May 22, 2025 | Week 8
This article written by Dianne Harris from the University of Washington explores the constructs of race in Architecture by critically exploring the photographic work of Julius Shulman- particularly the photos done of Case Study House. Harris sets up the framework of this discussion around how race has not been addressed much at all by architectural education or the profession as the profession has historically been led by white men in positions of power- despite the fact that our exterior and interior environments have been shaped by a racial and often weaponized intent. Shulman’s own status as an Architectural photographer was made possible by close relationships with architects like Raphael Soriano and magazine editor John Entenza. Ultimately Harris states that her intent is not to call out Shulman for being racist or for to suggest his work was made with those intention, but rather she is aiming to make clear that “the pervasive nature of racism in the united states makes it nearly impossible for whites especially – but also non whites to be untouched by racism power to own portions of every mind and soul…”
I really appreciate this article both for its thesis and stance on the subject but also for the way that she frames her argument. Harris is looking at our cultural content not for what is being said loudly but for what is not being said and or show, it is the erasure and the absence rather than the content itself, and through this the complicity in its power to help white supremacy. The photograph in question of Case Study House, according to Shulman was “undoubtedly the most widely published architectural photograph ever taken” and what it speaks to is an image of whiteness, gender, property, privilege and modernism that became internationally know and recognized. It was interesting to read about the “iconic girls”‘ in the photo and the history / decision in their positioning in the architecture. facing out towards the city vs. looking at one another. It is clear that the job of the “iconic girls” was to sell this home with a “domestic security and conviviality”. As Harris states the photograph is both a frame and a lens- it frames and filters a racialized view of the 20th century- embodying segregation.
“At Last: recliners that are beautiful living room chairs too”House Beautiful, Volume 115. Pt. 1, 1973, p. 82
When relating this image back to House Beautiful it is similar in many way in which that magazine portrays life and sells images of status both to women but also to the greater cultural narrative. Women were then and unfortunately still now used as a product and prop in advertising. The woman (read White woman) is there to legitimize and sexualize the product in a way for a man to be intersted into the space. For example in the photo above the woman is standing over the empty recliner looking longingly at it. Positioning herself almost as if there is someone already in the chair. Yes she is there to sell the chair but moreover she is selling an image of a lifestyle that a man would want to be in this chair with a woman in her nightgown standing beside him.
Ad. for Architectural Digest
2025
In a similar but slightly different way we of course still have the sexulization of women helping to sell us both capital as well as ideologies. But not we have largely have the celebrity cult culture running the advertising for our home interiors and products. When you go to Architectural Digest you can choose a custom celebrity shopping line so that you can have the same “taste” and display of wealth as the celebrity in which we are being told to worship. This make me thing of the larger discussion over the inherit “morality of taste” When we have the culture of celebrity co signing we need not wonder if we are “out of fashion”
May 8, 2025 | 1980s, Week 6
The article “Hollywood Architects” looks at how Hollywood films have portrayed architects, adding to stereotypes associated with the profession as being white males who are imbued with a sense of creative genius. The ways these characters are represented, shape the way that the public perceive architecture and those that work in the field. By looking at these portrayals, the writer highlights cultural narratives that influence and are influenced by the way architects are depicted in popular media.
The first point is how Hollywood fims regularly depict architects to be white males who are the protagonists and they typically marginalize people of color and women. This makes it hard for diverse voices within the architectural field to be heard. It is important that everyone should have equal opportunities to be represented and portrayed both on the big screen and in real world architectural discourse.
The second point is that often films portray architects as visionary creators who single-handedly shape the built environment through their designs. This holds architects to an unrealistic standard that is almost myth-like, making them seem like they work alone, but in reality, being an architect and designing something takes a big group. These misconceptions glamorize the architecture field in ways that are unrealistic even for the best designers.
Figure 1. “How I Met Your Mother”
In “How I Met Your Mother” the main character Ted Mosby is an architect who is working in New York City.
https://www.cbr.com/ted-mosby-harsh-realities-perks-himym/
This show has the main character as a white male architect who ends up trying to build a skyscraper and follows his journey. It is just another example of a show picking the white male characters to be architects but this depiction is a bit more accurate about how he was not able to have everything together always and how it can be a struggle to do well in the field and life.
Figure 2. Gorgeous Apartment Design
House Beautiful, September 1981, no. 123 pt 2, pg 90
“Sleek-lined design really shows off luxurious touches such as the bed’s rich quilted Indian silk throw. The leather chaise is perfect for lounging”
This image shows a luxurious apartment designed by John Saladino that showcases what people would think of when designers are portrayed as architects in Hollywood films. It shows a very put together space that has been carefully designed.
May 7, 2025 | 1960s, 2010s, Week 6
Summary/Takeaway: The Hollywood Architects article clearly paints a picture of the stereotypical architect, a man who is creative yet stoic. He’s incredibly desirable to straight female viewers and an inspiration for men. This piece points to the societal ideal of centering men. Architects are historically a man’s job, so it only seems right for an architect in a movie to always be a man. In this sense, the male is the primary gender, with the female as the secondary gender. Many feminist theorists have pointed out this societal norm because most people play into it subconsciously. Whether it’s saying “you guys” when addressing a group of people or making an excuse for a man who was rude, it’s clear that most of society views males as the default. When women are portrayed as architects, it’s seen as an exception, and it feels like a big deal, but if it’s a man, no one thinks twice. Men in architecture are much more normalized.
“House Beautiful” April 1960 issue (pages 150-151) Advertisement for Firth carpet where a woman is lying on the floor staring up at her husband sitting in a chair above her
Historical Case: This example from House Beautiful literally depicts a man being above a woman. Why is she lying on the ground (in a dress and heels) while he is sitting in a chair? The value of each person is visually present, as well as in the text. Sue has to get Bill’s approval before making the carpet purchase, which seems normal for a couple that owns a house to make that decision together, but she “smiles sweetly” and “fixed everything Bill likes” to convince him. This paints the man as the most important partner and the primary decision maker for the household. Since it’s a carpet ad, it would make sense for the happy couple to be lying on the floor together, perhaps, or sitting on the couch watching their child play on the floor. But instead, the wife is lying on the floor to emphasize the new carpet she convinced her husband to buy while he sits in the chair above her.
Cover of “Invisible Women” book by Caroline Criado Perez
Current Case: During my freshman year, I read the book Invisible Women: Exposing Data Bias in a World Designed for Men, which gave a lot of insight into data in things like car crash testing or pharmaceutical drug testing. Then, these ideas were reinforced during IARC 444 furniture theory, where we learned that a lot of furniture is anthropometrically designed for men. Yet again, another example where men are considered the default and women are considered an exception. Many times, the men’s version of a chair is the “normal” and the women’s version has a label like “petite” or has a smaller size name. These things not only create weird societal norms but also have dangerous real-life implications for women. The movement within feminism to decenter men is an important point for the health, safety, and value to society of women. Breaking stereotypes within our language and the way we move through the world will create a societal shift where women are seen as the norm in all places.
Comparison: Both the historical and current cases emphasize the literal and figurative position of women as the secondary gender to men. In movies, research studies, and architecture, men are considered the default for measurements, physiology, and jobs. The historical example visually puts men in a higher position than women, and the current example highlights the fact that women are completely left out. There is not even acknowledgment of women as different in the car crash studies, for example. The historical case is reminiscent of the times because the husband’s job is highlighted in the writing, while the wife’s hobbies are highlighted. Thus, emphasizing the higher value of men because they contribute in a more meaningful way by having a job. The current case highlights how women are simply not even considered in research data, therefore ceding importance.
May 7, 2025 | 1980s, 2010s, reaction paper, Week 6
Reading Summary / Takeaway:
This week’s reading was focused on the influence that Hollywood movies have on creating perceptions of specific careers, mainly focusing on the architectural profession. They mention a study done, that’s main objective was to look into movies where part of the cast was an architect, and noting what demographics the role was given to. The results of the study showed that the representation of architects in the Hollywood realm was dominated by white, male roles and actors. When female architects were looked into, the article claimed they generally had characteristics that were masculine, rational, and independent. Male architects were romanticized in some movies, portraying the perfect balance of artistic and heroic features. They eventually bring it back to real examples of how a female architect has to continually work to prove herself in the workforce. My topic for this week will address the question “are women pushed toward interior design?”
Application:
A. This article from the New York Times discusses the topic of different types of discrimination that women experience in the field of architecture. Topics range from racism, sexism, and several more. They interviewed several female architects to see what their experiences were. One woman talks about her experience of simply introducing herself as an architect, and having to fight the assumptions that people will make. Another woman speaks about her experience being a part of a lower demographic of architecture, African American women. Lastly, another explains the male dominance she has experienced. Specifically, how she sees younger female architects being pushed into drafting, interior, and landscape to leave the men the more important jobs, like structural design and dealing with clients. She puts emphasis on how her role is not a decorator.
Figure 1 is an article explaining discrimination of women in the field of architecture.
The New York Times
I Am Not the Decorator: Female Architects Speak Out
B. This ad is an example of how women might have been influenced to become interior decorators in the 1980s. Though the differences between interior decorators and interior designers was already known during this time, the company may have used this language to sway women towards jobs that seemed easier and took less knowledgeable skills. However, when looking into the institution that put this ad out, I found that they have a college of design for interior architects. I wonder if the term “interior decorator” was more of a use of common language than a push for women to pursue more domestic careers.
Figure 2 (top left) is an ad from the House Beautiful Magazine drawing interior designers to apply for school, showing a two women.
House Beautiful Magazine 1981, no. 2, p. 140
Be an Interior Decorator
Comparison:
Both the ad and article mention the term “decorator,” when referring to an interior designer. Though the ad is more specific to catering towards women who want to become interior decorators, they do acknowledge the term design in regards to the room. They also combine the two, decorator and designer, into the application that they are showing through the advertisement. The article on the other hand, holds the term “decorator” to be something that is lesser than architect. They view it as a form of discrimination in the field, making the assumption that men assume the female architects should put on roles more related to domesticity, such as interiors, drafting/drawing, and landscapes.
Aspects: inequality in profession and film, gender discrimination, female architect
May 1, 2025 | reaction paper, Week 5
Hilde Heynen’s article “Leaving Traces” is simultaneously a history lesson revolving around the concept of a home, and a critique of the gendered, capitalist nature of the heavily decorated home designs of the 19th century. As the modernists began to take footing in the world of residential design, they sought to eliminate the connection between wealth, ornament, and the concept of the home. The new modern home design would be removed from the nuclear family. The home would no longer serve as a vessel for one’s own wealth or material possessions, but rather as an abstraction of one’s own identity. The “abstract interior” was heavily criticized for its apparent coldness and lack of the elements that are frequently associated with what makes a dwelling a home. The modernists appeared to be of the mind that in removing the nuclear family, they could step forward into the future. However, removal of the nuclear family from the equation did not remove their own sexist biases. They associated many of the elements they sought to remove with femininity, and the elements they wanted to emphasize with the masculine. In contrast to this, Rietveld’s designs were meant to adapt to the inhabitants, women and children included, something many of the modernists felt was unnecessary in the face of “good” design. Although not all modernists agreed with these ideas, they were certainly at the forefront of the modernist movement.
I agree with a majority of Heynen’s points. However, as this article was written in 2009, there is no way they could have predicted the level of consumerism that would come to be in the 2010s and 2020s. Contemporary interiors have frequently shifted in their expressions of wealth and identity throughout the 20th and 21st centuries. I would be curious to see Heynen’s perspective on the matter in the post-Amazon Prime world. The middle class Americans of the last 15 years consume more frequently now than ever before thanks to the ease and cost of shipping and manufacturing. Although, a general theme I have noticed through lived experience is the lasting association of interior design and femininity. Although men have equal access to the same means of decorating their dwellings, masculinity in American culture prioritizes electronics or “utilitarian” possessions over decorative elements. The key difference between this masculine expression in the home and the modernist approach is the intent and execution. The modernist sought to eliminate decor as a means of emphasizing the architectural elements of the dwelling. The young man of today does so, generally speaking, because he sees no value in the home. There is no need for expression of identity in the home, unless that expression is a means of displaying masculinity.
Circling back to this concept of wealth and expression of identity in the home, it is interesting to see how this idea evolved over time. The modern, contemporary home has little decor, much like the modernists of the 20th century. However, wealth must still be displayed in these homes.
Photo by Phillipe Bollard. Taken from Divisare.
House Beautiful, May 1922.
Take for example, the photo above is a French apartment renovation completed in February 2025 by Brunet-Lecomte Eisenlohr architects. The ornamental elements were not removed entirely, but they were painted over to make each wall a monolith of white. Although there is very little decor, what is there speaks volumes to the wealth of its inhabitants. The Togo chairs, currently priced around $6,000 each, in addition to the custom casework shows the value of this home with three simple elements. Compared to this article from House Beautiful, May 1922 issue, the concept is very similar. Both seek to say a lot with “simple” designs. However, the key difference between the House Beautiful example and this French apartment is in what they seek to emphasize. The French apartment seeks to emphasize the simplicity of its bare-bones design. The House Beautiful example seeks to emphasize the simplicity of the architectural elements by complementing it with a few strong decorative elements.
