Feminised Brutalism by Tianna Greham by Tianna Greham

FEMINISED BRUTALISM

TIANNA GREHAM

TO VIEW THE WORLD IN BINARY IS PROBLEMATIC. Identifying the idea of ‘the ideal’ as a brutal one, this report defines the concept that is ‘Feminised Brutalism’ and dismantles the traditional genderfixities that minimise one’s agency as a woman.

CONTENTS

WHAT IS FEMINISED BRUTALISM? Page 6

BRUTALISM Page 8

FEMINISM Page 14

FEMINISED BRUTALISM DEFINED Page 18

THE IDEA OF THE IDEAL IS A BRUTAL ONE Page 30

THE IDEAL WOMAN Page 32

BEING & BECOMING A WOMAN Page 36

HARD & SOFT, MASCULINE & FEMININE Page 44

‘HER’ IN THE WORKSHOP Page 45

THE IDEAL SETTING Page 78

THE 50’s IDEAL HOME SHOW v.s. IKEA’s MODERN-DAY IDEAL A METHODOLOGY FOR GENDER & SPACE Page 97

THEN V.S. NOW A CASE STUDY ON IDEOLOGY, GENDER & DOMUS Page 101

THE IDEAL-OFF Page 103

THE KITCHEN Page 113

HOME - THE 50’S IDEAL V.S. MODERN-DAY IKEA’S Page 118

FEMINISED BRUTALISM REVISED Page 134

CONCLUSION Page 139

BIBLIOGRAPHY Page 143

WHAT IS FEMINISED BRUTALISM?

INTRO

Feminised Brutalism: What exactly is it? The basis for this report is an exploration of both contextual and practice-led research, that investigates and seeks to answer exactly that: What Feminised Brutalism is. Intrigued by the oppositional contrast of these subjects (Feminism and Brutalism), I set about deconstructing their individual meanings, interrogating their relation to one another and reinventing what ‘Brutalism’ is or could exist as - in terms of the concept that is Feminised Brutalism. Using concrete as a medium, femininity as a filter & juxtaposition as a means for questioning my initial assumptions about the binaries embedded within, I attempt to unearth why these existing definitions are problematic. I also intend to grapple with the effect/affects of ‘Brutalism’ on the female identity and ultimately fashion a definition for the concept. Whilst my project engages with the very broad and complex fields of Brutalism and Feminism, touching on matters such as: women and architecture, the social and architectural shaping of the ‘ideal’ and fragments of the Brutalism ideology, this report is not a commentary or critique on the topics in their entirety. Notably, there may be alternative feminist approaches or interpretations of the themes investigated. But I will remain silent regarding most of these so as to focus primarily on my own performative research and ‘Feminised Brutalist’ findings. For the purpose of this brief contextual analysis, I will give a short summary of the two and then specify the areas of focus concerned. 7

BRUTALISM 1

Royal Institute of British Architects. (2017). Brutalism. [online] Available at: https://www. architecture.com/Explore/ ArchitecturalStyles/Brutalism. aspx [Accessed 23 Dec. 2016].

Banham, R. (2011). The New Brutalism by Reyner Banham. [online] Architectural Review. Available at: https://www. architectural-review.com/ archive/viewpoints/thenew-brutalism-by-reynerbanham/8603840.article [Accessed 23 Dec. 2016].

Hatherley, O. (2016). LRB · Owen Hatherley · Strange, Angry Objects: The Brutalist Decades. [online] London Review of Books. Available at: http://www.lrb.co.uk/v38/ n22/owen-hatherley/strangeangry-objects [Accessed 17 Nov. 2016].

‘Brutalism’ is the term used to describe the emerging style and architectural movement that followed architect Le Corbusier’s build: Unité d’Habitation, Marseilles [fig 1]- a modern residential housing block built in the late 1940’s1. Taking from this, the construction of highly expressive forms and explicit use of ‘le beton brut’ (raw concrete), English architect’s Alison and Peter Smithson adopted the style as their own, and became pioneers of what flourished in England to be known as ‘The New Brutalism’. First coined by critic Rayner Banham in 19542, ‘The New Brutalism’ sought to reconstruct the face of post-war Britain and fashion “buildings for an entirely new form of society”3 - an idealised or utopian vision of standardised living - in the shape of “monstrous” concrete “carbuncles”4.

In a speech to the Royal Institute of British Architecture in 1984, The Prince of Wales described the projected building (ABK’s National Gallery Extension) as a “monstrous carbuncle on the face of a much loved friend”.

1952 Le Corbusier, Unité d’habitation, Marseille, France. Fig 1.

Hatherley, O. (2016). LRB · Owen Hatherley · Strange, Angry Objects: The Brutalist Decades. [online] London Review of Books. Available at: http://www.lrb.co.uk/ v38/n22/owen-hatherley/ strange-angry-objects Pp.2. [Accessed 17 Nov. 2016].

As it stands, “committed to social change and uncompromising design”5, The Smithson’s ‘Hunstanton School’ [fig 2] exists as a concretised manifesto. Personified in the unpretentious exhibition of it’s structure, textures and materials, ‘Brutalism’ soon became “characterised by precisely that: its brutality, its ‘je-m’ en-foutisme, it’s bloodymindedness”6. It favours the ‘warehouse aesthetic’ [fig 3] emphasised by its monumental composition, high standard of basic construction and being made of exactly what it appears to be made of7: casted concrete, steel, glass, brick.

1949-54. Alison & Peter Smithson, ‘The Warehouse Aesthetic’ Hunstanton Secondary School Interior. Fig.3

1949-54. Alison & Peter Smithson, Hunstanton Secondary School. Fig.2

Bruno, G. (2007). Public intimacy. 1st ed. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, p.81.

WatsonSmyth, K. (2013). Brutalist architecture: a concept made concrete. [online] Financial Times. Ft.com. Available at: https://www.ft.com/ content/4dcac1fe-be2511e2-9b27-00144feab7de [Accessed 29 Dec. 2016].

‘Brutal’ in size and unapologetic in its presence, the ‘image’ Brutalism composed was one that discarded “most accepted canons of form and order”8 including that of ‘beauty’. Rather than the classical aesthetic - “best dressed in white. [Wearing] only pure coats of paint and pristine fashions”9- its appearance was dictated more by its environment, its environment by its users and users by its use. In other words, for Brutalist’s ‘ethic’ trumped ‘aesthetic’, as their primary concerns were: the building’s purpose, the play of spaces and what occurred within – “the outside is merely the envelope that wraps it up.”10 11

Hatherley, O. (2016). LRB · Owen Hatherley · Strange, Angry Objects: The Brutalist Decades. [online] London Review of Books. Available at: http://www.lrb.co.uk/ v38/n22/owen-hatherley/ strange-angry-objects Page 2. [Accessed 17 Nov. 2016].

Hatherley, O. (2016). LRB · Owen Hatherley · Strange, Angry Objects: The Brutalist Decades. [online] London Review of Books. Available at: http://www.lrb.co.uk/ v38/n22/owen-hatherley/ strange-angry-objects [Accessed 17 Nov. 2016].

Born from the rubble and utilitarian in style, Brutalist housing estates like ‘The Robin Hood Gardens’ [fig 4] were functional and affordable solutions that recomposed post-war Britain into “something full of vigor, futurism and ruthless optimism”11. The Smithsons’ intent was to build a utopia where the ‘streets in the sky’ bridged the gap between the parallel of life and art. The rawness of its ‘anti-beauty/image’ reflected the ‘brut’ reality on the ground12, validated its human association and beautified its experience by amplifying the sense of cultural cohesion, equality and community life in East London.

1964-70, Alison & Peter Smithson, Robin Hood Gardens, London. Fig.4

Lisa Cole, N. (2016). What is Feminist Theory? Misconceptions and Realities. [online] About. com Education. Available at: http://sociology.about.com/ od/Sociological-Theory/a/ Feminist-Theory.htm [Accessed 29 Dec. 2016].

Gender. cawater-info.net. (2017). History and theory of feminism. [online] Available at: http://www.gender. cawater-info.net/knowledge_ base/rubricator/feminism_e. htm [Accessed 10 Dec. 2016].

Hooks, B. (2000). Feminism is for everybody. 1st ed. Cambridge, MA: South End Press, p.149.

FEMINISM Mentioning the word ‘Feminism’ or ‘Feminist’ may cause one to turn and run in the opposite direction or stand tall in solidarity, due to their “hotly contested”1 definitions. Despite Feminism’s vast progression in theory and practice since its early inception (1942)2, even today it’s intent is misconstrued by such assumptions and widely misunderstood as a whole. Comprised of both social and political activity, “Feminism is a movement to end sexism, sexist exploitation and oppression”3 as Gloria J W declares. Hence, Feminism is not gender specific as commonly presumed, nor solely an advocate of women rights and equality. That being said, by-default women are frequently at the forefront of the debate, due to the expansive history of Westernised patriarchal values and beliefs, that fail to validate women as individuals or equals4. In its refusal, Feminist’s “recognise that women’s location in, and experience of, social situations are not only different but also unequal to men’s”5. In turn, Feminist theory reveals and critiques the “social problems, trends, and issues that are otherwise overlooked or misidentified by the historically dominant male perspective within social theory”6. So as to rectify gender biases and counter concerns such as gender discrimination, among others: objectification, oppression, power, privilege, and structural/economic inequality. With an extensive history spanning three centuries, the movement can be understood as a surge of three waves according to Professor Judy Wajcman7. Initiated in the 19th and early 20th centuries, the ‘First-wave’ of Feminism was urged by women’s suffrage movements in the UK [ fig 1] and focused mainly on voting rights of women. 14

1918, Womenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Suffrage demonstration for the right to vote, London. Fig.1

Crossman, A. (2017). Feminist Theory in Sociology An Overview of Key Ideas and Issues. [online] About.com Education. Available at: http://sociology.about.com/ od/Sociological-Theory/a/ Feminist-Theory.htm [Accessed 10 Dec. 2016].

Crossman, A. (2017). Feminist Theory in Sociology An Overview of Key Ideas and Issues. [online] About.com Education. [Accessed 10 Dec]

Wajcman, J. (2010). Feminist theories of technology. Cambridge Journal of Economics, [online] 34(1), Available at: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/28623/ [Accessed 23 Nov. 2016].

Revealing that ‘not enough attention was paid to women’s agency’9 prompted the ‘Second Wave’s’ agenda and activism which began in the 1960’s. At this time, Feminist’s recognised that “The Personal is Political”10 and women started shaping their own identities, work, and environment that rivaled those “socially shaped and shaped by men to the exclusion of women’11 prior. Driven by a sense of independence and need for equality, the ‘Women’s Liberation’ movement sought to end discrimination in terms of gender and other sorts. Finally, the ‘Third-Wave’ emerged in the 1990’s as a continuation and critique of the failings reflected in the wave prior. Feminism was thought of as “multiple and dynamic”, stressing that gender is “connected to other axes of power such as race, colonialism, sexuality, disability, and class”12. Rather than equality, ‘Third-Wave’ Feminism shifted the focus to “the issues that divided women”13 including the lack of minority voices which were otherwise whitewashed as Gloria.J.W argued. Since there has been a multitude of new movements and of course more to be said of the three mentioned. However, the summarised waves are merely a heuristic model to help grasp the complexity of the movement and its chronology.

Wajcman, J. (2010). Feminist theories of technology. Cambridge Journal of Economics, [online] 34(1), Pp. 4 of 10. Available at: http://eprints.lse. ac.uk/28623/ [Accessed 23 Nov. 2016].

Wajcman, J. (2010). Feminist theories of technology. Cambridge Journal of Economics, [online] 34(1), Pp. 5 of 10. Available at: http://eprints.lse. ac.uk/28623/ [Accessed 23 Nov. 2016].

The feminist activist and author Carol Hanisch coined the slogan The personal is political . It is a political argument used as a rallying slogan of student movement and secondwave feminism from the late 1960s.

Fig.2

Wajcman, J. (2010). Feminist theories of technology. Cambridge Journal of Economics, [online] 34(1), Pp. 5 of 10. Available at: http://eprints.lse. ac.uk/28623/ [Accessed 23 Nov. 2016].

Hooks, B. (1984). Feminist theory from margin to center. 1st ed. Boston, MA: South End Press.

FEMINISED BRUTALISM DEFINED [THE PRELUDE]

Fig.1

Fig.2

Fig.3

Screenshots of Posts from My Design Process Blog.

FEMINISED BRUTALISM DEFINED [ THE PRELUDE ]

So, what exactly is meant by Feminised Brutalism? It’s a query of Feminism and Brutalism as binaural opposites, finding meaning within these juxtapositions and using the friction created between the two as a bearing for defining Feminised Brutalism. Brutalism is not just a style but a way of thinking. Riddled with paradox and politics, the notion of ‘what is’ and ‘what appears’ to be is equally significant in Feminised Brutalism. Whilst Brutalist’s were totally transparent with the intent and materialisation of the buildings they constructed, the ambitions and vision it was built upon contradicted the very reality that it prescribed. A flawed and failed utopia, born in a time of ruin, and bred a reality that was far from the one intended - dystopian (full of struggle, violence and crime). Similarly, the idea of an ‘ideal’ and its failings are amplified when it comes to females. Built on the false belief that the unattainable can be attained in the ‘image’ of the ‘ideal’, a prescribed behaviour and the negation of identity is forced upon women by an authority other than her own. Thus, her sense of ‘being’ and the way in which she 25

is received by society is dependent on the makings of this ‘ideal’/‘image’. Moreover, Brutalism was about the actions and activities that happened within the play of spaces, and these which made the architecture. For me, this was realised in the performative research I carried out and crucial to my understanding of what Feminised Brutalism started to become: a questioning of what things appear to be or could exist as and a treatment of materials - including femininity as one. In this respect, Feminised Brutalism observes the social construct of ‘the ideal’ in terms of one’s identity (ideal woman) as ‘Brutalist’. And the spaces she is confined to or associated with (ideal home, kitchen etc.), a reflection and product of the environment/actions she is brutalised by. Intrigued by these ‘Brutalist’ idea’s and that of gendered spaces, I began to investigate how “architecture (or space) is defined by the actions it witnesses as much as by the enclosure of its walls”1. Combined with my interest in the unexpected and the ‘brut’ quality of ‘Brutalism’s’ identity, I quite liked the idea of subverting everything typically feminine. 26

Juxtaposition is used as a means to interrogate these binaries and investigates the transition of making something typically feminine becoming something typically masculine (or raw in form) and vice versa. Instead, it is not as obvious or passive. It is more about the experience and entanglement of these themes, the interaction between them and behaviour that ensues. Considering the work of Feminist Judith Butler, “our gender, sex and self are the effects of publicly regulated performances”2 and this behaviour/act/ritual or ‘performativity’, is essential to understanding Brutalism as an experiential thing - as Feminised Brutalism. Combining this with the ideas discussed above, the female and her identity become a ‘material’. The treatment of this/’her’ in specific sites is then an act of ‘Brutalism’ performed by society based on what they deem acceptable. Whilst Feminised Brutalism dabbles in the Feminist theory and refers to the gender roles, stereotypes and attitudes that influence one’s gender identity, these do not define one’s femininity nor does Feminism define the project. Instead, Feminised 27

Brutalism is about one’s personal dealings with their femininity or gender identity and the effects of the one imposed on them by society. Ultimately, for Feminised Brutalism, the idea of the ‘ideal’ appears to be and is actually a brutal one. As is the way in which it is materialised through space, objects and activities, and the way in which living up to this ‘image’ or identity is experienced/ becomes her - a mode of being. Feminised Brutalism plays devil’s advocate with the themes concerned. It is deliberately provocative in order to prompt questions, interrogates binaries and examines the impact or expectation of ‘the ideal’ especially when it is subverted. Using juxtaposition as a means for investigating one’s femininity and the brutalism experienced through space, objects and interactions/ actions, Feminised Brutalism explores the threshold created by these often controversial and uncomfortable contrasts. Generating a conscious stream of questioning that confronts the awkwardness, taboo, stigma, problems and confusion created when the ‘image’ we perceive is anything other than the assumed or ‘ideal’. 28

Rice, L. and Littlefield, D. (2014). Transgression: Towards an Expanded Field of Architecture. Bernard Tschumi Advertisements for Architecture 1st ed. Routledge, p.18.

Digeser, P. (1994). Performativity Trouble: Postmodern Feminism and Essential Subjects. Political Research Quarterly, 47(3), p.655â&#x20AC;&#x201C;673.

THE IDEA OF ‘THE IDEAL’ IS A BRUTAL ONE.

Feminised Brutalism identifies the concept of the ‘ideal’ a brutal one, and is a model of ‘Brutalism’ that concerns the feminine identity. Located within the domestic, it deconstructs the architecture of the ‘ideal’ woman and home to understand the relationship between gender and space alongside how it is constructed and experienced. In doing so, we see how the identity of both are not only socially shaped but also embedded with gender stereotypes and customary expectations, that prescribe a certain behaviour and are imposing in more ways than one.

“Nature has determined woman’s destiny through beauty, charm, and sweetness. Law and custom have much to give women that has been withheld from them, but the position of women will surely be what it is: in youth an adored darling and in mature years a loved wife.” - Freud, Sigmund (1883) extract from letter deriding John Stuart Mill’s views on ‘female emancipation and the woman’s question altogether’.

Friedan, Betty (1963). „The Sexual Solipsism of Sigmund Freud“. The Feminine Mystique. W. W. Norton.

Martin Lambs, V. (2011). The 1950’s and the 1960’s and the American Woman : the transition from the “housewife” to the feminist. Masters. Université de Toulon - UFR Lettres et Sciences Humaines. <dumas-00680821>

THE IDEAL WOMAN The 1950’s was an important time in regards to the creation of the ‘ideal woman’, the stereotypes of who she should be and the construction of women’s identities during this period. Women of the time were expected to devote themselves to the domestic, embrace their feminine energy and fulfill their destined roles as doting wife and nurturing mother12 [ fig 1] . Founded on the ideology of the housewife, women became homeward bound with the ‘maintenance of the house and wellbeing of the family fundamental priorities’3. Fashioned by men and intensified by popular culture, the creation of the ideal woman (or the image of one at least) provided a clear model for the shoes women must fill and emulate as their proper role in society4. With this, the manifestation of her ‘perfect’ existence is one built on “socially defined, learned or constructed accoutrements of sex”5 that ‘reflect a political-economic effort to socially construct (and reward women for assimilating to) socially acceptable gender roles’6.

1950-1951 Better Homes & Gardens, Snippet of Ideal Woman Advert. Fig.1

Holt, J., 2006. The ideal woman. Turlock, CA: California State University Stanislaus Indiana University Approved Rooms for Women Official Rental Contract.

Lippa, R. (2002). Gender, nature, and nurture. 1st ed. Mahwah, N.J.: L. Erlbaum, Pp.3.

Holt, J., 2006. The ideal woman. Turlock, CA: California State University Stanislaus Indiana University Approved Rooms for Women Official Rental Contract.

Holt, J., 2006. The ideal woman. Turlock, CA: California State University Stanislaus Indiana University Approved Rooms for Women Official Rental Contract. Pp. 1

Holt, J., 2006. The ideal woman. Turlock, CA: California State University Stanislaus Indiana University Approved Rooms for Women Official Rental Contract. Pp. 2

Holt, J., 2006. The ideal woman. Turlock, CA: California State University Stanislaus Indiana University Approved Rooms for Women Official Rental Contract. Pp. 3

Fig.3

Fig.2

Meyerowitz, J.J., 1994. Not June Cleaver: women and gender in postwar America, 1945-1960 (Vol. 79). Temple University Press.

The family seemed to offer a psychological fortress, a buffer against both internal and foreign threats. In this ideological climate, independent women threatened the social order. Under cultural pressure and with limited options for work outside the home, women, contained and constrained, donned their domestic harness. Meyerowitz, J. 1994.

That being said, the social changes and institutional constraints that significantly contributed to the gender construction of the Donna Reed’s or June Cleaver’s [fig 2] of the time, can be ‘attributed to the end of World War 2 and the emergence of the Cold War’7. Prior to its end, women were elevated from the realm of the domestic and found work other than caregiving in the workforce. However, this was short-lived as ‘the sexual division of labour was re-established’8 and the discriminatory practices against women appeared justified in the conception of the ‘ideal woman’ and her ‘proper’ role9. As a result, ‘in the ideological climate, independent women threatened the social order’10 and in turn, the cultural and institutional pressures threatened their own (a self-made order: one of self-sufficiency and service to the self rather than to men). 34

Thus, ‘instructed to subordinate their interests to those of returning veterans’11, women ‘contained and constrained, donned their domestic harness’12, returning them to the less than ideal ‘ideal’: a happy, cookie-cutting, housewife.

The Feminine Mystique—the idea that women were naturally fulfilled by devoting their lives to being housewives and mothers. Friedan,Betty. (1963)

Friedan, B. (1963). The Feminine Mystique. 1st ed. New York: W.W. Norton. Friedan’s book was at the forefront of second-wave feminism in the United States.

In the interest of Feminised Brutalism, the fabrication (social and domestic) of the ‘Feminine Mystique’1314 is most important, as is the dual nature of what the ‘ideal’ promises and the reality of its ‘perfect’ illusion. In the dissatisfaction of what Frieden calls ‘the problem with no name’1516 “women naturally fulfilled by devoting their lives to being housewives and mothers”17 - women transitioned from the ideal woman to woman in crisis. From housewife to feminist and feminine (being) to masculine (doing), women broke away from the westernised entrapping’s of convention and binary code to find «one is not born, but rather becomes, a woman.” 18. But how then does one ‘become’ a woman if already biologically determined one? This would suggest that there is more to ‘being’ a woman (gender) than identifying as female (gender identity) or ‘appearing’ as one (femininity), and perhaps more to just the difference in language.

The problem that has no name—the widespread unhappiness of women in the 1950s and early 1960s. Friedan, Betty (1963).

Friedan, B. (1963). “The Problem that Has No Name”. The feminine mystique. 1st ed. New York: W.W. Norton.

Friedan, B. (1963). “The Happy Housewife Heroine”. The feminine mystique. 1st ed. New York: W.W. Norton.

Schwarzer, A. and Beauvoir, S. (1984). After The second sex. 1st ed.New York: Pantheon Books.

Fig.4

ONE IS NOT BORN, BUT RATHER BECOMES, A WOMAN. 36

BEING & BECOMING WHAT IS FEMININITY?

The quality of being female; womanliness: ‘she celebrates her femininity by wearing make-up and high heels’ Oxford Dictionary Definition. 2017

Oxford Dictionaries | English. (2017). femininity - definition of femininity in English | Oxford Dictionaries [online] Available at: https:// en.oxforddictionaries.com/ definition/femininity [Accessed 19 Jan. 2017].

In tune with these ideas and to discover what Simone de Beauvoir meant for myself, I put it into practice. Already a female, I began by exploring what one’s femininity is: Is it owed to her image? The style of her hair? Maybe her assets? Is femininity even a physical thing? An expression? Or an attitude? I set about observing the every day in relation to what I considered my own and what this consists of. From acknowledging simple things like the time spent applying makeup daily and the reason for such rituals, to not wearing a bra or exchanging routines with the opposite sex for the day, I began to differentiate what femininity is or rather isn’t. And identified objects that typically embody or are associated with ‘the quality of being female’1920. With this, I fashioned a 1:1 replica of a lace bra from cardboard and duck tape [Fig.1 & 2]. The brash and ‘masculine’ materials it was made of bode well in contrast to the intricate patterning of the lace and in likeness with the first impression of ‘Feminised Brutalism’ - a material exploration of transforming typically ‘feminine’ objects into masculinised versions or their ‘brut’(raw) form.

Feminine Object [The Antithesis]: ‘Brut’ Bra

1:1 Ratio of Real Bra Made from Cardboard & White Ducktape. Fig.1

Feminine Object [Original]: Bra 1:1 Ratio of Real Bra Made from Cardboard & Black Ducktape. Fig.2

Undoubtedly, these straightforward experiments pointed out the obvious in the distinction of popular opposites and one’s conventionalised perception of these notions (femininity and feminised). Therefore, I began to discover what a woman might anticipate (exercising what being feminine might be) rather than ‘become’.

However, provocative in style and as an object, when worn the Bra offered its user a bout of newfound confidence signified by her empowered attitude and sassy conduct [Fig.3 & 4]. From this, it was apparent that the behaviour she displayed was an ‘expression’ of her gender identity and one different to “culture’s idealisation of feminine nature”21. Observing this difference indicates that the idea of femininity we are familiar with or that I had been exploring is not its true essence but rather presumptuous and a cultural obfuscation. For one’s femininity is evidently unique to the individual and dependent on their personal perception of ‘self’ and ‘gender’ - their identity and what they choose to be identified by (purely experiential).

Erving Goffman formulates gender display as follows: If gender be defined as the culturally established correlates of sex (whether in consequence of biology or learning), then gender display refers to conventionalized portrayals of these correlates. (1976, p. 69)

Erving Goffman on gender display (1976, p. 69)

Stets, J.E. and Burke, P.J., 2000. Femininity/ Masculinity. Department of Sociology, Washington State University. Pp. 997-1005 in Edgar F. Borgatta and Rhonda J. V. Montgomery (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Sociology, Revised Edition. New York: Macmillan.

A new understanding of gender as a routine accomplishment embedded in everyday interaction…that gender is not a set of traits, nor a variable, nor a role, but the product of social doings of some sort. West, Candace. and Zimmerman, Don H. (1987)

West, Candace. and Zimmerman, Don H. (1987). Doing Gender. Gender & Society, 1(2), pp.125-151.

Simultaneously, it is one constructed or nurtured by social and cultural factors: a “conventionalised portrayal”22 of what society classifies as the proper, ideal or acceptable attributes for a woman. Thus indicating that ‘although gender roles, gender stereotypes and gender attitudes influence one’s gender identity, they are not the same as gender identity’ (Katz 1986; Spence and Sawin 1985)23. And therefore suggesting in accordance with Candace West and Don H. Zimmerman that the social construction of ‘gender roles’ are learned and enacted - an act of doing2425. It became obvious then that the performativity of one’s gender identity, the act of ‘doing’ and of that experience is an essential part of finding meaning in and understanding Feminised Brutalism. As is the environment it’s practised in.

Matrix (Organization) ed., 1984. Making space: women and the man-made environment. Pluto Press (UK).

Fig.3

Matrix (Organization) ed., 1984. Making space: women and the man-made environment. Pluto Press (UK).

Additionally, it seemed that the built environment makes ‘appropriate’ settings for different activities which contain ‘messages’ about ‘proper’ gender roles in these places26. And “there’s a way in which stereotypical ideas about female and male behaviour are connected to particular locations which can prescribe women’s movement (within and) outside the home and appropriate behaviour.”27 In order to interrogate this idea and that of hard and soft, masculine and feminine materials, I realised that the ‘beauty’ or ‘anti-beauty’ image previously discussed in Brutalism is key. I wanted to discover femininity that is void of its antique or ornate image and functionality too.

Shannon Vas trying on the ‘Brut’ Bra

Fig.4 43

HARD & SOFT, MASCULINE & FEMININE This escalated to the creation of another performative object, visually and thought-provokingly more provocative than the last: a concrete cast of a silicone dildo. From jelly dildo to concrete penis, my intent was to explicitly toy with the juxtapositional values of hard and soft materials, play on oneâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s perception of what classifies as masculine or feminine and investigate the controversies or problems that arise from such dichotomies.

‘HER’ IN THE WORKSHOP A Visual Essay

Her in the Workshop: Him & Her. Pink Nails Sanding. Sawing Wood. Drilling Dildo. Dildo Lollipop. Waiting. Dip. Dipped in Alginate. Pull Out. Open Up Seal. Peel apart. The Big Reveal Salted Penis. Polish. The Rise.

28 Bruno,

Giuliana. Public Intimacy. 1st ed. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2007. Print.

Johnston, Claire. ed. 1988. “Dorothy Arzener: Critical Strategies,” in Feminism and Film Theory. Constance Penley (New York) p.36

Using concrete as a ‘Brutalist’ material, the concrete penis charged in meaning and gendered politics, acted as a metaphor or signifier of what Feminised Brutalism is. It challenged gendered binaries, subverted the conventional character of femininity, materials used, ritual carried out and the setting they were performed in. In this sense, the performative object becomes “an instrument - a tool - for writing the woman into space”28 and therefore bears a resemblance to the work of Rebecca Horn. For example, In Scratching both walls at once (1974) [FIG 5], Pencil Mask (1973) [FIG 6] and The Prussian Bride Machine (1988) [FIG 7], Horn uses bodily extensions and erotically driven systems of representation to quite literally draw the female’s experience of space. Or “what is experientially female [-] the association of desire with a space”29 says Jessica Benjamin. In the shared interest of woman representation and self-representation, Feminised Brutalism differs, as the concrete penis doesn’t literally write a female into space or represent ‘her’ experience as such. Rather, the object instigates a new experience of space and this imprinted on the female.

Fig.7 76

Fig.5

Fig. 6 77

Matrix (Organization) ed., 1984. Making space: women and the man-made environment. Pluto Press (UK).

THE IDEAL SETTING “The physical patterning of space and activities either limit or expand the usability of our surroundings”1, and limiting it was for women in the 50’s as they had incredibly localised existences. Besides the constraints of playing domestic goddess, this was due to the lack of mobility, access to resources and more importantly the physical arrangement of the built environment. Divided by location and activity, men were aligned with the public sphere and production, and women with the home and consumption2. With this, the ideal woman was of course to be found in her ‘proper place’, the home, and this too an image of the ‘ideal’: a homogeneous model designed for the nuclear family[Fig.2]. This particular household plan prescribed a specific aspiration, living space and role to be played by each individual in the family. The loving wife/mother - homebound and of service to her husband and family. The father - ‘brought home the bacon’ and exercised his legs alongside power if and when he pleased. And “2.2 contended children”3 - to be nurtured by their mother.

Annie Taintor 1950’s domestic stereotype. Fig.1

1950â&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Nuclear family home design Fig.2

Matrix (Organization) ed., 1984. Making space: women and the man-made environment. Pluto Press (UK).

Weisman, L. (1992). Discrimination by design. 1st ed. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, p.86.

The Post-war home reflected societies obsession with order and ‘image’ as well as its idealisation of family life; “seeing the house as cheerful and comfortable where wives should find home making a pleasure, not a burden”4. Meanwhile, the real experiences and activities of women in their ‘appropriate’ environment were frankly that (burdensome/unsatisfactory), glossed over by a more romantic picture that concealed their not so perfect reality. Investigating the effect of space on gender and vice versa, demonstrated that those assigned to or occupied by women were frequently spaces of confinement. Limiting in space or activity, it seemed that “for her, the home became both altar and prison, and her authority within it was exerted entirely by way of symbolism”5. Considering this, Feminised Brutalism shifted from a material exploration of ‘Brutalism’ through the use of concrete and performative objects that subvert feminine ‘ideals’, to a spatial query of gender and its implications. Quizzing what a ‘cell’ could exist as (other than those in prison) where the architecture negates one’s identity and prescribes a behaviour, and is as imposing on one’s femininity as defined by it. For example: the kitchen, A room of one’s own, or the fainting room. What is ‘feminising’ in this context? How do you feminise a space of confinement? What would a feminised cell look like? [Fig.3, 4 & 5]

Fig.3

Although a useful exercise, the results in terms of the definition or potential for Feminised Brutalism felt exactly as the rooms intended: limited and conventionalised. 82

Fig.4

Fig.5

Hopkins, O. (2014). The Dezeen guide to Brutalist architecture. [online] Dezeen. Available at: https://www.dezeen. com/2014/09/10/ dezeen-guide-to-brutalistarchitecture-owen-hopkins/ [Accessed 20 Jan. 2017].

To overcome the habit of thinking according to premeditated assumptions or cliched stereotypes, I visited The Barbican to challenge these and observe/ experience Brutalism it in its original essence. In attempt to ‘Feminise’ the space I created collages using perspective and cut-outs of 50’s housewives that resembled ‘The Smithson’s’[ Fig.6] , where the architecture is overwhelmed by ‘human presence’6, her presence [Fig.7].

1953 Alison and Peter. Golden Lane Estate Collage. Fig.6

Fig.7 Architectureâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s shape becomes furniture to scale of woman.

Fig.8 Girlâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s just wanna have fu-un!

Fig.9 Gardening.

Fig.10 Power Trio.

Fig.11 Peek-a-boo, peek-a-who? Tucked away spaces that are unsafe for women/ children and encourage delinquency.

Fig.12 Public Spanking.

Fig.13 The struggle is real. Highlights inconvenience of accessibility in Brutalist builds.

Fig.14 A Bit of Lady Gardening.

These compositions reiterated the idea that the play of spaces and activities within, the subtleties of texture and light, the treatment of materials are what make ‘Brutalism’7. Hence, in the discovery of Brutalism as an experiential thing these same elements must be acknowledged in Feminised Brutalism. It is not to dress up or dress down a space in attempt to reclaim or re-gender it, nor as simple as ‘feminising’ what is masculine or aligning ‘Brutalism’8 with masculinity.

Referring to Brutalist Architecture here.

Referring to Brutalism of Feminised Brutalism here.

In the image of Ironing Concrete, Feminised Brutalism’s definition becomes paradoxically nuanced yet alluring. Its juxtaposition makes one question the seemingly impossible. Can concrete be ironed? Rather than ironing his shirt, is ironing concrete considered a household chore? Does it become an act of construction instead and the housewife literally a ‘home’ maker? Or does it just concretize her role as homemaker? Playing with the usually separate spheres of the public and domestic alongside production and consumption, I begin to create juxtapositions that confront, critique, question and subvert the conventionality of binaries in society, as well as the standardised gender roles imposed on us. Continuing my exploration of the ‘ideal’ as ‘Brutalist’ but in other acts and cells at home.

Fig.15 Put him straight! Ironing Concrete.

THE 50’s IDEAL HOME SHOW v.s. IKEA’s MODERNDAY IDEAL - A METHODOLOGY FOR GENDER AND SPACE

METHODOLOGY

This report will use the ‘Ideal’ as a model of brutality, identify where the ‘Ideal’ exists and what it implies about the concerning: the Feminine Identity and Brutalism. This will be examined by deconstructing the architecture of the ‘ideal’ woman and home, and analysing the brutality of the gender stereotypes/ roles/expectations of each. I acknowledge how these spaces are constructed settings that prescribe a certain behaviour and activities that play into the idea of ‘the ideal’ alongside its gendered identity. The period that I will refer to is the 1950’s when the idea of the ‘ideal’ was most prominent, readily enforced and heavily imposed on feminine identities. The ‘ideal’ is still as influential today, so I will crossexamine this in the more modern setting of IKEA home - not the brand itself but the sets constructed in store - which is also sold to us as a site of ‘ideal’ living. My intent here is to situate the concept of Feminised Brutalism in the contemporary, making the report relevant to the present day and my current findings. By observing the IKEA ‘sets’ I will begin to locate my analysis of the ‘ideal’ sites that exist there, gain an understanding of the gender activity and occupation of these spaces (from a shopper’s experience), and critique this through a feminist lens. In the discovery of our obsessive behaviour and interaction with these sets/the ‘ideal’ - the technologies, rituals, behaviours and gendered politics that exist here - I will be able to comment on the relationship between gender and space and perhaps a shift in ideals/concerns.

Finally, I intend to highlight the vast gap between what the ‘ideal’ appears to be (utopian) and the actual reality of what it is (dystopian). In addition to the ironic way in which despite experiencing and being aware of the entrapping/brutal way in which the ‘ideal’ is enforced, we (as in female’s) still embrace it to some extent, and play an active role (maybe subconsciously or inescapably) in the construction of our own brutally shaped ‘ideal’ identities/sets. Maybe then, as a result of this sequence of events (her acts within a specific setting), these constructs (gender and space she occupies) define Feminised Brutalism and the perpetrators (the female) themselves act as Feminised Brutalists.

100

THEN V.S. NOW - A CASE STUDY ON IDEOLOGY, GENDER AND DOMUS

101

Fig.1 1908, The Daily Mail Ideal Home Show, UK.

Fig.2 2016, IKEA Home Store, London.

102

THE IDEAL-OFF 1

En.wikipedia. org. (2016). Ideal Home Show. [online] Available at: https://en.wikipedia.org/ wiki/Ideal_Home_Show [Accessed 20 Jan. 2017].

History, I. (n.d.). Ideal Home Show History - Ideal Home Show. [online] Idealhomeshow. co.uk. Available at: http:// www.idealhomeshow.co.uk/ visiting/ideal-home-showhistory [Accessed 20 Jan. 2017].

British Pathé, (2014). Olympia - Ideal Home Exhibition (1959). [image] Available at: https:// youtu.be/JIxBetlTPS8 [Accessed 20 Jan. 2017].

British Pathé, (2014). “Olympia. Dream Houses”. [video] Available at: https://youtu.be/dXKQXHz-_ Kw [Accessed 20 Jan. 2017].

Established in 19081, for decades now the ideal home show has exhibited and styled the homes and lives of Britain[ Fig.1] . Initiated in a time when “suffragettes were chaining themselves to railings”2, the show has witnessed and been shaped by a fair share of historical milestone’s, reflecting the model ‘image’ and expected mode of living for society along the way. Introducing “elegance and efficiency”3 to 1950’s homes, the show presented the latest home innovations and ‘it’ conveniences that made one “wonder every year, how on earth [one] managed to exist up until now”4. From found footage of the 50’s ideal home show, we see the physical fabrication of the time’s architectural and social intentions as well as the disjunction between these and the realities they fashioned. Instead of using the 2016 exhibition as a comparative model, I decided to use the premises of Swedish store IKEA[ Fig.2]. Besides being used in earlier experiments and also exhibiting an idealised vision of dwelling, I chose IKEA because of its consumer experience. Rather than just a display, IKEA set’s invite consumer’s to quite literally make themselves at home. Installing it’s ideal’s into our everyday lives and normalising them through the active performance and consumption that takes place. The select few, are images from my case study which illustrate the ‘ideal’ set and intended behaviour for both periods in each scenario; the living room, bedroom and kitchen.

103

IKEA Home Store: The Bedroom Set

Fig.3

Fig.4

104

Fig.6

105

The Daily Mail Ideal Home Show: The Bedroom Set

Fig.5

IKEA Home Store: The Living Room Set

Fig.7

Fig.8

Fig.9

106

Fig.10

Fig.12

107

The Daily Mail Ideal Home Show: The Living Room Set

Fig.11

IKEA Home Store: The Kitchen Set

Fig.13

Fig.14

108

Fig.17

109

The Daily Mail Ideal Home Show: The Kitchen Set

Fig.16

Having observed and compared IKEA’s sets with those of the 50’s, I can see many parallels and some differences also. Above all, each room is submerged in a complex web of gender politics and embedded codes that demand a contextual report of their own. Based on the analysis I have done so far, exploring the gender politics of each room further could play out as follows: the living room as a space where ICT’s and media technologies link individuals and household to ideology, the bedroom as an intimate space for sexual politics and formation of one’s identity, and finally the kitchen as a space of gender politics and technology. However, as there is little space to do so here, I intend to use these sites in future practice to understand sexual difference in terms of space and perhaps create new performative objects or concrete interventions that negotiate the gender fixity within the household. For now, I have narrowed my study and analysis to a single room: the kitchen. Highly-charged and politicised, I think this space is rich in material and provides a rudimentary basis for understanding the relation between gender and space.

Fig.15

110

Fig.18

111

112

THE KITCHEN

Dating back 467 B.C., The Ancient Greek playwright Aeschylus wrote: “Let women stay at home and hold their peace” in Seven Against Thebes.

Oldenziel, R. and Zachmann, K. (2009). Cold War kitchen. 1st ed. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, p.3.

Matrix (Organization) ed., 1984. Making space: women and the man-made environment. Pluto Press (UK). Page 81

Holt, J., 2006. The ideal woman. Turlock, CA: California State University Stanislaus Indiana University Approved Rooms for Women Official Rental Contract.

Revolution, I. (2009). Industrial Revolution Facts & Summary - HISTORY. com. [online] HISTORY.com. Available at: http://www.history. com/topics/industrial-revolution [Accessed 20 Jan. 2017].

The kitchen as a space of gender politics and technology. For the most part, history has argued that ‘A woman belongs in the home/kitchen’1 and arguably this comment as simple-minded as the stereotype itself, for “[k]itchens are as deeply social as they are political”2 and the roles of women likewise. In 195171 the work of women shifted from solely housewifery to paid work, creating a 2.2million woman-strong workforce3 that dramatically challenged and conflicted the ‘ideal’s’ previously discussed. To manage and obscure such figures, the ‘appropriate’ role as housewife was reaffirmed4 and women seduced by new electronic toys to play with; consumer goods. Marked as a time of modernity and social progression, Industrialisation transformed 18th-19th century Britain as rapidly as it did our homes5. In the guise of more efficient spatial arrangements and labour saving machinery, of ‘work’station units and washing machines, kitchens became “as much a locus for industrialised work as factories and coal mines”6.

Cowan Schwarz, R., 1983. More work for Mother: The ironies of household technologies from the Open Hearth to the Microwave. More work for Mother: The ironies of household technologies from the Open Hearth to the Microwave. Page 4

113

Cowan, R.S., 1983. More work for mother: The ironies of household technology from the open hearth to the microwave (Vol. 5131). Basic Books.

Designed by Margarete Schütte-Lihotzky ,The Frankfurt kitchen was the first fitted kitchens of its time, that realised a unified concept, designed to enable efficient work and to be built at low cost. Wikipedia (2016)

En.wikipedia.org. (2016). Frankfurt kitchen. [online] Available at: https://en.wikipedia. org/wiki/Frankfurt_kitchen [Accessed 20 Jan. 2017]

Yorke, F.R.S. and Gibberd, F., 1948. The modern flat. architectural Press.

1926 Margarete SchütteLihotzky, The Frankfurt Kitchen Design for architect Ernst May’s social housing project in Frankfurt, Germany. Fig.1

114

Ironically, while the mechanisation of domestic tasks appeared to ease and reduce the workload, newly formed chores (done single-handedly) replaced ‘outdated’ one’s (dependent on family unit) and cleaning standards heightened, generating ‘more work for mother’7 instead. Soon the kitchen resembled a science lab adorned with the latest devices and imitated the Taylorist style of Lihotzky’s early design: The Frankfurt Kitchen89 [Fig.1]. Isolated in occupancy and task, the kitchen echoed “a machine for the preparation of meals”10 in Corbusier’s words.

115

Ryan, D. (1995). The Daily Mail Ideal Home Exhibition and Suburban Modernity 1908-1951. Ph.D. University of East London.

Oldenziel, R. and Zachmann, K. (2009). Cold War kitchen. 1st ed. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, p.3.

The Kitchen Debate was a fundamental controversy between U.S. Vice President Richard Nixon and Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev about the ideas of capitalism and consumerism. Cold War Kitchen (2009)

Promoted “as both traditional homemaker and yet new domestic scientist”11, The Ideal Home Show alongside other social actors placed women at the centre of their affairs. Making the ‘heart’ of homes target consumers and ‘households’ a product of capitalisation, production and consumption. Considered a “technopolictal node that linked the state, the market and the family”12 [Fig. 2], the kitchen grabbed the attention of World Superpowers and sparked a debate larger than ‘what’s for dinner’ in 195913. On par with “computers, cars and nuclear missiles”14, the kitchen became grounds for enacting political goals, redefining ‘real’ technology [Fig. 3] and even battle [Fig. 4].

Oldenziel, R. and Zachmann, K. (2009). Cold War kitchen. 1st ed. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, p.1.

Fig.2

Fig.3

116

Fig.4 1959 Photograph of Nixon and Kruschchev observing the General Electric kitchen at the American National Exhibition, USA.

117

HOME - THE 50’s IDEAL V.S. MODERN-DAY IKEA’s

Researching the gendered affiliations and politics of 50’s kitchens, provided a lens for assessing IKEA’s sets and scope for discovering what is suggested by the physical fabrication of its contemporary kitchens: For whom is it constructed? By way of? Demonstrating what?

Firstly, as main protagonists in both the home and domestication of kitchen technology, 50’s women feature at the centre of each set and act performed in the following screenshots. Here, masculine and feminine stereotypes are translated in the differentiation of space and duty, promoting “the illusion of security and family stability through traditional styles and symbols”15. Noticeably, only women are summoned to the stove or kitchen sink, thus fitting their role as a “dependent and passive female counterpart”16. 118

Weisman, L. (1992). Discrimination by design. 1st ed. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, p.97.

Fig.5

Fig.6

Fig.7

119

Fig.8

Fig.9

Fig.10

120

When compared to IKEA’s sets and footfall then, the opposite is suggested. Unlike the ideal home show, there was a diverse range of couples, families and individuals present [Fig.10] - demonstrating that the domestic is no longer just a woman’s domain [Fig.9] . Additionally, most kitchens were open-plan and included dining tables [Fig.8 & 11]; no longer privatised or resembling a ‘machine’, these promote family cohesion and contribution. Suggesting that authority is distributed more evenly amongst today’s households, with duties and decisions determined by the family as a unit, rather than dictated by a single person (man) or gender code.

Fig.11

121

Furthermore, while each store constructs its sets from the same blueprint and exact replica’s are found in the catalogue, IKEA breaks away from the homogeny of the 50’s nuclear family as an exemplary framework for its designs. For instance, expressed in the practical form of a small, minimalist kitchen dressed with steel countertops and dark backdrops, is the individuality of a Bachelor. Although IKEA projects an idealised image of family life, its representations are less elusive yet still a product of ‘the illusion’ and what it appears as today: single-parent families, unmarried cohabitants or singletons.

Fig.12

122

Fig.13

123

Fig. 14

Fig.15

Fig.16

124

Within these impeccably clean sets the presence of children is more apparent in IKEA than the 50’s. Emphasised by the interior design and miniature furnishings [Fig.14 & 15], the family ‘image’ and actual unit seem to be embraced and central to IKEA’s ethos. Meanwhile, the 50’s was built on the pretence of a family-oriented ideal, yet the children (mess/actual kids) remain traceless in these home sets [Fig.17 & 18] and their reality merely part of a social performance. In contrast, children are given a sense of individuality and ‘being’ in IKEA sets, expressed in not just their own room’s [Fig 15] but throughout the house too [Fig.16].

Fig. 17 Fig. 18

125

126

Fig.19 Screenshots from British Path´e Video of The 1950’s Daily Mail Ideal Home Exhibition.

Fig.20

Secondly, with excessive storage solutions, elaborate style choices [Fig.20] and abundant polished amenities, IKEA appears to focus on the aesthetics of the domestic rather than technology. In the 50’s however, kitchen furnishings and conveniences were utilitarian in style and based on functionality. They were actual inventions that did something [Fig 19].

127

Fig.22

Fig.21

Fig.23

128

Considering this and the public’s advanced understanding of such devices [Fig.21] as well as their positions in society today, it makes sense why these are no longer obsessed over. Accordingly, IKEA’s ‘wonderful everyday’ ironically beautifies and obscures domestic drudgery by hiding it behind glossy cupboard doors and infinite compartments [Fig.22 & 23] . Organising both our lives and kitchens in a compulsive and orderly fashion [Fig.24]. Thus, it’s face may have changed but the gender politics and materialised parts of the 50’s kitchen remain.

Fig. 24 129

Fig.25

Fig. 27

Fig.26

Finally, from kitchen utensils to streamlined units, the laborious nature of some kitchens seemed nostalgic [Fig.25, 26 & 27] and resembled those of the 50â&#x20AC;&#x2122;s [Fig.28] or even earlier: The Frankfurt kitchen [Fig.29]. Perhaps so and a result of designers being postmodern. Nevertheless, I believe the arrangement and rationale for the kitchen to be different to nostalgia and endured instead. Established in the 30â&#x20AC;&#x2122;s, defined as contemporary in the 50â&#x20AC;&#x2122;s and used presently, elements may have changed over the years (e.g. introducing hi-technology and a facelift) but the basic mapping and formula for kitchens are endured, a testament of its time and good design. 130

Fig.29

Fig.30

Fig.28 131

Fig.31

Fig.32

Fig.33

Fig.34

132

To summarise, many parallels can be drawn between the 1950’s and modern-day kitchen set’s observed. From my analysis, IKEA’s seem to express fundamental changes in family ideology and design for ‘housing the family’ in three main ways: family v.s. women at the centre, nostalgia v.s. endurance and aesthetic v.s. reality. But what does this suggest about the interrelationship between ideology, gender and space? In societies refusal of the nuclear family as an optimum and absolute ideal, more realistic versions appear in IKEA that accommodate varied family structures including individuals and the times. Evidently, men and women’s roles have become more fluid and somewhat equalised in the home. The relationship of space to these roles is less authoritarian and more desirable than before as the kitchen has become a socialised space rather than mechanised ‘work centre’. And this, a division of labour (public sphere) and leisure (domestic sphere) rather than sexes. Ultimately, assumptions about women’s subordinate position are less obvious (if not dismissed) today than in the 50’s, yet one still seems to re-enact elements of these notions (in IKEA or at home) and find them appealing (consumers of IKEA’s idealised living).

133

FEMINISED BRUTALISM REVISED [ THE AFTER-THOUGHT ]

134

Whilst the theme of my work is the search for a Feminised approach to social and cultural resistance, the focus is a type of nuanced anti-authority or act of resistance like those in the Fictional Final Goal Exhibition1. But instead of a focus geared toward dominant ideologies and the enactment of these by male protagonists represented in the media2, my project examines the ‘brut’ reality of women as both protagonists and victims of this cultural obfuscation. With this, Feminised Brutalism explores the consequential effects/ affects of such representations, using social constructs like the 50’s idealisations of one’s gender identity to discover the interrelationship between ideology, gender and space. Determined as ‘overtly masculinised modes of anarchist behaviour’3, Feminised Brutalism finds the translation of these notions (in space, objects and acts) as emotionally and physically confining as well as damaging to one’s idea of self - in terms of being female. Essentially the idea of the ‘ideal’ is deemed a brutal one.

135

Furthermore, it examines the gender politics and roles assigned to females via manmade architectures - the ideal woman and home - where “Domus, domesticity and domestication”4 become confused and expressed by way of the feminine. As explored by Louise Bourgeois in FemmeMaison, “the body and house are joined in the itinerary of dwelling”5. In this report, Feminised Brutalism investigates this “architexture” in attempt to question and challenge “what Domus [(home)] means for the female subject”6. By juxtaposing binary codes, reinventing ‘Brutalism’s’ original meaning and our relationship with materials (concrete, gender, self), we see what each can exist as in relation to one’s Femininity/Female Identity. In the form of performative objects and acts, the work generated is an investigation and collection of “feminised – but not feminist – acts of daily resistance”7. Its aim is not exactly to attack or ‘take arms’ against societal expectations8, but to prompt both a collective and internal survey that 136

allows for us as a society to acknowledge the failings/problems of such ideals and binaries. By subverting a woman’s work within the home from domestic chores to domestic construction, the traditional acts performed are transformed into “small acts of rebellion”9. This juxtaposition provides a means for her to evade her “essential nature” as she becomes empowered by her reinvented role as ‘creator’ rather than created, and ‘maker’ rather than homemaker. Arguably a doubled edged sword however, as it leaves on to question whether this new authority/agency comes at a price of constructing her own cell (home), still entrapped. 1, 2, 3, 7, 8, 9 “FFG Exhibition : Laura Potter”. Laurapotter.co.uk. N.p., 2015. Web. 24 Jan. 2017.

Bruno, Giuliana. Public Intimacy. 1st ed. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2007. Print. p.166

Bruno, Giuliana. Public Intimacy. 1st ed. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2007. Print. p.163

137

138

CONCLUSION 1

Nam, H. (2016). Let’s Talk Art: Fischli and Weiss and Their Popular Opposites. [online] Guggenheim. Available at: https://www.guggenheim.org/ blogs/checklist/lets-talk-artfischli-and-weiss-and-theirpopular-opposites [Accessed 20 Jan. 2017].

At first, Feminism may appear the complete antithesis of Brutalism and the gendered notions suggested by each (femininity and masculinity) likewise. Despite this, seeking new meaning in the juxtaposition and merging of these somewhat contrasting themes, revealed that there is more to polar opposites or gender than meets the eye. Similarly, establishing a definition for Feminised Brutalism forced me to actively engage with, interrogate and challenge everything I previously knew (or thought I did), whilst responding directly and sometimes abstractly to the question at the very centre of this investigation: why viewing the world in binary is problematic. In a time as unstable as present, to expect the unexpected never seemed better advice. By entertaining this idea and what Feminised Brutalism consists of, one begins to question their own rationale as well as societies in terms of the ”inherent dichotomies we draw between things”1. In likeness with the work of Fischli and Weiss, the unusual pairings “confuse and challenge the over-simplified binaries suggested”2, creating a space or dialogue even, that allows for such ‘constructs’ to be deconstructed and reimagined. Starting from just a question, I believe projects like mine have the capacity to influence and implement societal changes that are from small or simple-minded. Take the fluidity of gender in today’s world for instance. Even if new gender types aren’t entirely understood or accepted by all, the frictions caused by these new norms are openly discussed and celebrated in the form of inquisitiveness. My intent is to prompt other social actors (designers, the public, etc.) to undo the fixity of binary systems and challenge its conventionality in unorthodox yet progressive ways. 139

QUERY â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;CO AS WELL AS ASSUMPTIO FEARLESSL CONFRONT THE UNKOW 140

ONVENTION’ S ONE’ S ONS & LY T WN. 141

142

BIBLIOGRAPHY

143

BIBLIOGRAPHY Banham, R. (2011). The New Brutalism by Reyner Banham. [online] Architectural Review. Available at: https://www. architectural-review.com/archive/ viewpoints/the-new-brutalism-by-reynerbanham/8603840.article [Accessed 23 Dec. 2016].

British Pathé, (2014). Olympia - Ideal Home Exhibition (1959). [image] Available at: https://youtu.be/JIxBetlTPS8 [Accessed 20 Jan. 2017]. Hooks, B. (2000). Feminism is for everybody. 1st ed. Cambridge, MA: South End Press, p.149.

Bruno, G. (2007). Public intimacy. 1st ed. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, p.81.

British Pathé, (2014). “Olympia. Dream Houses”. [video] Available at: https://youtu. be/dXKQXHz-_Kw [Accessed 20 Jan. 2017].

Crossman, A. (2017). Feminist Theory in Sociology An Overview of Key Ideas and Issues. [online] About.com Education. Available at: http://sociology.about.com/od/ Sociological-Theory/a/Feminist-Theory.htm [Accessed 10 Dec. 2016].

Hopkins, O. (2014). The Dezeen guide to Brutalist architecture. [online] Dezeen. Available at: https://www.dezeen. com/2014/09/10/dezeen-guide-to-brutalistarchitecture-owen-hopkins/ [Accessed 20 Jan. 2017].

Digeser, P. (1994). Performativity Trouble: Postmodern Feminism and Essential Subjects. Political Research Quarterly, 47(3), pp.655–673.

Issakova, I. (2012). What is the difference between feminine and feminist?. [online] Quora. Available at: https://www.quora. com/What-is-the-difference-betweenfeminine-and-feminist [Accessed 19 Jan. 2017].

Friedan, B. (1963). The feminine mystique. 1st ed. New York: W.W. Norton. Gender.cawater-info.net. (2017). History and theory of feminism. [online] Available at: http://www.gender.cawater-info.net/ knowledge_base/rubricator/feminism_e.htm [Accessed 10 Dec. 2016]. Hatherley, O. (2016). LRB · Owen Hatherley · Strange, Angry Objects: The Brutalist Decades. [online] London Review of Books. Available at: http://www.lrb.co.uk/v38/ n22/owen-hatherley/strange-angry-objects [Accessed 17 Nov. 2016].

Cowan, R.S., 1983. More work for mother: The ironies of household technology from the open hearth to the microwave (Vol. 5131). Basic Books. Lippa, R. (2002). Gender, nature, and nurture. 1st ed. Mahwah, N.J.: L. Erlbaum, p.3. En.wikipedia.org. (2016). Frankfurt Kitchen. [online] Available at: https://en.wikipedia.org/ wiki/Frankfurt_kitchen [Accessed 20 Jan. 2017].

Friedan, Betty (1963). „The Sexual Solipsism of Sigmund Freud“. The Feminine Mystique. W. W. Norton. Retrieved 201102-18.

En.wikipedia.org. (2016). Ideal Home Show. [online] Available at: https://en.wikipedia.org/ wiki/Ideal_Home_Show [Accessed 20 Jan. 2017].

Holt, J., 2006. The ideal woman. Turlock, CA: California State University Stanislaus Indiana University Approved Rooms for Women Official Rental Contract.

Lisa Cole, N. (2016). What is Feminist Theory? Misconceptions and Realities. [online] About.com Education. Available at: http://sociology.about.com/od/SociologicalTheory/a/Feminist-Theory.htm [Accessed 29 Dec. 2016].

Hooks, B. (1984). Feminist theory from margin to center. 1st ed. Boston, MA: South End Press.

144

Haseman, Brad (2006) A Manifesto for Performative Research. Media International Australia incorporating Culture and Policy, theme issue “Practice-led Research”(no.

- Facts & Summary - HISTORY.com. [online] HISTORY.com. Available at: http://www. history.com/topics/industrial-revolution [Accessed 20 Jan. 2017].

118): pp. 98-106.

Rice, L. and Littlefield, D. (2014). Transgression: Towards an Expanded Field of Architecture. 1st ed. Routledge, p.18.

History, I. (n.d.). Ideal Home Show History Ideal Home Show. [online] Idealhomeshow. co.uk. Available at: http://www. idealhomeshow.co.uk/visiting/ideal-homeshow-history [Accessed 20 Jan. 2017]. Making space. (1984). 1st ed. London: Pluto Press. Martin Lambs, V. (2011). The 1950’s and the 1960’s and the American Woman : the transition from the “housewife” to the feminist. Masters. Université de Toulon UFR Lettres et Sciences Humaines. Marxists.org. (2005). The Feminine Mystique Betty Friedan (1963). [online] Available at: https://www.marxists.org/ reference/subject/philosophy/works/us/ friedan.htm [Accessed 19 Jan. 2017].

Royal Institute of British Architects. (2017). Brutalism. [online] Available at: https://www. architecture.com/Explore/ArchitecturalStyles/ Brutalism.aspx [Accessed 23 Dec. 2016]. Ryan, D. (1995). The Daily Mail Ideal Home Exhibition and Suburban Modernity 19081951. Ph.D. University of East London. Schwarzer, A. and Beauvoir, S. (1984). After The second sex. 1st ed. New York: Pantheon Books. Stets, J.E. and Burke, P.J., 2000. Femininity/ Masculinity. Department of Sociology, Washington State University. Pp. 9971005 in Edgar F. Borgatta and Rhonda J. V. Montgomery (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Sociology, Revised Edition. New York: Macmillan.

Meyerowitz, J. (1994). Not June Cleaver. 1st ed. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, p.3. Nam, H. (2016). Let’s Talk Art: Fischli and Weiss and Their Popular Opposites. [online] Guggenheim. Available at: https:// www.guggenheim.org/blogs/checklist/letstalk-art-fischli-and-weiss-and-their-popularopposites [Accessed 20 Jan. 2017]. Oldenziel, R. and Zachmann, K. (2009). Cold War kitchen. 1st ed. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, p.3. Oxford Dictionaries | English. (2017). femininity - definition of femininity in English | Oxford Dictionaries. [online] Available at: https://en.oxforddictionaries. com/definition/femininity [Accessed 19 Jan. 2017]. Potter, Laura “FFG Exhibition : Laura Potter”. Laurapotter.co.uk. N.p., 2015. Web. 24 Jan. 2017. Revolution, I. (2009). Industrial Revolution

145

Taylor, A. (2012). Slavoj Žižek’s House, Stalin Poster, and Weird Kitchen. [video] Available at: https://youtu.be/JA60L_NQYm0 [Accessed 19 Jan. 2017]. Wajcman, J. (2010). Feminist theories of technology. Cambridge Journal of Economics, [online] 34(1), pp.143-152. Available at: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/28623/ [Accessed 23 Nov. 2016]. Watson-Smyth, K. (2013). Brutalist architecture: a concept made concrete. [online] Ft.com. Available at: https://www. ft.com/content/4dcac1fe-be25-11e2-9b2700144feab7de [Accessed 29 Dec. 2016]. Weisman, L. (1992). Discrimination by design. 1st ed. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, p.86. Weisman, L. (1992). Discrimination by design. 1st ed. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, p.97.

West, Candace. and Zimmerman, Don H. (1987). Doing Gender. Gender & Society, 1(2), pp.125-151. “Judith Butler And Performativity For Beginners (Mostly In Her Own Words).”. Web. 21 Jan. 2017.

[Fig.3] Greham, Tianna. “Project ID?”. Unravelling. N.p., 2016. Web. 22 Jan. 2017.

CHAPTER 5 - BEING & BECOMING [Fig.1] Brut Bra. [Fig.2] Bra

IMAGES

[Fig.3] Pinterest,. June Cleaver. Web. 23 Jan. 2017.

CHAPTER 2 - BRUTALSM

[Fig.4] The Perfect Wife. 2011. Web. 23 Jan. 2017.

[Fig.1] Le Corbusier: Unité D’habitation, Marseille. 2016. Web. 22 Jan. 2017. [Fig.2] Abrahamson, Michael. Alison & Peter Smithson, Hunstanton Secondary School. 1949-54. 2011. Web. 22 Jan. 2017. [Fig.3] Alison & Peter Smithon’s Hunstanton Secondary School Interior - The ‘Warehouse Aesthetic’. 1954. Web. 23 Jan. 2017. [Fig.4] Abrahamson, Michael. Alison & Peter Smithson, Robin Hood Gardens, London. 1964-70.. 2011. Web. 22 Jan. 2017.

CHAPTER 3 - FEMINISM [Fig.1] Finch, Candi. Suffragette Movement - First Wave Feminism. 2005. Web. 23 Jan. 2017. [Fig.2] Smash Patriarchy. 2015. Web. 23 Jan. 2017.

CHAPTER 4 - FEMINISED BRUTALISM DEFINED [THE PRELUDE] [Fig.1] Greham, Tianna. “Feminised Brutalism: Adjective ????”. Unravelling. N.p., 2016. Web. 22 Jan. 2017. [Fig.2] Greham, Tianna. “Feminised Brutalism Definition ???”. Unravelling. N.p., 2016. Web. 22 Jan. 2017.

[Fig.5] Horn, Rebecca. Rebecca Horn: Two Hands Scratching Both Walls, 1974-75. 2014. Web. 22 Jan. 2017. [Fig.6] Tate,. Rebecca Horn - Pencil Mask. 1972. Web. 22 Jan. 2017. [Fig.7] Horn, Rebecca. The Prussian Bride Machine, 1988. Scanned Image from book: Bruno, Giuliana. Public Intimacy. 1st ed. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2007. Print. [Fig.8] Images of Concrete Penis In the context of Escort’s shopping list. [Fig.9] Images of Concrete Penis In context of The Wood Workshop. [Fig.10] Images of Concrete Penis In context of The domestic/The Kitchen Drawer. [Fig.11] Illustration of Site’s interrogated. [Fig.12 & 13] Lorry Driver interviewed at construction site. These are his hand gestures while holding Concrete Penis.

CHAPTER 7 - THE IDEAL SETTING [Fig.1] Taintor, Anne. Happy Mother’S Day!. 2010. Web. 23 Jan. 2017. [Fig.2] Scanned Image of House desing for Housing The Nuclear Family Found in: Matrix (Organization) ed., 1984. Making space: women and the man-made environment. 146

Pluto Press (UK). [Fig.3] Visual representation of J.Wardrop’s ‘Writing Place’.

[Fig.1] The Ideal Home Show,. The Ideal Home Show 1908. Web. 23 Jan. 2017. [Fig.2] IKEA HOME Store, London.

[Fig.4] Feminised Brutalist Fainting Room.

[Fig.3 & 4] IKEA Home Store - Images of The Bedroom Sets.

[Fig.5] Feminised Brutalist Room of One’s Own or Cell.

[Fig.5 & 6] The Daily Mail Ideal Home Show: Screenshots of The Bedroom Sets.

[Fig.6] Smithson, Alison and Peter. Alison And Peter Smithson’S 1953 Golden Lane Estate Collage. 1953. Web. 23 Jan. 2017.

[Fig.7, 8 & 9] IKEA Home Store: Images of The Living Room Set

[Fig.7]Brutalist Architecture feminised by 50’s cut-outs & collage - Architecture’s shape becomes furniture to scale of woman. [Fig.8]Brutalist Architecture feminised by 50’s cut-outs & collage - Girl’s just wanna have fu-un!

[Fig.10, 11 & 12] The Daily Mail Ideal Home Show: Screenshots of The Living Room Set [Fig.13, 14 & 15] IKEA Home Store: Images of The Kitchen Set [Fig.16, 17 & 18] The Daily Mail Ideal Home Show: The Kitchen Set

[Fig.9] Brutalist Architecture feminised by 50’s cut-outs & collage - Gardening

CHAPTER 10 - THE KITCHEN

[Fig.10] Brutalist Architecture feminised by 50’s cut-outs & collage - Power Trio [Fig.11] Brutalist Architecture feminised by 50’s cut-outs & collage -Peek-a-boo, peek-a-who? Tucked away spaces that are unsafe for women/children and encourage delinquency. [Fig.12] Brutalist Architecture feminised by 50’s cut-outs & collage -Public Spanking [Fig.13] Brutalist Architecture feminised by 50’s cut-outs & collage -The struggle is real. Highlights inconvenience of accessibility in Brutalist builds.

[Fig.1] VLCS,. Margarete Schütte-Lihotzky - The Frankfurt Kitchen. 2010. Web. 23 Jan. 2017. [Fig.2 & 3] Screenshots from British Pathe video of The 1950’s Daily Mail Ideal Home Show. Women & their new electronic devices. [Fig.4] The Magazine Antiques,. Photograph Of Nixon And Kruschchev Observing The General Electric Kitchen At The 1959 American National Exhibition. 2009. Web. 23 Jan. 2017.

[Fig.14] Brutalist Architecture feminised by 50’s cut-outs & collage - A Bit of Lady Gardening.

[Fig.5, 6 & 7] Screenshots from British Pathe video of The 1950’s Daily Mail Ideal Home Show. Women at the centre of the act/scene.

[Fig.15] Brutalist Architecture feminised by 50’s cut-outs & collage - Ironing Concrete.

[Fig.8, 10 & 11] IKEA Home Store: Images of The Kitchen Set.

CHAPTER 9 - THEN V.S. NOW - A CASE STUDY ON IDEOLOGY, GENDER AND DOMUS

147

[Fig.12, 13, 14,15 & 16] IKEA Home Store: Images of The Kitchen Set. [Fig.17 & 18] Screenshots from British Pathe video of The 1950’s Daily Mail Ideal Home

Show. f The Kitchen Dinning/Living room Dining Sets. [Fig.19] Screenshots from British Pathe video of The 1950’s Daily Mail Ideal Home Show. Men demonstrating the technical and practical inventions/convenience built into The Kitchen Set [Fig.20, 21, 22, 23 & 24] IKEA Home Store: Image of The Glossy Cupboards, Obsessive Storage Solutions and & Artistically Designed Deceitful Kitchen Set [Fig.25, 26 & 27] IKEA Home Store: Images of The Kitchen Set - Nostalgia over 50’s kitchen decor [Fig.28, 29 & 30] Screenshots from British Pathe video of The 1950’s Daily Mail Ideal Home Show. Nostalgic references/ressemblances. [Fig.31] Screenshots from British Pathe video of The 1950’s Daily Mail Ideal Home Show. [Fig.32 & 33] IKEA Home Store: Images of The Kitchen Set [Fig.34] VLCS,. Margarete Schütte-Lihotzky - The Frankfurt Kitchen. 2010. Web. 23 Jan. 2017.

148

149