elements that can create distinct visual aspects in architecture.

70

Figure 33. View of living room from terrace

71

A View to the Glamorous Los Angeles _ Case Study House #22 – Stahl House (Figure 34) Los Angeles – the metropolis In addition to nation-wide war influence on family structure and women’s roles, technology and industry development had considerable influences as well. In Los Angeles, the maturation of the aviation industry resulted from war provided influences on city planning and on architectural design and material use. The city of Los Angeles itself has been described as “a product of mechanised transport, allowing constant expansion beyond human-foot settlement”; the city was crisscrossed by numerous systems of parkways that link up residential area, city downtown and commercial areas.36 The city was home for more than one million residents in 1930s, proving it to be capable of being a large city, or even a metropolis. Argued by Kevin Starr in his essay Case Study House Programme and the Impending Future, Los Angeles is also a “product of self-invention”, a city without any inevitability; the rise of aviation industry as a war effort, however, made Los Angeles the aviation capital of United States and subsequently created a prototypical and efficient symbol of design model, an idea which was later incorporated by Entenza into the Case Study Programme in terms of material (prefabricated steel elements), production and assembly methods.37 Apart from the aviation industry, entertainment industry in Hollywood indeed provided employment opportunities for the city population. However, the glamorous image of Hollywood does not only appear in films but also apparent in Shulman’s photographic work. The glamorised 36 Gleye, 8.

37 Kevin Starr in Smith ed., 1989, 133-134.

72

Figure 34. Case Study House #22 exterior

73

images of Stahl House reveal not only the architectural tectonics but also the public’s fascination about Hollywood, and about the ‘good image’.

Located on Hollywood Hills, Stahl House has been in the focus of California dream lifestyle since it was constructed and ‘glorified’

by Shulman in 1960. Mr. Stahl’s dream for a modern glass and steel house was realised by architect Pierre Koenig. The L-shaped house embraces a swimming pool and a terrace; the house is heavily glazed on the side facing the pool so that all rooms can be opened up to the outdoor terrace while keeping the street side walls completely solid. The living space sits at the edge of the cliff and benefits from a magnificent unobstructed 270 degree of view of Los Angeles County. At the junction of the L-shape plan, a utility core of kitchen and bathrooms are located as a separation between public and private areas of the house. Before looking at Shulman’s photographs, this house has possibly stimulate the most responses and mass media coverage out of all other Cast Study Houses, as the house has been featured in numerous photographic editorials and film productions.

Scene 1_ View of living room, with Mr and Mrs. Stahl (Figure 35) Knowing the architectural feature of the house – panoramic view of Los Angeles – Shulman ensured the view is presented along with the house when possible. In this photograph, the East side of house is completely glazed and transparent, revealing the full landscape of Hollywood Hills (the ‘magnificent American landscape’) that almost appears slightly surreal as a backdrop.

The photograph also aims to show the free planning of interior space and the integration of the prominent box-like pre-fabricated

74

Figure 35. View of living room, with Mr and Mrs. Stahl

75

fireplace, and how the domestic life is being demonstrated by Mr. and Mrs. Stahl. The reader has been invited to peek into the life of an American family home while observing the wife preparing drink in the freestanding kitchen/bar island for the husband dressed in suit. This may be a typical moment in the occupants’ daily domestic life but for the reader it seems rather stylistically ideal, especially within the context of ‘well-designed’ modern dwelling. The voyeuristic approach is implied by the viewing angle of this image, the observer/photographer might have been standing in the corner of living room while watching the activities happening. This vision is then superimposed the imagination of the viewer, the viewer sees what the observer/ photographer wants the reader to see. As eyes move from the left end of room towards the living area, the deliberately placed objects on the coffee table can be observed: a binocular and Holiday magazines which highlight the consumer culture of that time. The binocular further emphasizes the unobstructed view from living area, and also suggests the view has essentially become part of the enjoyment of family life, while in another photograph by Shulman (Figure 36) a figure is seen standing at the edge of house enjoying the view with a binocular. However, the Holiday magazine directly signifies the leisure culture and consumer culture shared by American middle class families as it was not widely affordable for everyone, hence illustrating the idealised representation of a good, wealthy life that the public ever dreamed for.

76

Figure 36. Entrance patio and pool, with view to kitchen and living room

77

78

Figure 37. View of terrace and pool, with view of Los Angeles County beyond

79

Scene 2_ View of terrace and pool, with view of Los Angeles County beyond (Figure 37) Published in Arts & Architecture magazine, this photograph indeed bears a first person perspective, as it was taken in the occupant’s perspective. The projection of oneself onto the apparently absent occupants of Stahl House creates a new persuasion of architecture and visual experience. In other words, the viewer of the image is encountering the exact same view and same experience as the Stahls would find on a daily basis.

The photograph was taken from the master bedrooms, looking out of the glazed floor-to-ceiling walls to see the swimming pool and a panoramic view of Los Angeles. Moreover, the edge of pool appears to reach up the edge of cliff, it also becomes the defining boundary between the pool, or the house, and the cityscape of Los Angeles, though perfectly blended together. The outdoor furniture by the pool have been employed as objects of implication, since their presence and type of furniture (two low stools and a low table, with glasses on top for drinks) would certainly evoke the idea of the practice of outdoor living, in a place like Stahl House, and demonstration of the exact ‘selling’.

The separation between interior and exterior has completely vanished in the photograph but only defined by the vertical elements of glazing frame. As the result, the viewer is able to observe the living space with completely glazed walls to enjoy the view to maximum effect. From the direction and length of cast shadows of the outdoor furniture pieces, it is possible to assume the photo was taken in late afternoon for maximum shadow effect, and the contrast between light areas and darker areas is

80

further enhanced by darkroom processing techniques that were often employed and highly valued by Shulman, as the darkroom techniques were considered ‘as much a part of the photographic process as clicking the camera shutter’.38 In addition, the seemingly dark areas of the roof overhangs not only indicate the building configuration but also act as frames of the image, forming a focus on the bright areas of the terrace and the view. Due to the width of roof overhangs and the shades, they almost become strong linear elements pointing towards the city, directing the viewer’s eyes along the lines to observe different levels of depth within the photograph.

Scene 3_ Night view of living space (Figure 38) “Film… manipulation of two realities… ‘produces’ a new reality.”39 - Beatriz Colomina, Privacy and Publicity Although this photograph did not accompany the published project report in Arts & Architecture, it has become the most wellknown and the classic representative image of Case Study House programme that, in Joseph Rosa’s publication on Shulman, was used to sum up the programme – it is, in retrospect, the reflection of post-war lifestyle.40 The representation of the house in two-dimensional photographic format even becomes the way the house is circulated and being known. Let alone the architecture, it has become an iconic visual image itself that the house has since featured (Figure 39) in many popular culture 38 Rosa, 74.

39 Colomina, 1994, 80.

40 Rosa, 54.

81

Figure 38. Night view of living space

82

Figure 39. Valentino Autumn/Winter 2001/02 Campaign

83

or media images; Shulman’s images and their association with mass media will be assesses in the next chapter.

The photograph presents the night view of living space with two fashionably dressed women sitting by the glass sliding door, conducting a casual conversation. The roof overhang becomes a strong planar element in this photograph as it constructs and leads the directed perspective view of the viewer – a method that was frequently employed by Shulman and referred as ‘diagonal thrust’ – and that it ‘carries the viewer into the scene to where I want him to stop’.41 In this case, Shulman wanted the viewer to look into and ‘feel’ the living space, and the open view beyond.

The city of Los Angeles naturally becomes part of the everyday element of the house. Without the presence of human figures, the dramatic effect of the architecture would not have been as clear and the living space would not have been enlivened. In addition, the glorification of domestic life is illustrated and, with the location of the house in mind, it reminds us the glamorous association with Hollywood. Shulman’s intention in ‘selling modern designs’ is strongly demonstrated to the public about the possibility of great life. The demonstration itself becomes the idealised representative of modern living in America, converting the presumably ‘untouchable’ into a piece of architectural evidence.

The photograph was taken from the edge of outdoor terrace, close to the cliff edge, and a deck chair has been purposely moved and placed in such a way that it occupies across the bottom edge of the image. The deck chair not only suggests 41 Rosa, 69.

84

the possibility of outdoor living but also it suggests simultaneity of activities both in the living space and the outdoor terrace, as a result of inward-facing glazed walls. Nevertheless, the sliding door in the living space has been deliberately open to imply the flexibility and its interaction with the surrounding environment.

85

86

Chapter 3_ Iconic Images of Lifestyle and Beyond: The Impending Future or the Nostalgic Memory?

87

Being the principal publication of the Case Study House programme, Arts & Architecture carried great responsibilities assigned by John Entenza to ‘educate’ the public and to promote modern architecture in South California. The magazine established a readership from drawing separate reader groups of professional magazines, trades and consumer magazines.42 Though it is not difficult to observe that, if looking at any issue of the magazine, product advertisements can constitute more than half of the page’s content on a typical page (Figure 40); if looked at more carefully, many of them are specifically related to a selected Case Study House because the products were solely chosen based on the aesthetic-guaranteed merit. Photographs of models for proposed or finished interiors became the principal visual media for publicity, and, in this sense, architecture has been carefully translated from built environment into staged images of publicity, a visual identity of the area of South California and the entire nation. Based on the contextual exploration of postwar years in Los Angeles in Chapter 1 and the visual analysis of Shulman’s key photographs of selected Case Study House in Chapter 2, the aim of this chapter is to re-introduce the key concepts/ideas that were brought up in the process of image analysis and to re-examine them together in order to form a body of critical assessment of the stylistic approach of Shulman’s practice and the intended effort of his photographs and the magazine in publicity. In this chapter, the creation of subjective visual identity of modernist architecture specifically for publicity 42 Helen Searing, “Case Study House: The Great Modern Tradition” in Smith ed., 1989, 108.

88

Figure 40. Arts & Architecture book review page, Arts & Architecture December 1945

89

purpose, i.e. ‘selling’, will be further discussed with the aid of some concepts of publicity, and how the visual identity itself became an iconography of metaphorical implication of ‘enviable’ lifestyle.

“I hope that it is clear that the architects of this century have always actively engaged in an interdisciplinary discourse that uses the media to blur the line between high and low culture, art and commerce, and that the house is their polemical vehicle. To think about the architecture of the twentieth century will be to rethink the house/ media interface.”43 -Beatriz Colomina In order to continue the discussion, it is important to understand that the programme and the post-war utopian vision shared by architectural professionals and Entenza were based on two assumptions: first of all, things would be surely different in postwar years and that, secondly, the way the average Americans wanted to live was confronted and changed by the war, as outlined by Thomas Hine.44 It was these assumptions that initiated the concept of ‘better life’ in the yet-to-come post war years, whether it meant physically, mentally or metaphorically.

This sense of future, which is also evident in the development of aviation industry in Los Angeles discussed in Chapter 1 and 43 Beatriz Colomina, “The Media House” in Assemblage no. 27, 1995.

44 Hine, 141.

90

the renowned entertainment industry in Hollywood, has become an important part of the Californian experience. For example, the war-born materials and techniques were transferred from military fields onto architectural designs, the ‘new’ technology was re-introduced as a mechanism to improve life;45 with the aid of technology, the quality of life ‘will become’ better. Modern architecture was, as Colomina states, the ‘aggressively happy architecture that came out of the war’; this campaign of ‘happy’ images constructed by Shulman was indeed part of a general fascination of the ‘good’ life.46 This fascination of the good life was further reinforced by images of ‘attractive’ domestic architecture and the ‘attractive’ products, forming a well-packaged product of the brighter future.

As a result, the ‘sense of future’ in terms of media publicity is extensively introduced in the product advertisements and the project reports. Shulman regularly mentioned that his photographs were made to teach the general public how to ‘see’ modern architecture and how modern architecture can be ‘occupied’, mirroring the ‘intended lifestyle’ to which modern architecture becomes the key.47 The photographs therefore bear not only the purpose of knowledge promotion of Californian modern architecture but also the purpose of product promotion of architecture. These promotions, like advertisements, “do not try to sell you the product except as a natural accessory of a way of

45 In another essay “The Search of the Post War House” from the MOCA exhibition publication, Hine argues that this ‘new technology’ – new method of construction/manufacture and new materials – was ‘created’ by architects for the modern houses to improve life while most people just wanted to ‘add’ technology to the house to improve quality of life.

46 Colomina, Domesticity at War (Barcelona: Actar, 2006), 12.

47 Rosa, 88.

91

life”.48 Shulman knew the importance of architectural photography well as he regularly used the terms ‘selling architecture’ and ‘dressed scene’ to gain appeal from the laymen. Having worked for consumer magazines and manufacturers, it is possible to recognise his ‘dressed’ photographs with a commercial approach to them. For example, in one of the selected photographs of Case Study House #20, taken by Shulman (Figure 29), the deliberate incorporation of models who are the actual occupants suggests commercial staging techniques. This photograph does not only depict how the architecture can become part of daily life but also tries to evoke something that is not visually shown on the flat image – ‘your life will be transformed if you lived in a modernist Californian house’. Indeed, the same principle is used in publicity images as they tend to pursued or to convey such a transformation (‘you will become richer’, ‘you will become more beautiful/handsome’, or ‘your life will be instantly better’) (Figure 41) or, in Barthes’ words, as an ‘adventure’ of attraction exerted by photographs. The sense of future is presented in front of the viewer/potential buyer as a frozen moment/event.49 In addition, it is also noted that the viewer of Shulman’s photographs are invited to participate not as a voyeur due to his choice of low photographing angle. For instance, the viewer is immediately saluted by the presence and position of Mrs. Bass in another photograph of the Case Study House #20 (Figure 31). Moreover, the viewer is allowed to take part as a present 48 Alison and Peter Smithson, “But Today We Collect Ads” in David Robins et al., The Independent Group: Postwar Britain and the Aesthetics of Plenty, (London: MIT Press, 1990), 186.

49 Roland Barthes, Camera Lucida: Reflections on Photography, (London: Vintage Classics, 2009), 19 and John Berger, Ways of Seeing, (London: Penguin Books, 1990), 131.

92

Figure 41. Western-Holly gas range produce advertisement, Arts & Architecture December 1945

93

observer in the iconic image of Stahl House, watching the event of conversation happening (Figure 38). The human figures and other objects have appeared in Shulman’s photographs as ‘signs of events’ that would depict and sell the ideal lifestyles or ‘model behaviour’ that is appropriate to the house in the context, while these models of behaviour and moments become to form the inseparable part of the house’s appearance.50 Therefore, these published photographs and product specification can be regarded as a way to attract potential buyer or potential clients who had grown interests in the programme and the architectural approach, which was fully acknowledged and employed by both Entenza and Shulman for the purpose of programme publicity.

The viewer, or potential buyer, would acknowledge the images and the figures within as a proposed projection of himself because the image (lifestyle) corresponds to some particular interests (dreams); and the viewer is offered ‘an image of himself or herself, as he/she might and wants to be.’51 Apart from the ‘live’ project reports where photographs of proposal models or finished interiors taken by Shulman would appear, his photographs have also been featured as main focal image of advertisements (Figure 42) throughout the life span of Case Study House Programme. These product advertisements, mostly on domestic products, take up a relatively large proportion of the magazine content and they all have one thing in common – the products were to be or were already used in the Case Study Houses. Interestingly, as soon as a new Case Study House design was published in the magazine, a full product specification 50 Rosa, 95.

51 Ibid., 130 and 132.

94

Figure 42. Carpet product adverisement using Shulman’s CSH #9 photoshoot, Arts & Architecture July 1950

95

followed immediately. Many of the products and appliances featured in the houses were donations from manufacturers because, for the manufacturers, it was a great opportunity to increase product exposure as they were selected by ‘good architects’ for merit-based reasons to provide maximum aesthetic effect and maximum pleasure for living. Therefore the model photographs and interior photographs taken by Shulman would be purposely circulated between magazines and manufacturers to ensure a wide spread of photographic representation. Apart from the print publications, television commercials became a powerful tool since the availability of television in households reached up to 90% by the end of 1950s; coincidently, television commercials gain popularity and became the ‘loudest voice’ in advertising.52 These commercials often intentionally integrated within the programmes, which is a common strategy used in print publications such as Arts & Architecture.53 In addition, his photographs were favoured because they conveyed the sense of ‘comfortable home’ inhabited by real occupants, corresponding

52 Researched by Lynn Spiegel, 9% of American (wealthy) homes owned television set up to 1950, and the number grew rapidly to 90% by the end of 1950s. Coincidently, American advertising first increased dramatically between 1920 and 1950 and then doubled again between 1951 and 1960. The new form of advertising was marketed at, as Joan Ockman writes, ‘managers of consumption.’ Moreover, it is argued by Lawrence R. Samuel that the television commercials are ‘louder’ than magazine advertising as they were ‘seemingly more capable of motivating people to do things they would not otherwise consider’ because the ‘illusion of reality’ created by televisions. In addition, according to Samuel, these often short commercials are ‘something that moves fast, with abundant noise, holds your attention for two or three minutes… and leave you with a promise.’ See Lynn Spiegel, “The Suburban Home Companion: Television and the Neighbourhood Ideal in Postwar America” in Beatriz Colomina, Sexuality & Space, (New York, Princeton Architectural Press, 1992), 185 – 218; Joan Ockman, “Mirror Images: Technology, Consumption and the Representation of Gender in American Architecture since World War II” in Diana Argrest et al., Sex of Architecture, (New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1996), 191 – 210; Lawrence R. Samuel, Brought to You By: Postwar Television Advertising and the American Dream, (Texas: University of Texas Press, 2001).

53 Samuel, 6 – 7.

96

Figure 43. Case Study House 8 project report (caption highlighted in red for product names), Arts & Architecture July 1950

97

to advertising trends in print advertisements and, with the availability of television in households, television commercials.

Moreover, each published photograph in the project report is accompanied by long descriptions of construction elements and products, and the photographs almost become supporting visual evidence for commercial use in some cases (Figure 43). As a result, it is also argued that the Case Study Houses subsequently became a ‘living catalogue’, houses were built to be seen rather than to be lived.54 The captions emphasised the showroom/ exhibition quality of the Case Study House photographs, making the houses seem like the objects displayed within and their advertisements.55 Despite the photographs shared a close connection with advertising and publicity in the post-war years, the photographic documentation has become the way these buildings are being remembered and circulated; in other words, the architecture has become images and these images have become the futuristic identity of American modern architecture in the 1950s. The views and scenes constructed by Shulman have become the ‘iconic views’ that represent the ‘truths’ about the building, which in turn stimulate contemporary interpretations and manipulations.

For example, there is a close resemblance between another wellknow (well-circulated) image of Pierre Koenig’s Case Study House #21 (Figure 44) and a recent appearance of a photo editorial of a Hollywood couple for a fashion magazine (Figure 45).

Whether it is merely mimicking the Shulman photograph or it is an appreciation, this contemporary photographer have used the 54

Buisson and Billard, 236 and 240.

55 Colomina, 2006, 8.

98

Figure 44. Case Study House #21, 1958

99

essence of Shulman’s photographs of future –staged elements as signs of proposed lifestyle/behaviour and the importance of human figures to “add to the photograph’s own realism” – to sell an idea about the nostalgic past. 56 In other words, the elements of yet-to-come future life have been introduced in order to evoke nostalgic memories: memory of the good past, memory of the dream-like modern lifestyle and memory of the stylised domestic representation of sexuality in the 1950s. In this sense, Shulman’s photography was initially intended to sell futuristic ideas about the mythical ‘good life’ but at the same time they have preserved the nostalgic past time that tried to show the future. Whether there is still anything futuristic about the images and the buildings themselves today or not, the supposedly futuristic aspects of Shulman’s photographs in terms of publicity have been translated into a contemporary language of nostalgia.

It is a memory of the glamorised Californian Modernism shared among the public.

56 Lewis W. Hine, “Social Photography” in Alan Trachtenberg ed., Classic Essays on Photography, (Stony Creek: Leeke’s Island Books, 1980), 111.

100

Figure 45. Editorial for W magazine by Steven Klein, 2008

101

Conclusion Since the development of commercial advertising in the thirties, the media has its powerful influence on the public’s perception on architecture. When Modernism architecture arrived in United States of America, it adopted the local context of California to grow, resulting in the distinctive outcome of Californian modern architecture. The war might had brought depression but it also brought new opportunities for architects to experiment and test the war-born technologies and materials, and later on few architects were able to embark on the self-promoted Case Study House programme initiated by John Entenza before the war ended in 1945. After receiving numerous commissions from popular consumer magazines, Julius Shulman adopted some commercial staging techniques that later became his personal touch when photographing the Case Study Houses for Arts & Architecture. In order to ‘teach’ the public how to ‘see’ modern architecture and hence ‘accept’ good designs, Shulman extensively used the ‘dressed scenes’ to demonstrate how the houses can be enlivened, resulting in ‘selling’ themselves as dreams of better tomorrow. However, they were intended to create a new Californian image of glamorised lifestyle, embedded with a projection of future, to be publicised nationally and internationally.

Therefore, photographs of Case Study Houses were selected and analysed in the interest of Shulman’s methodology, their influence by/on publicity and the idea of selling the future.

It becomes evident that indeed his photographs may have succeeded in selling as they reflect the public’s expectations

102

of life which were presented visually as glamorous, enviable objects of desire. In order to sell, Shulman not only constructed idealised photographic representation of modern houses as liveable, glamorous and desirable houses, but also he created an idealised representation of American everyday life for the nation. The series of photographs has also succeeded in terms of statement-making and persuading public to ‘love’ modern architecture, or to love the lifestyles instead. Furthermore, this series of photographs has become the way the houses are remembered, as glamorous photo shoots that resemble carefully staged film sets, and has become the re-presentation of the mythical ‘better future’. Thus the specific views obtained their status as authorised takes, as truths of the Case Study House programme that cannot be justified by other views.57 As the photographs were intended for publicity purpose, the images were used as a mechanism that would create a specific moment or event that belongs to the house and its context which differentiates South Californian modern architecture from the European Modernism.58 The photographs preserve the ‘future’ moments of idealised life, resulting in that fact that the houses, up to today, still live upon its own endlessly reproduced ‘futuristic’ representation of, however, nostalgia.

Whether architectural photography would carry a purer purpose of education or is accompanied by the affiliation of mass media, it is no doubt that the persuasive power of Shulman’s images has always been recognised even when the production involves 57 Elwall, in Caiger-Smith, 77.

58 This ‘specific event or moment’ is also referred as the unique ‘aura’ by Walter Benjamin.

The concept of ‘aura’ and its dependence on the subject can be found in Benjamin’s essay on photography. Walter Benjamin, “A Short History of Photography” in Trachtenberg, 212.

103

re-interpretation of well-known photographs. His photographs created well-crafted ‘truths/myths’ about modern American families, the domestic scenes suddenly became the most public part of the houses. The scenes/images were staged and treated almost as if they were part of the film production. Although they can be solely read as realistic documentation of the architecture in the sense that they present the spatial qualities, it is essential to acknowledge the fact that they can be regarded as stylised idealisation of the nation’s dream: a dream about the impending future. In any case, the photographs were created intentionally as reassuring evidence of ‘good life’, as projections of the brighter future that could be purchased like products.

As a result, Shulman’s practice of photography enables the seductive essence of publicity images to emerge, corresponding to the culture of consumer society and image-conscious society in mid-twentieth century, denoting the emerging commercial aspect of photography in the field of architecture. On the other hand, Shulman’s photographs not only reflect the aesthetic aspects in architectural design during the post-war years but also they spoke for the buildings for those who were not able to visit and experience on location. In other words, they preserve and present, or even ‘sell’ as Shulman’s original intention, the memories and idealised visions from the past to the general public even up to today.

104

Appendix 1

105

106

Announcement: the Case Study House Programme, Arts & Architecture, Januray 1945

107

108

109

Bibliography Argrest, Diana et al. Sex of Architecture. New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1996.

Barthes, Roland. Camera Lucida: Reflections on Photography.

London: Vintage Classics, 2009.

Berger, John. Ways of Seeing. London: Penguin Books, 1990.

Buisson, Ethel and Thomas Billard. The Presence of Case Study Houses. Basel: Birkhäuser, 2004.

Caiger-Smith, Martin, ed. Site Work: Architecture in Photography since Early Modernism. London: Photographers’ Gallery, 1991.

Colomina, Beatriz. Sexuality & Space. New York, Princeton Architectural Press, 1992.

Colomina, Beatriz. Privacy and Publicity: Modern Architecture as Mass Media. Massachusetts: MIT Press, 1994.

Colomina, Beatriz. Domesticity at War. Barcelona: Actar, 2006.

De Mare, Eric. Architectural Photography. London: B. T. Batsford, 1975.

Elwall, Robert. Building with Light: The International History of Architectural Photography. London: Merrell, 2004.

Gleye, Paul. The Architecture of Los Angeles. Los Angeles: Rosebud Books, 1981.

McCoy, Esther. Modern California Houses 1945 – 1962. New York: Reinhold Publishing, 1962.

Robins, David, et al. The Independent Group: Postwar Britain and the Aesthetics of Plenty. London: MIT Press, 1990.

110

Rosa, Joseph. A Constructed View: The Architectural Photography of Julius Shulman. New York: Rizzoli Publications, 1994.

Samuel, Lawrence R.. Bought to You By: Postwar Television Advertising and the American Dream. Texas: University of Texas Press, 2001.

Smith, Elizabeth A. T, ed. Blueprints for Modern Living – History and Legacy of the Case Study Houses. Los Angeles: MOCA, 1989.

Smith, Elizabeth A. T.. Cast Study Houses. Cologne: Taschen, 2007.

Steele, James. Los Angeles Architecture: The Contemporary Condition. London: Phaidon, 1993.

Trachtenberg, Alan, ed.. Classic Essays on Photography. Stony Creek: Leeke’s Island Books, 1980.

Travers, David. “Arts & Architecture” 1945 – 54: The Complete Reprint. Cologne: Taschen, 2008.

Image Credits Figure 1. House overlooking the Schwielowsee, near Potsdam, 1931. Reproduced from Robert Elwall, Building with Light: The International History of Architectural Photography (London: Merrell, 2004), 140.

Figure 2 and 3. Kun House photographed by Julius Shulman.

Reproduced from Joseph Rosa, A Constructed View: The Architectural Photography of Julius Shulman (New York: Rizzoli Publications, 1994), 43.

Figure 4. Libbey Owens Ford Glass product advertisement, Arts & Architecture, January 1945. Reproduced from Arts & Architecture, January 1945, 9.

111

Figure 5. May House published in House Beautiful, April 1946.

Reproduced from Elizabeth A. T Smith ed., Blueprints for Modern Living – History and Legacy of the Case Study Houses (Los Angeles: MOCA, 1989), 177.

Figure 6. Case Study House #8 plan update. Reproduced from from Arts & Architecture, May 1949, 38 – 9.

Figure 7. Lovell House. (http://farm4.static.flickr. com/3090/2336411628_ea80310a58.jpg) (27th March 2011) Figure 8. Competition for post-war living, Arts & Architecture August 1943. Reproduced from Beatriz Colomina, Domesticity at War (Barcelona: Actar, 2006), 38.

Figure 9. Case Study House #9. Reproduced from Esther McCoy, Modern California Houses 1945 – 1962, (New York: Reinhold Publishing, 1962), 56.

Figure 10. Map of Greater Los Angeles with location of the Case Study Houses. Reproduced from Elizabeth A. T. Smith, Cast Study Houses, (Cologne: Taschen, 2007), 4.

Figure 11. Cover of Small Homes Guide, 12th ed., Spring 1944.

Elizabeth A. T Smith ed., Blueprints for Modern Living – History and Legacy of the Case Study Houses (Los Angeles: MOCA, 1989), 168.

Figure 12. General specification for Case Study House #2.

Reproduced from Arts & Architecture, April 1945, 39.

Figure 13 and 14. Proposal for Case Study House #4 by Ralph Rapson. Reproduced from Arts & Architecture, August 1945, 32 – 34.

Figure 15. Convector product specified in Case Study House #1 advertisement. Reproduced from Arts & Architecture, November 1945, 19.

112

Figure 16. Plywood product specified in Case Study House #11 advertisement. Reproduced from Arts & Architecture, July 1946, 9.

Figure 17. Frankel Gallery with furniture designed by Paul T. Frankel, 1942. Reproduced from Joseph Rosa, A Constructed View: The Architectural Photography of Julius Shulman (New York: Rizzoli Publications, 1994), 45.

Figure 18. Case Study House #8 exterior. Reproduced Arts & Architecture, December 1949, 28.

Figure 19. Plywood product advertisement in Arts & Architecture August 1943. Reproduced from Ethel Buisson and Thomas Billard, The Presence of Case Study Houses (Basel: Birkhäuser, 2004), 45.

Figure 20. Plywood leg splints designed by Charles Eames.

Reproduced from Beatriz Colomina, Domesticity at War (Barcelona: Actar, 2006), 42.

Figure 21. LCW (Lounge Chair Wood) by Charles Eames. (http:// www.eames.biz/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/eameschair.jpg) (27th March 2011) Figrue 22. Case Study Houses 8 and 9 project pages.

Reproduced from Arts & Architecture, December 1945, 44 – 5.

Figure 23. View of living room with Charles and Ray Eames.

Reproduced from Elizabeth A. T. Smith, Cast Study Houses, (Cologne: Taschen, 2007), 22.

Figure 24. View from living room towards living court.

Reproduced from Joseph Rosa, A Constructed View: The Architectural Photography of Julius Shulman (New York: Rizzoli Publications, 1994), 24.

Figure 25. Charles Eames in the studio. Reproduced from

113

Elizabeth A. T. Smith, Cast Study Houses, (Cologne: Taschen, 2007), 25.

Figure 26. Case Study House #20 exterior. Reproduced from Esther McCoy, Modern California Houses 1945 – 1962, (New York: Reinhold Publishing, 1962), 142.

Figure 27. Surface product advertisement. Reproduced from Arts & Architecture, May 1950, 13.

Figure 28. Shulman and his ‘portable garden.’ Reproduced from Joseph Rosa, A Constructed View: The Architectural Photography of Julius Shulman (New York: Rizzoli Publications, 1994), 84.

Figure 29. View of outdoor terrace into the house. Reproduced from Joseph Rosa, A Constructed View: The Architectural Photography of Julius Shulman (New York: Rizzoli Publications, 1994), 91.

Figure 30. View of outdoor terrace into the house. Reproduced from Elizabeth A. T. Smith, Cast Study Houses, (Cologne: Taschen, 2007), 60.

Figure 31. View of living space, looking towards outdoor terrace.

Reproduced from from Elizabeth A. T. Smith, Cast Study Houses, (Cologne: Taschen, 2007), 61.

Figure 32. Cover of House & Garden February 1960, featuring Bass House. (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_Pmjd5_C6-M4/ S0Ueo3N71QI/AAAAAAAAAQA/0HTQ7mjE9As/s1600-h/Buff,+ Straub+%26+Hensman+Bass+House,+Case+Study+House+ No.+20.jpg) (25th March 2011) Figure 33. View of living room from terrace. Reproduced from Esther McCoy, Modern California Houses 1945 – 1962, (New York: Reinhold Publishing, 1962), 147.

Figure 34. Case Study House #22 exterior, street entrance.

114

Reproduced from Esther McCoy, Modern California Houses 1945 – 1962, (New York: Reinhold Publishing, 1962), 132.

Figure 35. View of living room, with Mr and Mrs. Stahl.

Reproduced from Elizabeth A. T. Smith, Cast Study Houses, (Cologne: Taschen, 2007), 70.

Figure 36. Entrance patio and pool, with view to kitchen and living room. Reproduced from Elizabeth A. T. Smith, Cast Study Houses, (Cologne: Taschen, 2007), 71.

Figure 37. View of terrace and pool, with view of Los Angeles County beyond. Reproduced from Esther McCoy, Modern California Houses 1945 – 1962, (New York: Reinhold Publishing, 1962), 135.

Figure 38. Night view of living space. Reproduced from Joseph Rosa, A Constructed View: The Architectural Photography of Julius Shulman (New York: Rizzoli Publications, 1994), 55.

Figure 39. Valentino Autumn/Winter 2001/02 Campaign. (http://its177aricel.tumblr.com/post/729187082/valentinophotoshoot-at-the-stahl-house-case-study) (25th March 2011) Figure 40. Arts & Architecture book review page. Reproduced from Arts & Architecture, December 1945, 22 – 3.

Figure 41. Western-Holly gas range produce advertisement.

Reproduced from Arts & Architecture, December 1945, 9.

Figure 42. Carpet product adverisement using Shulman’s CSH #9 photo shoot. Reproduced from Arts & Architecture, July 1950, 8.

Figure 43. Case Study House #8 project report (caption highlighted in red for product names). Reproduced from Arts & Architecture, July 1950, 35.

Figure 44. Case Study House #21, 1958. Reproduced

115

from Joseph Rosa, A Constructed View: The Architectural Photography of Julius Shulman (New York: Rizzoli Publications, 1994), 19.

Figure 45. Editorial for W magazine by Steven Klein, 2008. (http://trendland.net/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/pitt_jolie_ steven-klein.jpg) (28th March 2011)

116